“Yahweh, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference.” There are those setting about to change decrees and rulers because they don’t like them. Who do you suppose sets the things in order in the expanse of this universe? Who do you suppose sets up the nations leaders? Do you really think that you as an individual human being actually set in place the leaders of this country called America? Do you really believe that your vote at the last Presidential election was what caused the next President of the United States to be elected and set up as America’s new ruler? Or; do you really know how these positions come about or are allocated?  “…until you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever he will.” Daniel 4:32.

This was spoken by a Heavenly Angel to a ruler called Nebuchadnezzar. It appears that he became arrogant in his position and failed to acknowledge who was actually in control and where his position and power of that position was derived from. He needed a lesson in humility so, he was temporarily disposed of his position and driven away from mankind and became as one of the beasts of the field. After a period called seven times (seven years) he finally looked up, gave the glory and praise to the Most High, and his senses was restored and he was given back the kingdom that he once ruled. For many of us that is the truth and we believe that the Most High rules and controls the human race. However, there are those who do not believe this and think their power and position comes from their own efforts and they are the ones who set themselves into positions of leadership and authority.  “Rulers and nobles rule by me, and all the judges of the earth.” Proverbs 8:16

It appears that there is a concerted effort orchestrated by individuals that think they can change what has occurred in the last election cycle. Mostly, these are arrogant and ignorant people whining over the GOP losses. Whose fault is this? Did the GOP put the right candidate into the race? Would the GOP candidate this cycle be selected by the Most High as His choice for President? Well, the answer to this can be found in the results. Who is now the President Elect? There is a plan set in motion by the higher authority that cannot be changed by anyone in the human race at this time.   No matter how hard you try, His will cannot be altered! Consider time and circumstance that accompanied each Presidential selection from George Washington to Barack Obama.   Do you believe or understand why each man was selected in his time? Was President Abraham Lincoln selected for his time and the subsequent troubles that accompanied his tenure in office? How about President Truman, do you believe that he was chosen for a time and hour? How did WW2 end? Who was partly responsible for the Japanese surrender? 

I must assure you that all events from the beginning of this great country America have been controlled by a power beyond our understanding, our comprehension!  Every sequence of events during America’s existence has been guarded and controlled by decisions that kept everything on a predetermined course. No matter what anyone tries to do to change the course of America’s fate or direction in the coming events, they will fail. Here is a prophecy that reveals America’s part in the destruction of the descendants of Esau. “And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for straw. And they shall burn among them and consume them. And no survivor shall be to the house of Esau, for Yahweh has spoken.” Obadiah 1:18.  Is this a coincidence that America and Great Britain took the lead in the Arab crisis of this current war? The descendants of Esau will become a waste and desolation, burned by fire at the hand of the descendants of Jacob (the twelve tribes) and the house of Joseph, which are also known as America and Great Britain! Do you suppose you can change this? Do you suppose that you can select and install the correct leaders for this coming event? No, there is absolutely nothing that you or I can do to change anything of this order and nature.

And grant me the serenity to change the things that I can, and; the wisdom to know the difference!

“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?” Job 38:2

“He that gives answer before he hears, It is folly and shame unto him.” Proverbs 18:13

Many commentators today speak errantly and without knowledge. They report the matter as it suits their agenda or goal.  Recently, there has been a push on to try the veracity of President Elect Obama’s citizenship requirements. Obama taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. From the University’s own press release the following applies.

“UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.” (http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html)

What I am saying is simply (and it must be kept simple) this, someone that taught Constitutional Law would most certainly know what the Constitution says, wouldn’t they? And knowing what it says in Article II Section 1 would they believe themselves to be qualified for the office of the President of the United States of America? What does this portion of the Constitution actually say? The part in question is stated simply (and for the people challenging this (Barack’s eligibility) it must be kept simple…real simple).

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;… Article II Section 1.

What does this actually say? “Except a natural born citizen, OR a citizen of the United States.” The part that keeps turning up missing is the “OR a citizen…” The focus and accent is on the “natural born” part by the (quasi) as it were educated challengers to Obama’s citizenship. Let us examine the facts, shall we? From the State Department’s Website on Citizenship the following applies, providing it becomes necessary!

“Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship By a Child Born Abroad:

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.” (http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html).

Now let’s follow the timeline of Barack’s mother.

Born:

Stanley Ann Dunham

November 29, 1942

Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, US

Moved to Hawaii:

1960 (18 years of age)

Married:

February 2, 1961 to Barack Obama Sr.

Gave Birth in Hawaii:

August 4, 1961, (age 18) to Barack Obama II

All of the aforementioned occurred within the United States of America as Hawaii was a state since 1959. We will examine more timeline information for clarity’s sake.

Ann Dunham Timeline:

1942

November 29, 1942: Ann Dunham is born Stanley Dunham in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Her parents are Stanley Armour Dunham and Madelyn Dunham. Her father names his daughter Stanley after himself because he wanted a son. When she's 18, Stanley, who doesn't like her boyish name, starts introducing herself as Ann.

1956

Ann Dunham is 13. Her family moves to Mercer Island, Washington, so Ann can attend a new high school that has recently opened. Ann spends 8th grade through high school on Mercer Island. Ann is deeply influenced by two of her teachers: Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman. Foubert, English teacher, and Wichterman, philosophy teacher, encouraged their students to challenge authority and societal norms. The reading list provided by them included: Atlas Shrugged, 1984, and The Communist Manifesto. Parents on Mercer Island were outraged and tried to have Foubert and Wichterman fired. During high school years Ann Dunham states she is an atheist and that she is not interested in getting married or having children.

1960

Ann Dunham is 18. Her family moves to Honolulu, Hawaii. Ann begins classes at the University of Hawaii.

- She meets Barack Obama Sr. in a Russian-language class. Barack Obama Sr. is a foreign student from Kenya, who has a magnetic personality. Barack Obama Sr. is very opinionated, talkative and passionate. The two start dating.

- Ann tells her parents about her African boyfriend and they invite him for dinner.

1961

 February 2, 1961: Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. get married in Maui in a discreet ceremony. Nobody is invited. At the time of the wedding Ann is already three months pregnant with Barack Obama Jr.

August 4, 1961: Barack Obama Jr. is born. Ann is eighteen. She drops out of college after one semester in the University of Hawaii.

1962

 When Barack Obama Jr. is 1, his father, Barack Obama sr., leaves the family and goes to Harvard to pursue a Ph.D. in economics.

- When Barack Obama Jr. is almost 2, Ann returns to college. Her parents help take care of baby Barack. Money is tight.

- Ann meets Lolo Soetoro at the University of Hawaii. Lolo is a foreign student from Indonesia.

1964

 Ann files for divorce from Barack Obama Sr. and he signs the papers.

