Whoa, Wait a Minute…

Much ado about a nobody…Political Truisms

No Effect

Just watched BHO give his speech announcing his 23 Executive Orders.  Of course he opened with children.  Now, we have seen over history how leaders of countries wanting to generate support have used children.  We’ve seen the pictures of Adolph Hitler standing amid a cluster of youngsters.  I’ll let that go for the time being.  Dictators have always used children that way.

What I heard was a guy who wanted to provide stronger limits on those of us who legally own or acquire firearms.  If I were there I would have asked…oh, wait, no questions were taken…anyway, I would have asked to whom did he think these new restrictions would apply.  Which of the bad guys will go through the process?  How many kids that are currently hit in a “drive-bys” aimed at taking out some gang rival would escape that fate?  BHO and the Democrats have to realize that action needs to be taken to get the bad guys.  It’s the criminals who commit the crimes.  While it’s the loonies who get the most attention because they generally take lives of large numbers of innocent people – generally children.  I absolutely do not want to degrade the seriousness or display any disrespect to those families, as tragic as those events are, those losses do not make up most of the deaths in America.  The President and his minions are exploiting the deaths of these innocent people for their own ideological goals.  Most deaths in this and other countries are caused by criminals or gangs often engaged in drug or other illegal activity.  It wasn’t legally purchased firearms, or background checked buyers or even registered firearms that caused those deaths.  Focus on that, Mr. President!  Look at your own hometown, sir.  Chicago has some of the most restrictive rules in the country….along with one of the highest murder-by-gun rates in the nation.  Bad guys love it when the innocent civilians are unable to defend themselves.

Why, sir, let’s look for a second at your own personal record at preventing illegal or unauthorized folks for owning and using firearms that are illegally acquired and unregistered.  Pretty crappy record isn’t it?  I wonder how many of those firearms – assault weapons with very high capacity magazines – are still out there taking innocent life after innocent life in the Southern United States and Mexico.

Then there was the comment you made that kind of scared me.  When you said, “Weapons designed for the theater of war have no place in a movie theater,” that was a pretty friendly and almost irrefutable way of saying that civilians should not have military-style weapons.  Only the military should have them.  That worked out well in Germany in the 1930s and 40s.  It did a remarkable job of securing the Russian population throughout their existence.  I was reminded, again, of what my father told me a friend of his said to him in the 1930s, “America has too many guns, but that’s okay, because you will turn them over to us.  We already have people working on that.”

Let’s think a little bit about this more aggressive search of mental health records of those of us who want to purchase a firearm.  While on the surface it seems pretty reasonable, aren’t medical records supposed to be private?  Will this require medical staff to publish these records?  Will patient privacy be nullified?  Seems to me that with the public record of gun registration, medical records will be part of that public record.  According to you, if I decide to sell one of my guns to a friend I have to do a Mental Health background check first.  I will know my friend’s most privately held information and you will see it too as part of the public record.  Will we be able to see who was turned down and why?  Let’s get serious, folks.  I ask you, “Who will actually go through the process?”  Only honest Americans who look to exercise their Constitutional Rights will agree to go through the process. Heck, we’re the only ones who go through the process now.  Look at what happened right after the catastrophic event in Newtown, Connecticut.  The Lower Hudson (N.Y.) Journal News published the names and addresses of every person who legally owns a firearm.  They didn’t publish the names and addresses of folks who illegally held a firearm or owned one or stole one or a bunch.   Finally, what’s likely to happen to those Mental Health records?  I don’t know and I don’t think anyone else does either.  Talk about a slippery slope.


Ideology is not Authority

Can you imagine what the Democrats would have said or how they would have acted if President George Bush threatened Executive Order to accomplish an ideological goal that, under the normal, constitutionally-defined process, would not make it through Congress?  Can you imagine the reaction of the Democrats if he, or any other Republican President, circumvented or tried to circumvent the Congress and, consequently, the Constitution? 

Who does he think he is, the second Messiah, the Second Coming?  What his actions intimate, though, is that he is or will, if left unchallenged, become the first American Dictator.  What’s he up to?

  1. Many of us think that this guy is so full of himself that he just cannot see what the ultimate outcome of his questionably legal, unchallenged actions might be.
  2. Others of us think that he knows exactly what he’s doing and that is to take us into a socialist, Euro-type nation at the least or, more probably, a stronger socialist dictatorship. 
  3. Then there are those of us who think he is nothing but a lackey, a stooge, for those who have been pushing him, influencing him and directing him throughout his life. 

Simply look at the people with whom he has associated in college, as a community activist and in politics.  Just look at the people he appointed or tried to appoint to his administration.  Look at the folks he has appointed to unelected positions.  Look at the people who supported him in his earliest steps into politics.  I won’t list them here.  Those lists of people and their backgrounds are all over the Internet.

My point here is that it doesn’t matter which it is.  They all lead to the same thing – the same result.  If allowed to continue unabated, the actions of Barack Hussein Obama and his obscene administration and pack of followers spells the demise of our country as a Federal Republic.  It is the end of our country, as we know it.  

Can you imagine?  With his left hand on the Bible and his right hand in the air, twice,  he swore, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

The first time he stood there was because many of us had hope and thought he meant what he said.  The second time he stood there was simply the fault of the “Stupid Majority.”  Both times, in my estimation he lied! 

Today, it is more important than ever for us to keep our collective eye on all his Executive Orders.  Rumor has it that he will use EO to control, or change the rules for firearms purchases, ownership and registration in such away that are directly intended to circumvent Congress.  We are expecting to see an EO to raise the debt ceiling, which will again circumvent the Congress – the legality of which is seriously questionable.

As time passes, it has become more and more evident that BHO is just not all that interested in enforcing some of our existing laws, reinforcing some of our historically strongest international friendships, reducing spending, improving our economy by allowing job creation, or even preserving our Constitution. 

It’s time for all of us to take a stand that clearly proclaims “our pledge” to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution, our nation.  Write your representatives and senators.  Please, take a stand for our country – your country!  Take A Freekin Stand for once in your life – the most important time in your life!

Guns vs. Constitution

Back in the late 30s/early 40s my father had a friend staying with him while he got his feet on the ground. This man was a registered member of the Communist Party (legal in those days). He was saying how great the Soviet Union was (remember them) and how they would and should rule the world. He said that they would even take over America. My dad, always the debater, asked why that hadn’t happened yet. This Communist said it was because of all the guns that Americans had. “It would be too hard now.” He went on to say that it was okay because we would eventually hand them all over to the government. “We already have people working on that.” My father was never a gun advocate, never owned one as far as I know until I got my first when I was in Eight Grade, but he did see that members of Congress were already taking steps to make it harder to own a gun – The National Firearms Act of 1934. Through the 40s, 50s and 60s it continued. It was a focus in the 70s, 80s and 90s — all by Democrats, BTW. Now, we have a social-progressive president who is willing to go around Congress again using Executive Order to take another grab. I agree that some folks have them who shouldn’t and some use them when they shouldn’t, but umbrella rules do not fix a problem. They only serve the wrong purpose. Just saying. This is wrong for several reasons, but taking our guns will only serve the bad guys and our president’s frequent use of Executive Orders to circumvent the Congress circumvents the Constitution — that’s even worse.

