ANOTHER BRIEF RESPITE

I know, I'm slacking off again and not adding my unique perspective to the national conversation.  But it's time to put aside my 33 years of public service, and that means looking for work.  I've posted my resume, and am sorting through various interviews and offers ... and that means I really don't have the time or inclination to write much these days.

But rest assured, I'll be back on the Information Superhighway soon enough ... or at least as soon as I have employment and don't have to worry about writing work applications in place of my musing about politics and popular culture ... TTFN

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!”

AMERICA IN THE LIGHT OF ISLAM

I finally got a moment to sit and read some of my lingering e-mail.  In it was a rather long note from a friend dissecting an article regarding the public’s opinion of the president’s religion.  An overwhelming majority believes that Obama is Muslim and not the Christian he professes to be.

Personally, I have no concern over any president’s personal religious convictions, as long as those convictions do not become institutionalized as policy for America as a whole. Granted, while one faith may well suit the nation’s direction and another may not, the office of President is not, according to the Constitution, the only game in town. The Administrative branch is to be limited and balanced by the other two. The problem arises when the policies of the president are also shared by congress and the courts. With the most recent appointment of Justice Elaina Kagen, the political trifecta of the left is nearly complete. At present, they hold well enough seats in congress and the courts to where the president’s personal philosophies become hyper-critical.

Where I have my greatest concern is in the concept that he is not committed to America, which is extremely apparent in his devotion not just to Islam, but to some form of radical socialism never seen at this level of political office. While there have been lone congressional and judicial leaders in the past who shared his views, they were then seen as rather comical figures, given little regard within the general public. Today, however, with the help of an extremely complicit media, these individuals are now the mainstream, and the culture has begun shifting over the past two or three decades to where we no longer value freedom, and the General Welfare clause of the constitution is being reinterpreted to support a general welfare state at large.

Worse yet, there still seems to be this ongoing discussion of America adopting some form of sharia law. I don’t know, but I believe the First Amendment has yet to be repealed, and that embodies the establishment clause. So here we are as a nation debating whether the president’s religion is Islam, without ever noticing that we are on the edge of codifying it into law. To become “sharia compliant”, means the establishment of Islam, and that is a direct and clear violation of the First Amendment. Should even one conservative justice leave the court, and we could easily see the constitution upended in this regard.

Now enter national security in the light of Iran’s ascension to nuclear status, and we have far more critical issues to deal with than just the building of a mosque near Ground Zero. While I doubt seriously they would assemble a bomb there within their upcoming victory tower – it’s far more useful as a propaganda monument than as a misguided secret weapon – I do see Iran as an extremely dangerous threat to world peace and our ongoing national existence. Remember, my friends, Russia is assisting them in their efforts toward gaining the bomb, and Russia also has inter-continental ballistic missile technology. Why assemble it here when the Russians can win what’s left of the Cold War through an arms sale to Iran? There will be no port inspections in Tehran.

But let’s say they do intend to build a bomb here within the U.S. Why use such a public venue? It would be far more useful to simply rent office space within the financial district, drawing as little attention to their plot as possible. Remember, it’s not just about an advantage in weaponry, but also in propaganda. Use the mosque to blow up New York, and they damage the name of Islam. Use the center to celebrate their victory on 9/11, and they could post recruitment posters all over the world to bring untold numbers of murderous terrorists right to our doorstep. I have no doubt these Islamists are up to no good. But it will be far more subtle, and thus have a certain degree of public support, of which they presently seem to enjoy to the tune of around thirty percent of the general public.

When you combine all of this in one caldron, what boils over the edge is that the president’s religious affiliation is absolutely critical! If he sees himself as Muslim, then one can’t rule out that his personal sense of affiliation and duty will draw him toward favoring jihad rather than resisting it. Throw in that though he may well have been born in Hawaii, his upbringing and early education was in Indonesia in a madrassa. His books, words, familial ties, and social affiliations prove he’s no friend to freedom and the America our founders built. And because he has support in congress, his personal religious convictions may well affect each and every one of us.

This November we will have the chance to stop this juggernaut. That is, if Americans will stop watching American Idol and pay more attention to Fox News. The alternative is bleak, and I personally don’t hold out much hope. Remember, this is the same electorate that put Obama into office in the first place . . . !

