It All Depends on What "Literal" Means

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with radical Jihadistan.

If Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton get to be President, they will need all our prayers. It is physically impossible to remove all the troops at the same time. Because of this logistic problem, the last to be extracted from Iraq will be vulnerable to attack and Massacre, by Al Qaeda whom once the withdrawal is announced, will lie in wait and prepare to kill the troops as they depart..

While we are praying we should consider the dire consequences for Israel if Senator Obama is elected President.

The "Israel Insider" is reporting today on a speech given Monday by Barrack Obama in which he said the following: "Palestinian refugees do not have a "literal" right of return to Israel. He did not clarify whether that implied they had a moral, metaphorical, legal or other non-literal right to return to Israel.

More controversially, Obama said he supported the division of Israel into at least two parts by a Palestinian state. This completely stunning comment came as Obama was attempting to articulate his position on key Mideast issues presently in dispute.... "The right of return [to Israel] is something that is not an option in a literal sense," Obama said, but then went on to say that "The Palestinians have a legitimate concern that a state have a contiguous coherent mass that would allow the state to function effectively."

Roget;s thesaurus defines literal with any one of the following
Synonyms:
accurate, actual, apparent, authentic, bona fide, critical, faithful, genuine, natural, not figurative, ordinary, real, scrupulous, simple, strict, true, undeviating, unerring, unexaggerated, unvarnished, usual, veracious, verbal, verbatim, veritable, written. I have put some of the words in italics to Illustrate the duplicitous nature of his speech.

To make an analogy that is closer to home. Let us consider the ramifications of applying his solution to the problem native Mexicans living in southern California and Nevada have with Our Country, that they believe was wrongly taken from their ancestors.

Would We stand still while Congress and the President gave back a part of Southern California from the Mexican border to the Southern end of Los Angeles. Would We stand for the return of the portion of California and Arizona that included the land from Mexacali, Mexico North to Las Vegas, then East to the Arizona/ New Mexico border, then South to Aqua Prieta on the Mexican border.

This would effectively cut the Southwestern United States off from the rest of United States. Not unlike what it would do to Israel if Obama's plan were implemented. People traveling or transporting goods from Colorado Springs, Co. to San Diego,Ca. would have to pass through a foreign Country!

A land corridor between Gaza and the West Bank, as he has suggested, would effectively cut Israel in half, making it a non-contiguous Country. It would divided Israel into northern and southern portions by the Palestinian land-mass Obama envisions. The Democratic Presidential candidate didn't explain why it was legitimate for the Palestinians to have a coherent and contiguous territory at Israel's expense. It also would give them a position that surrounds Israel from which they could destroy them with Russian and Chinese made rockets.

Barack Obama does have a record to run on, despite many critics of him who say he has done nothing of note in his two years in the Senate. It is a record that should be of concern to those who support America's only real ally in the Middle East, Israel.

The following quote is one made my Reverend Jeramia Wright

Pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ. This Church and

it's Pastor follow a particularly Afro-centric view of Christianity, emphasizing a Black Work Ethic, commitment to a Black Value System, and an allegiance to all Black Leadership that follows the Black Value System. A brief review of its philosophy shows that this is not your everyday Christian parish, in fact it follows a very racialist belief system that is espoused by Louis Farrakhan. This could account for Obama and his campaign's managers dropping of the name "Trinity" when discussing his church membership.

Pastor Wright had this to say about the Isarel/Palestinian problem:

"The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism".

This racist belief system stands in stark contrast to Obama's rhetoric regarding the need and desirability of racial and religious inclusiveness. The church's principles seem to belie Obama's platitudes about the need for all people - of whatever race or religion - to come together as one.

Until Obama refutes his Pastor's position, We can assume he like his other benefactor, George Soros and his Democracy Alliance (whose members are called “partners,”who pay an initial $25,000 fee and $30,000 in yearly dues,and must pledge to give at least $200,000 annually to groups that Democracy Alliance endorses), are pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel!

Why would any one vote for this duplicitous smooth talking man to the Presidency?

Time to Take Iran's Nuclear Threat Seriously

- Iran Focus has learnt that the photograph of Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, holding the arm of a blindfolded American hostage on the premises of the United States embassy in Tehran was taken by an Associated Press photographer in November 1979. Prior to the first round of the presidential elections on June 17, Iran Focus was the first news service to reveal Ahmadinejad’s role in the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. This man has been, and still is a terrorist who is in the process of developing a nuclear bomb. A bomb that he denies on one occasion to be building, and on another threatens to use against Israel and U.S. military bases if attacked by Israel.

It is time to take this mad man, megalomaniac seriously!

Yet, we are in the middle of a Presidential campaign, and not one candidate on the Democrat side and too few on the Republican side have even mentioned how they would deal with this real threat if elected.

Anthony Cordesman may be the most influential man in Washington that most people have never heard of. A former director of intelligence assessment for the secretary of defense and director of policy and planning in the Department of Energy, he is now the top strategic "guru" at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. He believes it is a real possibility that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

In the real world outside of politics, this matters mainly because an Iranian nuclear capability would transform the power balance in the Middle East, and leave the region and the rest of us living under the constant prospect of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel.

Cordesman theorizes that the biggest bomb that Iran is expected to have is 100 kilotons, which can inflict third-degree burns on exposed flesh at 8 miles; Israel's 1-megaton bombs can inflict third-degree burns at 24 miles. Moreover, the radiation fallout from an airburst of such a 1-megaton bomb can kill unsheltered people at up to 80 miles within 18 hours as the radiation plume drifts.
Cordesman assumes that Iran, with less than 30 nuclear warheads in the period after 2010, would aim for the main population centers of Tel Aviv and Haifa, while Israel would have more than 200 warheads and far better delivery systems, including cruise missiles launched from its 3 Dolphin-class submarines.

Cordesman also notes that Israel, if attacked or threatened with an attack, would have various options, in addition to a strike on Iran. A limited nuclear strike on the region mainly inhabited by the Alawite minority in Syria, from which come the ruling Assad dynasty.

A full-scale Israeli attack on Syria would kill up to 18 million people within 21 days; Syrian recovery would not be possible. A Syrian attack with all its reputed chemical and biological warfare assets could kill up to 800,000 Israelis, but Israeli society would be able to recover.

So in a clear, and chillingly style, Cordesman spells out that he believes the real stakes in the crisis that is building over Iran's nuclear ambitions would certainly include the end of Persian civilization, quite probably the end of Egyptian civilization, and the end of the Oil Age. This would also mean the end of globalization and the extraordinary accomplishments in world trade, growth and prosperity that are hauling hundreds of millions of out of poverty.

