Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Barack Obama claims that his tax plan is going to expand the economy and grow the middle class. Oh really?

How do you expand the economy and grow the middle class with tax increases on those who sacrificed their time and personal money to realize the “American Dream”, only to have their hard earned money taken and redistributed to those who didn’t? How long will it take before those with the entrepreneurial spirit burning within realize that it won’t pay to sacrifice so much to gain so little? How long will it take before the creation of new businesses slows down or comes to a screeching halt? Will this expand the economy? Not likely! What it will do is stifle economic growth while decreasing the local, state and federal government tax bases.

How do you expand the economy and grow the middle class with tax increases on those that create jobs? Economic expansion does not happen from the bottom up as Obama continues to claim...no matter how much he wants it to be so. I don’t know anyone at the bottom of the economic ladder that provides one single job. Jobs are created by those at the top...and by some in the upper middle. When their taxes go up, they will be forced to compensate. How long will it take before businesses close down or move overseas? How long will it take before businesses start cutting hours or begin to lay off employees? How long will it take before they pass on their new tax burden to the consumer through higher prices and fees? By raising taxes on those who actually provide jobs and provide economic growth, Obama will be hurting the ones he professes he wants to help…the middle class.

Under Obama’s plan, the middle class will not grow by elevating the poor through more social welfare programs. It will grow by bringing those in the upper brackets down. When that happens there will be less money to go around, not more.

Do not be fooled by this wolf in sheep’s clothing. His tax plan is social welfare…plain and simple…as well as punishment for success. It will kill jobs…not create them. It will destroy the entrepreneurial spirit…not encourage it. It will crush this country and its economy…not grow it.

Heaven help us all if Barack Obama and his liberal allies get what they want.

Life as an Obama Subject

If you want to know what life will be like under an Obama administration, for those of us who don’t agree with his policies and have the audacity to question him, just look at how “Joe the Plumber” has been treated?

After all, how dare a simple American, one who only wants to own a business and realize the real “American Dream”, question “The One” on his tax plan of raising taxes on small businesses and the wealthy? How dare this simple American get the debate started on the fact that “The One’s” tax plan will not only hurt his chances of making his dream come true, but destroy the entrepreneurial spirit that has made this country thrive?

“Joe the Plumber” was able to accomplish what no one in the McCain campaign had been able to or those in the mainstream media wanted to accomplish. With that one simple question he was able to get “The One” to admit that, “I don’t want to punish you for your success. I just want to make sure that those below you have a chance at success as well. I think that spreading the wealth around is good for everyone.”

Since “Joe the Plumber” asked that nefarious question of “The One” he has been the subject of Obama/Biden attack ads, investigated, criticized, ridiculed, harassed, demonized, had his reputation tarnished, accused of tax evasion, and had his private information made public by government officials. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to hear in the not so distant future that he is the subject of an IRS audit as well.

Won’t Obama's America be great? Welcome to the U.S.S.A. (United Socialist States of America)!!!

Voting is Not Only Your Right, But Your Duty

I understand that in the last presidential election, some Christians did not exercise their right to vote. What was their reason for not participating in the most important election we hold every four years…that of selecting our country’s next leader and the leader of the free world? They believed that to do so would be a violation of the 1st Amendment…a violation of the separation of church and state.

In my humble opinion, the 1st Amendment is the most misinterpreted amendment in the Bill of Rights. I think it is time to revisit what our founding fathers intended.

"The 1st Amendment expressly prohibits the United State Congress from making laws 'respecting an establishment of religion' or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

How could anyone seriously interpret this to mean that if you are a member of a church, you should not vote? As Christians, we are not just members of a family or a church, but members of a largely populated and diverse country.

We are so blessed to live in a land where we get to choose those who will represent and lead us. We are not subjects of a king or queen who rules because of birthright. We are not subjected to the whims of a dictator who remains in power because of fear and intimidation and leads the same way.