For further insight into what’s happening in America, here’s a link to an interview on “Uncommon Knowledge” with Dr. Thomas Sowell.

The Dismantling of America

A MOMENTARY PAUSE

For those who are wondering where I’ve been, let me suffice to say that while politics is still a primary concern of my heart, finishing a manuscript for immanent publication is the more pressing matter.

As you know, if you know me well at all, my passion is for the dog sport.  Within that, I’m a breeder, exhibitor, and a UKC conformation judge.
So if you’re wondering about the subject of my work, it involves what I know best . . . dogs!

I’ll announce it when it’s published.  But for now, I’ll need to continue this short respite until that day.

Thank you for understanding.

2014 UPDATE:  How Much is that Doggie in the Window, is now available on Amazon.com.  Go check it out ... [Click Here]

NEWS FLASH: COAKLEY WINS IN MA

I’m sure you’re aware that tomorrow there will be an election in Massachusetts for the Late Teddy Kennedy’s old senate seat.  Martha Coakley (D) will be taking on Scott Brown (R) during a special election.

At the moment, Brown holds a narrow lead over Coakley, however, that’s not enough to win an election against a Democrat.  Being ahead in the polls means nothing in such situations.

Now, you probably think that having more votes at the end of the day will put you into office.  But didn't you learn anything from the elections in WA and MN?  There's no way Scott Brown can win.

Why, you ask?  He's a Republican, and will follow the rules.  Coakley doesn't have the same restraint as Brown, nor does any of the Democrat party.  And they have one single rule . . . "Keep counting until the Democrat wins!"

I predict that if the race is as close as it's shaping up to be, Brown may well come out ahead in the polls on the 19th.  But by the 29th, he will be behind by at least 200 to 300 votes.

How, you ask?  There will be precincts that just happen to show up in the trunks of cars, the absentee ballots will start flooding in from all sorts of out-of-state locations, and who knows, there may even be a few chads, "hanging" around.
While we all hope that we would see a clean election, when it comes to the deciding seat in the health care debate, one can’t believe for a moment the left will play fair.  There's just too much at stake.

As late as Friday, some news outlets reported that the busses were already leaving for Massachusetts.  Of course, they surely were filled with registered legitimate voters, right?  There’s no reason to expect that this election will be any different than any of the others of late.  Wisconsin proves that being more than 200 votes ahead can easily leave you more than 200 votes behind in a matter of weeks.

And Democrats can't count well anyway.  Look how many of them still decry Gore's loss . . . even after nine counts where Gore lost in every one of them.
And what if Brown were to pull out a victory?  Senator Reid has already put out the concept that it may take them some time in getting around to certifying the election and seating him as a US Senator.

I wonder how that works, when the Democrats found it possible to certify and seat Al Franken (D-MN) even before the courts had decided that Norm Coleman lost.  Suddenly now, Sen Reid sees it necessary to delay Brown’s confirmation for as long as possible, if he should pull off a victory.

And this is the “open” and “ethical” government that the Democrats have promised us since 2006?

So, we may as well resign ourselves to a Coakley win, regardless of the vote count.  Heck, we could even send Carter up there to monitor the proceedings.  He's good at overseeing rigged elections.

2014 UPDATE:  Well, not only didn't Coakly win, but Brown didn't matter.  We got Obamacare by Biden's tiebreaker.  And as for election fraud, a study came out this last summer whereby when they removed all of the obvious election fraud from the last presidential skirmish ... Romney actually won.  But you know how well those Democrats count, and how little the honest electorate matters ... !

CHRISTMAS WITH A SPIN

I just thought I would put a little contemporary spin on some old Christmas carols in the light of last night’s health care vote. I figure our Democrat friends will need a little holiday cheer to warm them while they commit political suicide.
Enjoy, and please feel free to pass the link to these along to everyone you know. Who knows, maybe we can get Congress to sing a different tune next year . . . after all . . . it will soon be election time again!
David Arthur

OH CONGRESSMAN
(Sung to the tune of Oh Tannenbaum)

Oh Congressman, Oh Congressman, I don’t think you are listening.
Oh Congressman, Oh Congressman, Your recent votes are blistering.
About health care, we’ve told you “no”, but you decided we can go . . .
Oh Congressman, Oh Congressman, in twenty-ten you’re history!