The emotional reaction to what happened in Newtown is justified, but emotion is not the way to act in a legislature. That’s been happening for the last 4 years in DC and that’s really worked well hasn’t it. We all agree that the wrong people should not get firearms – that’s simple, but to umbrella rules for the sake of those few wrong owners is absolutely wrong and only makes the bad guys stronger. The folks who thumb their noses at people who want to keep their firearms because they hunt, have unjustified and, certainly, undeserved elitist-like attitudes. Who the hell cares about anyone who looks down on folks who hunt? Nobody slams folks who fish, cheese knock it off!

Back to emotion, let me tell you what makes me the maddest. I’ve already addressed it once here. Our Vice President and President are considering using executive orders to grab more control of the guns in the United States. They are prepared, once again, to circumvent the Constitution and those who support that or see no issue with that are not true Americans in my mind.

Let’s see. Some of the posters here talk about how many people are shot here in the U.S. and attribute that to the number of guns we have. They site those countries that have significantly tougher controls on firearms as utopian because there are fewer gun deaths in those countries. The key word here is “fewer” – 12,000 less murders (wow). The word “none” is not used in reference to those numbers. There is another vastly more important note here. Those “fewer” are the good guys. By the way, killings are increasing year-on-year in those “better” countries. Importantly, most of the deaths here in the U.S. are the result of gang or drug action. Those shoot-outs often result in the horrible deaths of innocent people, kids. It wasn’t legally purchased firearms, or background checked buyers or even registered firearms that caused those deaths. Focus on that!

Oh, yeah, “Fast and Furious” firearms killed lots of innocent people. Where is the “hate response” to that? Those were firearms sold through the complete authority of OUR FREGGIN GOVERNMENT – the same freegin government that wants to use executive orders to control the sale of firearms mostly to those who actually participate in the registration process– and there isn’t a single word about that.

If all an individual has to offer is the “shoot a deer” argument or the “powerful rush” argument or the “it ain’t the wild west anymore” argument, then it’s time for them to support the socialists-state concept.

We have terrorist groups out there; terrorist nations who want to see us vanish from the face of the earth. They are all supporting this rush to gun control. Initially it was the communists. Now it’s the Social-Progressives who are pushing us to a socialist state. This president doesn’t want guns in the hands of civilians. I am convinced that his goal is to create a socialist state and that requires a level of dictatorship for it to work – guns in civilian hands doesn’t support that concept.

The Guy In the White House: Idiot or Genius

One of my nephews reminded me of a comment my father made decades ago.  This nephew was responding to my posts on FaceBook about how most people didn’t support ObamaCare and how catastrophic tax increases would be.  That was back in early 2012.  He said, “I remember that your dad told me,  ‘most people in America are stupid.’”  Before I could remind him that most of the people in America voted for Obama in 2008, he “Unfriended” me.  I guess he realized that he was part of the “stupid majority”.  Now, we’ve been forced to suffer another four years by that same group.

Although it was through Tim “the tax cheat” Geitner, several weeks ago we heard what BHO was offering in his plan to avoid the “Fiscal Cliff” and now I am even more convinced that my nephew is right.  Most of the people in America are stupid.  I can’t believe we actually re-elected BHO.  How is it possible that we can support a man whose only agenda is to build the Democrat Base?  Listen to me, you stupid majority!  If you pay a person not to work, that person won’t work.  They will continue to collect the money they think is do to them from the only people who can give it to them – the folks who are working.

As I keep thinking about this, I am beginning to wonder if the term “stupid majority” really or completely defines the idiots who elected him.  Just like I’m beginning to wonder if the guy is really the idiot he seems on the surface or a political genius.  While it is clear that the majority voting for Obama is stupid, it may no longer be the appropriate term that effectively defines the whole group.  Maybe a more appropriate label is the “entitled majority.”

BHO’s economic plan is the same economic plan the Soviet Union had.  Remember them?  They established a dictatorship that controlled most industry, salaries, jobs, all education and all fees associate with industry.  Then they took the money through taxes and those fees in the name of the “Workers”.  They shared a little of the wealth with some of those workers.  Importantly, most of the money went to the party leadership and their supporters.   Does that last part sound familiar?

Back to the plan.  Look at what the major points of his plan are:

  1. Increase taxes by $1.6 trilion
  2. Additional $50 billion in stimulus spending
  3. Presidential authority to raise our credit limit

Let’s talk about the tax thing.  The social-progressive democrats will love this.  According to Keynesian Multiplier Effects, every dollar spent in the economy will generate almost double their value.  In other words, John Maynard Keynes, the absolute God of Economics to the Democrats, said that every $10 spent in the economy adds $19 dollars to the GDP.  Using his analysis, when government takes money out of the economy, the multiplier dips off significantly.  That same $10 will generate only $14 in GDP growth.  The reason for that is simple.  Money goes to so-called “entitlements” and they don’t create much value.  The bottom line here is that when the government takes money through taxation they reduce the GDP growth by as much as 50%.  Is it any wonder why our economy is growing so slowly?  Watch out, its about to get worse.  Recently, our esteemed Treasury Secretary, when asked about the relatively small amount of revenue represented by the “Obama-Tax-on-the-Rich” plan — the actual money that would be contributed to the government coffers would be insignificant relative to our debt — was quoted as saying that it ‘s not about the money.  It’s about increasing the tax rates.  He confirmed that the focus, the whole objective of the administration, is “higher taxes”.   It is simply another cog in the Class Warfare machine being engineered by BHO and his socialist team.

Also just a few days later, the President himself said that without those tax increases there would be no deal.  He would allow our economy to drop off the “fiscal cliff”.  It’s really funny how he stands there and jumps all over the Republicans for being inflexible because they want to reduce spending as part of an overall plan.  Now, who’s being inflexible?  The Republicans, in their focus on taxes, have also suggested increased revenues through tax reform instead of tax increases, which would also hit the wealthy BHO thinks make too much money in the first place.  BHO, again, says they are inflexible.  Yeah, he is an idiot.  I have been reluctant to call anybody any names because it is generally unproductive.  However, there comes a time when there is just no other way to define the lack of intelligence or understanding or the intentionally evil agenda of a person or group.