Again; all of this occurs while Barack Obama’s mother is a United States citizen dwelling within the United Sates for more than twenty (20) years! And, according to the State Department’s website this also satisfies the requirements if the child was born elsewhere, such as outside of the United States. Either way Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States of America by law and by birth. This at the minimum satisfies the OR factor of Article II Section 1 clause on qualifications for candidacy of the office of President. 

It remains to be seen what will happen or where it will end, but it seems to be an effort in vain as the challenge to Obama’s citizenship was tossed from several courts already including review by SCOTUS Justice David Souter. However, as sore losers go, they want their pound of flesh. The current charge and whining is led by Alan Keyes, Senate and Presidential contender and loser to both offices, and World Net Daily, another sore loser website. It’s not about Constitution or about Constitutional Law or they would have challenged some serious violations of the Constitution by the Bush Administration et al. It is personal against Obama! They have tried everything they could to discredit the man and his candidacy. They tried to use subversive propaganda by desperately attaching an appellative to him such as “he is a Muslim.” They tried to paint him as a Chicago thug and connected to questionable people and hard dirty politics; Chicago style. However, to date, it has failed to work. And, I do not think the latest attempt will either. So, what’s left? If everything else fails they will either have him assassinated or try to have him assassinated! Remember who these people are, and write their names into an investigative file as suspect in collaboration to murder in cold blood President Barack Obama. And that will make our job much easier because we know who you are, and where you live! It will not go down like the JFK assassination; we won’t stand for it this time! So, keep track of those involved in this (quasi) Constitutional challenge, and then place them on the suspect or person (s) of interest list! Remember, hatred and envy is powerful motivators. 

“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?” Job 38:2

“He that gives answer before he hears, It is folly and shame unto him.” Proverbs 18:13

Many commentators today speak errantly and without knowledge. They report the matter as it suits their agenda or goal.  Recently, there has been a push on to try the veracity of President Elect Obama’s citizenship requirements. Obama taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. From the University’s own press release the following applies.

“UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.” (http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html)

What I am saying is simply (and it must be kept simple) this, someone that taught Constitutional Law would most certainly know what the Constitution says, wouldn’t they? And knowing what it says in Article II Section 1 would they believe themselves to be qualified for the office of the President of the United States of America? What does this portion of the Constitution actually say? The part in question is stated simply (and for the people challenging this (Barack’s eligibility) it must be kept simple…real simple).

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;… Article II Section 1.

What does this actually say? “Except a natural born citizen, OR a citizen of the United States.” The part that keeps turning up missing is the “OR a citizen…” The focus and accent is on the “natural born” part by the (quasi) as it were educated challengers to Obama’s citizenship. Let us examine the facts, shall we? From the State Department’s Website on Citizenship the following applies, providing it becomes necessary!

“Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship By a Child Born Abroad:

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.” (http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html).

Now let’s follow the timeline of Barack’s mother.

Born:

Stanley Ann Dunham

November 29, 1942

Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, US

Moved to Hawaii:

1960 (18 years of age)

Married:

February 2, 1961 to Barack Obama Sr.

Gave Birth in Hawaii:

August 4, 1961, (age 18) to Barack Obama II

All of the aforementioned occurred within the United States of America as Hawaii was a state since 1959. We will examine more timeline information for clarity’s sake.

Ann Dunham Timeline:

1942

November 29, 1942: Ann Dunham is born Stanley Dunham in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Her parents are Stanley Armour Dunham and Madelyn Dunham. Her father names his daughter Stanley after himself because he wanted a son. When she's 18, Stanley, who doesn't like her boyish name, starts introducing herself as Ann.

1956

Ann Dunham is 13. Her family moves to Mercer Island, Washington, so Ann can attend a new high school that has recently opened. Ann spends 8th grade through high school on Mercer Island. Ann is deeply influenced by two of her teachers: Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman. Foubert, English teacher, and Wichterman, philosophy teacher, encouraged their students to challenge authority and societal norms. The reading list provided by them included: Atlas Shrugged, 1984, and The Communist Manifesto. Parents on Mercer Island were outraged and tried to have Foubert and Wichterman fired. During high school years Ann Dunham states she is an atheist and that she is not interested in getting married or having children.

1960

Ann Dunham is 18. Her family moves to Honolulu, Hawaii. Ann begins classes at the University of Hawaii.

- She meets Barack Obama Sr. in a Russian-language class. Barack Obama Sr. is a foreign student from Kenya, who has a magnetic personality. Barack Obama Sr. is very opinionated, talkative and passionate. The two start dating.

- Ann tells her parents about her African boyfriend and they invite him for dinner.

1961

 February 2, 1961: Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. get married in Maui in a discreet ceremony. Nobody is invited. At the time of the wedding Ann is already three months pregnant with Barack Obama Jr.

August 4, 1961: Barack Obama Jr. is born. Ann is eighteen. She drops out of college after one semester in the University of Hawaii.

1962

 When Barack Obama Jr. is 1, his father, Barack Obama sr., leaves the family and goes to Harvard to pursue a Ph.D. in economics.

- When Barack Obama Jr. is almost 2, Ann returns to college. Her parents help take care of baby Barack. Money is tight.

- Ann meets Lolo Soetoro at the University of Hawaii. Lolo is a foreign student from Indonesia.

1964

 Ann files for divorce from Barack Obama Sr. and he signs the papers.

Again; all of this occurs while Barack Obama’s mother is a United States citizen dwelling within the United Sates for more than twenty (20) years! And, according to the State Department’s website this also satisfies the requirements if the child was born elsewhere, such as outside of the United States. Either way Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States of America by law and by birth. This at the minimum satisfies the OR factor of Article II Section 1 clause on qualifications for candidacy of the office of President. 

It remains to be seen what will happen or where it will end, but it seems to be an effort in vain as the challenge to Obama’s citizenship was tossed from several courts already including review by SCOTUS Justice David Souter. However, as sore losers go, they want their pound of flesh. The current charge and whining is led by Alan Keyes, Senate and Presidential contender and loser to both offices, and World Net Daily, another sore loser website. It’s not about Constitution or about Constitutional Law or they would have challenged some serious violations of the Constitution by the Bush Administration et al. It is personal against Obama! They have tried everything they could to discredit the man and his candidacy. They tried to use subversive propaganda by desperately attaching an appellative to him such as “he is a Muslim.” They tried to paint him as a Chicago thug and connected to questionable people and hard dirty politics; Chicago style. However, to date, it has failed to work. And, I do not think the latest attempt will either. So, what’s left? If everything else fails they will either have him assassinated or try to have him assassinated! Remember who these people are, and write their names into an investigative file as suspect in collaboration to murder in cold blood President Barack Obama. And that will make our job much easier because we know who you are, and where you live! It will not go down like the JFK assassination; we won’t stand for it this time! So, keep track of those involved in this (quasi) Constitutional challenge, and then place them on the suspect or person (s) of interest list! Remember, hatred and envy is powerful motivators. 