We have the opportunity to mandate how we want our country to be run by choosing those whom we believe hold our same values. Does this mean we always get the leaders we want? No, but at least if we tried, we are not to blame for the results. To do otherwise…to believe we are not to take part in elections or that our vote doesn’t matter…is akin to surrender and defeatism.

It is not only your right, but your duty to vote. We have the privilege of letting our voices be heard, but when we do not exercise that privilege, we are responsible for whatever happens. It is our responsibility as citizens of this great nation to study the issues and those running for public office at the city, county, state and national level. We must look within ourselves and determine what our values are and vote for the issues and the individuals we believe will uphold those values. We can not sit idly by and let others determine our destiny or the destiny of this nation.

The “silent moral majority” in this country has been silent for far too long and shares in the moral decay and corruption that plagues this nation. However, it is not too late to truly change the direction of this country in a positive direction…a direction which will keep us free, keep our children safe, continue to reward hard work and determination, and keep us safe and secure from our enemies abroad. If we do not stand up and make our voices heard we may wake up one day and find out that the country we have called home no longer looks like home.

Orson Scott Card Tells It Like It Is...Thank You Mr. Card

I was listening to Rush Limbaugh earlier today when he mentioned this article written by Orson Scott Card.

I was so impressed by what Mr. Card (one of my favorite Science Fiction authors) wrote, I just had to make sure that anyone who reads my blog knows the truth he pointed out.

Below is the entire article that Orson Scott Card, a staunch Democrat, wrote for the Rhinoceros Times. I hope you enjoy.

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

by Orson Scott Card

October 20, 2008

"An open letter to the local daily paper -- almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor -- which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house -- along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate."

Instead, it was Sen. Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" (http://snipurl.com/457to): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury."

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Fred Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign -- because that campaign had sought his advice -- you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension -- so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie -- that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad -- even bad weather -- on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth -- even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means. That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards' own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women (NOW) threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe -- and vote as if -- President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats -- including Barack Obama -- and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans -- then you are not journalists by any standard.

You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a daily newspaper in our city."

Who is Your Messiah?

This is the "Messiah" of the left-wing radicals of the Democrat party. Just ask Louis Farrakhan who said that when Obama talks, "the Messiah is absolutely speaking."






This is my Messiah.

John 3: 16-18, 36 states,

1. 16 ¶ For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
   17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
   18 ¶ He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
   36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

I do not...and I will not...place my faith and trust in the arm of any man.

I place my life in the hands of the one and only true Messiah, the Savior of the world, the Son of God. I place my faith and trust in Jesus Christ, the one who gave His life for me, so that I may one day return home to my Father in heaven. I celebrate his life and his resurrection. I thank him for his example and for his love.

There is only one who can heal my soul and the soul of our nation and it is not Barack Obama...it is Jesus Christ.

Yes…He Really Did Say It

Is Joe Biden for real? Sometimes I have to wonder if he really believes Obama is the best man for the job. Can he really be that stupid? I hope so? Keep talking Joe...please, keep talking.

Here's the latest gaffe, compliments of Senator Joe Biden.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, on Saturday, October 18, 2008; during a speech in front campaign donors in Seattle, Biden said, "And here's the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough - I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you, not financially to help him, we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they're made if they work, then they weren't viewed as a crisis. If they don't work, it's viewed as you didn't make the right decision, a little bit like how we hesitated so long dealing with Bosnia and dealing with Kosovo, and consequently 200,000 people lost their lives that maybe didn't have to lose lives. It's how we made a mistake in Iraq. We made a mistake in Somalia. So there's gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia's newly-emboldened position because they're floating in a sea of oil."

Although the main stream media was slow in reporting this major gaffe, they finally came around. It may have not made the front page of the major newspapers (like it would have if Sarah Palin had said the same thing about John McCain), but at least many of the major news channels were covering it on both Monday and Tuesday.

Thank you Joe for accomplishing something John McCain has been unable to accomplish. Thank you Joe for helping to bring national security and national defense back to the forefront of this election...or at least into the national debate.