However, as we focus on these verbal assaults he and his minions, the social progressives, are piling on the GOP, generally with the help of the Mainstream Media who support that tactic at every turn, we may be missing the real agenda.  I believe that Obama has always wanted all taxes to go up and has laid out a brilliant plan to assure that happens.   Here’s the “genius” part.  Republicans, the GOP, do not want any taxes to go up — period.  That’s simple.  Just as simple, BHO wants them all to go up.  BHO has made a winning campaign plank that targeted the evil rich, knowing full well that the Republicans would resist.  His whole plan is to appear to be a rigid pro-tax guy against the rich, while keeping taxes low for the middle-class.  The GOP will resist to the year’s end, because they want to keep taxes low on everyone.   BHO will be enjoying a vacation somewhere — costing us millions of dollars – jumping for joy as the GOP falls in line with his plan.  Not only does he get all the revenue he wants through the across-the-board tax increases, he can blame the Republicans for the whole thing.  That’s right, the Republicans who are fighting to protect our economy will be the fall guys, as all taxes will go up at the start of 2013.  BHO will blame the GOP for the success of his plan.  Yeah, he’s a genius.

It’s a brilliant plan from the start.  The full intention of all taxes going up is to increase the revenue he can use to buy more votes – building his base.  Remember the true socialist doctrine, “Take from the Rich and give to the poor.”  BHO’s corruption of that ideal — “if you pay a person not to work, then they won’t work” — is to get more people dependent on the government.  Those who are dependent on the government for their livelihood will do whatever it takes to keep that government in place.  They are his base.

Finally, even those who are dependent on the government will ultimately pay for their own handouts.  Now, I’m back to the “stupid majority” title.  Here’s how that happens.  BHO has yet to accept the premise, or may just not want to recognize, that tax increases will cause higher prices on all products and services as well as a reduction in the work force – happens every time.  A reduced workforce reduces the tax base so the final outcomes of higher taxes are higher prices and reduced revenue because the tax base is smaller.  Remember, the prices are higher covering lost revenue from the higher taxes, so every American will pay the higher prices – yup even the government-dependent takers.  So the takers pay higher prices, which will pay for the higher taxes.  In summary, those stupid “takers” who stand there with their hands out for the money “due them” from the “givers” are actually participating in the process that increases all costs to them while, at the same time, reducing the actual number of givers who will be able to contribute to the revenue on which these takers depend – they are the “stupid majority”.  It’s the circle of economics…always happens.

This President, who swore to defend the Constitution, circumvents our elected legislature, and thus that same Constitution, through executive orders and departmental regulations.   This very same President, who has no idea how economies work, simply blames the GOP for his inaction.  Genius or idiot?  He can’t see, nor can his stupid staff, that raising taxes will ultimately reduce revenue and cause the number of us, who have the ability to contribute to his entitlement scheme, to dwindle.  As tactically brilliant as his plan seems, as successful as it will be at targeting the GOP, it is a strategic abomination that will cause our economy to spiral down to the same depths as Greece and who will be there to bail us out – nobody, that’s who — and it’s all our fault.  Yup, he’s an incompetent idiot!

It’s Over, but not Finished

Well, it’s over and the wrong man won.  The point is he won and he is our President for another, and final, four years.  We have talked about him for the last four years and have outlined, highlighted and acknowledged his missteps, miscalculations and “misstatements”, but he is in the White House for another four years.  Those of us around the world who understand our Federalist system are worried.  President BHO has used his position to circumvent Congress in ways no other president has ever even considered.  Here is a Constitutional Law Professor who takes specific steps to avoid the need to consult Congress.  We should all be angry as hell, but a bunch of us voted for him.  In an earlier post I said that if you pay a person not to work then they won’t work.  It’s that simple.  Now, while there are those who voted for BHO because they saw something – that isn’t there, there are the incredibly large group of takers who went to the polls with their hands out to vote for the guy who will continue to put money in them.  He has created a base of people who feel that the government owes them a living and we let him do it.  This is the group of folks who would rather have people like you and me pay their way than earn their own way.  To them, the American Dream means they do not have to work because the government (us) will provide for them – to them, we owe them their cars, cigarettes, beers, etc.  So, what do we have?  One set of really stupid people and another group of really effective cheaters who exploit the system to their benefit.  I don’t want to be in either group.

Having said all that, he is our President and I, personally, honor that office.  This is the best system in the history of the world.  The Electoral College is a remarkable process that protects the rights of minorities, smaller states and takes into consideration the diverse spread of population across the country.  It has no comparison anywhere.  Our election process, while sometimes seems to be a little unprotected, has been shown to be fairer than that of most other countries.  While I strongly support voter registration and using identification cards to validate citizenship and voting districts, we are still better at this than anyone else.

We elected our President fairly and in accordance with the rules.  All we can do now is watch him carefully.  We must raise our Flag when we sense wrongdoing.  We must remember his socialist leanings, friends, associates and mentors.  We must make sure that these next four years do not take us very much further down the path he started four years ago.

I am saddened by the results of this election, but it is what it is.  He is my President and I am thankful for the process.  Keep in touch because it is our responsibility to maintain our America.

The Final Debate

So, I began the day the way I ended the night – mad at the debate, especially at Mitt Romney.  First of all, I was disappointed at Romney’s non-confrontational performance.  BHO pitched him softball after softball and he just didn’t swing.  The President, on the other hand, attacked Romney time and time again using the same points he used during the second debate — points that fact-checkers said Obama had wrong.  He used facts that Romney successfully countered during that town hall meeting.  Romney just sat there, smiling.  He respectfully watched the President as he spoke and politely listened to BHO’s comments.  He even took a few notes.

I hollered at the TV – at Mitt – each time Obama interrupted Romney.  With more than 100 interruptions, Obama played the Biden game and did it successfully by all standards.  There was Romney, the last debate, two weeks before the election and he didn’t take the initiative.  He gave Obama the floor and watched as Obama told his story – empty prose.  Obama just can’t run on his record, but Mitt never said anything like that. 

The next day, the talking heads all gave the win to Obama based on performance, but they also gave unexpected props to Romney.  Then they started talking about what was actually said and it struck me.  Romney had a plan and, whether or not I liked it, he stuck to it.  His plan was to let the President, himself, shine the light on his own abysmal record.  I’m not sure if you remember but in one of my earlier posts I said that people were taken by “how” BHO said things not by “what” he said.  While the talking heads, on both CNN and FNC, didn’t say that exactly, they did give Mitt more props than I did and as they “unspun” Obama I thought back to the debate and remembered some of the things he said that caused me to scream at Mitt to challenge. 

Late in the debate, Mitt was outlining some of the things he accomplished during his term as Massachusetts Governor.  Obama interrupted again, as prescribed I suppose by his debate strategy as taught by Joe “the Interrupter” Biden, saying that the successful advances in performance of Massachusetts students happened before Romney took that office.  Wrong, Mr. President, and you know it.  Every fact checker in existence admits that Romney’s education progress, as Governor, was superlative. 