SENATORS
(Sung to the tune of Jingle Bells)

Senators, senators, lined up in a row,
Taking money for their votes, acting just like hoe-oh’s
Senators, senators, lies on every breath,
Telling us it’s for our good, they’re spending us to death.

SILENT NIGHT
(Congressional Version)

Silent Night, what a sight,
The Senate works to solve their plight,
Reid’s round minions are voting his way,
While conservatives can’t get a say,
Sixty votes and it’s over,
The young and the aged are screwed!

THE TWELVE DAYS IN CONGRESS
(Sung to the tune of The Twelve Days of Christmas)

On the last day in session the Congress gave to me,
Five tax increases,
Four clunker autos,
Three dead banks,
Two waning wars,
And a bill that our children can’t pay!

PLEASE REST YOU SCARY GENTLEMEN
(Sung to God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen)

Please rest you scary gentlemen you’re causing me dismay,
For you are spending trillions to steal my means away,
The President says share the wealth, and congress does his bid,
Oh hiding behind the last admin, so you say,
Oh hiding behind the Bush admin.

OH HOLY COW
(Sung to Oh Holy Night)

Oh holy cow, my money you are spending,
It’s not your right to ignore our request.
We said vote “no”, but pride is never ending,
And now you’ve gone and sold us down the stream,
Once health care’s won, your days in power are numbered,
In twenty-ten, we’ll vote you on your way,
So fall on your knees, and pray that you survive it,
Or go-oh,
With the polls,
Turn around,
Before you’re gone,
Or please resign,
Oh please, please resign!

OH LITTLE TOWN OF WASHINGTON
(Sung to Oh Little Town of Bethlehem)

Oh little town of Washington how long we’ve see thee lie,
With what you’ve done most recently, there’s little question why,
By ruining our health care, you prove just who you are,
With bribes and payoffs by the score,
Next year we’ll say goodbye!

OFF TO THE SENATE
(Sung to Up On the Rooftop)

Off to the Senate, quick, quick, quick,
Congress thinks they are Saint Nick,
Giving to those who they need for power,
They steal from the rich with every hour.
Hoe, Hoe, Hoe, we all know
Hoe, Hoe, Hoe, They all gotta go-oh,
Off to the hilltop oh so slick,
The way they vote it makes you sick!

I’M DREAMING OF A SLIGHT CHRISTMAS
(Sung to White Christmas)

I’m dreaming of a slight Christmas,
Not like the ones I used to know.
Where I once had money, and things were sunny,
But after April I don’t know.
I’m dreaming of a slight Christmas,
With every quarterly I send.
With my reps not listening or care,
Looks like my whole Christmas will be bare.

HERE COMES THE PRESIDENT
(Sung to Here Comes Santa Claus)

Here comes Santa Claus, looks like the President, coming from Washington,
He’s got money from my wallet, will this ever end?
There’s no reason for this thievery, except to make him king.
It’s all for power and his glory, while we’re all suffering!

I WONDER AS I WANDER
(The carol to Fannie and Freddie)

I wonder as I wander through what’s left of my home,
It’s deep in foreclosure and I’m all alone,
The President promised no mortgage for me,
But my bank and my lender they all disagree!
Was it not that the rich folk were all there to pay,
As the rest of us squander in usual ways,
But most rich are leaving and the rest become poor,
No wonder the economy has sunk through the floor!

JOY TO THE OBAMA WORLD
(Sung to Joy to the World)

Joy to the world, Obama has come,
And said, “It’s all ok,”
The banks are bleeding,
And GDP receding,
But the wonders of his name,
In a teleprompted fame,
Do nothing, oh nothing,
To bring us gain.


“Merry Christmas to all, and to all a . . . ‘Good Heavens!’”