Biden continued his ramblings by saying, "I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I'm not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it. This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going 'oh my God, why are they there in the polls, why is the polling so down, why is this thing so tough? We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

I don't know about anyone else, but if I were an Obama supporter I would be scratching my head, wondering if I'd made the right choice. This guy is telling his supporters that "The One" who is supposed to restore America's standing around the world...the liberal "Messiah" who is supposed to be "The Healer" of the nation (and the world)..."The Unifier"...is going to be so unpopular in his first two years that their poll numbers will plummet.

Why? What decisions will he make that are going to be so unpopular?

• Could it possibly be Obama's tax increase on small businesses which will not only cost jobs, but damage our fragile economy?
• Could it be that Obama's tax increases on energy providers...like large oil companies...will raise the price of gasoline to historic highs that will make the national all time high average of $4.10 in August of 2008 pale in comparison?
• Will the "believers" finally realize that not only were taxes raised on the "rich" but on everyone else as well in order to provide the increased social welfare programs Obama is promising?
• Will everyone finally believe the conservatives warning about Obama's socialist programs?
• Will Obama's gutting of our national defense capabilities bring terrorism to our doorstep for the first time since September 11, 2001?
• If we are attacked, will Obama do what Clinton did....nothing?
• Will he be the "Great Appeaser"?

With only two weeks left until election day, these comments by Joe Biden have to be making Obama supporters shutter, while hopefully giving undecideds more reason to look at the McCain/Palin ticket.

I Cannot...I Will Not...Vote For Barack Obama

My case for voting against Barack Obama and for doing everything in my power to make sure others do the same.

I cannot...I will not...vote for Barack Obama because he has promised that, "The first thing I'll do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act."

According to WashingtonWatch.com, "The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

Prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from: (1) denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or (2) discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.

Authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action."

According to Senator Barbara Boxer, a co-sponser of the bill, "The Freedom of Choice Act supercedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman’s right to choose. That means a poor woman cannot be denied the use of Medicaid if she chooses to have an abortion." In other words, if the bill were to be signed into law, federal and state governments would be mandated to use taxpayer funds to provide abortions.

Finally, according to David Freddoso the author of "The Case Against Barack Obama", as found on several blog sites, FOCA "would effectively cancel every state, federal, and local regulation of abortion, no matter how modest or reasonable. It would even, according to the National Organization of Women, abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions. If Obama becomes president and lives up to this promise, then everyone who pays income tax will be paying an abortionist to perform an abortion."

Freddoso continues, "Obama is promising 1) to abolish state laws that protect doctors and nurses from losing their jobs if they refuse to participate in abortions and 2) to abolish requirements for parental notification and informed consent for mothers who consider the procedure."

I am not a proponent of abortion and I do not believe abortion should be legal. Abortion is the murder of unborn children and I, for one, do not want one penny of my tax dollars to fund murder. So, therefore, I will not vote for a candidate who supports such a drastic reform to an abortion law which destroys life.

I cannot...I will not...vote for Barack Obama because he has promised to reduce our ability to defend ourselves and others around the world to a level dangerously below those of the pre-9/11 capabilites.

In October, 2007 in a video presentation to the non-profit group "Caucus for Priorities" he outlines how he will defend this nation. Obama stated, "I am the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning and as President, I will end it.

Second, I will cut 10's of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems and I will institute an independent defense priorities board to insure that the quadrenial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal I will not seek to develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global ban on production of fissile material and will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBM's off hair trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal."

This is absolutely terrifying to me. How naive can Barack Obama be? Did he learn nothing from 9/11? Does he truly believe that Britain, China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia will give up their nuclear capabilities or ambitions just because he asks? If he reduces our nuclear capabilites, our enemies...the terrorists of the world...will only be more emboldened. To them he will be saying..."America is open for business." I don't know about anyone else, but that will not help me sleep peacefully at night.