Let me take on a few more on Mitt’s behalf and try to shed some light on the facts.

Another point that jumped out at me and that I thought Mitt was about to turn back on Obama was this thing about the strong “partnerships” BHO claimed he built around the world.  The only names that he specifically mentioned as partners were Pakistan, Somalia, Russia and China.  The one that exploded in my mind was the “valuable partnership [Obama] built with Pakistan.”  There he was proclaiming that he had a great partnership with Pakistan, one that was important for security in the area and, yet,  just a few minutes earlier, after ridiculing Mitt for thinking we should have asked for Pakistani permission before going in and killing Bin Laden, Obama went nuts and said Pakistan would never give us permission and that if we had waited for that permission Ben Laden would still be alive.  Now, that’s a testament to a valuable partnership.  Baloney!  The only partner we have in Pakistan is the Pakistani Doctor who helped us nail down Ben Laden’s location.  That partner is currently serving a life sentence in a Pakistani prison for aiding and abetting us.  Great partnership.

Oh, Yeah almost forgot, we have a partnership with Somalia, too.  There is a partnership that we can use to help secure peace in the world.  Why on earth is that such a valuable partnership?  Pirates still rule that place and murderous gangs roam the forests killing children or pressing them into military service for any one of the various warlords. 

Obama talked about the partnerships with Russia and China, as well, and how much stronger they are today than when he took office.  We did hear Obama himself trying to personally establish a partnership with Russia.  Remember the promise he made to Medvedev and Putin “…of more flexibility” after the election.  Russia has done everything in their power to block every initiative the U.S. has made to limit Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear weapons initiatives, not to mention the anti-missile system we were placing in Poland to protect our allies and us from Iranian attack.  I can’t think of a single thing that Russia has done that would indicate they might even be loosely considered a partner.  Every time he goes to the UN to get international support for sanctions against Iran over their nuclear weapons program, Russia and China, our strong partners, veto them in the Security Council – the only ones doing that.  Oh, I forgot, Putin has endorsed Obama.  I wonder if he’s looking forward to the flexibility Obama promised.  I think that Chaves and the Castros might want to be partners, too.  They endorsed, as well.

Although not mentioning any names, Obama also said that through strong partnerships he has “created” he’s been able to effectively establish the strongest sanctions ever on Iran over their nuclear ambitions.  “Sanctions that are crippling their economy.”  Yet, after four years in office, not a single unilateral sanction has had any effect on Iran’s plans.  What he doesn’t realize is that the Iranian leadership doesn’t care a whit about the suffering of its people.  Like other extreme governments in the region, only the goals of the government are important.  Look what’s happening in Syria.  Romney respectfully and calmly reminded us that four years of Obama’s strong leadership and partnership-building has accomplished exactly what?  An Iran so close to a nuclear weapon that our “only” ally in the area is threatened by extinction and 30,000 Syrian civilians have been killed by their own government/military.  Show me the strength – SHOW ME THE STRENGTH!

Now, that I have taken some time to put into words some of the things I remember from the debate, Mitt’s tactics in this debate have begun to crystallize.  His mission was to show he knew the details, geography, the leaders and the problems.  You know what?  He did that with clarity.  He remained calm and ready to present his picture of the future and the past along with his plans for fixing the massive problems Obama has created.  Most importantly, he was able to demonstrate that the security of the US, the loyalty of allies and, yes, the development of “partnerships” depend first on the vitality of our economy.  Mitt reminded us in all three debates that our economy doesn’t have much vitality and that the responsibility for that rests squarely on Obama’s shoulders.

Mitt was calmer, less confrontational and showed more willingness to collaborate than did Obama.  Obama painted the clear picture.  At no time did he talk about having included Republicans anywhere, in any discussions.  Mitt demonstrated understanding of the problems, offered different recommendations and was clearly more ready to work with diverse politics.  Obama, in his own words, simply restated his vision – no plan, just vision.  You know what, it is the same vision he shared with us four years ago. 

As BHO moved through is plan of attack, he talked about Mitt’s plans for additional spending on our military.  I remember this being aggressively and exhaustively discussed during Debate #2.  Mitt was clear, he wasn’t increasing spending, he was talking about not accepting the disastrous reduction in spending — two different things.  Obama got it wrong then and he got it wrong again.  However, that wasn’t such an important part of this discussion.  Romney pointed out that our Navy had taken a serious hit and that more was going to happen.  The US Navy will be smaller than it was in 1916 (I think that was the date).  Obama, very disrespectfully, went into his “Battleship Game” analogy.  At the time, I wondered if he planned that or it just came to mind then — you know the whole” horses and bayonets” thing.  Inventive, but not true analogy.  What Obama doesn’t know is that the number of ships has declined to a point lower than we need to support operations that defend  our national security.  What he doesn’t know is that it takes lots of ships ferrying supplies — weapon systems, medical and food supplies, water purification equipment, base camp supplies that include tents, cots, sleeping bags, pots & pans, you name it – to sustain a mission.  Oops, forgot the Marines – “Semper Fi.”  They travel by ship, too.  Having led an operation that established such supply ships during my time in the military, I know what I’m talking about.  Obama doesn’t.  Whether Obama actually sought input from the Joint Chiefs or not, they are under the command of POTUS and if told to build a plan to reduce spending by $2 Trillion, they will come up with a plan.  I would like to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting.

As I continue this post, I am falling more in line with Mitt’s plan than I was during and immediately after that last debate.  Obama told some lies and made some outlandish statements.  Was Mitt totally accurate?  No, but Obama was the winner in the “false” or “mostly false” categories.  The reason for that might be based in his insistence to “quote” data.  He was disrespectful and rude in a couple of cases and, man, did he ever interrupt.

Anyway, I wanted to talk about one more thing – another falsehood perpetrated by our President.  That is his short-term memory regarding his attempts to secure a Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq.  He attacked Romney on Romney’s position that we should probably still have troops in Iraq.  While Obama was coming up with a total withdrawal of forces, Romney was saying that some troops should stay to help secure and maintain the gains we made over there.  Obama tried to sell the tale that it was Obama that brought all the troops home, which enabled more to go to Afghanistan.  He chided Romney by saying if Romney were in charge; we’d still have troops over there because Romney was against the recall.  Truth be told, Obama was trying to keep troops there too.  He sent Biden and Clinton to Iraq to negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement.  Obama wanted a Status of Forces Agreement in place.  Why, because one needs a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in place when troops are to be deployed to the country.  Yup, Obama, probably at the behest of his military leaders, wanted to keep forces there as well.  That was one of the biggest lies he’s told this year.  I remember the SOFA debacle when it happened, but it was brought clearly to the surface when Mitt mentioned it during the debate.