Cordesman also lists the oil wells, refineries and ports along the Gulf that could also be targets in the event of a mass nuclear response by an Israel convinced that it was being dealt a potentially mortal blow. If it was contained within the region, such a nuclear exchange might not be Armageddon for the human race; it would certainly be Armageddon for the global economy.

Source: Middle East Times

The Wrong Pesron To Get Endorsement From

In Mafia lore the soldier never wanted to get a kiss on the lips by the "godfather'. If he did he knew immediately that he was marked for death!

The analogy is a little far fetched when you speak of politics, but I believe the announcement of the endorsement of Obama by Senator Ted Kennedy may turn out to be a negative in the long run. Not because of the animus Senator Kennedy has developed in his alcohol sodden 52 year tenure in the Senate. The endorsement and comparison of Obama and John Kennedy will only result in people delving into Obama's and John Kennedy's history to compare the two, and what they find will be a stark contrast in persons.

When we compare Barrack Hussein Obama to Ted's brother John Fitzgerald Kennedy we will see a great difference. Not a similarity.

Kennedy was a Catholic, Obama belongs to a Church whose pastor is an supporter of Louis Farrakhan. John Kennedy was a war hero who had his PT boat shot out from under him by the Japanese, for which he received the Purple Heart and the Navy and Marine Corps. Medal. He was an advocate of defending the South Vietnamese against the Communist North Vietnamese. He could be described as a Hawk in the way he stared down the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Obama is described at best as a dove. He believes we can talk directly to the maniac that runs Iran, and that the Iraq war was wrong from the beginning.My question is at what point would he be willing to use the military?

President Kennedy proceeded to cut the high income tax rates
immediately after he was sworn in as President. Obama is for repealing the Bush tax cuts, and is advocating expanded welfare programs like universal health care. All of which will result in more tax dollars coming out of the pockets of working Americans and heading for the big welfare State rulers in Washington.

Unlike the two years service in National office of Obama. Kennedy served three terms in the Congress of the United States before being elected to the Senate. He was an experienced young political operative by the time he was nominated for President.

As Senator Lloyd Bensten said in 1988, during the vice-Presidential debates with Dan Quayle: "Senator you are no Jack Kennedy!". I repeat:Senator Obama, you are no John F. Kennedy!

When Your Choice Is "None Of The Above"

From the time when there were ten Republicans running for the Party's nomination for President. I searched for a REAL Conservative in the group. He surfaced later, but is now gone. Fred Thompson was the only Federalist who believed in smaller Federal Government and States Rights. But his "trophy" wife and non-charismatic manner was not attractive to the voters. The race for President has become a contest of sound bites, promises and a beauty contest.

I can't vote for any Democrat because they are all a group of lying, Tax and Spend Liberals, who would rob those who make an honest living, and give it to their dependency base.Not to mention the fact that like Lindon Johnson and Harry Truman, they won't allow the troops to win in Iraq, to please their leftist base.

Consider the statements of two well known contributors to Town Hall Internet site.

“I consider all three of [the leading Democrat candidates to be anti-military, tax-raising, left-wing flyweights who would bury this country in entitlements while essentially ignoring Islamic fascism.” —Burt Prelutsky

“The Clintons have a record of lawless and ruthless corruption that goes back not only to their White House days in the 1990s but even back to their time in the governors’ mansion in Arkansas... It may not be emotionally satisfying to vote for the lesser of two evils but a lot depends on how bad the worse evil is. Nobody running on the Republican ticket is as dangerous as the Clintons.” —Thomas Sowell

Of the eight senators making presidential runs, Clinton (N.Y.), who is completing her first Senate term, and Obama (Ill.), sworn in two years ago, have the briefest voting histories. The Senate has held 645 roll-call votes during their shared tenure, and more than 90 percent of the time the two senators stood with other Democrats. They opposed John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination as chief justice, supported increased funding for embryonic stem cell research and backed the same nonbinding measure that urged President Bush to plan for a gradual troop withdrawal from Iraq.

Obama voted to increase taxes when he opposed a package of business breaks that included the extension of middle-class provisions. Clinton voted for the tax bill -- before she voted against it, as did Obama, in the legislation's final form. Source is the Washington Post

On the Republican side you have McCain, Huckabee, Romney and Rudy Guilliani as the front runners. None of them is what I would call a Conservative. The reasons are numerous, but I will list just a few reasons why I am reluctant to vote for anyone of them.

Huckabee, an ordained Baptist Minister, had this unkind reference to the Religion of Romney:" Don't Mormons believe Jesus and the devil are brothers"!

Senator McCain teamed up with Senator Feingold to pass a bill that gutted free speech during election cycles, and John McCain may be an ex-POW, but he didn't sound like a Senator who believes in the rule of law. When he said: "the demonstrations by the illegal aliens moved the senate committee to come out with the amnesty bill". He was for a blanket pardon of all illegals!

He also stated on the Chris Matthews show that he would vote with the Democrats to stop a filibuster on Judicial appointment. Too close to the Left for me.

Mr. Guillani, in 1996 compared "the anti-immigration issue that's now sweeping the country" to "the Chinese Exclusionary Act, or the Know-Nothing movement -- these were movements that encouraged Americans to fear foreigners, to fear something that is different and to stop immigration." He also has been accused of allowing havens for illegals to exist in New York while Mayor.He also said educating the children of illegal immigrants made sense.

That narrows my choice down to Romney who has held more liberal positions on social issues such as abortion and gay rights in the years prior to becoming a candidate for President.

Mitt has campaigned on "if elected he will change Washington", an echo of Obama, but during the Iowa Caucus he displayed a "TO DO" list. Mr.Romney broke out a long banner with the twelve things he hopes to accomplish as president. Though they incorporate just about every goal of a conservative , they did not include balancing the budget, a major mistake.Then at a town hall event later, a voter rose and asked Romney why balancing the budget wasn't on the list. His campaign staff then taped it on the bottom. Two additional blank spaces were left, in case voters suggested Romney do anything else. Too duplicitous for me!

If this were a beauty contest I believe Romny and Edwards would be good candidates to run against each other. But this is a voters choice for the leader of the Free World, Commander in Chief of the military forces, who will have to contend with World wide Islamic terrorism, and titular head of the moral fiber of this great Country. Why do we seem to have forgotten this precept?