I cannot...I will not...vote for Barack Obama because he has promised to drastically increase the size of the government.

According to the National Tax Payers Union Foundation, Barack Obama's proposed budget will cost the American taxpayers approximately $343.586 billion annually or $1.374 trillion over four years. Ouch!!!! Following is a breakdown of Obama's budget proposal:

• Economy, Transportation, and Infrastructure proposals will cost approximately $111.603 billion annually, with the costs of the majority of this section unknown.
  
• Education, Science, and Research proposals will cost approximately $37.088 billion annually, with the costs of several sections unknown.
• Energy, Environment, and Agriculture proposals will cost approximately $56.489 billion annually, with the costs of several sections unknown and several being proposed over 10 years.
• Health Care proposals will cost approximately $100.848 billion annually or $403.392 billion over four years, with the costs of most sections unknown.
• Homeland Security and Law Enforcement proposals will cost approximately $10.173 billion annually, with the costs of most sections unknown.
• National Defense and International Relations proposals will cost approximately $13.808 billion annually, with the costs of most sections unknown.
• Veterans proposals will cost approximately $2.76 billion annually, with the costs of most sections unknown.
• Miscellaneous will cost approximately $10.817 billion annually, with the costs of most sections unknown.

With the majority of the costs in Obama's budget proposal being unknown, no one really knows where the final numbers will fall, or should I say rise.

I cannot...I will not...vote for Barack Obama because his tax philosophy of "spreading the wealth around" is equivalent to Socialism and tax welfare.

According to the Library of Economics and Liberty, "Socialism—defined as a centrally planned economy in which the government controls all means of production—was the tragic failure of the twentieth century. Born of a commitment to remedy the economic and moral defects of capitalism, it has far surpassed capitalism in both economic malfunction and moral cruelty. Yet the idea and the ideal of socialism linger on."

Obama's "spread the wealth around" philosophy will benefit no one...especially not the ones he promises to help....the middle class. It will only serve to destroy our capitalist society and stifle the entrepreneurial spirit that creates jobs and wealth. It has the potential of destroying two hundred plus years of econimical growth and development. It has the potential of sending our already fragile economy further into a despression and it will increase individual dependency on the federal government and decrease individual responsibility and self-reliance.

Finally, I cannot...I will not...vote for Barack Obama because to do so would give unchecked power to the far left liberals who have hijacked the Democrat party.

It is absolutely terrifying to me to imagine the damage a handful of liberals with unchecked power and a far left agenda would be able to do to our country and our Constitution. There will be on one to stop them. By the time there is, it may be too late. I once heard it said that the Constitution will one day hang by a thread. Could this be that time?

If Sarah Palin Were a Man...

If Sarah Palin’s name was Steven Palin you can be sure all the concern about her readiness to assume the presidency would not be in question.

First of all, reality check people. Sarah Palin is not running for president, she is the vice presidential nominee. How many times do we need to say this? She will only assume the presidency if something were to happen to John McCain. Let's say it again. Together this time...she will only assume the presidency if something were to happen to John McCain.

Second, if she had to assume the presidency, she is qualified and she would be ready. She has the experience. She has been a business owner, a City Councilman, a Mayor, and a Governor. She has taken on “Big Oil” and won. She has taken on corruption in her own party and won. She has lowered taxes and balanced budgets. She has negotiated energy contracts. She knows what this country needs to become energy independent and she has made executive decisions that affect the lives of people in the state of Alaska everyday.

If any man had half as much experience as Governor Palin, there would be not doubt about his readiness or qualifications. How do I know this? Just look at the three men running with, and against, her. Not one of them has the experience she has, yet no one questions their readiness or their qualifications. So, why do we keep hearing people say she is not qualified? Because she’s a woman plain and simple…that’s why they question her readiness.

Now, once again this extremely qualified woman has been dissed by another popular political figure. I was shocked to hear Colin Powell, a very popular black Republican, who I had hoped would one day run for president, throw his support behind Barack Obama.