IN CELEBRATION OF THE FALL HARVEST

It’s funny how stories change over the years. Take Thanksgiving, for example. The present story tells of a terrible winter where the Pilgrims barely came through with their lives. In fact, were it not for the hospitality of the local native American tribes – who gave the new settlers the knowledge of native flora and fauna – that early colony would have starved out and died in the wilderness of the New World. And so, to thank Squanto and his tribe, the Pilgrims gave a great feast we now call “Thanksgiving”.

What a lovely story to pass on to the generations . . . or should I say what a lovely PC story to shove down their throats!

In the PC version, there’s no mention of God, nor that the Pilgrims came to America to escape sever persecution because they were not willing to bend to the state religion of their European homeland. There’s no mention of the reason why the Pilgrims found it so hard to survive, or why and how the Indians came to their aid.

The true story of the Pilgrims begins in 1609, in Holland. As a religious separatist movement, they found that their homeland, England, no longer tolerated their beliefs. And so, they immigrated to the Dutch city of Lieden.
But even in the broadminded Dutch culture, persecution continued to follow them, and as Holland came closer to war with Spain, it became apparent that the Pilgrims would have to move once again. This time, it would be to a new world, a place where they could practice their beliefs without molestation.

The European continent was a place for neither religious nor political free thinking. In 17^th Century society, if you didn't go along with the King and his administration, you were likely to find yourself on the wrong end of an inquisition. While the church and state vied equally for ultimate power, it was often a blending of the two that ravaged the masses. Between Anglicanism and Catholicism, you had little choice as to what you were to believe, and even then, geography dictated your flavor of choice.

And so, in 1620, they set out for a new land, where they could believe as they chose, and practice as they wished.

They took what stores they could to weather the first year in America, though their holdings were meager at best. It was a hard journey, and an even rougher landing on the new continent. Luck had lost them long before they began, and by the time they arrived on the shores of Plymouth, they were all but shipwrecked and heading into winter. Their original intent was to immigrate to the colony of Virginia, which extended at that time to the Hudson River. But both the weather and lack of supplies conspired to leave them in the port of Cape Cod.

Because their original charter was to settle in Virginia, they had to reorganize as a New England colony. And thus, they entered into an agreement – the Mayflower Compact – that set forth the original political framework for their society. They would follow the biblical practice of the early Christians recorded in the book of Acts. However, it also set forth some very important concepts that we now hold sacred within our own political climate; that of religious freedom, separation of church and state, and equal justice under the law.

It was the winter of 1620 that nearly eradicated the Pilgrims. By the spring of 1621, nearly half of their party perished from the cold barren New England climate. But they managed to survive, gaining a foothold in America. When the Mayflower returned to England, it did so without a single Pilgrim. This spirited group had the opportunity to return to their homeland, yet they chose to remain in the New World. Over the following decade, others joined with them and immigrated to America.

The Abrnaki Indian Samoset was the first to welcome the new settlers in the spring of 1621, and not Squanto, whose native name was Tisquantum. Squanto, of the Wampanoag tribe, had been taken to Spain as a captive in 1614, but found his way back to the shores of New England by the time the Pilgrims landed in Cape Cod. The Wampanoags were the people who had lived in that area. Sadly, when he returned to his home, Patuxet, it had been completely wiped out by disease. Though the first meetings between European explorers and trappers, and American aboriginals were relatively peaceful, that contact carried biologic invaders the Indians were not able to withstand.

Inadvertently, the downfall of the original Native American population began in illness and not by war.

Regardless, the Indian’s first welcome was offered in mutual respect, and was also one of political significance to the Wampanoag. Massasoit, a Wampanoag chief, needed the support of the colonists to keep stability between his tribe and that of the Narragansett, another powerful nation in the region. Disease had tipped the balance of power in favor of the Narragansett, and the Wampanoag were certainly willing to welcome anyone who was helpful to their security.
The Pilgrims also needed support and protection. As a very small community, they easily could have been vanquished and eradicated by the native peoples living in that part of the world. While Europeans had a clear technological advantage, that benefit extended only so far as the European continent. In the wilderness, the new colonists were extremely vulnerable.

And so, the first contact between the new European settlers and the aboriginal peoples of America were elementally political and resulted in a treaty of mutual support between them.

