WHEN THE SHOE FITS

Little dust has settled since Mark Gruber, one of the Obamacare architects, was caught on video calling the American electorate, “stupid”.  According to him, the strategy used to pass the Affordable Health Care Act followed two prongs in its approach.  The first was to write a bill that was so onerous and confusing that no lawmaker in the nation could make heads-nor-tails of what it meant.  And the second was that the majority of voters were so unaware of economics – and dare I add civics – that they would embrace its entitlement and never oppose it.

The initial comments that came to light via YouTube were made during the 24th Annual Health Economics Conference hosted by the University of Pennsylvania.  But since then, his other rants have also made their way to the viral video stage, and he is on record numerous times saying that their intention was to hoodwink the people.  Knowing that careful and rational scrutiny of the bill would reveal its true intent to grab control of the entire health care system, they were counting on our naiveté regarding all things political and economic to sneak it into law.

The problem, as the media and general public see it, is that he openly stated the American voters were, “stupid!”  People are all up-in-arms because they feel insulted by his statement.  Surely, we’re not political morons, are we?  Well, let’s test that theory.  In 2004, we elected Obama as President.  He said he was going to “fundamentally change the American system.”  Based on “hope and change”, we found ourselves with a declining economy, rising unemployment, overwhelming national debt, loss of strategic control in the Middle East and race relations that harken back to 1964.  So how did we fix that?  We elected Obama for a second term!

What is really telling is that all the time Obamacare was being unveiled to the public, the President kept promising that we could keep our own doctors, that our insurance plans would be untouched and that health costs would come down.   Anyone with an ounce of economic understanding could easily have seen through this.  Our experience with government controlled medicine, primarily Medicare and Medicaid, gave plenty of evidence that droves of medical professionals have been streaming from the profession.  The rebates for procedures under government oversight made it unfeasible for many doctors to retain their entitled patients.  Both programs were slighted for severe cuts due to their overburdening costs and the growing barrage of red tape.  Combined with vanishing reimbursements, this all leads to a decline in the supply of service providers.

As for insurance, the new requirements pressed insurers to up the amount and types of services, with a mandate to include those who had pre-existing illnesses.  No sick person was to be left behind, and such things as trans-gender surgery, rehab for addictions and every form of prophylaxis were in the bucket for anyone and everyone.  And if you didn’t feel you needed such services, so what!  Everyone had to have insurance or face the fed’s wrath on April 15^th.  This meant that the number of insured would shoot through the roof, leading to premium hikes as the insurance industry desperately sought to recoup the costs for providing the increased coverage.  Of course, once everyone had insurance, the demand for healthcare was poised to skyrocket.

Now, here’s a little concept for you to consider.  When supply decreases and demand rises … which way do prices go?  I remember learning this principle in sixth grade, and so far in nearly a half-century since, that economic law hasn't changed.  But when the President said prices would go down, the people believed him.

With cost spikes and policy cancellations flowing like a tidal wave, we’re getting a good economics lesson now!

So was Professor Gruber right in what he said?  Frankly, it was a very valid strategy.  They hoped that nobody would catch onto what they were doing, and sure enough, their wager paid off.  It went so well that not only did the bill pass, but even now when people are losing their insurance right and left and the costs are enough to give you a heart attack, there are still those who swear that Obamacare is our most dire need.  The policy makers placed their chips on the hope that the average voter wasn't smart enough to know how they were being duped, and when the whole house of cards was served up, the voters went right along and filled it in with entitlement concrete.  In the end, it proved that the concept was not only valid, but useful.

Of course, we’re a lot smarter now.  We can see how we've been duped by dishonest politicians, and we’re surely not going to fall for that sort of stupidity again, are we?  In fact, we have our eyes on them, and they had better not attempt to pull any wool on us, for surely we’ll stop them dead.

Oh, and have you heard?  Mary Landrieu, a staunch Obama clone in the senate, announced last week that she was putting a bill forward to kick the ball rolling on the Keystone pipeline.  By Heaven, she’s all for this conservative job creator, and she’s going to personally ensure that it gets the attention it needs to pass in congress and make its way to the President’s desk.  Of course, Harry Reid will have to allow the bill to come up for a vote, but he’s already given his complete and unconditional approval.

Wait, aren't they Democrats?

Hasn’t Reid and the rest of his party vehemently opposed it in the past?

So why are the two of them so hot and heavy to get rolling on energy independence?