Sunday on the NBC program "Meet the Press", Mr. Powell expressed disappointment in the "over the top" negative tone of the McCain/Palin campaign, as well as in McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as the vice presidential nominee. He said, "Now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made."

Just what has he seen over the past seven weeks that makes her unqualified to be president? He was as cryptic as "The One" he is supporting. He raised a criticism of Sarah Palin and said she "isn't ready to be president", yet didn't say why. I have lost all respect for Colin Powell. He’s just another drone brainwashed by the Obama machine.

Sarah Palin has more experience in her little pinky, than Obama has in his entire body, yet do we hear anyone (other than a few Republicans) question his readiness? Instead, they bow down at his feet as if he were the second coming of Christ.

What has Barack Obama done that makes him more qualified than Governor Palin? Absolutely nothing!!!

He served as an Illinois State Senator for eight years and has only been a US Senator for two years (most of which he has spent running for president). He has never run a city. He has never run a state. He has never made a single executive decision. Yet, we stand on the precipice of letting this man, the most liberal and least experienced candidate to ever run for the highest office in our nation, make critical decisions that will affect our lives in the present as well as possibly change this country for future generations.

We stand on the precipice of letting a socialist “spread the wealth around” by taking money from hard working Americans who sacrificed their own time and money to become successful and giving it to people who haven’t.

We stand on the precipice of having our Democracy transformed into an Oligarchy, where all branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) and even the media will be controlled by one party. We can all say goodbye to fairness and the “checks and balances” our Constitution intended.

If Sarah Palin were President, she would protect our Constitution. She would protect our nation by standing up to our enemies. She would take on corruption in the government. She would be compassionate and tolerant of the views of others. She would try to help people by giving them opportunities to succeed instead of more government entitlement programs that would make them more reliant on government. She would use the executive experience she has obtained to make the right decisions for America and its people.

It seems that a slight majority of people might be ready to accept an inexperienced, extremely liberal man for president before it will accept an experienced, conservative woman for vice president, who might one day become president.

I am at a loss to understand what is happening to my country. I feel like I have been transported into another dimension where irrationality is the norm and where logical thinking people are at a disadvantage. God help the country I love.

A Little Australian Cartoon Relief

With the election just around the corner our lives seem to be in turmoil and our stress level is at an all-time high. To relieve some of that stress, we need to laugh and find humor in the life around us.

I received an e-mail full of cartoons that poke fun at the Liberal Left and point out, in a comedic fashion, the things our main stream media should be pointing out. However, these cartoons were not in any American paper, they were found in Australian papers. Enjoy!!! I hope these cartoons lighten your load a bit...they did mine.

Say It Isn't So!!!

The election is less than three weeks away and the liberal left has cranked up the racial based rhetoric to historic proportions.

On CNN Tuesday night, October 7th, after the debate, David Gergen stated, "I think it's too early to declare victory, because Barack Obama is black, and until we play out the issue of race in this country, I don't think we'll know and maybe (not until) late in the campaign."

Huh? Once again, Americans are racist and Obama will only loose if the racists don't vote for him. Is that what we are to believe?

While on Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees on Tuesday, October 7th, James Carville stated, "Let me be clear, I said you can call the dogs and light the fire and leave the house. I think it sounds over. Now let me be clear here, if Obama goes in this race with a five point lead and loses this election, the consequences are -- bull, man. I mean I don't think that's going to happen...

...But you stop and contemplate this country if Obama goes in and he has a consistent five point lead and loses the election, it would be very, very, very dramatic out there."

So, are we to believe there will be rioting in the streets if Obama doesn't win because the polls say he should? Please, say it isn't so. Does anyone really think the polls matter? It has been proven that the polls are weighted toward Democrat voters by a 39.3% to 33.3% and 27.4% for Republicans and unaffiliated voters respectively.