Well, that’s about it for me.  Did Mitt lose the debate.  I think Obama performed better, but Mitt was more honest with us and Obama was disrespectful, almost demeaning, throughout.  I think Romney folks are still Romney folks as Obama folks are still with him.  As for the undecided, if they listened to the delivery, Obama won.  If they listened to the content then Mitt won.  It’s up to you, but my hope is with Mitt.

Debate Number 2

Well, the Town Hall style debate did not turn out the way every one projected.  Instead of being a measured, controlled, respectful give-and-take forum where regular people got to ask questions, it turned out to be somewhat measured (BHO got 4% more talking time than Romney, not bad), uncontrolled (Crowley didn’t really step up to that task, she did try though) and, while not disrespectful, it was, to put it mildly, confrontational.  Happily, the regular folks did get to ask their previously-screened questions.  They were pretty good questions and, as expected, candidates still tried to get their messages across.

Let’s get the biggest elephant off the table first:

The Attack on our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya:  (International Relations and Foreign Policy is reserved for Monday)

Of course the foremost topic on everybody’s mind was the attack on our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans were killed including our Ambassador, Chris Stevens.  One point of contention was whether or not BHO called it an “act of terror” or “senseless violence” as he stood in the Rose Garden the day after.  He used both terms in his remarks that day.  However, that specific point of contention is irrelevant.  If he indeed meant that the attack was a terrorist act designed to take place on the anniversary of 9/11, then why did the Administration back step from that within minutes, seconds?  Why did Susan Rice, Ambassador to the UN, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and several other administration officials immediately thereafter – and for the next 14 days — describe it as a spontaneous attack fueled by a protest over an anti-Muslim video that nobody watched?  It was because, there is no way BHO could continue to proclaim his “strongman” image in international relations if the attack on the consulate was a planned terrorist attack — an attack that may have been foreseen and a loss of lives that probably would have been avoided.

They began the “cover-up” (I use that term specifically) to protect that “strongman” persona he needed to maintain in the days leading up to election.  The bad guys couldn’t be Al Qaeda.  According to BHO, he had already decimated them, left them without leadership and killed off most of their members.  How would it look if all of a sudden America had to send additional security forces to our embassy in order to protect it and our representatives from that devistated terrorist group?  How would it look for that decimated Al Qaeda group to conduct an effective, successful attack on American soil killing an Ambassador?

What if we were to find out that the administration knew of the danger for weeks before the attack?  What if we were to hear that there were repeated, frequent requests for additional security personnel and perhaps the need to recall our embassy staff over threats in the region?   What if we were to find out that the attack was being watched and captured on tape, by State Department or intelligence personnel,  as it was happening and that direct communication was ongoing at the same time back to Washington? It would be catastrophic to that image.

Well, so much for the image.  BHO has thrown the intelligence community under the bus.  Secretary of State Clinton finally, willingly stepped in front of that same bus accepting full responsibility for the debacle – probably before BHO tossed her, too.  Personally, I think this is worse than Watergate.  That was a cover-up, a big cover-up, but nobody was killed.  We lost four Americans and BHO wanted to call it a spontaneous demonstration.  How dare he?

And, finally, during the most cataclysmic event to happen to America in since 9/11, BHO left the Rose Garden and headed to Las Vegas for a fundraising event.  Remember the harassment President Bush took over his reaction to the news of 9/11 when he was reading to those school kids in Florida?  At least, President Bush took charge, put a plan in place, went to DC and met with his staff and then met the First Responders at Ground Zero and said and meant,  “I hear you.  The rest of the World hears you!”  BHO’s responsibility is to us, to our people around the world.  It looked like his primary focus that day and for the rest of the week was raising money for his reelection, leaving his peeps to whitewash the whole thing over a video nobody watched.

Importantly as I write this more and more incriminating material surfaces giving more and more credence to the cover-up manufactured by the Obama Administration and Campaign Staff.

In a series of messages from Embassy and Security staff and Ambassador Stevens himself over the several month leading to the attack on the Consulate in Benghazi that resulted in the his death and the deaths of three other Americans, the following issues were raised:

  1. “Security staff repeatedly sounded alarms to their superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died.”
  2. “Stevens cited a meeting he had held two days earlier with local militia commanders.  These men boasted to Stevens of exercising ‘control’ over the Libyan Armed Forces, and threatened that if the U.S.-backed candidate for prime minister were to prevail in Libya’s internal political jockeying, ‘they would not continue to guarantee security in Benghazi.’”
  3. “Roughly a month earlier, Stevens had signed a two-page cable, labeled ‘sensitive,’ that he entitled ‘The Guns of August: Security in Eastern Libya.’”
  4. “Aug. 8, the ambassador noted that in just a few months’ time, ‘Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape.’ He added, ‘The individual incidents have been organized,’ a function of ‘the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.’”
  5. “By Sept. 4, Stevens’ aides were reporting back to Washington on the ‘strong Revolutionary and Islamist sentiment’ in the city.”
  6. “Scarcely more than two months had passed since Stevens had notified the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and other agencies about a ‘recent increase in violent incidents,’ including ‘attacks against western interests.’”

It just goes on and on and the leftist talking-heads laugh at the suggestion that this surpasses the Watergate Conspiracy.

Oil/Gas Production

In February 2011, the Obama Administration was ordered “…to act on five deep water drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico within 30 days, calling the delays in issuing new decisions ‘unreasonable, unacceptable, and unjustified.’”  The administration is still evaluating those permits on the basis of additional regulations recently imposed.

BHO was right.  Oil production has increased during his administration.  However according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Mitt was also correct in that the increases were on private lands and not federally controlled sites.  Mitt was also correct regarding the number of permit approvals over the last four years.  Let’s be a little serious here.   After a permit is approved it takes years – as many as five or six – to begin getting crude out of the approved site.  So, any increases in oil production were probably the result of permits approved during the Bush Administration.  Certainly, none of the permits approved by Obama are producing yet.  It is a fact, permits are under the Obama Administration are down.  According to the Bureau of Land Management, oil and gas leases under Obama are down 11%.  The number of acres under lease is down 19% and the number of permits for oil and gas exploration is down 36%.

Again, Mitt is right and Obama is “mistaken”.


President Obama rejects Mitt’s claim that ObamaCare has significant tax hikes that will affect every single American Household, small business, insurance carrier, drug innovator companies, medical device manufacturers, indoor tanning facilities, and charitable hospitals among others to the tune of about $500 billion according to the Congressional Budget Office.  Maybe BHO should take Nancy Pelosi’s advice now that the bill is passed he should read it to be sure he knows what’s in it. (http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes)

What are the 23+ million folks out of work supposed to do?  Will they be exempted from the tax when they eventually come to the point where they have to decide whether to buy food or health insurance?