In case you didn’t know, in Louisiana, when you run for a U.S. Senate seat, you have to win more than 50% of the vote or the election has to go to a run-off before you can claim your victory.  Landrieu not only won less than half the vote, but only held a little more than 1% lead over her Republican opponent Bill Cassidy in the final tally.  There had been a third party challenger, but with him out of the way that lead evaporated, showing Cassidy ahead by as much as 5% in some of the more recent polls.  With a run-off set for December 6^th, Landrieu looks to position herself as far right as possible to sway enough voters to win the election.  And that’s where we’ll see if Mr. Gruber is still correct.  Will Ms. Landrieu’s blustering over Keystone make the more conservative hearts flutter her direction?  Actually, if you look at her bill, it’s not really about the whole pipeline, but just the part that traverses Louisiana on its way to Texas.  So it’s an ineffectual bill, at best, but at least has “Keystone” in the title, so that all the voters can see her true dedication to job creation and economic growth … in place of her pandering for Obama’s every whim, earning her the title of “The Louisiana Purchase” during the Obamacare vote.

By-the-way, Landrieu and Reid both know full well that Obama won’t sign it anyway, so they’re safe by supporting a bill they secretly expect to go nowhere.

Enter Mr. Gruber’s enlightenment of our shiny new health care legislation.  He spilled the beans on how Democrats enact their ever-widening rule, while Nancy Pelosi denies that Mark Gruber even exists.  And all the while the White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, declared that the whole debacle is really the republican’s fault … “HUH?”

Yes, Mr. Gruber, you nailed it!

AMERICA'S HIGH NOON

As the sun blazes above a dusty street, four lone figures face each other with hands twitching nervously, just waiting for someone to flinch.  Two on each side, they all, with beady cold stares, sneer at one another throwing polite insults across the expanse between them.  Each try to goad their counterparts into making a fatal mistake, and the clock on the ole’ town hall clicks dangerously toward the climax, as the crowd surrounding them hold their breath.  Unwilling to back down, all of them know that in just a moment guns will blaze leaving bodies slumped in the aftermath.  One-by-one the bells sound and soon one side or the other must stand up to the showdown or step aside in shameful cowardice.

An old-time western?  Nah, it’s tomorrow’s opening session of congress!

The President has made it very clear that he’s not going to back down on any of his agenda.  He will either have his way, or he will abuse his executive powers to get it.  And as for compromise, it's doubtful his ego could ever endure it.  So, while the American people have voiced their desired direction – which curiously hints at sending this administration out the back door on a rail – the new congress doesn't take office until the first part of January, leaving a long few weeks for Reid and Obama to stir up mischief.

Of course, this still depends on the Republicans resolve to resist, and that’s something ever lacking when balanced against offending the public’s tender sensibilities.  So for the sake of staving off any offense to the uninformed, they usually cave on anything smacking of populism.  And you must admit, the Democrats do spin a popular message.  Just hold out your hand, and they’ll give you a handout … trying desperately to hide the fact that at some point, somebody has to pay for it.  Recently the rising costs of Obama’s policies have shown clearly who’s going to pony-up, and that’s exactly why the electoral wave crashed as it did.

None-the-less, if the Republicans do clarify their message and calcify their vertebrae, it may have a rather interesting effect on congress as a whole.  Nobody, except possibly Bob Beckel, Juan Williams and the entire MSNBC (pseudo) news corps, is oblivious to the message sent last week.  The public is not amused with Washington, and the balance of power was decidedly set into more rubicund hands.  Thus, any who dare to hang with the President may well hang again in November of 2016!  And that premonition alone could sway congress during this lame duck session.  Granted, there are those who have already been ousted, and as Dick Morris pointed out in a recent editorial, have nothing to lose by voting from the far left.  But even then, if they wish to return home with any sort of political future, they will still have to temper their ideals, or explain themselves to their rather unsympathetic constituents.

So Obama may not have full support toward pulling off his threats, with the hope that the whole oligarchy has taken careful note of what we expect, and that it’s high-time to remove the uber-left’s grasp on the nation’s jugular.  While there are plenty of us who wish the political winds would suddenly surge from the far right, the truth is, most Americans prefer a gentle breeze down the center.  Either way, what they don’t want is the gale-force blue typhoon to which we've been subjected for the past six years.