The first celebration was a three day feast in honor of the fall harvest. It wasn’t a religious holiday, and was an observance that was brought to America, not originating here. It was a few years later in 1623 that the first religious day of thanksgiving was celebrated in response to a much needed torrential rainfall. Over time, the two fused into one observance, which in 1863 was commemorated through a national holiday.

The purpose of that first Thanksgiving was to thank the Creator for the annual harvest, and to honor the treaty of mutual support between the Indians and the colonists. While not a religious event, they were a religious people. And while the Indians did bring necessary knowledge to the settlers, the colonists too brought political stability to the Indians. And thus, the celebration has taken on many meanings aside from its original intent, that being an acknowledgement of providence on the part of God for a good and full harvest.

So what can we take from this time of celebration, aside from the fact that while the Pilgrims were legal immigrants, as chartered by England, their immigration eventually spelled the demise of the native peoples? As Europeans continued to colonize the continent, the Indians eventually found they had been conquered. Had they realized what was in store for their nations, they would likely have not been so symbiotic on that day in 1621.

As time passed, friction grew between the Pilgrims and the Indians. There were skirmishes and wars that broke out from time to time, and eventually the native peoples were subdued. As in most conflicts, this was not nearly as black and white an issue as it seems. There were native people who wanted to coalesce with the settlers, and some even went to war on their side. Thus, not all Europeans were intent on displacing the local tribes, nor were all of the indigenous people adverse to accepting European ways and traditions.

It was a culture clash, something that today we view as a negative.

Regardless, this early meeting of the two societies was one of mutual peace and support. The Pilgrims gave as much to Massasoit’s cause, as he gave toward their survival. It was in a spirit of mutuality that both gained in the process. And as for the religious connotation, we cannot forget that the Pilgrim’s whole intention was to establish a state whereby they could practice religious freedom.

It was in recognition of Europe’s tight grasp on the church that they set out on a path of separation between church and state. They had been victimized by the results of established religion, and so, they were very careful to keep the two aspects of society distinct. They did not, however, fear the civic observance of faith. In fact, they celebrated it openly. They simply drew the line between the secular and sacred at the point where one would dictate policy to the other. The two were blended, equal, but not conjoined.

This is the guiding principle the founding fathers used to pen our own Constitution.

And as for the early attempt at socialism, they tried the experiment we’re now toying with, and they found that it brought them to destruction rather than benefit. Within only a few years, they realized that some were working hard for the good of the community, and others were willing to sit back and share in the communal good. It wasn't long before the colonists became good capitalists, and their wares were the envy not only of the Old World, but are still valued as collectible today.

As for the Native Americans, people throughout the ages conquered one another, and will do so in the future as well. Were it not for that European invasion, you wouldn't likely be reading this, as Microsoft wouldn’t likely exist. Even the Indians conquered one another, as have the English, Spanish, Huns, Romans, Mongols, Greeks, Israelites, Babylonians, Egyptians, and others throughout time.
The world has never lacked for dictators, emperors, and potentates.

But for one brief moment in history, two worlds came together to share in celebration. In peaceful mutuality, they gave thanks to their respective gods for a bountiful harvest to carry them through the winter. That’s the point of Thanksgiving. In our war torn world today, maybe, just for one day, we can put aside our overburdening concern with melanin content and observe a day of mutual support. Who knows, maybe we’ll end up starting a new tradition?

(Special appreciation is given to the Pilgrim Hall Museum, whereby most of the information for this blog was gleaned.)

SLIP SLIDING AWAY

Saturday the first of the funerals began for the fallen Killeen thirteen. They were laid to rest because of a brutal attack on the part of an Islamic jihadist who – though born a U.S. citizen, raised in the borders of our country, and commissioned by the U.S. Army – felt a greater allegiance to Islam than to the oath he freely took as a military officer.

According to the words of our President and his willing accomplices in the media, Major Hasan is not an Islamic terrorist, but a lone gunman who acted on his own behalf.

Also, this last week, our military leaders brought four plans outlining victory in Afghanistan to our President. The basic concept was to increase the troop strength in a surge much like what was done in Iraq. He summarily dismissed all four plans, citing that Karl Eikenberry, our ambassador to the country, was uncomfortable with raising force strength in the light of the instability of Afghanistan’s political climate.