All fact-checkers have indicated that some providers will stop accepting Medicare patients as some of my doctors have indicated, and that some insurance providers and medical practitioners will eventually drop out of the market.  While these “Fact-Checkers” claim that the more than $700 billion that will be taken out of Medicare to help fund ObamaCare is a drop in the bucket based on the projected total spend, much of it is to be collected through reduced pay rates for services by the providers.  Therefore, it does invalidate BHO’s claim that if we like our doctors we can keep them or if we like our insurance plans we can keep them as well.

If ObamaCare remains the law of the land then many of us will lose our doctors and insurance plans and pay the tax if we don’t move to the “approved” providers.  Basically, it is the wrong plan and will catastrophically affect our healthcare system. It is important for every American to get the medical care they require.  However this plan, written as a huge, all or nothing bill by a cloistered group without bi-partisan participation then bullied through Democrat-controlled legislature without the chance for full understanding, will reduce the number of providers causing ever-increasing numbers of patients to those who do not drop out – longer wait times, reduced time for evaluations, lines for surgeries, government-reviewed medical care, limited access to improved medications and rejection for services at end-of-life.

Not a prospect I look forward to.


One does not increase taxes during a recession.  That is a simple fact of economics.  It is a fact that Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton and Bush all recognized and in each case they corrected recession trends during their administrations by lowering taxes across the board.  You know what happened?  Revenues grew.  But our guy, BHO, asks, “Do we want to go back to the old ways?”  I say, “Absolutely.”

He keeps talking about the “Bush Tax Cuts” with derision.  That’s really funny.  As the Clinton Presidency was ending, there was a recession on the horizon that Bush kept talking about.  The Dems said he was just trying to make it political for his election.  As soon as Bush was inaugurated, he put into effect the tax cuts and the recession stopped.  Now, Bush did spend a lot of money during his second term.  9/11 had a lot to do with that.  However, it is also important to remember that Congress during that term was Democrat.  All the spending bills came to him out of a Democrat congress.  He signed most of them so that he could maintain a solid base for this war on terror – which most Americans supported strongly.  If it weren’t for his collaboration on those spending bills we would not have been as aggressive against Muslim extremist as we were.  Because of that aggressive, take-it-to-them defense, there were no more serious assaults on American soil since then – except for the recent attack in Libya, that is.

Bush even suggested that Fanny and Freddy needed to be more regulated, but was reminded that his resistance to those entities would be seen as an attempt to keep lower income Americans from their “rightful share” of the American Dream.  Can you imagine the holocaust that would have surrounded him if he regulated them a little?  The fact is that our current recession is directly traced to those unregulated organizations.  Everything that has happened started with them. By the way, who was the single larges recipient of campaign contribution for them – BHO.  Now, of course, BHO wants to regulate everything.

But, back to taxes.  Back in late 2010, there was strong talk about the Debt Ceiling needing to be raised.   Tim “The Tax Cheat” Geithner told us that the Debt Ceiling needed to be raised in early 2011 because of significant reduction in revenues resulting from the advancing recession.  At the same time, Republicans were pushing for at least an extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.  They sited that there would be fewer layoffs and that businesses needed to be able to plan for 2011 and this would help them in their staffing needs.  BHO caved and the tax cuts were extended.

Within a month, Geithner stepped back and said that had been a slight “miscalculation” and that revenues were such that the Debt Ceiling increase emergency could now be pushed back to the end of the summer.  Interesting, tax cuts — increased revenues.  Did anyone in the administration seize on that?  Nope.  I wonder what would be happening now if the tax cuts had been made permanent.  Anyway, the Debt Ceiling was raised and our credit rating was reduced.  Great outcome, Mr. President.

By the way, Tim did pay his overdue tax obligation.  However, he paid no interest or penalties.

Now, BHO wants to eliminate the tax cuts on the richest of us, leaving in place the cuts to the middle class – that does not include the huge set of taxes that will fall out of ObamaCare on every American.  Two things will happen immediately.  Prices on everything we buy will go up to offset those increases and more people will be laid off, or at least fewer people will be hired.  That’s a simple economic truism.  It happens every time.

The third, and most egregious, fallout of the increased taxes and regulations on our businesses has already begun.  To the great happiness for China, Thailand, Vietnam, India and other nations around the world, American businesses are moving their plants and jobs overseas.  Higher taxes and greater numbers of regulations chase businesses and jobs out and they aren’t taking the people with them.

Democrats simply don’t understand that lower taxes will always increase revenues through increased employment.  More people working increases the tax base.  Mr. President, it’s that simple.


The President promised to put Medicare under the microscope finding ways to make it more efficient cutting out waste and abuse.  Nothing has happened.  However, he is resisting all efforts of the Republicans to identify and help plan fixes.

He promised to check on social Security finding ways to make it more solvent for future generations.  Again, nothing.  However, he has ridiculed all Republican recommendations while not providing any alternative solutions.

He promised to help secure our borders and his only action has been to sue Arizona over a law they put in place to provide more effective enforcement of the laws of the United States.  Arizona is a state that has suffered more than any other and they, among others, are still waiting for assistance from the Federal Government.

ICE won’t even respond even when illegals are found and retained.  The only result is that those illegals are returned to the public.  Again the government simply does not enforce the laws that are in place today.  His promise to secure the border has been forgotten.

My mother always said that promises not kept are promises broken.  They are lies.  Our President, who swore to uphold the laws, has not done that.  He promised to defend the “Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic” and he has failed.

Binders full of Women

Now for a little humor.

Clarence Page, of the Chicago Times, wrote a critical piece that started, “’Binders full of women,’” Mitt Romney’s wince-inducing expression from the second presidential debate, has become almost as big a Mitt-ism as ‘Big Bird’ was in the first.”

Then the vaulted CNN came up with, “Mitt Romney showed up Tuesday night talking about “binders full of women” being brought to him when he was governor. Sounds kind of kinky and certainly not something you want to be touting.”

What I heard when Romney said he got those binders full of women’s résumés was that as he was staffing of his Gubernatorial Office in Massachusetts he wanted to have women represented.  He asked his Lieutenant Governor, Kerry Healey (who, if you hadn’t noticed, is a woman) to help him find qualified women as he was staffing his office.

She said, “When Governor Romney was elected, he undertook to do that. During the transition, he reached out to his business contacts, he reached out to the folks who had worked on the campaign through the transition to ask for their recomendations, and he also reached out to the Massachusetts Women’s Political Caucus that had been out there reaching out to women’s organizations on a bipartisan basis, collecting a number of names of women who were ready willing and able to come in and serve in government. So he had a number of sources that he drew on, and the now-famous binders that came up in the debate last night were ones that were provided through the Massachusetts Women’s political caucus as part of the MassGap project.”

What occurred to me and millions of other Americans was that Romney’s search efforts demonstrated that there were huge numbers of qualified people, women, who were capable and ready to go to work.  Women who, whether or not currently employed or not, were not doing what they were wanted to do.  Remember, Governor Romney had more women on his staff than any other governor in the country.