Then today, Congressman John Murtha (yes, the same John Murtha who accused our soldiers of murdering innoncent Iraqi's) accused his own constituents in western Pennsylvania of being racists and said that they could reduce Obama's margin of victory by 4 percentage points.

In an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Mr. Murtha stated, "There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area."

According to the Associated Press, "Murtha said it has taken time for many Pennsylvania voters to come around to embracing a black presidential candidate, but that Obama should still win the state, though not in a runaway."

The left is even accusing Sarah Palin of being a racist because she has the audacity to do what the main stream media has refused to do…look at Obama’s record and his associations…and because she speaks to small town America. So, because she speaks to us, she’s a racist and therefore, we must be racist as well…we, the biter Americans, who cling to our guns and religion.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am sick and tired of being told that if I don’t vote for Obama I’m a racist…how absolutely pathetic.

It can’t possibly be because I’m a conservative and he is the most liberal Democrat in the Senate with the second most liberal Democrat as his running mate or because his running mate has been a Washington insider for almost 36 years…yet they say they are running a campaign of change.

It can't possibly be because I don't agree with him on one single issue.

It can't possibly be because he is a tax and spend liberal who plans on adding approximately $1.3 trillion in new spending over his first term. This country is already too far in debt. We need to cut spending. We can not afford another trillion or more in new spending.

It can’t possibly be because his promises to cut taxes for 95% of Americans (even though approximately 33% of Americans already pay zero taxes) is an empty and impossible promise since he is also promising to increase spending by $1.3 trillion. There is no way 5% of Americans can pick up that tab.

It can’t possibly be because I believe his tax policies are technically just more social welfare for the lower income people at the expense of those who have spent their own time and money to achieve success. Or that his tax policies will only increase people’s dependency on the Federal government and less on themselves.

It can't possibly be because he not only supports abortion, but he has promised to sign into law the "Freedom of Choice Act" which, according to Senator Barbara Boxer, a co-sponser of the bill, "supercedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman’s right to choose. That means a poor woman cannot be denied the use of Medicaid if she chooses to have an abortion." So, in other words, if the bill were to be signed into law, state and federal governments would be mandated to use taxpayer funds to provide abortions.

It can’t possibly be because his policies on national security are so radical that 9/11 will pale in comparison to what our enemies will be able to accomplish on our homeland.

If you think I’m kidding here’s what he said he would do in October, 2007 in a video presentation to the non-profit group "Caucus for Priorities":

"I am the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning and as President, I will end it.

Second, I will cut 10's of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems and I will institute an independent defense priorities board to insure that the quadrenial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal I will not seek to develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global ban on production of fissile material and will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBM's off hair trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal."

I don't know about you, but this does not give me a sense of security. Does Obama realize that Russia and Venezuela just held naval war games south of our borders? Does he realize that China controls the Panama Canal? Does he realize that Iran is rumored to have a submarine capable of carrying nuclear weapons? So, when the Russians or Venezuelans or Chinese or Iranians or others come calling we'll more than likely be defending ourselves because the government under President Obama will be unable to. Where's my gun and where do I sign up for the Oregon militia?

It can't possibly be because he has been irresponsible in his comments about our troops. Here's what he said about our US soldiers and marines in Afghanistan on August 14, 2007, "Now you have narco drug lords who are helping to finance the Taliban, so we’ve got to get the job done there, and that requires us to have enough troops that we are not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there." And he wants to be their Commander in Chief?

It can't possibly be because he wants the government to take control of the nation's health care system...a government that can't even manage the institutions it already controls; education, social security, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. Do we really want them to handle our health care as well? How long will it be before health care benefits are rationed or limited?

Could the Obama health plan end up like the Oregon Health Plan (OHP); a government subsidized health plan for poor and low-income families?

During the Clinton administration it was hoped that the new OHP would serve as a model for a possible federal health plan. However, due to budget cuts, OHP has begun to limit access to the plan.