Generally Americans are not extremists.  They will tolerate strong opinions about who’s on target for the Super Bowl or whether “blade runner” Pistorious got off to easy, but still want politics and religion to stay quietly underscored.  And while they love the idea of helping the disadvantaged, they won’t accept becoming disadvantaged to do it.  Obamacare, alien amnesty, IRS bullies, ACORN offshoots and a laundry list of scandalous civil servants have infuriated them to the point where they really are throwing out anyone connected with the President.  Which calls to the Democrats remaining in office, “Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin!”  Loosely translated, if they choose to give Obama and Reid that last gasp of power prior to the new congress, during the next election cycle they will likely join the most recent flock of unemployed legislators.

Of course, that too depends upon if the Republicans heed the call.  If they don’t stand firm and stay in this proverbial Hadleyville, We the People will toss them aside too for more purposeful legislators.  Either way, it won’t be too long before we figure out whether John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are any measure of Gary Cooper.

THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS

It seems that the outcome of last Tuesday’s elections is clear; Obama the First has been handed his version of the Magna Cara Libertatum.   He stated all over the media that the 2014 mid-term would be a vote regarding his policies.  Well, the people have spoken in overwhelming rejection, and the Republicans are back in charge … or are they?

It was interesting that in the past few days, the present American ruler has put it to his opponents that if they don't, “send me a bill that I can sign,” he will simply dictate by executive order whatever whim meets his fancy.  And so, the showdown begins.  Today, on Fox News, the “I-word” was used in regards to amnesty.  If King Barack decides to unilaterally declare all illegals legal, some in Congress are ready to step in and escort him to the proverbial Bastille for his political execution.  And I say more power to them.

That is, if the Republicans have the same gumption the Bolshevik’s showed during their Red October!

And therein lies the problem.  Obama has been a master at calling their bluffs.  Along with his minion in the Senate, the two have ensured that nothing of note would make it to the floor for a vote.  Many a House bill sits smoldering in Harry Reid’s desk, awaiting our expectation that Mitch McConnell will actually bring them to the quorum.  Thus far, McConnell has promised to do so, and the hope is that he will make good on that promise.

But the Republicans have had opportunities to take up arms and storm the castle before, yet have shown little stomach for the fight.  They much prefer gentleman’s rules over the guerrilla tactics foisted upon them from the left.  It’s just not polite, and above all, Republicans are polite.  We can’t make the voters mad at us, especially if they're voters of color or are foot soldiers in the bogus war on women.

What they may want to consider is that many of us remember the great revolution of 2000.  Newt Gingrich became Speaker, and the Republican Party was set to go.  They had the reins of power and with the help of a new Republican president, they lavished in the opportunity to undo all that President Clinton’s administration had botched up in the previous years.   The problem is, they didn't do much of that at all.  In fact, they outspent and out-legislated the Democrats on an amazing scale, and showed themselves to be true politicians with little to no regard for conservatism.

Shortly after, the newly born Tea Party and all of us conservatives were told to sit back, shut-up and color.  Our voices were subversive in the eyes of the Blue Bloods, and we found as much opposition within the party as was within the ranks of the Democrats.  Of course, nothing has changed in that regard whatsoever, thus far.

So the question arises, with all of the bluster from you fresh faces on the way to Washington, will you do what you say, or abandon your principles once enter the ivory halls of government?  If ever there was a mandate, you clearly have one now, no matter what Rachel Madcow has to say!

Liberalism has all but destroyed this nation, and like it or not, our fine dictator-in-chief has actually effectuated much of the change he sought to heap onto the American system.  There is likely little the new congress can do to straighten all of the mess this administration has stirred up.  But they're tasked to try!

I just hope they're wise enough to understand that we didn't hire them to get along.  Sure, Americans get jumpy when there’s gridlock.  Nobody likes an argument.   But that’s the way the U.S. system works, and so far, just going along to get along has brought us Obama Care, plenty of bankrupt green industries, lots of projects that should have been shoveled under and an employment rate where they had to stop counting the permanently out of work just so the numbers didn't cause revolt in the streets.

Will they take up the task upon which we've sent them?  We'll see!  But be advised Republicans, you were only able to hold power for twelve years after the 2000 election because you showed little opposition to the left wing progression to which we were vehemently opposed.  Instead you embraced it, and without a clear difference, nobody saw any reason to keep you over those who at least admit they're liberals.

As they say, those who don’t learn from history … well … we'll see how much you've learned.