Here’s the humor.  I can’t even come up with a good reason why the left-leaning media, those folks who have always said they stood for women’s rights, equal pay and such, couldn’t see the depth of Romney’s comment.  Romney went looking for women, found them, employed them at “equal pay for equal work” and did it more effectively than any other governor in the country.  In fact, he did it more effectively than the current President of the United States.  That’s right, our current President, according to Politisite.com “Using late 2011 figures, the latest available at the time, The Washington Times earlier this year surveyed 121 White House employees who were paid at least $100,000 and found that 47 were women and 74 were men…When all White House employees are considered, the Obama administration’s record dims a bit further.  Female employees earn a median salary of $60,000, roughly 18 percent less than men, whose median salary is $71,000.”

There’s our President, on one hand strongly supporting the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, while, on the other hand, he pays his women staffers 18% less than their male counterparts.  Then he and the liberal media have the unmitigated gaul to claim that Romney waffled on his support of the law.

Quoting Politifact.com,  “Obama said that when asked whether he would have signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act into law, Romney’s campaign said, ‘I’ll get back to you.’  His point was that the campaign was dodging the question.  Indeed, a Romney adviser did say earlier this year that he would ‘get back’ to a reporter about whether he supported the Lilly Ledbetter Act.  A spokeswoman then said he would not change it, and Romney later said he ‘certainly support(s) equal pay for women, ‘and has’ no intention of changing that law.”

Now here’s the real funny part.  We already know that the left-leaning media will go to any extent to protect BHO.  Here’s the proof of how extreme that protectionism goes.  Having for years supported “equal pay for equal work” in every possible venue, here, knowing full well that their hero, while verbally supporting that truly honorable principal, actually doesn’t.  Do they uncover and report on that or shed light on the reality in the White House?  No!  Do they celebrate the enlightened position actually in place in the gubernatorial staff in Massachusetts during the Romney years there?  No!

The liberal media would rather give up their fundamental beliefs than lose their liberal, socialist president.  While not my belief, I guess for them its “Principals be damned.”


Only a Heartbeat Away

Dear Vice President Biden:

Last night you displayed the highest level of disrespect and condescension I have ever seen.  You should be ashamed.  The people of Delaware and Pennsylvania are more embarrassed than I am.

I grew up in a family that taught me to be respectful and to listen to people.  I was taught not to interrupt others or be condescending.  I don’t know about your family, but I’ll bet you were taught the same things and chose to ignore them last night.  Shame on you, Sir.  You were an anathema to your family upbringing.

I’ve always thought you were the dumbest person in Congress.  Now, not only were you the dumbest person in Congress, you are the rudest, most ignorant, condescending VP in our history.  Enjoy that reputation.  Putting aside your total ignorance of economics and the effect taxes have on economic growth, your numbers didn’t add up.

Congressman Ryan was right when he challenged you on the withdrawal of the surge troops.  Of course we want the Afghanis to stand up and take over the job of securing their country.  Sir, they aren’t up it.  They can’t sustain the mission with which you’ve tasked our soldiers.  The fact that you and the President insist that there be no reduction in actions or missions while reducing their numbers during the “fighting season” is inane.  In other words, you and our glorious President are trusting the security of our reduced numbers of soldiers to newly trained, loyalty-questionable Afghani military.

You said that you did not know that the embassy in Libya had asked for additional security around the consulate in Bengazi.  What you basically did was “throw the intelligence community under the bus.”  How dare you.  You, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Jay Carney and the president all said the same thing.  The tragic attack in Bengazi was the result of a demonstration against a video that nobody watched.  You know very well that the State Department in Libya did ask for more security and sent alerts upstream regarding increasing danger in that country.  You did nothing but throw the intelligence community, which was right from day one, under the bus.  You lied last night, Sir.  You told a bold-faced lie.

What a great feeling I have now — my Vice President is a rude, disrespectful, condescending, interrupting liar.  Great, you’re a heartbeat away.

Debate Number 1

I was worried as I sat down for the first Presidential Debate of the 2012 political season.  There was Mitt Romney about to face probably the best most engaging orator in my recollection.  My concern was that no matter how dreadful his record for the last four years was, Barry would somehow make it seem like he has been on top of everything and that, as tragic as our economy is, he would insist that things are better.  I knew he would ignore the 350,000 or more jobs lost every week for the last 48 months or the 23 million people out of work and point to the 5 million jobs HE created.   I knew that somewhere along the line he would proudly talk about the growth in oil and natural gas production that took place during his administration.  I knew that Barry was good.  I knew that when he spoke people listened.  I knew that people often didn’t hear what he said.  They only responded to how he said it.  After all, we all know and the media has always said BHO was good at presentation.  They all said that Barry was the best ever at delivering a speech. 

Then there was Mitt.  I always thought he was a really smart guy who just couldn’t get his message across.  I understood him because I am an economist, but it’s not me he has to reach.  He was always the guy who knew what was wrong but always spoke as though he was on the outside looking in and not fully engaged with the people or engaging in his delivery.  Sometimes he said things poorly and spent wasteful time clarifying positions.  We all knew his history and what he’s done in business, in office and in the Olympics but he has not been able to get the masses beyond the “so what” response.  Many wondered about his plans and what was in them.  I was worried for him as Jim Lehrer opened the proceedings.

Then it began.  BHO did what we all expected in his opening remarks – things aren’t rosy yet but they are getting there.  However, he was not energetic or specific.  Barry seemed like he would rather be at home watching the thing than participating in it.  Mitt, on the other hand, rose to the occasion.  He showed himself as a CEO who is willing to collaborate with all parties leading from the front.  He was energetic, engaging and concerned.  He was so steeped in the facts of the last four years.  He took BHO to task at every turn.  Respectfully, Mitt demonstrated and continually called Barry out when his facts wrong – over and over again.  Never calling him a liar, Mitt debunked reports Barry sited as support for his positions referencing subsequent reports that demonstrated that the “facts” Barry kept using were erroneous.  It was an amazing switch for Mitt.  It was Mitt who showed that BHO had nothing to do with improving oil and gas production.  It was Mitt who talked about the real unemployment numbers and the BHO-increases in taxes.  It was Mitt who took the fight directly to BHO and BHO had no response.  It was Mitt who tried to engage Barry while Barry wouldn’t even acknowledge he was being spoken to.  It was Mitt who spoke to Barry while Barry looked away or spoke to Jim Lehrer.  While Barry took notes to which he never responded, Mitt looked at him and tried repeatedly to get substantive responses.  They never came.  It was Mitt who repeatedly told Barry that he was misrepresenting facts, while Barry seemed to be completely unprepared to talk about his record.  Mitt demonstrated why he was an effective CEO – a leader.