Earlier this year the Oregon Center for Public Policy (OCCP) was urging, "poor, uninsured Oregonians to sign up for the Oregon Health Plan (OHP) reservation list. Signing up for the list enters uninsured adults in a monthly lottery to apply for the subsidized health insurance plan.

'This is the only kind of lottery that’s totally devoted to helping poor Oregonians,' said OCPP executive director Chuck Sheketoff.

Starting today and continuing through February 29, the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) will be accepting reservations for a lottery for new slots in the Oregon Health Plan, Oregon’s Medicaid program.

Those on the reservation list will enter a monthly lottery in which people will be randomly chosen and invited to apply for the Oregon Health Plan. DHS will initially draw 3,000 names, and then a declining number in subsequent months until the program reaches its budgeted level of an average of 24,000 per month for the two-year budget period.

OCPP is encouraging all adult Oregonians who believe they might qualify for the OHP slots to put their names on the reservation list...

...OCPP is also encouraging health care providers, social service agencies, and family and friends of the uninsured to sign up people for the reservation list."

Do we want or need a government run health plan that could end up limiting access and using a lottery system to pick enrollees?

In addition the Oregon Health Plan fell under serious criticism this past July. According to the Oregonian, "The conflict came to light in a recent report in The Register-Guard of Eugene. The newspaper described the sad plight of Barbara Wagner, a 64-year-old Springfield woman with lung cancer.

After her oncologist prescribed a cancer drug that would cost $4,000 a month, the newspaper reported, 'Wagner was notified that the Oregon Health Plan wouldn't cover the treatment, but that it would cover palliative, or comfort, care, including, if she chose, doctor-assisted suicide.

That presents an unacceptable conflict. The state health program should not be in the position of denying chemotherapy to terminally ill patients while offering to pay the cost of helping them die.'"

Do we seriuosly want a health system where bureaucrats, instead of doctors, could end up deciding what health care we can receive? Do we want a health care system where bureaucrats could decide whether we live or die?

Not me. I'll keep my inexpensive catastrophic health plan....even as limited as it is.

As I have pointed out, there are many reasons to not vote for Obama, which have nothing to do with race. The left needs to get off this issue or they may be scratching their heads on November 5th and be left wondering what happened to their "Messiah"...at least that's what I am praying for.

Your Vote Matters More Than Ever

Our nation stands at the precipice. We must decide for ourselves if we will stand by and let our nation continue on its downward slide toward secularism and socialism or do we want to stand up and try to force the real change we need...to restore our nation to the Republic that it was meant to be.

Let no one tell you that your vote doesn't matter...that there's nothing you can do to affect the outcome of this election. Don't let the skewed polls that are heavily weighted toward Democrats keep you from voting. Don't let those polls make you feel like the election is over. If we learned anything from the past two elections (2000 and 2004) it is that the polls don't matter, but every vote does.

The electorate in our nation is so evenly divided that it won't take too many to believe their vote doesn't matter, to send the wrong man to the White House. Remember, a refusal to vote for one candidate is a yes vote for the other. It is up to each of us, as citizens of this great nation, to look at... and study intently...each candidate for President and what he plans to do for us, our familes and our country; then vote according to our own values and which candidate will uphold those values.

Make no mistake about it, this election is the most important election in our nation's history. Here's an extremely moving video that touches on the importance of this election.

We need every vote to save what is left of this great nation and put it back on the right track. To do this we need to talk to all of our friends and family members and encourage everyone to vote. We also need to educate and inform each other about what is at stake.

Please, please, please...don't quit...don't give up...don't surrender. Stand up and make your voice be heard...stand up for your future...stand up for the future of your families...stand up for the future of your country. VOTE!!!!

Poor...Poor Robert...I Think He Needs a Reality Check

Here is more of what Robert had to say in the September 25, 2008 issue of The Chief (my home town newspaper).

Robert wrote, "How bad do things have to get in this country before the Republican loyalists 'wake up' to reality? If you are a Cub fan, it is great to remain loyal to your team, but in politics, we need to decipher good from bad, right from wrong."