The President feels that their country needs greater political strength before committing more combat troops to complete the task we started.

Then, it was announced on Friday that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, along with four of his co-conspirators, will be tried in the civil court system and not under a military tribunal. This will take place in New York, and as for the rest of the Al Qaeda combatants we’ve gathered over the years at “Gitmo”, they are likely going to be moved to a maximum security prison in Illinois. It is further assumed that they too will be tried in the civil courts, all being granted the same rights as any red-blooded American citizen.

The problem is, these individuals were collected during battle, are not citizens, were never detained on U.S. soil, nor were they apprehended due to a breach of American criminal law.

In all of this, the truth is, there is one common theme. According to the White House, the whole of the 911 attack was a criminal offense and not an act of war. Our President seems oddly uneasy with the concept that we are truly in a direct confrontation with Islamic extremists, not even allowing the term “terrorists” to be applied to them.

This is why it is essential to President Obama to push this into the courts. By doing so, the whole of 911 becomes a criminal matter, changing the prosecution over to the Justice Department and out of the hands of Defense. Like most liberals, he is very uncomfortable with the operations of the military, and thus, proves this further by his waffling on the subject of Afghanistan. By committing troops, he then must admit that we are still engaged in a military conflict, and not the pursuit of criminal justice.

Where does this leave the military? If the President is successful, then the only alternative will be to leave Iraq and Afghanistan, which would then appease the left, though it will outrage our allies in the region. When we withdraw, which is where I assume he’s going with all of this, it will pull the only support these fledgling democracies have to keep them afloat. From there, the pattern looks peculiarly similar to the path of implosion seen in Saigon during the mid 1970’s.

Wars should never be run out of the White House, which is the one aspect of Bush’s presidency that he truly got right. Of course, Both GW and his father were veterans, fighter pilots, and men who understood the dynamics of warfare. President Obama has never served in the armed forces, and also carries that certain disdain for them found in common with nearly all leftists.

Worse yet, he is not alone. This disease of mistaking the Jihadists call to war for stand-alone criminal activity seems to infect nearly all of the Democrat party. Listening to Fox News, to a person, every Democrat lawmaker sided with the Administration. Both Reid and Pelosi are on record in line with the Justice Department’s actions, and the whole lot of them together is bent on twisting the public’s perception of the conflict to meet their own political ends.

If there is no “war”, then Bush’s administration was not only acting unjustly, but was doing so illegally, as the methods they employed were those reserved for military conflict, and would be deemed unlawful in a police action. Therefore, the left would be justified in pursuing investigations and eventual show trials for anyone they deemed a political adversary out the previous administration.

And so, the witch hunt continues. Their intention is to vilify the prior presidency, and to lay at Bush’s feet any failures that arise from leaving the battle before its conclusion. In fact, as has been seen in our economic situation, this is a very common ploy they are using. Nearly everything that has gone wrong over the past year is deemed to be inherited. This plays even further into the scapegoat affect whereby none of the recent catastrophes can be pinned to Obama, regardless of whether they either happened or worsened due to his leadership, policies, or lack thereof.

Part of the reason Obama is so hesitant to move on Afghanistan with the same surge as Bush did in Iraq is that it very likely would be successful, and that gives the distinct possibility of victory, something with witch Obama has already stated his uneasiness. In the liberal world, “winning” is simply a concept they cannot abide. Our schools are beginning to teach our children how to play games without keeping score, so as not to offend anyone or hurt their feelings. To be honest, the Taliban and Al Qaeda are keeping score!

Moreover, it also is increasingly obvious that these foreign conflicts are a distraction from Obama’s intended goal of grasping further power by federalizing our health care system. He has already imposed the will of government on the banks, two major auto manufacturers, the education system through student loans, and by shoving his hand into the pockets of even modest wage earners by proposing extremely excessive taxation.

And yet, he is caught on video bowing to the Japanese Emperor, all after giving his grand world apology tour this last summer; even bowing to a Saudi king.

But in all of this, there may well be a backlash. Reverend Wright may have uttered an unwitting prophecy. America’s – or should we say, Obama’s – chickens are coming home to roost. North Korea clashed with South Korean naval forces on Friday, Iran stated that they have no intentions of bending to the U.N.’s nuclear restrictions, and Palestine recently decided to make its bid for nation status.