“Righteousness exalts a nation; But sin is a reproach to any people.” Proverbs 14:34

So; where did the GOP go wrong? Actually; where did they go right? The GOP takes the moral high ground but yet they have several office holders during the past eight years (and beyond) that proved to be moral reprobates, and the last two candidates, McCain and Palin are no exceptions to the continued immorality that pervades the quasi moralistic GOP! Don’t exposit morals when members of your party are amoral! In review from part 1 we ended on the amorality of the GOP. So, what about the last two candidates fielded by the GOP for the office of President and Vice-President, what are they doing? Well, McCain is in therapy for his loss (the GOP does not handle losses very well either) and Palin is taking Fifth Grade classes to catch up and be better prepared should the GOP be stupid enough to knock on her door again! For crying out loud GOP she’s a (quasi) beauty queen, and comparatively speaking where does that take you intellectually? Duh! Remember Miss Teen USA 2007 - South Carolina Lauren Caitlin Upton? And these two were compared (accurately?) during the election cycle! Need I say more?

Now, to get back to point as to the loss suffered by the GOP in the Presidential race, some Senate seat races et al. The classic example and criminal mentality of Alaska, can be found in defeated (finally!) Ted Stevens. Stevens although convicted of seven felonies was almost re-elected by Alaska voters. The percentages were Begich 47.76 percent and Stevens 46.58 percent. That dear people is only 1.18%! A very narrow margin! So, Alaska voters (46.58% anyway) are willing to overlook the criminality of Ted Stevens, and that says a lot about the mentality of Alaska citizens. This of course was confirmed by the academic exposure of their Governor, you betcha Sarah Palin!   I think the constituency in Alaska vote with their other head, not the one that sits on their shoulders either. So, this is a major obstacle for the GOP, crooks and convicted felon (s) in their party. Remember that McCain was/is an adulterer by confession and also a traitor on record. You want this for your party’s representation? This was/is another problem for the GOP. 

What about Mark Foley? Foley the U.S. Representative from Florida engaged in sexually-explicit SMS text-messaging with 17-YO males, former pages. Can the GOP justify and sustain such conduct and still be a viable political party? And of recent memory is that old foot tapping/touching Ex-Senator from Idaho, Larry Craig. Is this the kind of conduct that best exemplifies the GOP? Can the GOP regain their lost political ground with this in the party? Personally, I am so disgusted by the behavior of elected officials at every level in the GOP that I could not vote for them in the last election. And, I have been a staunch Republican all of my political life beginning at the age I could first vote, 21! I could not even hold my nose this election cycle and vote for the likes of McCain et al. I most certainly could not vote for the other party either. I do like President-Elect Obama, however, I cannot concur with some of his political policies or ideologies. His selections for Cabinet positions go beyond reason. How can he tout change while bringing back Clinton posers and wannabes? Do we need a second dose of the Clinton travesty? I think not!    I will have more to say next time!

“Righteousness exalts a nation; But sin is a reproach to any people.” Proverbs 14:34

Well, the dust has settled in the Presidential Election 2008? And, not everyone is happy with the results. President Elect Obama could prove to be a surprise in spite of his stereotyping by the also-ran GOP and its’ stagnant candidates. Perhaps Obama will be a cross between President Abraham Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King with the best of each one residing within. One can only hope! Some of the early assessments have revealed a pragmatic individual with great discipline. These are not bad qualities, and not usually found in any true liberal. President Elect Obama is also considered to be highly intelligent, as is his wife. Both of these individuals are Law School graduates but neither was born with the proverbial silver spoon in their mouth with everything handed to them. Their lessons in life were hard, but remembered. As aforementioned, he (they) may surprise everyone and actually do a very good job considering the financial mess they inherited from the GOP et al. “First of all, then, I urge you to offer petitions, prayers, intercessions, and expressions of thanks for all people, for kings, and for everyone who has authority, so that we might lead a quiet and peaceful life with all holiness and dignity.” 1 Timothy 2:1-2

Just where did the GOP fail? On several fronts the answers can be found to this question, the first being a broad and blatant deviation from the proven agenda of President Ronald W. Reagan. President Reagan basically reformatted the GOP into proven workable governance. His rule and correct political guidance if followed by succeeding GOP candidates would have insured GOP domination for generations to come. However, it was not too long afterward that President Reagan’s teachings and work was undone by his own chosen successor, George Bush forty-one. Bush forty-one did the unthinkable as per the Reagan formula for continued success; he raised taxes after promising not to do so! And he then lost the next election cycle to a Democrat candidate. However, the GOP continued to make serious mistakes in their politics and ideals for rulership as per the Newt Gingrich Congressional revolution of 1994, the “Contract with America.”

Under the leadership of Gingrich the campaign was run on ideas and values such as tax cuts, a bigger military, tough on crime and welfare. This campaign gained the GOP fifty-four seats to take control of Congress, ending forty years of Democratic rule. However, according to the Cook Political Report, this really wasn't quite as influential as the Republicans like to say it is. But these noble aspirations only went so far under the leadership of Newt Gingrich, why? It is said great men have feet of clay and Gingrich is no exception. “Gingrich, who ran for Congress in 1978 on the slogan, "Let Our Family Represent Your Family." (He was reportedly cheating on his first wife at the time). In 1995, an alleged mistress from that period, Anne Manning, told Vanity Fair's Gail Sheehy: "We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, 'I never slept with her.'" Gingrich obtained his first divorce in 1981, after forcing his wife, who had helped put him through graduate school, to haggle over the terms while in the hospital, as she recovered from uterine cancer surgery” (washingtonmonthly.com, 2006). “He that commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding: He that does it would destroy his own soul. Wounds and dishonor shall he get; and his reproach shall not be wiped away.” Proverbs 6:32-33.

Well the media can always be blamed for the GOP’s failure, can’t they? Another reality check on the recent election came from well respected Fox News reporter Shepherd Smith. “Fox News anchor Shepard Smith, host of the highest-rated evening newscast on cable television, calls suggestions of a bias toward Barack Obama by the mainstream media "preposterous." His sentiment was aired out during a roundtable discussion on his network's "Strategy Room" program. During the discussion, comedian Nick DiPaolo said, "The mainstream media being so in the tank for Obama ...." "Oh, please. That's preposterous," interrupted Smith. "The mainstream media reflected what was happening in this nation. It did not drive it. The blogs didn't drive this movement. The media did not drive this movement. Barack Obama did not lose this election. It was his to lose. It was not John McCain's to win.

"The Republicans had no shot unless the Democrats gave it to them, and they didn't. And to blame the media is a copout and ridiculous. We are always here to be blamed for people like you who enjoy that activity. We always will be. When the Democrats lost last time, it was our fault. When the Republicans lost this time, it's our fault. It's not. The nation was changing. Barack Obama did not lose, therefore John McCain did, and that's it." DiPaolo responded, "The major media has been liberal since its inception. It's years and years of pounding." "How did George Bush win twice?" asked Smith. "I don't know," answered DiPaolo. "[Ex-Bush strategist] Karl Rove is a genius, I guess" (wnd.com, 2008). The media cannot be blamed for this election defeat.