I couldn't agree with him more. So, I ask Robert, when is he going to take his own advice?

He continues, " Why would anybody want to vote for a Republican in '08? Oh yea, if you oppose the lifestyles of single people, live-in heterosexual couples, gays and lesbians, then you should vote Republican."

I'm a single individual...I don't recall the Republican party being concerned about my lifestyle. I have friends who live together and I don't remember the Republican party saying anything about them either. This is what I understand the Republican party's stance on gay and lesbian issues to be: 1) Gays and lesbians will not be allowed to serve openly in the military. If they want to serve, then "don't ask, don't tell" is the motto. 2) Traditional marriage will not be redefined. It is to only be between one man and one woman. "Civil Unions", which will give gays and lesbians some of the same rights as married couples, may be acceptable.

Robert continues, "If you believe in the use of our military to enforce regime changes, then you should vote Republican."

Here we go again with that age old Democrat mantra. The Iraq war was not just about regime change...although that was a great result. It was about the enforcement of multiple United Nations Resolutions that Saddam Hussein was ignoring and the removal of weapons of mass destruction which everyone, including many leading Democrats, thought he had.

Here are some quotes from a few of those leading Democrats, who after the Iraq war did not turn out the way everyone hoped and no weapons of mass destruction were found, turned tail and ran the other way, leaving President Bush and the Republicans holding the bag.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." (Letter to President Clinton, signed by Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle and John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998)

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." (Representative Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998)

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." (Letter to President Bush, Signed by Senator Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001)

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." (Senator Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002)

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country...Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." (Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002)

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies..." (Senator John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002)

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." (Senator John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002)

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." (Senator Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002)

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." (Senator Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002)

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." (Senator John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003)

These Democrats sure have been spinning a different reality over the past five years haven't they? Democrats seem to suffer from a strong sense of amnesia when they think their political lives might be on the line and illusions of grandeur when they think it will serve their purpose of staying in or gaining power. If the Iraq war had gone as people had hoped, the Democrats would have been taking all the credit.

Finally Robert says, "If you support the 'Drill Baby Drill' energy policy, then you should vote Republican."

Well I do. I support drilling off the coastal United States and in ANWR. I also support the research and development of alternative energy sources like wind, solar, nuclear, and clean coal. Though it is true that it could take up to ten years for us to reap the rewards of domestic drilling, no one knows if these alternative energy sources will provide the United States with all of the energy it needs. So, if we only look to alternative energy sources, we may never break our independence on foreign oil.

Who really needs to "wake up" to reality, Robert?

We Must Take Comfort from the Scriptures

During a recent conversation with a dear friend of mine, he pulled out his scriptures and read this to me:

A PSALM OF DAVID
Chapter 37

1 Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.

2 For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.

3 Trust in the Lord, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed.

4 Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.

5 Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass.

6 And he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noonday.

7 Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.

8 Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.

9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth.

10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.

11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.

12 The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth.

13 The Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming.

14 The wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation.

15 Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.

16 A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.

17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the Lord upholdeth the righteous.

18 The Lord knoweth the days of the upright: and their inheritance shall be for ever.

19 They shall not be ashamed in the evil time: and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied.

During this stressful time in our nation's history, we can find comfort and strength in the scriptures. We can find solace in the counsel God has given us through His words. Now more than ever is not the time to forget who really guides our lives on a daily basis and whose hand should guide our every action.

We need to look around each day and see the hand of God in our lives. We need to see the love of God that surrounds us daily and thank Him continually for His unconditional love. With Him everything is possible. With Him we can defeat our enemies at every turn. With Him we can protect our families and our country from those who wish to destroy both and with Him we should fear nothing. We must realize that whatever happens in this election is supposed to happen and we must continue to pray for his guidance and direction.

However, as I said in a previous blog, take heart...stay strong...stand up...speak up...fight back. Let's not be silent anymore. Let's make our voices heard and make our opinions matter. Let's begin to make a difference and force positive change in our homes, communities, country and world.