TV Hypocracy Raises It's Ugly Head

Mentioning that he believed homosexuality was a sin. Reggie White lost his previously announced job/hire for CBS sports.
White created a furor in the gay and lesbian community in March 1998 with a speech to the Wisconsin State Assembly. In it, he referred to homosexuality as “one of the biggest sins in the Bible”.
At the time, White, considering retirement, was on the short list of candidates for CBS’s N.F.L. studio show, but of course he did not get the job.

For years there has been an underlying prejudice against Catholics and Jews in the Media, while every attempt was made to increase the presence of women and minorities in the industry in the name of diversity.

Now for a another time in recent history, an active television sports announcer has made derisive and scurrilous remarks about a Catholic University and the Deity they worship.

This is not the first time, nor will it be the last as Media persons have substituted the use of bias license for freedom of speech. Personal prejudices and down right hatred have replace objectivity and the TRUTH!


In 2006, as anchor woman for The Today Show, Katie Couric's attack on Ave Maria University and its "dangerous Catholic culture" with its "segregation," its "intolerance," its disrespect for "civil liberties", was a notable on air attack.


Now ESPN anchor woman Dana Jacobson verbally"attacked" Jesus Christ.
Jacobson, reportedly intoxicated, was speaking at a celebrity roast in Atlantic City, N.J., when she unleashed a profane tirade, saying, "F--- Notre Dame," "F--- Touchdown Jesus" and finally "F--- Jesus."
"Touchdown Jesus" is the popular moniker for a statue on the Notre Dame campus of Jesus raising his arms.

If that wasn't enough, last September Kathy Griffin, the star of the Bravo show "My Life on the D-List," stirred controversy when she used her appearance on the Emmy Awards program to tell Jesus to "suck it" while claiming full credit for the honor for herself.


Thus far there has been no public apology from either Ms. Jacobson nor from ESPN leadership. Apparently word sensitivity is reserved for minority groups and the Muslim religion. Had she said F--- Mohammad, CAIR would have her head, literally within days!

Apparently this is just another example of the Secular/anti-religion world we now live in. A World that has abandoned the belief and reverence for God, and has substituted foul language,sexual license, hedonism, Atheism and unbridled self gratification.
Then some wonder why we seem to be experiencing more and more natural disasters! Could it be that the Almighty is trying to get our attention?
Today,, many Americans are infatuated with outright, full-bore atheism. In fact, Dr.Dawkins, the Oxford scientist who wrote "The God Delusion," is even selling young people "Scarlet Letter" tee-shirts with a giant "A" – for "atheist" – on his website (and bumper stickers too). Somehow, atheism – just like homosexuality, which used to be considered shameful and something to hide – is now becoming hip, sophisticated, enlightened, even a badge of honor.


This type of news indicates that any Christian Religion and their followers are fair game for discriminatory practices. The following story, as does the story about Ms. Jackobson, appears in today's edition of WorldNetDaily.


"In Witchita, Kansas, Reverend Holick was "attempting" to express his faith on a public sidewalk outside of an event in a public park that was celebrating homosexual behavior.
According to the records in the case, Holick had contacted the police department a week before the event and expressed his desire to communicate his religious views on the date of the homosex-fest".

"He was told he couldn't go into Heritage Square Park where it was being held but was told the sidewalk would be his "friend."
Then on the day of the event, Holick and other church members arrived at the sidewalk outside the event and "immediately" were confronted by about 10 officers. He was ordered to leave the sidewalk or be arrested.
He asked where he could go, and he was told the public sidewalks were off-limits to him, and he could go into a nearby private parking lot"!

So much for Freedom Of Speech and The Right To assembly!

Is The Pole Shift Theory Possible?

One of the theories that has not been published in the dialog of Global Warming, is the Mayan Pole Shift Theory in which the north and south pole shift. Albert Einstein agreed that this effect is now going on, and can be responsible for Global Weather change.

The theory if correct would make all other theories moot, because they predict the Poles will shift again in 2012. If this occurs, the catastrophe that will include earthquakes, tsunamis and massive destruction could be the "End of Times".

The end of the fifth creation of the Maya calendar is on December 23, 2012 of the Current Era (C.E.2).That would be 12-21-12, It has to do with the movement of the earths axis where all of the planets line up. It will change the tides and start massive flooding. Not necessarily the end of the world just major change in "mother nature" that could result in devastating events.

The magnetic field of the Earth has actually switched its direction many many times during Earth's history. Although this is not completely understood, the leading theory of how it works is that Earth's magnetic field is caused by the motion of the liquid outer core. The churning of the liquid in the outer core acts as a giant electromagnet, moving electrical charges around, in what is known as the "geomagnetic dynamo." The rotation of the solid inner core also contributes to the magnetic field.

When a certain combination of inner and outer core motion occurs, the Earth's magnetic field will quickly reverse. For example, lava that solidified 30,000 years ago shows that the magnetic field was in the opposite direction at that time. Evidence from the geologic record shows that this reversal could take less than 1000 or even less than 100 years. The way these reversals throughout geologic history were discovered was by looking at the seafloor. New ocean floor is created along the mid-ocean ridges. When lava along these ridges cools, its minerals harden in line with the Earth's magnetic field. This causes the seafloor to have magnetic "stripes," which can be measured and mapped. This is very useful for oceanographers and geologists.
One effect that may occur during a magnetic reversal is that the Earth may not be protected from charged particles streaming from the sun. These particles are called the "solar wind", and could be dangerous to life if they reached the Earth's surface. However, the interaction between the magnetic field and these particles deflects them around the Earth. The area around a planet (including Earth) within which the motion of charged particles is affected by the magnetic field is called the magnetosphere. The Earth's environment extends all the way from the sun to the Earth and beyond? It is not an empty wasteland of space. Instead, near-Earth space is full of streaming particles, electromagnetic radiation, and constantly changing electric and magnetic fields. All of these things make up our magnetosphere (source for this material is from NASA)

We've learned that the solar wind travels past the Earth at well over 1,000,000 miles per hour. And thanks to the Earth's magnetic field, the solar wind is stopped and deflected around the Earth so that most of it does not hit our atmosphere head on.

Sometimes the magnetosphere becomes overloaded with particles. When this happens, some particles escape through the magnetosphere and interact with atoms in the upper atmosphere, making them emit light. This is what creates the northern lights (aurora borealis) and the southern lights (aurora australis). weakened during a reversal, more of these particles will get through to the upper atmosphere. This could be a problem, but most likely the atmosphere is thick enough to protect the Earth's surface.