So; where did the GOP go wrong? Actually; where did they go right? The GOP takes the moral high ground but yet they have several office holders during the past eight years (and beyond) that proved to be moral reprobates, and the last two candidates, McCain and Palin are no exceptions to the continued immorality that pervades the quasi moralistic GOP! Don’t exposit morals when members of your party are amoral! And incidentally, where were the Evangelicals this election cycle? Usually they support and endorse the GOP candidates (sometimes reluctantly) but, this time they were noticeably quiet. Perhaps they are fatigued by the immorality within the GOP? I’ll have more to say on this next time.

“Righteousness exalts a nation; But sin is a reproach to any people.” Proverbs 14:34

Well, the dust has settled in the Presidential Election 2008? And, not everyone is happy with the results. President Elect Obama could prove to be a surprise in spite of his stereotyping by the also-ran GOP and its’ stagnant candidates. Perhaps Obama will be a cross between President Abraham Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King with the best of each one residing within. One can only hope!  Some of the early assessments have revealed a pragmatic individual with great discipline. These are not bad qualities, and not usually found in any true liberal. President Elect Obama is also considered to be highly intelligent, as is his wife. Both of these individuals are Law School graduates but neither was born with the proverbial silver spoon in their mouth with everything handed to them. Their lessons in life were hard, but remembered. As aforementioned, he (they) may surprise everyone and actually do a very good job considering the financial mess they inherited from the GOP et al. “First of all, then, I urge you to offer petitions, prayers, intercessions, and expressions of thanks for all people, for kings, and for everyone who has authority, so that we might lead a quiet and peaceful life with all holiness and dignity.” 1 Timothy 2:1-2

Just where did the GOP fail? On several fronts the answers can be found to this question, the first being a broad and blatant deviation from the proven agenda of President Ronald W. Reagan. President Reagan basically reformatted the GOP into proven workable governance. His rule and correct political guidance if followed by succeeding GOP candidates would have insured GOP domination for generations to come. However, it was not too long afterward that President Reagan’s teachings and work was undone by his own chosen successor, George Bush forty-one. Bush forty-one did the unthinkable as per the Reagan formula for continued success; he raised taxes after promising not to do so!  And he then lost the next election cycle to a Democrat candidate.   However, the GOP continued to make serious mistakes in their politics and ideals for rulership as per the Newt Gingrich Congressional revolution of 1994, the “Contract with America.”

Under the leadership of Gingrich the campaign was run on ideas and values such as tax cuts, a bigger military, tough on crime and welfare. This campaign gained the GOP fifty-four seats to take control of Congress, ending forty years of Democratic rule. However, according to the Cook Political Report, this really wasn't quite as influential as the Republicans like to say it is. But these noble aspirations only went so far under the leadership of Newt Gingrich, why? It is said great men have feet of clay and Gingrich is no exception. “Gingrich, who ran for Congress in 1978 on the slogan, "Let Our Family Represent Your Family." (He was reportedly cheating on his first wife at the time). In 1995, an alleged mistress from that period, Anne Manning, told Vanity Fair's Gail Sheehy: "We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, 'I never slept with her.'" Gingrich obtained his first divorce in 1981, after forcing his wife, who had helped put him through graduate school, to haggle over the terms while in the hospital, as she recovered from uterine cancer surgery” (washingtonmonthly.com, 2006).  “He that commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding: He that does it would destroy his own soul. Wounds and dishonor shall he get; and his reproach shall not be wiped away.” Proverbs 6:32-33.

Well the media can always be blamed for the GOP’s failure, can’t they? Another reality check on the recent election came from well respected Fox News reporter Shepherd Smith. “Fox News anchor Shepard Smith, host of the highest-rated evening newscast on cable television, calls suggestions of a bias toward Barack Obama by the mainstream media "preposterous." His sentiment was aired out during a roundtable discussion on his network's "Strategy Room" program. During the discussion, comedian Nick DiPaolo said, "The mainstream media being so in the tank for Obama ...." "Oh, please. That's preposterous," interrupted Smith. "The mainstream media reflected what was happening in this nation. It did not drive it. The blogs didn't drive this movement. The media did not drive this movement. Barack Obama did not lose this election. It was his to lose. It was not John McCain's to win.

"The Republicans had no shot unless the Democrats gave it to them, and they didn't. And to blame the media is a copout and ridiculous. We are always here to be blamed for people like you who enjoy that activity. We always will be. When the Democrats lost last time, it was our fault. When the Republicans lost this time, it's our fault. It's not. The nation was changing. Barack Obama did not lose, therefore John McCain did, and that's it." DiPaolo responded, "The major media has been liberal since its inception. It's years and years of pounding." "How did George Bush win twice?" asked Smith. "I don't know," answered DiPaolo. "[Ex-Bush strategist] Karl Rove is a genius, I guess" (wnd.com, 2008).  The media cannot be blamed for this election defeat.

So; where did the GOP go wrong? Actually; where did they go right?  The GOP takes the moral high ground but yet they have several office holders during the past eight years (and beyond) that proved to be moral reprobates, and the last two candidates, McCain and Palin are no exceptions to the continued immorality that pervades the quasi moralistic GOP!  Don’t exposit morals when members of your party are amoral! And incidentally, where were the Evangelicals this election cycle? Usually they support and endorse the GOP candidates (sometimes reluctantly) but, this time they were noticeably quiet. Perhaps they are fatigued by the immorality within the GOP?  I’ll have more to say on this next time.  

Well; the GOP are serving Kool-Aid with their excrement sandwiches these days. The country is going down the proverbial tube while these ignoramuses completely ignore this calamity. Being content to avoid the true issues at hand they are now throwing dirt instead of facing the real problems in America. Every conservative (quasi) web site that I visit offers the latest mud sandwich for their bylines. What should be the real story displayed on these news sites? Shouldn’t there be a concerted effort to change or solve the financial problems facing America and the world? Shouldn’t there be some concerted effort to get the government back into the Constitutional framework it was designed in? It seems that these issues are irrelevant and dirt throwing is of primary importance instead. While this country is being destroyed before our eyes the most important thing to these media provocateurs is dirty politics.

The GOP fielded two loser candidates for their selections.  These two are bottom of the barrel selections all things considered. What is their actual stand on the issues at hand and how would they deal with the problems facing America? Do they still believe the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is relevant for our time? Where would they govern from and what would be their plan for America? On one side of this political campaign a truth is spoken and on the other side it is called a lie! Where is the proof of the lie (s)? On one side you know the candidates are liberals, while on the other side you are not sure where they stand, but you do know this, they are not conservatives. So, the GOP ostentates the candidates as the conservative choices for America, all the while knowing this is in all reality, untrue.  These two are to the left of Moderate which is now the GOP propensities so it seems. The GOP is now moderate to semi-liberal. Actually the whole government is going (perhaps already there) in the direction of Karl Marx and his socialism framework for government. The big “Bail Out” seals the ideology and implementation of Marxism completely.