Mitt won that debate so effectively that David Axelrod began a defense minutes after it was over.  Now, BHO’s team is talking about how Mitt was the great presenter and BHO was just a good guy doing the best he could.  What a switch, what a switch.  You go, Mitt.  Keep it up.  If you win the election, you did it on your own experience and with the ability to clarify and solve problems.  You presented you plans again and correctly said that you will not be a “take it or leave it” president like our current one.  If you don’t, well, bad on us.

What’s Religion Got To Do With It?

I do not care one whit whether or not BHO is a Muslim.  It is so unimportant in the overall scheme of things here in America.  I remember the hideous issue over Kennedy’s Catholicism when I was in high school.  My grandfather said that the Pope would be the “defacto” President.  My mother voted for Nixon because he was raised Quaker and our next-door-neighbor voted for Kennedy because he was a Catholic.  They said that with a laugh and with their tongues squarely jammed in their respective cheeks.  At least my mother and the lady next door understood the idiocy of the manufactured fear.

What concerns me about Barry’s “religion” is whether or not he is acting in accordance with some underlying focus on eliminating the Christian roots of our nation.  One can argue all year long about the “separation of church and state”, but those words never appear in our Constitution, anywhere.   In fact the context of that statement, traced to Thomas Jefferson (1806), is this:

“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

In other words, the government will take no action, one way or the other, with regard to religion.  The communist-rooted ACLU has a blast shredding that original tenant of our Constitution.  Shame on them.  While there are some groups who do attack religion from several different directions, most are focused on removing any reference to religion – Christianity — wherever it appears – even in our founding documents.

Fundamental people in Jewish neighborhoods can’t stand the sight of a Nativity Scene in a local park, but insist that a Menorah is fine.   Their claim is that the Nativity is a purely holiday depiction of a strictly Christian event, while the Menorah represents the “way of life” of their people – come on.

Now, I am not a Constitutional Scholar by any means, but I know what I believe.  I am a Quaker – a Birthright Quaker.  There are not many of us around anymore.  While The Religious Society of Friends is Christian, many do not side with the “virgin birth” as described in scripture.  And, again, it doesn’t matter to me what so ever.  What does matter is what is at the root of all major, and some not so major, religions throughout the world and history.  Those basic tenants are these (not necessarily in this order): (source: Messiah Matrix by Kenneth John Atchity based on the principles of Clementia and Buddhism in the words of the Dalai Lama)

  • Love
  • Peace
  • Compassion
  • Patience
  • Mercy
  • Tolerance
  • Forgiveness
  • Contentment
  • Sense of Responsibility
  • Sense of Harmony
  • Universality
  • Resurrection

These same basic principles are the root for all – I say again – all religions throughout the world and through all history.  Yes, even the Muslim Quran proclaims these tenants or principals as the basic root of its doctrine.  It’s the radicals that change the meaning or ignore them all together.

Historically, there have been radical Christians who have waged war, gone on witch-hunts, conducted brainwashing and mutilations all in the name of God.  They even misused the scriptures to extend bigotry and racism into the twentieth century.  Horrific deeds that were attributed to the Will of God, but were really for the sake of some narcissistic pack leader(s).

Today, the Muslim community is sparsely populated by a similar group of narcissists who, for the sake of their own image and popularity, are using the same techniques to, in their words, destroy Christianity and Judaism.  Why, because every narcissist needs an enemy and the bigger the enemy the greater the potential Glory.  They want to be seen as the “New Coming”.  They want to be the next “Holy One”.  Yet, we all know that the basic tenants of Islam are the same as all those of all those other religions.

This is where my concern begins.  Knowing the root of Islam and what it has stood for over the centuries – tolerance and peace, I see an administration or perhaps a president, who has taken the position that Islam is rightly ready to take a more prominent role in the government of our nation.

The DNC was prepared to open its convention with a couple of days of celebration of Islam.  It was to begin with “…starting Friday afternoon there will be Islamic prayers followed by an evening halal banquet and then Saturday there will be an Islamic “festival” – all presided over by the Grand Imam, Siraj Wahhaj.  Now, there’s a great guy.  Here are some of the things the Grand Imam has said:

(From the American Thinker — 12/21/12:  Richard Butrick: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/08/an_islamic_festival_to_jump_start_the_dnc.html).

  • “Wherever you came from, you came to America. And you came for one reason- for one reason only- to establish Allah’s deen [Islam as a complete way of life], as a servant of Allah.”
  • “Islam is better than democracy. Allah will cause his deen [Islam as a complete way of life], Islam to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what? It will happen.”
  • “If Allah says 100 strikes, 100 strikes it is. If Allah says cut off their hand, you cut off their hand. If Allah says stone them to death, through the Prophet Muhammad, then you stone them to death, because it’s the obedience of Allah and his messenger — nothing personal.”

Yet, that same DNC, under the direction from our President, initially sought not to have a benediction to close the convention.  Initially, they even specifically removed reference to God and the reference to Jerusalem from the Party Platform.  Although BHO finally gave in and let Timothy Cardinal Dolan give the benediction, initially the Cardinal was snubbed — Christianity out, Islam in.

One month prior to 9/11/12 our President said in remarks to the Turkish Parliament, “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over may centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country.”  It was another stop on his four-year-long apologist tour.  What did he say about the terrorist threats to World Peace (“Peace” being one of the basic tenants of Islam)? Nothing, not a thing!

Again, Islam has the same basic tenants as all other religions.  I don’t care which one we name.  Yet, our President chooses to ignore that and promotes Islam at his convention while intending to eliminate all reference to Christianity, which is without doubt as proclaimed by all our early governing and exploratory documents, the founding principle of our nation.

“In God We Trust”, “One Nation Under God”, “Endowed by Their Creator” – don’t you see.  It doesn’t matter what or which God we are talking about.  I happen to believe they are all the same God, but that doesn’t matter.  What does matter is that they all – or [He] – governs the universe with the same principles that Cesear Augustus used to created Pax Romana and our founding fathers used as the foundation on which they built our nation.  And today, our President has chosen to look the other way.  I see him now as not only incompetent but as one of those narcissists waiting for the big event that will propel him to greatness and he’s using our religions to do it.

Stop focusing on the name of the religion or deity.  Even if we choose to remove the deity from all reference, as the atheists wish, what is wrong with the tenants?  But, why would we even listen to those people in the first place?  Our religions all want the same things.  Atheists don’t have to acknowledge what we believe but they cannot eliminate what it is we believe.  The real problem here is that BHO seems to be favoring one religion over another—Islam over Christianity, which contributes eventually to the greatness of the narcissistic leadership of that extreme Islamic minority.  Full circle: Our incompetent President completes the circle – giving the nod to them, makes them greater than he.  Making himself the toady of the terrorists.

What he doesn’t understand is that if we live our lives and run our nation and see the world within the boundaries of those basic principles, irrespective of the name we choose to call them, it will be a better place and our God will be happy with us and we will be happy with ourselves.