Solar wind energy in our magnetosphere can also cause what are known as space plasma storms. These storms can cause communication and science satellites to fail. They can also cause damage to electric power systems on the surface of the Earth. (See picture above of damage)
A large space storm in 1989 made currents on the ground that caused a failure in the Hydro-Quebec electric power system. This prevented 6 million people in Canada and the US from having electricity for over 9 hours. The same storm caused the atmosphere to inflate and dragged the LDEF satellite to a lower orbit earlier than expected.

This phenomenon, can and does have an affect on the Earth and it's climate. Al Gore's theory of Global Warming blames man made co2 gases for a decrease in the Polar ice cap, and many other climatology things. He like other hucksters is peddling a disputed scientific theory that will do nothing but slow down the United States economy.

Perhaps politicians and pseudo-scientists should consider the effect of the "solar winds" on climate change, and pay a lot more attention to people like NASA who have sent people into space where they can measure the effects of the Sun on our Mother Earth!

Polar Bears More Valuable Than Oil?

Recently, some scientists have claimed that human-caused global warming poses a significant threat to the survival of many species. For most species at risk, they argue, warming will cause the range of suitable habitat to shift faster than either the species (or their food sources) can move or adapt to a new range. For other species, they say, suitable habitat will cease to exist altogether.

Among the species claimed to be at high risk of extinction from human-caused global warming is the polar bear.
In February 2005 the Center for Biological Diversity filed a petition with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to list the polar bear as endangered or threatened. The petition was later joined by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace. In response, the USFWS initiated a formal status review to determine if the polar bear should be protected throughout its range.

A new NCPA study by Dr. David Legates, director of the University of Delaware’s Center for Climatic Research and state climatologist, examines the claim that global warming threatens to cause polar bear extinction and finds little basis for fear. By and large, the study finds that polar bear populations are in good shape.

The National Center for Policy Analysis reports that the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), an international organization that has worked for 50 years to protect endangered species, has also written on the threats posed to polar bears from global warming. However, their own research seems to undermine their fears.

According to the WWF, about 20 distinct polar bear populations exist, accounting for approximately 22,000 polar bears worldwide. Their study shows population patterns do not show a temperature-linked decline. In Fact the conclusion is. ”What seems clear is that polar bears have survived for thousands of years, including both colder and warmer periods. There may be threats to the future survival of the polar bear, but global warming is not primary among them.”
“Moreover, when the WWF report is compared with the Arctic air temperature trend studies discussed earlier, there is a strong positive (instead of negative) correlation between air temperature and polar bear populations. Polar bear populations are declining in regions (like Baffin Bay) that have experienced a decrease in air temperature, while areas where polar bear populations are increasing (near the Bering Strait and the Chukchi Sea) are associated with increasing air temperatures. Thus it is difficult to argue that rising air temperatures will necessarily and directly lead to a decrease in polar bear populations.”

People like Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate, Air and Energy Program, a liberal organization, should concern themselves with the real killer of polar bears.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, allow native Alaskans(Eskimos) to kill polar bears for food and clothing. They kill 60-100 polar bears a year. This is a bigger threat than an oil spill that may or may not happen.
People like her and the sycophant Democrat Congressman, Rep. Ed Markey, chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, who last Thursday introduced a bill that would require the Interior Department to delay the sale of oil drilling rights in the Chukchi Sea (Sale 193) — currently scheduled for Feb. 6 — until it makes a decision on the polar bear. A a real Threat to our oil independence.

Kassie Siegel and her co-conspirators, The Center for Biological Diversity(there's that word again)Climate, Air and Energy Program, are holding up the sale of leases to oil companies in the Chukchi/Bering Sea area by threatening to sue, are a threat to our Countries way of life and oil independence from the Arabs.
In this bloggers opinion they are the "fifth Column" of the United States who would like to force us back into the "horse and buggy days"!

UF Prof. Selects Diversity Over Free Speech

Having two sons who are alumni of the University of Florida, I am appalled by the apparent attitude of a faculty member in a position of power over students attending the University.

The faculty member involved is Dr.Patricia-Telles Irvin, Vice-President of Student Affairs. The good doctor appears to be more concerned with the feelings of the minority Muslim students than she is in protecting free speech as illustrated by the following dialog.



Delray Beach Republican Rep. Adam Hasner released a press statement tonight demanding an apology from University of Florida Student Affairs VP Patricia Telles-Irvin, pictured above, who had the misfortune of grabbing the lighting rod that is the movie Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West.

The movie, which some pan as anti-Muslim propaganda, has caused such a controversy at college campuses across the country that some schools have canceled showings. But others have praised the movie for its vivid depiction of Islamo-Fascism: Hasner encouraged fellow legislators to see this documentary this spring.

At the University of Florida, a coalition of student Republican and Jewish groups promoted the movie with fliers that read "Radical Islam Wants You Dead.

Some UF students expressed concerns for their safety after seeing the fliers, which prompted Telles-Irvin to send an e-mail to the complete student body that discussed the responsibilities that come along with free speech. She said the groups that designed the advertisement owed Muslims on campus an apology!
Enter Hasner.
Hasner, e-mailed UF President James Machen to say that he disagreed the posters posed an "inherent threat to campus safety."
"According to the administration's view of the world, elements of Radical Islam do not want to kill us," Hasner wrote. "Not only is this view wrong, but it is itself dangerous."
Hasner said that the incident has called into question UF's commitment to free speech. To restore confidence, Hasner suggested a "public reprimand" of Telles-Irvin and a "substantive and enunciated" free speech policy for the school.
According to Hasner's press release, Attorney General Bill McCollum is also involved.

Hasner quoted a Dec. 3, 2007 letter McCollum sent Machen saying that the Telles-Irvin's e-mail "may have violated the free speech rights of the students and organizations who posted this ad and sponsored the movie" and "at the very least it has created a chilling effect on the free speech rights of students."