The issues at hand are not the issues at hand. When I look at the GOP field many things comes to mind, mostly from my religious background and current Biblical beliefs. On Palin; Proverbs 30:20 “So is the way of an adulterous woman: she eats, and wipes her mouth, and says, I have done no evil.” Proverbs 6:13 ‘That winks with his eyes…That makes signs with his fingers.”  Palin is an adulterous woman who thinks that she has done nothing evil, who winks with the eye, and makes signs with the fingers. Did you watch her body language at any time? Did you see her on the debate? Did you see the follow-up picture in the news the next day? There she was winking and pointing that finger! Need I say more? Do you know what you are looking at? And the real problem with this poser is the haunting question; “Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?” And the resounding answer to that is—NO!   All of the questions she answered were rehearsed by coaches assigned to her utilizing see Jane run see Dick run techniques. Remember the ones we used in first grade to remember our lessons by continuous rote? Anyway, keep drinking that GOP Kool-Aid, hold hands and sing, Kumbayah! While America crashes!

Someone's sleeping, Yah, kumbaya

Someone's sleeping, Yah, kumbaya

Someone's sleeping, Yah, kumbaya

Oh Yah, kumbaya

Oh Yah, kumbaya

So many individuals that pump up their resume to seem better qualified than they actually are, can usually be found in academic circles, but now we have an example in the presidential race, Palin. Inflated curriculum vitae are the nemesis among College Professors, especially when discovered, as is plagiarism among their students. Plagiarism is cause for immediate suspension for students from the better colleges.   College Professors can dance around this mendacity if they have tenure or an enabling college Dean.   Also, this amplified qualification of job experience (s) can be seen in job application resumes. And because this is so extant, many companies perform an entire background check for verification of applicant statements on their resumes. In some circles this is known as vetting or examining carefully the person’s entire life. Someone failed to completely vet Sarah Palin before she was nominated for the McCain VP selection. 

In a closer examination of a gross exaggeration of Palin’s foreign policy experience, Palin led listeners to believe a prevarication concerning her actual experience and duties as Governor of Alaska.  The following was reported in the news after her interview with Katie Couric.

NORAD: Sarah Palin has no role in guarding U.S. airspace despite claims in Katie Couric interview

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK

DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Tuesday, September 30th 2008, 5:21 PM

WASHINGTON - When Russian bombers approach American airspace and U.S. Air Force fighters are scrambled, Sarah Palin's phone doesn't ring.

The Alaska governor has no command authority over the guardians of U.S. airspace despite her recent suggestion otherwise.

"She doesn't have any role in that process," Air Force Maj. Allen Herritage, spokesman for the Alaska North American Aerospace Defense Command, told the Daily News.

"The authority to launch and respond to a Russian incursion lies with the Alaska NORAD Region commander" - Air Force Lt. Gen. Dana Atkins, he said.

Palin said last week that her foreign policy experience includes facing the Russians.

"It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia, as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America - where do they go? It's Alaska," Palin told CBS' Katie Couric. 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/09/30/2008-09-30_norad_sarah_palin_has_no_role_in_guardin.html 

So, why is the media giving little miss falsehood a pass on this? Why was this overlooked in the vetting process? Maybe she wasn’t completely vetted! Maybe she is in all reality unqualified for this VP selection! This is only one of many mendacities committed by Sarah Palin et al. There seems to be a plethora of willing accomplices to enable this poser. Other things that have come to light while others perform the vetting process that should have been accomplished pre-Palin selection are turning up some startling things. The GOP parades itself as a conservative moral party. They seek the endorsement of the Evangelicals every election cycle. The religious right wants a good morally clean candidate that they can endorse and be conscience free concerning their choice. However, is Palin that choice? Is McCain that choice? They are if you don’t mind an adulterous behavior pattern displayed by both candidates and confessed by one, McCain. Palin has yet to pony up on her adulterous relationship with Brad Hanson. Investigative reporters doing the job that McCain’s vetters should have, revealed plenty about this Alaska first family. 

Uncovered in this family were several things that seriously challenge the decision for VP candidate selection. Because this is the GOP (quasi) the disturbing family revelations includes serious drug use (cocaine, marijuana, OxyContin) and abuse by the Palin’s older children Track and Bristol. Sexual promiscuity of the daughter Bristol and the oldest son Track leading to the pregnancy of the unwed daughter Bristol. However, as the Palin’s lead by example their dysfunctional family; consider for a moment the consequences of her being in the office of the VP? Is the GOP serious about this tainted selection?   Why did it take a team of investigative reporters to track down and reveal this family for what they really are-dysfunctional? Incidentally, one of the witnesses that testified concerning Sarah Palin’s adulterous relationship with her husband’s business partner passed a lie detector test, and another witness provided a sworn affidavit attesting to the Palin-Hanson story! And, this is the same group of people that ran the John Edward’s adulterous affair to the ground and forced Edwards to confess to his affair with someone outside of his marriage! And you want this kind of flawed unlawful person as your VP? What are you thinking?

So it boils down to this! If you want mendacity as your guideline and example for your children and grandchildren, vote the GOP ticket. However, this years Democratic candidates have not engaged in any known (and they checked) sexual liaisons or inordinate behaviors. However, they are the liberal party so you know their politics. But; that doesn’t seem to matter this year as the GOP has now adopted the Karl Marx social doctrine and solution for the financial catastrophe the country is currently in. Your choices are…not so good this election cycle. Maybe none of the above would be the best choice!   And if there is no merit to the Palin-Hanson affair, why did Palin’s husband dissolve their business relationship and become estranged from his former business partner? In criminology this would be considered suspicious behavior and a follow-up would be conducted by investigators to arrive at the truth. So, where are the investigators, the truth seekers? Are you afraid to seriously vet McCain and Palin, or are you content to drink that GOP Kool-Aid?  Pity the fool as Mr. T used to say!

So many individuals that pump up their resume to seem better qualified than they actually are, can usually be found in academic circles, but now we have an example in the presidential race, Palin. Inflated curriculum vitae are the nemesis among College Professors, especially when discovered, as is plagiarism among their students. Plagiarism is cause for immediate suspension for students from the better colleges.   College Professors can dance around this mendacity if they have tenure or an enabling college Dean.   Also, this amplified qualification of job experience (s) can be seen in job application resumes. And because this is so extant, many companies perform an entire background check for verification of applicant statements on their resumes. In some circles this is known as vetting or examining carefully the person’s entire life. Someone failed to completely vet Sarah Palin before she was nominated for the McCain VP selection. 

In a closer examination of a gross exaggeration of Palin’s foreign policy experience, Palin led listeners to believe a prevarication concerning her actual experience and duties as Governor of Alaska.  The following was reported in the news after her interview with Katie Couric.