IT’S ONLY A GAME, ISN'T IT?

While I don’t follow sports to any degree, I will stop on a channel that’s offering up either Boise State or the Seahawks.  I like football, but am certainly not a devote’.  But lately, whether or not you’re into the NFL, all you get is Rodger Goodell, who is snagging more air time than any of the local candidates for the upcoming mid-terms.  And he’s neither publicly elected, nor has nearly the effect on our daily lives as do those we’re about to send to congress.

So why all of the fuss?  Oh yea, one of the players, Ray Rice of the Baltimore Ravens, displayed a little bad behavior while riding in an elevator.  (How’s that for understatement?)  It seems that he and his then fiancé’ were having a bit of a discussion – to include her spitting on him – when he took matters into hand and decked her cold.  Worse yet, he then tried to drag her like an unboxed ragdoll out of the elevator, and when approached by one of the hotel staff, told the man that she had just passed out from being drunk.  The video showed otherwise!

Whether Rodger Goodell either did or didn't view the video that he either did or didn’t get was the question of the hour as the story came to light.  He had the chance to come forward and make known what he should have surely figured would be bandied about by the media.  But instead, he chose silence over common sense, either due to a strong desire to protect his sport or a misguided need to minimize the predictable hailstorm of criticism.  Either way, he did the wrong thing, and so we've been hearing all about it above the fold for days on end.

Now, not only is Mr. Rice worthy of prison and other sanctions fitting for those who partake in domestic violence, but we also have to wonder about his now wife’s judgment for not tossing back his ring and running for the first exit out of the relationship.  (Just a little hint here Janay, if he’ll lay you out once, he’s probably going to do it again in the future!)  These sorts of things are often a dance between victim and abuser, with both battling their internal dragons that eventually manifest in severe bodily injury or even death.

Anyway, regardless of the status of their marital issues, this whole mess has wound up in Mr. Goodell’s lap, and the going bet is on a laborious media trial, where good ole’ Rodger has to make copious public apologies, eventually stepping aside to prove that the NFL is gentle and caring.  All the while, the ratings won’t suffer a bit … even though Ray McDonald, Greg Hardy, A.J. Jefferson, Robert Reynolds, Dez Bryant, and who knows how many others have been charged with the same.

Worse yet, there’s Ike Turner, Bobby Brown, James Brown, Ozzy Osborne, Pamela Anderson, Tommy Lee, and Sean Penn … oops … wait … they aren't in the NFL, they’re entertainers!  Well then, I want either Bob Iger or the head of Warner Brothers to step forward and give us some big apologies, to include a clear and concise domestic violence policy for Hollywood.

That’s ridiculous, you say?

Look, here’s the chase.  Domestic abuse is horrible, no matter who commits it.  From the good ole’ boy in a “wife beater” on cops, to Hope Solo, the goalie for the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team.  If you batter your significant other – or even insignificant ones as well – you should spend some time with some real abusers in the local pokey.  There’s no place for this sort of behavior, and it’s irrelevant as to your status in the world of sports or entertainment.

But is it the responsibility of the venue to police their own?  The answer there is a definitive, “Yes!”

Is it a private matter between the police, the victim and the offender?  Again, yes!

Does any of this matter in regards to the ratings?  Here, the answer is essentially “No”.  When it comes to entertainment, being entertaining is far more important than being a reasonable human being.

Our culture values celebrity, and if you can make the team or the “A-List”, behaving badly only grows your popularity while your publicist grows older quickly.  Anymore, it seems as if scandal is a resume’ enhancer, and even if you do get caught with a house full of bloody pit bulls, you’ll only have to serve a little jail time, winding up back in the limelight as Quarterback for the Jets.

Oh, and just a side-note here, while we were watching the drama of Ray Rice, did anybody notice that Putin has still not recalled his troops from the Ukraine?  I suspect there’s much greater consequences in that battle than the one over whether Condi will get her chance to replace Goodell.

Somewhere along the way of tearing crosses off of both public and private edifices, we seem to have missed the point that there really is a need for morality in today’s culture.  It’s not that we should politically espouse any given religious doctrines.  I’m all for the basic separation of church and state.  But the Constitution has been so warped that, “shall make no law respecting an establishment,” has become outright abolishment in regards to God, and we’re now reaping the consequences of this obliteration by winding up with a culture devoid of even so much as public decency.  Without collective morality, really, what’s wrong with what Mr. Rice or any of his cronies did?  According to situational ethics, it suited his purpose and surely stopped her from continuing the argument … or consciousness, for that matter!