"Dr. Telles-Irvin's letter may have violated the free speech rights of the students and organizations who posted this ad and sponsored the movie. At the very least it has created a chilling effect on the free speech rights of students enrolled at the University of Florida. As the Attorney General of Florida, it is my duty to protect the constitutional rights of all Floridians including civil rights and free speech rights. Consequently, I have asked attorneys in my office to review this matter and advise me what if any action this office should pursue. I am writing to request that you review this matter with your staff, legal counsel and the University of Florida Board of Trustees and, if they concur with my concerns, formulate and take some appropriate remedial action.
No doubt Dr. Telles-Irvin was responding in her letter to the sensitivities of the Muslim students on campus. While the Muslin faith should be honored and respected and most practicing Muslims are not radical and not terrorists, the United States has been at war with radical Islamic terrorists since September 11, 2001. The movie "Obsession," which I have seen, describes the nature of our enemy and this war. The headline on the ad for the movie reading "RADICAL ISLAM WANTS YOU DEAD" is one of the messages in this movie and is a true statement of the intent of these radical Islamic terrorists. In her letter Dr. Telles-Irvin says, "regardless of its original intent, the language reinforced a negative stereotype, created unnecessary divisiveness and contributed to a generalization that only furthers the misunderstanding of the religion of Islam." This may be the view of Dr. Telles-Irvin, but a great many Americans would disagree and argue that it is essential to the discussion and understanding of this war that the terrorists be properly and correctly labeled as radical Islamists who by their very actions clearly want us dead. Students and student organizations who hold this latter view should not be stifled in their free expression of it."
I will still root for the Gators, but am glad I won't be sending another of my children to UF.

We Embrace What We Escaped

Two hundred and twenty seven tears ago, the British army surrendered at Yorktown and the "War for Independence" was officially ended, although the Treaty of Paris in 1783 was needed to declare that the 13 Colonies were independent of Great Britain.

Although we fought them, many in this Country still follow the traditions and customs of England. You see this more in the East Coast and some parts of the middle West where British "old school" ties are still de rigour.

The Ivy League schools are filled with English traditions and so are many of the so called "Prep" schools.

The disturbing trend is found in the way our political system seems to mimic the trends in Great Britain. Recent political campaigns seem strangely reminiscent of what happened in Great Britain in 1945 when Prime Minister Churchill was soundly beaten in his quest for re-election by Clement Attlee.

Churchill had led the British through the war to victory over the Nazis, but in 1945 the Country was in dire financial condition, and the Socialist Attlee was victorious in his bid to unseat the man who said these memorable words: "One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half."

He also said: " You have enemies, Good! That means you have stood up for something, sometime in your life."

These and many other quotes, too numerous to mention in this blog, show what a great man was Winston Churchill. But the people turned on him for six years and elected the Socialist Clement Attlee.

It is not a small thing to note that the British realized the folly of their actions and re-elected him in 1951 after Attlee had Socialised the National Health Service, railroads, mines, roads, gas and the Bank Of England! Had it not been for a loan from the United States of 4.34 Billion dollars at 2% interest, obtained by the famous economist John Maynard Keynes, the British economy would have been bankrupt.

Today we have struggle for the power of the Presidency in which all of the Democratic and too many of the Republican(RINOS) candidates are advocating the installing of Government Programs which if passed will start the United States on the road to Socialism. Many believe we are already on that "slippery slope", but if Obama, Hillary Clinton or John Edwards it will be a fate complete.

Churchill's words about turning your back on danger seem to be the watch word of the Democrats. The Iraq war has disappeared from their campaign rhetoric. Unfortunately for Americans "out of sight out of mind " will not make the World wide threat of radical Ilsam go away! But apparently not unlike the "Britts" in 1945, the American voters appear to be more interested in "change" and more "goodies" from the Federal Government.

It was once said that "You Can't kill Santa Claus"! Apparently that applies to 50% or more of the voters in the United States who have voted in the Democrat Congress and appear ready to turn the Commander In Chief position into a Santa Claus. Butter for guns and more taxation for the working man will be the rule of the day, until we like the British in 1951 when they threw out Attlee for Churchill, wake up and realize that Socialism has failed in every Country it has been enacted. My fear is that fear we may not awake in time!

The Fifth Column of Islam

There are many Internet sites devoted to the work that the Islamic terrorists cannot accomplish in Iraq. These sites are fulfilling the role of modern day Nazi Goebbels. They are masters of disinformation and divisiveness. One such site was closed by the FBI in Texas for reasons of National Security. The "'Infocom"website in Franklin,Texas outside Dallas was servicing 599 web pages for Muslims.

There are an estimated 4000 Muslim web pages, and one particular page has the following example of inciting violence: "Muslim pulls out a baseball bat, Muslim smashes Jew over the head, Muslim wipes off the blood." The few who control the Islam channel kick and ban arbitrarily whoever disagrees with their opinion or definition of Islam.

One site I reviewed is "altmuslim", written by Rabab Fayad who is a Middle East consultant in Washington, DC. She formerly served as deputy national director of ethnic outreach for the Kerry-Edwards 2004 presidential campaign. Her posts appear in Islamica magazine.

Her January 14th post includes the following: "The words used by Republican candidates to describe inhuman acts of terrorism wrongly associate those who practice these horrendous acts with the 5 million Americans and 1 billion people throughout the world who practice Islam. This has been in direct contrast to Democrats, who have opted to use language that does not make such an association.Rudy Giuliani is among the worst culprits. In effort to use scare tactics to keep his numbers up, Giuliani often paints a picture of Muslims as violent radicals and criticizes Democrats who refrain from linking Islam with terrorism, saying they are on the defensive in the war on terror. He has reinforced this association throughout the campaign trail, saying in Milwaukee for instance, "I believe we have to be on offense against Islamic terrorism," and again in New Hampshire, "Islamic terrorists... want to kill us".

Her comments regarding President Bollingers comments concerning Ahmedinajad's speech at Columbia show a twisted logic or a devious intent. "As a University, Columbia sees itself as a bastion of free speech and academic freedom. Indeed, this has been the repeated rhetoric surrounding the justification for Ahmedinajad's visit. However, were these values exemplified when President Bollinger viciously denigrated a head of state in his introductory remarks? Did these personal attacks against Ahmedinajad - which included calling him "uneducated," "evil," and "ridiculous"( blogger's note: he is all that and more!) - uphold the standards of discourse that Bollinger and Columbia as a university claim to defend? . Despite our own rhetoric about the exceptionalism of the university campus, today we realize that we too are vulnerable to political pressure. We too can manipulate a platform to our own political advantage- whether we are pandering to the conservative media, special interests, or university donors. We too have lessons that we need to learn about the essence of free speech.

This shows the anti-American bias of this blogger, who as all who are residents of this world know that the man she is defending is an advocate of the destruction of Israel and the "great Satan" United States.

She and other apologists of radical Islamic terrorism use the victim analogy to hide the fact that they have never denounced the acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam. That is not to say that all Muslims feel the animus toward the United States, but then neither did all the women an children in Germany before WWII. They too hid behind the curtain of unknowing and denial!