NORAD: Sarah Palin has no role in guarding U.S. airspace despite claims in Katie Couric interview

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK

DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Tuesday, September 30th 2008, 5:21 PM

WASHINGTON - When Russian bombers approach American airspace and U.S. Air Force fighters are scrambled, Sarah Palin's phone doesn't ring.

The Alaska governor has no command authority over the guardians of U.S. airspace despite her recent suggestion otherwise.

"She doesn't have any role in that process," Air Force Maj. Allen Herritage, spokesman for the Alaska North American Aerospace Defense Command, told the Daily News.

"The authority to launch and respond to a Russian incursion lies with the Alaska NORAD Region commander" - Air Force Lt. Gen. Dana Atkins, he said.

Palin said last week that her foreign policy experience includes facing the Russians.

"It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia, as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America - where do they go? It's Alaska," Palin told CBS' Katie Couric. 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/09/30/2008-09-30_norad_sarah_palin_has_no_role_in_guardin.html 

So, why is the media giving little miss falsehood a pass on this? Why was this overlooked in the vetting process? Maybe she wasn’t completely vetted! Maybe she is in all reality unqualified for this VP selection! This is only one of many mendacities committed by Sarah Palin et al. There seems to be a plethora of willing accomplices to enable this poser. Other things that have come to light while others perform the vetting process that should have been accomplished pre-Palin selection are turning up some startling things. The GOP parades itself as a conservative moral party. They seek the endorsement of the Evangelicals every election cycle. The religious right wants a good morally clean candidate that they can endorse and be conscience free concerning their choice. However, is Palin that choice? Is McCain that choice? They are if you don’t mind an adulterous behavior pattern displayed by both candidates and confessed by one, McCain. Plain has yet to pony up on her adulterous relationship with Brad Hanson. Investigative reporters doing the job that McCain’s vetters should have, revealed plenty about this Alaska first family. 

Uncovered in this family were several things that seriously challenge the decision for VP candidate selection. Because this is the GOP (quasi) the disturbing family revelations includes serious drug use (cocaine, marijuana, OxyContin) and abuse by the Palin’s older children Track and Bristol. Sexual promiscuity of the daughter Bristol and the oldest son Track leading to the pregnancy of the unwed daughter Bristol. However, as the Palin’s lead by example their dysfunctional family; consider for a moment the consequences of her being in the office of the VP? Is the GOP serious about this tainted selection?   Why did it take a team of investigative reporters to track down and reveal this family for what they really are-dysfunctional? Incidentally, one of the witnesses that testified concerning Sarah Palin’s adulterous relationship with her husband’s business partner passed a lie detector test, and another witness provided a sworn affidavit attesting to the Palin-Hanson story! And, this is the same group of people that ran the John Edward’s adulterous affair to the ground and forced Edwards to confess to his affair with someone outside of his marriage! And you want this kind of flawed unlawful person as your VP? What are you thinking?

So it boils down to this! If you want mendacity as your guideline and example for your children and grandchildren, vote the GOP ticket. However, this years Democratic candidates have not engaged in any known (and they checked) sexual liaisons or inordinate behaviors. However, they are the liberal party so you know their politics. But; that doesn’t seem to matter this year as the GOP has now adopted the Karl Marx social doctrine and solution for the financial catastrophe the country is currently in. Your choices are…not so good this election cycle. Maybe none of the above would be the best choice!   And if there is no merit to the Palin-Hanson affair, why did Palin’s husband dissolve their business relationship and become estranged from his former business partner? In criminology this would be considered suspicious behavior and a follow-up would be conducted by investigators to arrive at the truth. So, where are the investigators, the truth seekers? Are you afraid to seriously vet McCain and Palin, or are you content to drink that GOP Kool-Aid?  Pity the fool as Mr. T used to say!

Michael:

This is one of the major reasons I named my blog "Mac's Between The Eyes." The pointed commentary is designed to reveal stark contrasts and relevant issues. Yes, I believe in the life of the fetus and the Creator’s design at conception. I also believe that anyone, I repeat anyone that takes the life of a fetus via abortion or perpetrates violence upon the mother that causes an abortion, is guilty of first degree murder. These liquidators of innocent lives are morally reprehensible, and should be charged and tried for their homicidal acts. 

What I was illustrating in my post (Abortion and Stare Decisis) was stare decisis and the improbability of overturning Roe v Wade anytime soon. This decision is bad law in every sense of the demented ruling. And, my comments on Limbaugh, Warren, et al goes to credibility of these people in general. They start out on one path and end up walking on another. They shift their positions and allegiances when it suits them to do so; Limbaugh on supporting the GOP (on not carrying their water anymore) et al, and Warren for the false prophet that he is. What is the common denominator between them? Money! I haven’t missed anything on either Limbaugh or Warren as you postulate. Both have changed their original positions from their inceptions. So this is really moot in every sense to engage in any argument with you or anyone else that cannot see what is really happening before their eyes. Some things Michael you just cannot change and they will get worse before they get better. 

Michael, I have seven children and fifteen grandchildren, and I love them all. Michael, I am a realist. Moral issue (s)?  Michael I am an ordained minister that firmly believes in what the Bible teaches concerning life. Above his pay grade is euphemistically spoken I would assume. Perhaps he was alluding to his incapability to actually change this abhorrent legislation. Note; I am not making excuses for this person. The President cannot make law or adjudicate law. The Executive Branch as distinguished from the legislative and judicial departments (i.e. branches) of government, the executive department is that which is charged with the detail of carrying the laws into effect and securing their due observance.  The point of this blog post was the legal issue that cannot be changed because of Roe v Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania et al. v. Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania, and et al. No. 91- 744. Argued April 22, 1992 -- Decided June 29, 1992. Rarely does the Supreme Court overturn decisions of stare decisis.  

What is occurring in America's governmental system today is not what the architects of the Declaration of Independence had in mind. After reading Chuck Norris's column in World Net Daily, I must concur with the object and scope of his column. However, I would take his concept of "The Coming Revolution" one step farther. When we read what the framers of America had in mind based on previous experience with tyrannical governments, we can truly understand their concept of freedom; freedom that was given not by man, but endowed by the Creator on the entire human race. What these brave men and women fought for is now being discarded by egotistical government officials propelled by avarice and their desire for absolute power. Power that will perpetrate on the peoples severe bondage, physical and financial! These incalcitrant individuals reject the concepts delineated in the Declaration of Independence and subsequently, the Constitution! We need to read a section of the Declaration to comprehend fully their (the framers of these foundational documents) direction and reasons for inclusion.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (Declaration of Independence)

When we analyze this paragraph in the light of today's government misconduct, it becomes more apparent that change must come albeit revolution or abolishment, this current government must be changed. Some type of revolution must be seriously considered. The framers knew their lives were unvalued before entering the new colony. They knew the severe bondage that they suffered while living under the regime of ruthless despotic kings. And they knew the sorrow of religious oppression that accompanied them every day of their life prior to their exodus. They considered their former estate and determined not to allow this evil to come upon them in the new colony, their new free world. And, while it lasted, it was very good for the new colonists. Nevertheless, there arose a Pharaoh that knew not Joseph, casting aside religious values! America's peoples are the descendants of Joseph; the Bible is our true textbook. The new colonists knew the Bible, and believed in it. The words of the Most High adorn many documents and speeches given by these brave people. They were willing to give everything, including their lives, in order to remain free from any form of tyrannical government.