Obviously Obama’s standing within the international community is not what he believes it to be. Much of the inroads Bush built by refusing unilateral talks, insisting instead on all negotiations being multilateral, is fading as the world’s rogue leaders snub Obama. Bush also was readily willing to back U.S. assertions with military force, if necessary. Obama is openly apologizing for our nation’s strength, and is actively undermining our recent military operations. This would be little more than laughing stock, were it not for the fact that a major nuclear arms agreement with Russia will expire this December.

How will a man who disdains the military, has no experience on the foreign stage, refuses to see Jihad as war, and is all but willing to roll over and show his belly to every world leader he meets, going to be able to hold the line on U.S. sovereignty and security in arms limitation?

Remember, he’s the one who vowed to disarm America’s nuclear arsenal . . . first!

Maybe he should take notes from Israel’s Prime Minister before heading to Moscow. "There is no substitute for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians," Netanyahu said. "Any unilateral action would only unravel the framework of agreements between us and can only lead to one-sided steps on the part of Israel."

At least the world hasn't run out of leaders yet. Only America has, for the moment. Then again, the elections in 2010 are just around the corner and less than a year away. Hopefully Americans will see how our country is slipping away from us and will bring some real “hope and change” by sweeping Obama’s support from Congress.

Maybe then we can get back to fighting and winning our conflicts, relieving the people from their tax burden, instilling pride in our young, and elevate the U.S. to her former position as “leader” of the free world. I must admit, it’s an awful big, “we’ll see”. In years past, Americans have had short memories and an all too forgiving heart. Let’s hope we’re not seeing the last days of a once great empire, because though the President is uncomfortable with victory, the terrorists are not. And they are the ones who declared war on us.

Haven’t we seen this situation before, where some European countries were queasy about conflict and didn't want to confront a rogue nation, choosing appeasement in place of strength? Of course, that was a long time ago in the 1930’s and 40’s, and surely couldn't happen again . . . could it?

VETERAN'S DAY

I just can’t resist responding to an e-mail sent to me shortly after the most recent observation of Veteran’s Day.

I’m sitting here, still in uniform, after a normal duty day as a full-time member of the reserve forces. My boss, a F-16 fighter pilot, should be returning from the Gulf in the next week or so, while the young Master Sergeant who works for me isn't due home until sometime in February. I will likely do a tour next year.

I’m an older vet, having spent a little over 30 years of my adult life both on active duty and in the reserves. I've seen times when it wasn't cool to wear this uniform, and sometimes people would spit on or assault us in one way or another. I've seen more recent days when folks would cross the street just to come over to shake my hand and to thank me for my service. Both extremes have left me oddly uncomfortable, yet lately humbled.

So why do I do what I do? I suppose it’s a job, much like other jobs. But there’s an odd satisfaction in being the guardian of a cause. When they say that, “Freedom isn't free,” the words are quite personal to me. I know that were it not for my oath, joined with that of my brothers and sisters who serve with me, we most certainly would not have this benefit of freedom. For the price of our independence is paid in blood, inasmuch as it is also in time, sweat, pain, and the endless moments that alternate between extreme anxiety and unfettered boredom.

But this experience has been so much more than a job, and I am not unaffected. There once was a time when the Pledge of Allegiance and National Anthem were little more to me than the lead in to the morning’s scholastic announcements. Three decades later, those same words often bring a lump to my throat, as I truly believe that each are nothing less than a sacred vow, reminding us, military and civilian, of the benefits our benefactors fought to secure.

I’ll doff this garb before too long, taking my place amongst the ranks of the retired. I’ll sit with my friends and tell glorious stories of Cold War antics, trade Gulf War anecdotes, and lie with the best of them about, “There I was.” But more than that, I shall continue to give reverence to the founding fathers, and will stand, with pride, in the knowledge that I too lived in honor of my pledge. And all without any requirement for anyone’s appreciation. We do this because it’s right; to appease our own sense of honor; to carry out that sacred trust laid upon us by you. And while your gratitude means more to us than gold – and believe me, it is never unnoticed nor unappreciated – my reasons for serving are a matter of conviction, more personal than I can ever explain.