Should We All Cheer The Reduced Killing?

Today's Washington Post headlined a "feel good" story, they thought! A survey of 1,787 abortionists nation wide revealed the "encouraging" fact that abortions are reducing. Their survey showed that in 2005 the number of abortions being performed in the United States has dropped to 1.2 million a year - the lowest level since 1976, the year Roe was approved by the Un-Supreme Court.

Since 1976 their have been 50 million abortions performed in the United States. A genocide of mythical proportions, and the Capitol of abortions is New York City! A city in a state that has the most liberal abortion laws.

The average payment for this death producing procedure is estimated at $413.00. The aborting is done on pregnant women aged 15-44, and most abortions are performed in the North East. The least number of abortions are performed in the Middle West and the South.

Many states do not even require a permission slip from the parents to have an abortion,nor do they have to notify the child's parents after. But most public schools need a permission slip from the child's MD and parent to give the child an aspirin.

Scientist have shown that a baby in the womb( aka fetus) can feel pain at six weeks, but they prove that the fetus can feel pain at the 20th week because the baby responds to the pain.

Doctor Carlo Bellieni, Professor of Neonatal Therapy at Le Scotte University of Siena, Italy has this to say about fetal suffering during abortion. "The scientific evidence for the humanity of the unborn is immense. We cannot understand how it can be thought that it becomes a person at a certain point, perhaps when coming out of the uterus. From the physical point of view, at the birth very little really changes: Air enters the lungs, the arrival of blood from the placenta is interrupted, the type of circulation of blood in the heart changes, and not much more.

"As I often say, only blind faith in magic arts or some strange divinity can lead one to think that there is a 'human' quality leap at a given moment -- certainly not science."He concludes, ". . .I think one should say 'enough' to that anti-scientific attitude that regards prenatal life as a second-class life. And the paradox is that instead the Church is accused of retarding progress. In reality, the Church has an attitude of protection of health."

New Yorkers, like Americans generally, start to get queasy when confronted with the best weapons in the pro-life movement’s arsenal: graphic descriptions of rarely used late-term-abortion methods, and the fact that thousands of New York women return each year to clinics for a third or fourth abortion. When we nod our heads at Bill Clinton’s famous formulation that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare” or Hillary Clinton’s more recent proclamation that abortion is “a sad, even tragic choice,” we admit some discomfort with the procedure.
Among New York’s pro-choice leaders, reaction to this message is divided. Political groups like NARAL say they understand the need for conceding to public opinion. But to providers, the Clintonian reframing of the issue capitulates to pro-lifers. “Hillary can say anything she wants about whether an abortion is a tragedy,” says Dr. Paul. “What I know when I perform an abortion for a patient is that the overwhelming feeling is one of relief. Because the abortion has solved a huge problem in her life, whether it’s because she couldn't’t afford another child, couldn't’t afford to be a good mother to another child, or doesn’t have the money to raise a child.” She becomes increasingly passionate as she speaks. “Every time I do an abortion I save a woman’s life. If you want to call that a tragedy”—she pauses and exhales a sharp sigh—“I don’t consider it a tragedy, I’m sorry.”

Not as sorry as the baby you just killed I say!

“Our view is, abortion is nothing special. Abortion is right up there with having a baby or getting the care for whatever other medical needs you have.”

This is the attitude of one who either fails to accept a Divine purpose to Life, or chooses to ignore it. Her reasons are lies and are fathered by the father of all lies! Let us not celebrate until abortion "on demand" is nothing but a nightmare in the memory of events that this Country has passed through!

A Stark Study In Contrast

This is a story of two prominent people and how they are treated in their own Country.

The first notable is Pope Benedict XVI, who under pressure from University Professors and radical leftist students was forced to cancel a scheduled speech at Rome's La Sapienza University.

His "people" cancelled the speech because of security concerns, as many professors and students faulted the intellectual, conservative and tradition-minded Pope for a series of positions he has taken that they say subordinate science and reason to faith. Authors note: The statements were about Galaleo many Centuries ago, and recent comments about radical Muslims!

The protest against the visit was spearheaded by physicist Marcello Cini, a professor emeritus (means he doesn't teach anymore basically)of La Sapienza, who wrote to rector Renato Guarini complaining of an "incredible violation" of the university's autonomy.
Sixty-seven professors and researchers of the sprawling university's physics department, as well as radical students, joined in the call for the pope to stay away on Thursday, the start of the university's academic year.

In stark contrast to the rejection of the Pope in Rome is the open arms reception given by the President of St. Peters College in Jersey City, NJ. where he was allowed to give a political rally speech. Senator and Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama held a rally at Saint Peter’s College Wednesday, January 9 at the Yanitelli Recreational Life Center.
“Sen. Obama is the latest in a long series of historic figures to choose to speak at St. Peter's College,” said Dr. Eugene J. Cornacchia, President, Saint Peter’s College. “We welcome him as we would welcome any presidential candidate who wishes to discuss and debate the ideas and events that are shaping our history.”

If only Catholics, especially the Head of The Church, were given the same courtesy that a Muslim born and raised, who is a convert to a Church whose Pastor honors Lewis Farrakahn is given by the President of a Catholic College!

Obama is an advocate of almost every thing the Jesuits, who founded this University, stand for. He is a proponent of repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, calling it an "abhorrant Law". He has voted(1997) against the ban in Illinois of partial birth abortions. This is considered a murder of a live person by all Catholics.

He is for research on embryos from fetal cells. This statement reveals his position. "And I'm proud to be a cosponsor of the stem cell bill before us today ["Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005" (H.R. 810)]. This bill embodies the innovative thinking that we as a society demand and medical advancement requires.

"When freedom does not have a purpose, when it does not wish to know anything about the rule of law engraved in the hearts of men and women, when it does not listen to the voice of conscience, it turns against humanity and society." Pope John Paul II

Gold As An Indicator

In January 1980, when Jimmy Carter was President and we had gasoline lines, gold was priced at $675.00. Today we are looking at gold prices that spiral day to day. This morning the market price for an ounce of gold is $910.00!

In 1968 during the Vietnam war, the price of one ounce of gold was just $36.50.

However, during these last 40 years Americans have lost confidence in OUR paper money. A rising gold price means investors are fleeing paper money for gold. This may be the result from the central bank issuing too much money, more than what's demanded to support trade, or by the U.S. Treasury selling dollars and advocating a lower foreign exchange value, as we have seen the devaluation of the the dollar compared with the Euro.