It’s the proverbial slick incline, and once you start supplanting what’s right for what’s entertaining, you get the unscripted cast of Cops on your doorstep.  Gone is the baby, bathwater, tub, bathroom, and presently so much as the plumbing in the whole darned house!  Progressivism keeps telling us that sanctioning gay “marriage”, abortion on demand, rampant ongoing welfare, and any other aspect of what once was considered shameful, will make us feel good about ourselves for being so inclusive.  Thus, by moving or erasing the lines of descent behavior, we now have no boundaries by which to keep our citizens from handing out a “KO” to their supposed loved ones.

Then again, maybe if we started bringing morality back into our schools, our homes, and most of all, our personal lives, we wouldn't need to demand that sports leagues fire their offenders.  They would already accept the moray that real men don’t hit women!  I’m not necessarily advocating prayer in schools, but the Pledge of Allegiance might be a good start.  We could then teach our children that self-expression must be subjugated to self-control, and we could even hang the wooden paddle back above the chalkboard, with the hope there’s an even bigger one waiting at home.  If we want our fellow Americans to act civilized, we might just begin by teaching civilization instead of indoctrinating our youth with a common core of pseudo self-actualization.

Of course, according to the ACLU, NARL, NOW, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and all of the other acronymic activists, my sort of antiquated thinking is just plain barbaric, and certainly not progressive.

Yup, in the end, Rodger will likely keep his job, and personally, I will continue to watch my Seahawks whenever I have a free afternoon.  I’ll certainly vote in this upcoming election, hoping but doubting it will make a difference, and the atheists will surely have another tablet of commandments expunged from public view in fly-over country.

And sometime soon, a young man, likely with a new wife and infant child, will give up his life on some God-forsaken battlefield in a faraway land; all so that you and I can keep watching the NFL.  Heck, it’s just entertainment anyway, isn't it?

AMERICA ANSWERS THE CALL, “911, PLEASE HOLD!”

There’s an interesting historical fact regarding America’s military prowess of which few have really taken notice.  While we consider World War II to have been a single global conflict, it was actually two complete wars, one in Europe and the other in the Pacific.  That’s why we celebrate “VE Day”, the date of Germany’s surrender, on May 8^th and “VJ Day”, when Japan tossed in the towel, on the 14^th of August.  We were not only fighting in both theaters, but were sending goods, equipment, and armament to our allies as well.

In a sense, it was America that made it possible for defeating the Axis powers, and winning two wars at the same time was something no other nation had ever done or accomplished since.  While there were shades of anti-war sentiment, our Presidents at that time committed us to winning the conflict and bringing everyone home in victorious peace.  America became not only the land of the free and home of the brave, but also the protector of freedom throughout the world.

Today … not so much!

In this post-Korea\post-Viet Nam era, we’re not into “winning” wars, as much as negotiating them.  We’ve lost that edge, and because of it, our allies have suffered from our wavering inability to commit ourselves to victory.  Much of this is due to the ebb and flow of election cycles, and here we are today, embroiled in world conflicts with a seeming dove at the helm.

Recently President Obama was criticized for holding a Styrofoam cup in his hand while trying to salute the Marines attending his helicopter.  His distain and disrespect for the military is well documented.  He’s also been under fire for the delay in the Bengasi, his impotence in dealing with Putin, North Korea’s missiles, Iran’s rampant centrifuged aggression, and a total loss of control in the Middle East.   Add to this the growing concern that his “lead from behind” approach to the crisis of ISIS will actually lead to terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, and what begins to emerge is a growing concern that our Commander-In-Chief is frankly either not capable or not concerned.

There’s no question that his guiding principle in world affairs is to avoid war at all costs.  Even when faced with direct threats to the U.S. by gun toting thugs in Iraq, he had to be dragged kicking and screaming into directing air attacks on a clear enemy.  And how does he expect to meet this present danger?  He has vowed to throw bombs from above, but has no intention of sending in ground forces to support an invasion to clean out the rats nest.  Of course, world events often override philosophical desires, and we not only have committed ground troops, but will add more to the mix over time.  It’s the only way historically to defeat an enemy … that is, if the nation’s Commander-in-Chief is willing to admit there’s a problem.  Sadly ours holds a philosophy of which the likes of Wilson and Chamberlain would overflow with admiration.