Well! Have we come full circle? Has this current government forgotten the rights of the governed? Have we been forced to accept the leaders' rulership as absolute and dictatorial in concept? When did we relinquish the rights of the "consent of the governed?" It is "We the People" that are supposedly consigned the rights to set these leaders' into their positions of rulership, according to this document. When the governed are supplanted by the governing, and the people no longer have the powers inscribed in the founding documentation, we have been constrained to another dictatorship from which our ancestors fled. Do we need another King of England? Do we need another Stalin, Lenin, or Hitler? This is exactly what happens when the checks and balances are disturbed and disrupted by narcissistic representatives. When the foundational documentation remains inviolable, the nation under which it was written cannot be easily destroyed. However, when these documents along with the major source of reference, the Bible, are breached, destruction is at hand!

I cannot concur with Mr. Norris's selections politically speaking of course. And this is my right to agree or disagree. Huckabee, Mr. Norris' choice for presidential candidate in my opinion is inadequate. However, he is by far the better choice than McCain. Also, Romney supersedes McCain by a wide margin. Mr. Norris also considers Sarah Palin a "maverette" politically speaking. However, Mr. Norris needs to do his homework and take a closer look at this one. I have written about her fiscal irresponsibility previously. She just doesn't pass muster! Her popularity among some is contingent on which head the males see her with! We can certainly do better than McCain and Palin as GOP candidates. And, this is one of the major reasons Americans needs to alter or completely abolish this current government. We are over 480 Billion dollars in budget deficit. We are closing in on 9.7 Trillion dollars as America's National Debt. The fiscal irresponsibility of President Bush (2), Congress, Senate and the governors of America's fifty states is beyond alarming. We are being destroyed by these leaders and what pray tell is being done, talk without action? This is where talk show hosts like Limbaugh are a joke! He touts the economy as being good while in TRUTH Limbaugh, it is crashing! Wake up and pull your head out of the sand! Maybe Chuck Norris can generate a head of steam and get something accomplished. Just view these politicians as opponents in a fight Mr. Norris, and take no prisoners. You cannot have respect of persons to accomplish what you are trying to do! We face two choices, either alter or abolish this current governmental system. I am for the latter! 

When President Bush leaves office that is not the only thing he will leave. Bush will leave a budget deficit of over 490 billion dollars. This exorbitant amount is unprecedented in the history of the entire world. Perhaps you have heard the saying “do the math?” When you do the math, the statistics are staggering. The per-capita debt for every man, woman and child in America now stands at over $30,000! And this is based on 2007 stats. Another serious problem to consider during this presidential election year is; do we really want another Republican in office? Under Republican administrations the National Debt increased. During the last Republican controlled presidential administrations the increase is incomprehensible. Statistical figures tell a disconsolate story that can only portend doom for America financially. How can this astronomical debt ever be repaid? And do we really want more of the same from John McCain and the Republican Party? Hardly!

What have the Republicans’ brought to the table, exactly? Well, we have war! We have debt beyond belief! How many widows and orphans have the Republicans caused because of their wars? We have extortionate gas prices! Our jobs and resources are being outsourced to other countries to obtain a higher profit margin by GOP fueled Capitalism!  Our privacy rights are now brought into question by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 which includes warrantless wiretapping supposedly to protect us from foreign enemies!   And, the Republicans have put us into severe bondage equated to the time of Moses and Egypt. The Republican Pharaohs have imposed upon us rigorous servitude as the nation is being offered for less than thirty pieces of silver to our enemies. When the debt comes due and the financial obligations are demanded in repayment, where will the money come from, the U.S. Treasury printing presses? Can we just create money and buy our way out of this financial disaster? Not likely!

The Republicans have been in power for twenty of the last twenty-eight years. Republicans have ruled via Reagan-Bush One eight years, Bush One four years, and now Bush 2 eight years. They leave a deplorable financial legacy. During Bush 2 alone the National Debt has almost doubled, and by some current estimates, it has! “On the day Bush 2 took office, the National Debt stood at this unfathomable number:

$5,727.776.738,304.64

In fiscal shorthand, that's $5.7 trillion dollars. Trillion with a "T."

Six and a half years later, the Bureau of Public Debt tells us the National Debt clocks in at a staggering:

$8,835,268,597,181.95

That's $8.8 trillion – an increase of $3.1 trillion dollars since January 20, 2001. And that amounts to a jump of 54% during Mr. Bush's watch.

If you wanted to pay it off, dividing it equally among the U.S. population (estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau to be 302,103,675), it would come to $29,245.82 for every man, woman and child” (CBSNews.Com)!

I have looked at a plethora of United States National Debt charts and they all tell the same story! They graphically depict a distressing financial picture of the debt under each president since pre and post WW 2. The Republicans are most likely to increase debt during their administrations when compared to the Democrats! This is particularly distressing for me as I have been a registered Republican throughout my voting life. My grandfather was an ardent Democrat and knew politics very well. As a college graduate he learned the political sciences and was current on political issues throughout his life. Undoubtedly this is where I obtained my political passions.   The one thing in this is; I thought for some reason that my grandfather was a Republican because he was always so conservative. Although he discussed politics fluently and frequently, I was somehow led to mistakenly believe that he was a Republican. So, I registered as a Republican to follow in his political footsteps and many years later I learned the truth from my mother, grandpa was a Democrat! Was I ever surprised, and so was my mother that I registered as a Republican! Well, now we have a dilemma! What should be done this electoral year? For my part, some of the things Obama and Biden are saying capture my attention. However, I have a problem with their abortion and same sex cohabitation stances. I cannot condone the murder of innocents, and I cannot condone same sex relationships or marriages. So, thus the quandary!   The Republican Party is offering stagnant candidates and more of the same. Their platform and execution of such will follow the Bush pattern, and as much as he tries to distance himself from Bush 2, McCain is still leftovers. And Palin can’t walk on water as some disillusioned Republicans believe. Between Palin and Hillary (and I can’t stand Hillary) I will give the academic and political edge to Hillary. Palin is politically livid by comparison. So now you can have war and debt with the Republican Party, or you can have the social doctrine with the Democratic Party. Personally, I think the obvious choice would be the one that leads to peace, and which party can supply this?

Hillary Clinton’s GOP VP Pick; Palin!