This policy has lowered the demand for dollars and raised the demand for gold. Today we see inflation running wild, the dollar declining and the secondary mortgage industry in free fall. We are spending money as a Country that acts like a drunken sailor on his first leave!

The stock market is a perfect illustration of the lack of confidence that Americans have for the economic condition in the United States.The free fall of most stocks illustrates the shift from stocks and bonds to gold.

This lack of confidence is directed by all the Democratic aspirants to the Presidency, and too many of the Republican candidates, toward President Bush. To be sure, he has some blame for the lack of a sound dollar. He should have used the veto pen many more times on spending bills passed by Congress than he did.

But the real culprit in this debasing of our dollar is the Congress of the U.S.. The profligate spenders in Congress sent more Pork back to their constituents this past session of Congress than ever before in our history. This despite the fact that as of December 19, 2007, the total U.S. federal debt held by the public was roughly $5 trillion.
This does not include the money owed by states, corporations or individuals, nor does it include the money owed to Social Security beneficiaries in the future. If intragovernment debt obligations are included, the debt figure rises to roughly $9 trillion If unfunded Medicaid, Social Security, etc. promises are added, this figure rises dramatically to a total of $59.1 trillion. In 2005 the public debt was 64.7% of GDP according to the CIA's World Factbook .

Of this outstanding debt a total of $2.079 trillion is owed by the Federal government in long term Bonds and notes held by such adversary Countries as Communist China.

U.S. Treasury statistics indicate that, at the end of 2006, foreigners held 44% of federal debt held by the public. About 66% of that 44% was held by the Central Banks of other countries, in particular the central banks of Japan and China.
This debt is a burden borne by the American public. Wikapedia states the following: The debt equates to $28,412 per head of the U.S. population, or $58,390 per head of the U.S. working population.

Despite these stark statistics, not one of the Democrat candidates who promise change in Washington, says anything about how they will reduce this burden on the U.S. taxpayer.

All we hear is promises to spend more money on welfare programs to garner votes.

The fires of National bankruptcy have been lighted, but like Nero in ancient Rome, Congress continues to spend and call for more money in the form of increased taxes.

The choice is clear. We Conservatives must turn our backs on the tax and spend Liberals, and elect a person who stands for fiscal responsibility.

Thompson For President

Last week Senator Clinton promised if elected President she would spend 70 billion dollars to help stimulate the economy.

Today, Senator Obama promised to spend 120 billion to aid workers, social security recipients and other welfare recipients.

Neither one made the slightest mention of reducing the Taxation of the over taxed middle class! Bigger Government

and withdrawal from Iraq is all we are promised by these deceptive politicians.

Obama supporters like to be compare him with John Kennedy, but The martyr President was born and raised Catholic, not a born and raised Muslim. He also advocated reducing the high tax rates of previous Administrations to help the economy. The list could be expanded, but these two items illustrate the fact that Senator Obama is no John Kennedy.

This life long Republican voted for Kennedy because of his compassion for the over taxed working man.

Presidential aspirants Clinton and Obama are trying to buy your votes with Cash that they have no right to spend! Americans are already weighted down with a heavy tax burden. We don't need a tax and spend Socialist in the White House.

The man who thus far has gotten very little traction in the race for the Presidency, is Ex- Senator Fred Thompson. A no nonsense candidate who firmly believes in the principles upon which this Country was founded. States Rights and a smaller Federal government with a strong military !

Thompson is some what like Reagan in terms of how to deal with the evil in our world. Like Reagan, Thompson is also very firm on free enterprise and free trade as the solution to economic challenges. Thompson stands for less taxation, regulation and litigation, as the way to grow a strong economy, just like Reagan.

Leftists hated Reagan, just as much as they hate Bush, maybe even more. They called him “a cowboy” – a “war-monger” – a “fool on foreign policy” and “dangerous” due to his heavy handed willingness to confront evil wherever he found it, on the other side of the world, or the other side of the political aisle. I believe the left feels the same way about Mr. Thompson. And that alone makes me want to vote for him.

But unlike Reagan, Thompson has always been pro-life all his adult life.President Reagan was pro-choice until later in his life.

Thompson is a pure federalist, opposed to bigger government and for reducing the size, scope and expense of government. Unlike Reagan, he is fully opposed to any form of amnesty for those who have broken our laws and seek a free ride to American citizenship. History shows that Reagan relaxed immigration laws (aka amnesty) during his Presidency.

I believe it is time for the Americans to decide whether they want a "slick" politician who promises US a bigger government, with increased taxation and government control of our lives. Or would we be better off with a man who could be the 2008 "version" of Ronald Reagan. A man who doesn't believe in taxpayer funded scholarships for illegals and does not call President Bush's foreign policy arrogant. For those who don't know who advocates the above, it is Huckabee.

Huckabee is a wolf in sheep's clothing!

A syncretist is one who attempts the reconciliation or union of different or opposing principles. Trying to convince the United States voting public that the can be all things to all people appears to be the aim of today's candidates for the Presidency.

All except for Fred Thompson. What you hear him say is what he really means, and will deliver. Vote for the man who may not be "so slick" but will make a great President

The Travesty In The Pentagon

Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families, especially those of our fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who have died in defense of American liberty while prosecuting the war with Jihadistan, and while you are praying, pray for US!

The recent sacrifice of Stephen Coughlin by the political correctness "police" of the Pentagon, for being to critical of the radical Muslims is an incident that should elicit shivers up and down the spine of any American who remembers 9/11/2001.
Technically he was not fired, but the man who is considered the most knowledgeable expert on radical Islam, did not have his contract renewed.
The injustice of this action has made a mockery of the recent statement made by US military chief Admiral Michael Mullen, who when asked about the situation in Pakistan said: "We know about al-Qaeda in Pakistan, we know it is having a significant impact, not just in Afghanistan, but certainly there are concerns about how much they have turned inward inside Pakistan. I am extremely concerned about this," he told a press conference. So concerned, he allowed the dismissal of the one man who knows more about al-Qaeda than anyone left on his staff. I wonder if his concern includes the infiltration by al-Qaeda here in the United States as well?

I have said it before and written it many times, but it needs to be shouted from the roof tops! We are letting our freedom be subverted by those who would destroy us. Kruscheff was right when he said we don't have to beat you on the battle field, we can defeat you from within!

Even the Democrat candidates for President refused to comment on the Islamic threat when prompted in the recent debate.None of the four Democrat presidential candidates — despite running for an office that demands they lead the ongoing global war against Islamic extremists — could bring himself or herself to define the enemy we face is Islamic.