One has to ask why he’s following this path, and the easy answer is that he’s a pacifist who finds even the concept of war distasteful … unless it’s in Libya, I suppose.  But the truth may be even more insidious than just a slight philosophical bend.  Let’s get right down to the meat of the issue … he’s a liberal with a capital “L”!

So there you have it, the real concern is with liberalism in general.  But why?  Aren’t liberals nice enough people?  I mean, all they want is for the world to get along.

Basically, it’s a utopian concept where all the world’s people are essentially good and just want better lives for themselves.  Isn’t that why we should get rid of the borders, so that all the poor huddled masses can come to our shores and live fulfilling lives … scrubbing toilets and picking vegetables of course?  I mean, no ordinary American would want those jobs anyway, and we are, after all, the land of opportunity.  And the only reason those poor Middle Eastern peoples hate us is because we’re meddling in their affair of trying to exterminate each other while eliminating Israel.  Who are we to tell them who to, or not to, car bomb or rocket attack?  Heaven’s, dictatorship may not be fun, but freedom’s far too messy to leave to the masses to decide for themselves.  In the liberal eye, we’re the aggressor; we’re the threat to universal peace.  If only we would be more tolerant.

The problem is, people don’t generally act in a utopic manner.  And while the liberal longs to usher in an era of gentle harmony into the waiting world, it’s just not something to which many more aggressive national leaders will agree.  Oh, and let’s not forget about religious tolerance, where the growing militant Islamic tide has vowed their lives to world domination.  These are the truths that underpin our present condition, and their acts of aggression are presently more effective than that of which we stand accused.  They hate us because of our freedom and tolerance toward others; thus, the very things that progressives want to extend toward them in friendship are the same aspects for which they are beheading journalists as of late.

Remember, my liberal friends, “Utopia” was a work of fiction!

Traditionally, in the last century, we took on the job of world policeman.  We didn’t do it because of nationalistic imperialism; we did so out of self-preservation.  We have both the industrial and military might to overpower aggressors, and we have used that to ensure that we and our allies have remained free.  That is, until we started counting the cost.  It’s an expensive proposition to lend our supplies and youthful American blood for countless years to struggling peoples in faraway lands.  And since The Big Bang is more important to the electorate than exploding Russian missiles, nobody seems to be noticing that the world is slowly devolving into the pit of totalitarianism; either socialist, communist, or Islamic.

And who’s to stop them?

It used to be us, and like it or not, that’s our place in international relations.  We are the big dog in the yard; we are the one factor that keeps peace amongst nations because we wield the biggest nuclear-tipped stick and aren’t, or at least weren’t, afraid to threaten using it to enforce good.  We kept the peace by threatening those who sought to disturb it with a whole lot of military hardware and personnel.

But that’s dwindling too.  There have been massive drawdowns to the point where our arsenal and troop levels are lower than they were prior to the Second World War.  Our generals have been hamstrung to only using air power, which any military strategist will tell you is incapable of succeeding, and our only weapon has been sanctions, which Cuba alone has proven is feeble at best.  And because of all of this, our allies have grown to distrust us.  More than once in recent years, we’ve committed to their protection, only to walk away before that security is secured.

And it’s all due to the leftist philosophy that “Might doesn’t make right!”

In truth, however, being the dominant nation is not wrong.  It’s actually rather necessary if you look at things from the standpoint of balancing power.  Granted, this nation started in the imperialist wave of the early 1800’s, but that ended long before our entry into WWI.  Throughout the 20^th, and now into the 21^st, Century of all of the land we’ve conquered, we’ve given back, save enough to give us that strategic advantage that keeps Teddy’s “big stick” in our benevolent hands.

But being a progressive means you can’t make that jump in logic.  Any violence is bad, and war is hell even without the bumper stickers.  “We’ve won the war, and now we must win the peace,” they tell us, and our government is boldly dedicated to not going boldly anywhere we might make waves.  And so, by dropping that stick, the world is now in disarray, and those with nefarious intent have availed themselves of the golden opportunity to wreak havoc across the globe.  There is far greater conflict on the planet, with much higher stakes, than has been since the 1940’s.  Back then, it was just Germany, Italy, and Japan.  Now, it’s Russia, North Korea, Libya, Bengasi, Yemen, Palestine, Iran, and anywhere you can find Al-Qaeda, ISIL, Hamas, or any of the Islamic Brotherhood.