Never ever underestimate the power of a woman scorned, especially if it is in the mold of one Hillary Clinton. Do you honestly think McCain chose Palin? What are you drinking and or smoking? How many people know that McCain and Hillary are best buds? I wondered from the beginning why Sarah Palin was the GOP VP choice; it just didn’t make sense until I factored into the equation Hillary Clinton, and then it became crystal clear. Hillary was calling the shots because of her own party’s rejection. What better way to voice her obvious anger over being rejected in favor of Senator Obama first and then Senator Biden? Clinton (HR) is from assorted devious character molds such as Saul Alinsky that old radical from “Rules for Radicals” cookbook fame, if you want to call it that. Alinsky liked to use an evasive action called tactic proxy. Sometimes an attacker's true target remains obfuscated.  By attacking the target by proxy using circuitous means and methods, the attacker diverts the attention away from themselves. The true target in this case is the Democratic Party.   So to avert suspicion, and divert attention away from herself and her supposed allegiance to the Democratic Party, Hillary makes a subversive proxy attack via John McCain to obtain her vengeance for being rejected as the Democratic Party presidential nominee, and then being snubbed for the VP slot.  Hillary contacts John McCain and tells him to select Sarah Palin as his running mate.  Don’t think the Clinton’s are capable of such deceit, where were you living during the Clinton Mafia years, in a vacuum? 

Everything stinks about this entire GOP process. Forced to drink Kool-Aid by the GOP; Republicans are following along like sheep to the slaughter. Forced to accept a mentally challenged person for their presidential candidate, Republicans are being basically forced to carry the banner, the fetid water and then agree to everything being said by GOP officials. There is no way under creation that I could ever personally support something like John McCain for president. Perhaps he will have a heart attack and die so a better choice could be found. Perhaps the GOP can find someone who won’t foist upon the GOP the “it’s my turn” imbecility and be a genuine honest to goodness candidate with high morals and no mental issues. Who in blue blazes ever said it was John McCain’s turn, and just how do you figure that, because he said so? What bovine scatology! The earth has close to seven billion inhabitants, and the USA has over three hundred million people. I tell you this; if this is the best that this country or the world can offer, we are in deep you know what! If the four candidates that comprise the Democratic and Republican selections are the best America has to offer for potential presidential and vice-presidential choices, it’s over! We are absolutely finished as a nation. Somebody please sound taps and bring down the flag because it’s over!

PS Palin as GOP VP potential furthers the family values role of the Republican Party with an in-house unwed pregnant teenager! Now here’s a real good example for our youth to look up to, don’t you think?    

It is interesting to be categorized by readers of this blog. When GOP conservatives (quasi) and Kool-Aid drinking Limbaugh fanatics cannot respond intellectually to what I have written, they attach an appellative to you. They want to categorically stigmatize you with a label that makes them feel good about their ignorant selves. Several of the aforementioned have erroneously labeled me as a liberal, are you ever wrong on that appellative! I make Pat Buchanan look like he is still in Kindergarten by comparison. Am I a radical? No! I am a balanced conservative that studies the issues being considered, and then offer intellectual response (s). In other words I think before I engage my mouth, something that true liberals and arm-chair critics do not. One issue that recently came to my attention was Obama’s stance on abortion. Rick Warren, a poser minister if there ever was one, queried Obama on the when life begins question seeking the old abortion stance response that so many politicians and people running for office face. Obama’s response was not strong to Warren’s must ask question, but for a liberal, it was better than some that I’ve heard over the years. Maybe Obama did not want to be caught up in a trap by responding to the question another way. Why is this question so important that it demands an emphatic answer? Are there not more important issues that affect most Americans? Now I want to posit something for consideration. Does it really make a difference on what the candidate believes concerning this issue? NO, and I’ll tell you why.

This same query was posed to Bush forty-one. Bush is a pro-life president. And I think Obama in all reality is the same. For whatever reason the candidates must pander to every lobby group under the sun and give them the answers they want to hear to get elected to office. Once in office they can change positions on the issues, elected officials flip-flop on beliefs and issues all the time. But, what if anything can be done about the abortion issue? Can Roe v Wade be overturned? Yes, it is possible but for now highly unlikely. Bush forty-one has been in office for almost eight years now. My question is this; has he been able to get Roe v Wade overturned during his time in office? No he has not! Now why do you suppose this is? Time for a little back in time lesson! In landmark Supreme Court cases Roe v Wade stands as monumental. In 1992, the Supreme Court decided the case of Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania vs. Casey. This case was presented in hopes of changing Roe v Wade. Because the make-up of the Court had changed and become more conservative since Roe was first decided, many people believed that the Court might use this case to overturn Roe altogether. But what happened? 

In a 5-4 decision the Court reaffirmed its commitment to Roe and to the basic right of a woman to have an abortion under certain circumstances. Justice O’Connor, who authored the majority opinion, argued that stare decisis required the Court to not overturn Roe. Stare decisis is the general principal that when a point has been settled by decision, it forms a precedent which is not afterwards to be departed from (landmarkcases.org). Yes, stare Decisis came into play and the court ruled against Casey. Incidentally, I am from Pennsylvania and I supported Governor Casey completely in this case. However, it is very difficult to overturn cases wherein stare decisis is the precedent by preceding court cases. The full legal term is "stare decisis et quieta non movere" meaning "stand by decisions and do not move that which is still".  Oh, this happened during the end of Bush one and the beginning of Clinton presidencies. Now to return to point; If Bush one followed by Clinton, followed by Bush two could not change the Roe v Wade ruling, what’s the point and why even ask the abortion question? Doesn’t this issue appear to be a moot point? What would it take to change this ruling? A complete conservative Supreme Court with a test case to challenge the current ruling could result in overturning Roe v Wade. But, will it happen any time soon is the question. Look how hard it was to get conservative judges on the Supreme Court to start with. The moderates on the court are not pro life vote guarantees, and neither are the avowed liberals willing to cast their vote in favor of overturning this flawed decision any time soon.  (BTW, if you want my true stance on what should be done with beyond doubt convicted murderers specifically with aggravating circumstances such as cop killers, you can bring me a truckload of rocks as I have a lot of work to do!) Just thought I would insert that little personal gem.  Anyway, don’t look for change anytime soon on Roe v Wade. But, wouldn’t it be a shocker if Obama was elected president and pushed for this to be overturned, wishful thinking, perhaps. I do believe however, there is more to Obama than meets the eye. 

Chief Justice John Robert’s opinion on this volatile issue taken from the Washington Post September 15, 2005.

“Judge Roberts made clear that he believes the Constitution contains a right to privacy, and he expressed his agreement with high-court decisions striking down bans on contraception. While he declined to address the merits of Roe v. Wade, he did indicate that it is a decision to which stare decisis considerations properly apply. Importantly, he said several times that the subsequent decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey -- which reaffirmed Roe’s core principle -- was independently entitled to be treated as a precedent. That implies that there would be a heavy burden for the court in upsetting abortion rights now. Judge Roberts was careful not to say what he would do, but his comments suggest that he appreciates the difficulty of eliminating a right the court has solemnly declared, and redeclared, in the past.”