For those who oppose or disregard us, though they are few, even in their disrespect, they prove the value of our cause. For it is with our lives, we grant them the privilege. That right of opposition is written in the epitaphs carved in granite, or marble, or bronze. For opposition is the prize of freedom, and in its exercise, the true value of our sacrifice shines. We feel no shame, for we stand watch for all, regardless of your viewpoint.

So, if you feel the desire to thank a vet, let me simply state, “You are most welcome.” And there is one gift you can give that proves our lives are not lived in vain. With every election, you choose those who dictate our fates. I only ask that you choose well. For a thank you from the lips, means far less than giving us the leadership to guide us through these perilous times and to ensure the security of our cause. True appreciation is to support us by exercising the power of choice toward those leaders who, in pledge, in deeds, and in heart-felt sincerity, take their position as a hallowed trust. Our lives quite literally depend upon it.

By doing so, you will protect and keep us well. Though we shall offer ourselves without question in trade for the freedoms of this promised land, it is a gift not given lightly. Honor us by your ballots. Give us the leaders who will ensure the purity of our cause, respecting this nation as it was intended, and upon the principles of which its foundation was forged. By doing this, you will defend all of our liberty, so we may continue – one nation – forever onward as the, “The land of the free, and the home of the brave”.

OFF-YEAR, ON-POINT!

I ran into one of my good friends yesterday who asked me about the blog. “When’s the next update?” Well, I apologize for being missing, and my explanation is found at my website. I never realized how complicated one can get, and have spent the last three weeks working up my corner of the web.

There is so much to say regarding the power grab being foisted on the American people, along with all of the liberties that we’re in danger of giving over to the oligarchy, that I could write for pages and never run dry. But I’m sure you have been watching the news and can clearly see that our nation is about to step into the pit of socialistic doom, with a mighty shove by both the White House and Congress.

So, instead, I shall give you a very simple cure.

Can we stave off the slide into oblivion? Cane we as common Americans, with such a limited voice in opposition to the tirade of the present political tyrants, be heard with loud clarity?

The answer is a resounding, “Yes!”

You see, tomorrow we have the power and opportunity to let the administration know that we, as conservative Americans, still have one power we have retained within the political system. We have both the opportunity and responsibility to vote.

There are a few elections, such as the governorships of New Jersey and Virginia that will be pivotal. But they are not a stand alone message. With every issue in play throughout the nation, we have a singularly unique opportunity in time to tell the politicians that we will no longer be willing participants in the downfall of our nation.

The turnout is not expected to be much at all. It never is during an off-year election. These are the cycles where communities pass their tax levies, the local dog warden gets a new truck, the school board picks up new membership, and a few initiatives make their way either onto the law books or out of consideration until the next cycle.

Not much business takes place during the off-years. Except, this year the eyes of the nation are watching.

The left is counting on you to stay home. If you do, they will see the lack of interest, and interpret it as your tacit approval for all they’re doing in congress at the moment.

However, if the governorships and various elected seats throughout the nation go conservative, it will send an entirely different message. There are those who know that their seats in congress lie in how the public perceives them, and if a conservative message is sent, then conservative they shall become.

One shouldn’t expect that tomorrow will completely erase the votes cast last year. As Rush Limbaugh says, “Elections have consequences!” And there are always those who really don’t care what their constituents think of them.
Still, there are a lot of those we call “Blue Dogs”, who know full well that their path of following the liberal leadership, is likely to be their path back to the private sector.

And so, it is essential you make time tomorrow to go to the polls. It will take only a few moments of your time, but may set the outcome of American politics for decades to come.

While I urge you to vote conservative, I also believe in the American ideal of conscience. Do what your heart tells you is right.

Regardless, take time and vote. Just by being a part of the numbers and showing an increase in action, we can send the message that Americans are both active and watching. And our voice will be heard, regardless of how it is reported by the mainstream media.

Who knows. By this one small act of personal patriotism, you may just be part of the sleeping giant that awakens to make real change, and to offer real hope. Those are two things we’re sorely in need of, but have yet to even begin to realize . . . especially under the present administration!