So what will we do?  Whether we ran for sheriff or not, we are the world’s policeman and we can slow the tide of growing aggression if we’re willing to put off the throws of pacifism.  Yes, it will take another generation of our young fighting men and women to make that change.  But because we are reluctant to ascend to the role, things have been left to rot to the point where there’s now no easy fix for this situation.  So the question resounds, are we willing to step up to the office or not?

And that means more than just forcing the hand of the Dove-In Chief.  It means electing leaders who understand the nature of world conflict and are willing to respond as necessary to abate it.  That’s where the issue truly lies, as congress has had plenty of opportunity to make the appropriate declarations and address these thugs by either threatening or using good ole’ fashioned American might.  This is the year of the mid-terms, and there are those who do understand this reality who are running for office and must be given the chance to set the nation in its proper place; that of walking our beat and holding the “bad guys” at bay.  And that means closing our own borders to the most recent illegal – yes, they’re not just “undocumented” – invasion.

As you enter the ballot box month after next, it’s time to ask yourself how much longer will it be before our own national security is lost in the process of appeasement, avoidance and political correctness?  Personally, I believe it’s already in jeopardy!  And that’s just in the matter of national defense.  Throw in the rest of the leftist agenda, and how much longer before we’ve lost our very soul?  There are at least a few dozen school shooting victims and one and a quarter million extinguished fetal voices that can answer that question easily enough.

BACK FROM THE DEAD

Wow, it’s been more than four years since I posted my last post to this blog.  If you ever followed it, you've likely wondered where I’ve been … soooooooooo, here’s an update.  And if not … well then, you can surely read the archives and figure out if it’s worthy of your attention.

In the past four years, I started taking a more serious stance regarding my writing.  For a while I had a column in The Dog Press.  Called “Show Me the Bite”, I covered various aspects of the pure bred dog sport.  It was fun to write, and was on a subject in which I had a good background.  (Yes, I do know something more than politics.)

Along with the column, which I produced on a bi-weekly basis for about a year, I then found myself inspired to complete one of my manuscripts and self-published my first book.  It was quite the endeavor, and I found that in writing such a work, I really didn’t have much time for anything else.  There’s so much organization and other grunt work in just getting things formatted in a reasonable manner that you spend about half of your time just making sure the words you write are readable.  Oh, and let’s not forget actually writing each chapter.  I never let a piece go without at least two or three drafts, and in a publication of that length, just the editing took longer than I could have imagined.  But in the end, it was done and on Amazon.com, and I could add the moniker, “Published Author” to my repertoire.  (Here's the link to “How Much Is That Doggie in the Window”, by David J. Arthur.)

After spending about six months getting things completed and into print, I felt as if I was due a good break.  So I sat around for a few months before the itch returned and the next manuscript started to come forward.

Books are a bit like Lay’s Potato Chips, and you certainly can’t have just one.  And so, I wrote another.  The first work was all about choosing the right puppy.  The second was a work on Christian faith.  Another year or so went by, and in the end, “Anatomy of a MustardSeed” also wound its way onto Amazon.com.  With a second book completed, I’m starting to itch again, and I’m not sure whether to return to either religion or the dog sport, or to delve into the political arena for the next one … but I’m sure I’ll let you know when I decide.

And so, with all of this writing going on, I really didn’t want to spend time … well … writing.  I also had another little glitch that gave me reason to back away from my political rants.  You see, I have been working for the government for the past few years.  As a GS-11 in the bowels of the military, I’m actually prohibited from criticizing the government.  I guess they don’t want us spilling the beans on how things really work there … but I digress …

Anyway, I was starting to feel a bit uncomfortable in speaking out about the administration because of that requirement, and chose to pack-up the blog until I was safely retired.  Which I am in the process of doing!

After 34 years of military and 22 of civil service, I will step out the door sometime around May, a free man and able to share my deepest conservative opinions.  And so, it’s time to resurrect the blog.  It’s good practice for my writing skills, and even more so, a good way to voice the conservative point of view … something MSNBC is completely incapable of doing.

Therefore, if you’re interested in politics, religion, modern culture, or anything canine, this is the place.  I won’t promise to give you copy every week, but I’ll try.  And if you like what you read, by all means, subscribe.  And if not … you’re probably a liberal!

As they used to say in the 1940’s … “See ya’ in the funny papers!”