The Republican candidates , on the other hand, called the enemy by its proper name.
The candidates referred to terrorists and terrorism as "Islamic," while also citing radical "Islam" as the problem, no less than 22 times.

Fred Thompson asserted, "We are in a global war with radical Islam. They declared war on us a long, long time ago. We took note, really, for the first time on Sept. 11, 2001."

The Republicans seem to get it. Democrats don't. They talked a lot about "fighting" — fighting insurance companies and big business and Wall Street and polluters. But will they fight the real enemy — Islamic terrorists?
To hear the Democrats in their debate, you'd think Islamic radicals had stopped plotting new attacks against us and scheming new ways of killing us.

WE allowed the secularist humanists to "kick" God out of our schools, public buildings, an WE stood by silently when the Supreme Court perverted the Constitution to allow the killing of unborn babies in the name of "free Choice". What choice, and whose choice I ask?
We have allowed many of the basic principals of our Constitution and Bill of Rights to be subverted in the name of "PC" and diversity. Will we give up our freedom completely by sitting on the fence of political correctness while organisations like CAIR and ACLU subvert our basic right of free speech?

Truth Is a Stranger To Hillary Clinton

There are some basic truths that describe the condition that we find ourselves and the Country in today.

The first is we are at war with World wide Radical lslam.A war that will probably last for years to defeat an enemy who has stated they want to destroy us!

The second is despite the relatively small number of home foreclosures. To date, approximately 500,000 of those sub prime borrowers have lost their homes to foreclosures. An additional 1.8 million are likely to follow as the market deteriorates. That’s nearly 2.4 million lost homes.

But compared with the number of total households in the USA, 111,269,000 in 2007, of which 67% were owned. It is evident that despite the painful experience for those who loose their homes. It is not a big National problem. Many of the people involved are second time home owners who over reached their financial capacity by buying a second house that cost more than they could afford!



The Third Truth is Social Security is the single largest federal program, and it is going broke. In 2004, the Social Security system took in $569 billion in tax revenue and paid out $493 billion in benefits. The program provided benefits to more than 47 million people--about two-thirds of them retired workers and the rest disabled workers, survivors of deceased workers, workers' spouses, and minor children.
Although today the program takes in more revenue than it spends, that situation will not continue once large numbers of baby boomers begin claiming retirement benefits. In coming years, the Social Security system will face mounting financial pressures as its outlays start to grow much faster than its revenue. CBO projects that scheduled Social Security outlays (those implied by the current benefit formula) will rise from 4.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) this year to 6.5 percent in 2050. Revenue, however, is scheduled to remain at 4.9 percent of GDP. This is the third basic truth, Social Security is going broke!
And yet, candidate Hillary Clinton seems to ignore the Basic truths and promise if elected she will spend 70 billion dollars on what this blogger believes are nothing more than an extension of the Federal Governments rush to bankruptcy or massive tax increases.

Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton on Friday proposed a $70 billion emergency spending package and possibly another $40 billion tax rebate to counter what she sees as a coming recession, according to the New York Times.
“I have been looking at the latest unemployment numbers, and I really think it is imperative that we start to move to help people dealing with the housing market and give the country a jolt of confidence in the economy,”(aka more welfare at taxpayers peril) the senator from New York told the Times.
Clinton’s plan would provide $30 billion for an emergency housing crisis fund for states to help low-income families unable to make mortgage payments; $25 billion to help low-income families pay heating bills this winter; $10 billion to extend unemployment insurance for people unable to find jobs; and $5 billion for alternative energy programs, the Times said.
The $40 billion tax rebate would be enacted later if economic conditions worsen.
Clinton told the newspaper she “absolutely” believed it was possible for Democrats in Congress to work with US President George W. Bush to enact a stimulus package early this year. The US presidential election does not come until November and the new president would take over a year from now.
But President Bush has said any stimulus he is considering would most likely focus on tax cuts rather than spending.

The more I hear from Clinton, Obama and Edwards the more I think I am hearing a speech from the famous Socialist of the past, Karl Marx. But even he wasn't advocating the "genocide"of partial birth abortion!

Hollywood's New Matinee Idol Examined

The Hollywood elitists appear to have chosen their new Matinee Idol, Barrack Obama. The rich and "beautiful" of the celluloid screen helped push Bill Clinton into the Oval Office. Until the Iowa caucus it seemed their favorite was Bill's wife Hillary. But in all fairy tales the story has shifted a bit.

Yesterday the Hollywood mogul known for his lavish parties for Bill Clinton's campaign,David Geffen,endorsed Obama. His reasons were as follows:

He essentially said Hillary was unelectable. But he went further: he called her "incredibly polarising" before turning on her husband.Calling him "a reckless guy", who had given his enemies ample stout sticks with which to beat him, he even suggested Bill Clinton's personal habits would yet damage his wife's campaign, hinting at further skeletons in the cupboard. Referring to the couple, Geffen added: "Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling."

Their are lies, liars and politicians who use semantics and double speak to convince voters to pull the lever opposite their name on election day.

The candidate in this election cyle who has thus far demonstrated the ability to sway voters with semantics and catchy slogans but little substance, is Senator Obama.

The junior Senator from Illinois has little to show for his two years in the U.S. Senate other than his votes against providing more money for the troops fighting radical Islam in Iraq.

He is using as his slogan for his campaign " Change We Can Believe In."

But what kind of change, does he envision much less promise to accomplish if he were to be elected President? Obama has voiced essentially the same positions that the top three Democrats running have itterated. Abortion on demand, withdrawal from Iraq, ebryonic cell research sponsored by government money, gun control, larger taxes, repeal of Bush's tax cuts and bigger government.

From this Socialist, secularist position how will he affect a change in Washington that will lead to better protection for US and make life better for the rapidly vanishing middle class?

This candidate is handsome, erudite and appealing to the young. Those who always think they can make the World a better place than their parents did. Maybe they can, but to do so One must have a plan or at least an outline of what he/she will do to affect the change.

So far all Obama has shown us is his anti-war sentiments, and with the situation in Iraq looking better each month you don't hear many Democrats talking about Iraq on the "stump".

With the Iranian situation becoming each day more threatening. I would hope Americans would not vote for a man who has said publicly that his way of dealing with Islamic terrorists is by negotiation, not by force of arms to defeat them!

This is not Mister or Miss America we will elect in November. The beauty contest is a far cry from electing the head of the Free World !