The possibility of Senator Barack Obama becoming President of the United States worries me a great deal. While I consider myself a conservative, I'm not a particularly smitten with John McCain either. However, when voting for someone to lead the nation, it is sometime precient to vote for the lesser of two evils - not that I consider either candidate "evil."

As I stated in my previous post, my aim in writing this is not to compare the two. It is simply to explain why I believe Senator Obama is the absolute wrong choice for President. One thing I wish to stay away from is the emotions and rhetoric involved in this year's campaign - an election cycle that unfortunately has become remarkably fueled by style over substance.

Since I was first old enough to vote (in 1980), I was often dismayed with how skewed the media portrayed the conservative candidate against the liberal one. It seemed every election, most reporters were either in the tank for the Democrat nominee, or were certainly more cynical about the Republican. Hollywood and the music industry also have heavily supported whomever the Democrats bring out, which amazes me, although it really shouldn't. Many artists live in a bubble of adulation and praise and are often unaware of the realities of life outside Hollywood. To many of them, they will do and say what is popular amongst themselves. The same goes for those in academia. Again, these are not the ones who have to work hard each and every day just to put food on the table. They are not those who go to PTA meetings, churches and synagogues, or bowling alleys. Academics, for the most part, are paid to remain in a closed fraternity - away from the lives of most Americans.

Whether it was for Walter Mondale, Mike Dukakis, Bill Clinton, Al Gore or John Kerry, the passion for the Democrat Party's nominee has been almost cult-like. Almost as if each one of them was the "Second-coming" of the Messiah.

Adoration of Barack Obama has surpassed that and more. Why is that? I believe the answer lies in a number of places - all have led to an almost perfect storm.

Obviously, since the 2000 election, most Democrats believe (unfairly) that George Bush stole the election from Al Gore - choosing to ignore the absolute facts of the situation. Although the movie, Recount, tries to imply otherwise, it would have been a "stolen" election only if the courts awarded Al Gore the victory. Aside from Mr. Gore's insistence that only the three heavily Democrat districts be recounted, the Miami Herald and the USA Today (neither one of which endorsed Mr. Bush) both concluded in independent recounts that President Bush did defeat Vice-President Gore in Florida.

However, to the Democrats, cries of stolen elections could be heard for years to come and it became a rallying cry for the John Kerry campaign in 2004. Yet even though the majority of media pundits, Hollywood actors and actresses and what seemed to be the entire European continent wanted Kerry, President Bush won re-election by a rather comfortable margin.

The horror of a Bush re-election was best illustrated by the international headline, "How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?" In the following years, Democrats have seethed about losing again to a man most considered "stupid", "a monkey" and the equivalent to Adolph Hitler (nice). Thus, the Bush derangement syndrome was born - where everything from the beginning of time that has ever happened was blamed on President Bush. While admittedly, his administration has not always been blameless, the vile sheer hatred of the man has become legendary.

This untamed hatred has unfortunately clouded many people around the world - especially those on the political left. In their eyes, everything Bush does or says has been condemned and vilified - not for the facts, but for the man. And this is very unfortunate for the good of our country. By clouding their vision, liberals have concluded the only way to make America "right again" is to undo the "damage" done by President Bush. But in reality, the question is "what damage?"

This short-sightedness has led us to Barack Obama. Obama is not only the latest incantation of the Messiah-searching Democrats, but just may be the most dangerous. In Obama, the liberals have discovered a man who is everything that President Bush isn't. And as an added bonus - something to get him over the hump, so to speak, he's black. Because he is a person of color, Democrats can use race to their advantage. If you've noticed (and certainly, I have), Obama's color has strategically been used to his advantage. Liberals are knocking themselves out with charges of racism and xenophobia anytime any criticism of Obama is made.

All that has accomplished has been to divide this country even further apart. By once again clouding the debate, the liberals have created a terrible dilema for the United States. At a time when rogue governments and Islamic terrorists have developed (or will develop) nuclear weapons - governments who want nothing but to see our nation and our people destroyed without regard to their own), we are too caught up in the mass hysteria of "global warming" and multi-culturism.

And why? Why is this happening? Because liberalism at its core, is equal to socialism. To have the State decide what you can do, where you can work, what you can feed your children, what you can say, is socialism. With each new law that limits our freedom, we become one step closer to socialism. It's already gotten so bad in Great Britain that now school lunches that parents pack for their children must be approved by the government. Although remarkably, Mark Steyn was acquitted, Canada’s Human Rights Commission has caused a tremendous amount of grief for believers in free speech.

The great concern the world today is not “global warming” and America’s greatest threat is not racism. The world has become considerably more dangerous than it has ever been. Unfortunately, the Democrats have been able to blind many Americans into buying into their Bush derangement philosophy which clouds the true evils we face. This is why electing Obama would be so dangerous.

In his own words, Obama has pledged to undo the “failed policies” of his predecessors. But how failed are they and which policies is he talking about? For instance, Obama has promised to set a timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq and will begin the process immediately upon inauguration. However, as we have learned time and again (and as the armed forces generals have pleaded), we are clearly winning the war in Iraq. Even the President of Iraq has called Obama’s platform “troubling” and “a victory for the enemy.” Why on Earth would Al-Qaeda not go into hiding until America pulls her troops and then resume operations. Obama has said that should that happen, he will send the troops back in.

If?

This shows a complete lack of understanding and foresight. In addition, Obama has pledged – numerous times- that he would meet without preconditions the leaders of nations who are enemies of America. Obviously, this would legitimize rouge nations and afford them a moral equivalency that they do not deserve. However recently, Obama has backtracked on his stance and said there would be conditions. So how is that different than President Bush?

There is an old adage that says if you want to know about someone, look at who they are friends with. Unfortunately, you can learn a lot of negative things about Obama from the company he keeps. It is not racism to question the wisdom of being an active member of a Black radical theology church for 20 years. It is not racism to question why Obama could “no more distance himself from Reverend Wright anymore than he could from his own White grandmother.” But when more speeches were uncovered, he kicked him off his campaign. It is not racism to question the close relationship Obama has with William Ayers or Tony Rezko. Furthermore, it’s not racism to question what Michelle Obama means when she says things that many people find controversial - especially in light of her stumping for her husband on the road. If she wanted to be left alone, she should’t have started campaigning for him.

What makes this concern even more alarming is how the mainstream is treating Obama. What should be the last defense against injustice and abuse, the media has become the very thing they have fought against for hundreds of years. Causing the downfall of President Nixon and skewing the coverage of the Vietnam, the mass media was able to show themselves as above the needs of the country. Certainly, abuses by a President, or acts unbecoming an officer should be reported and condemned, even criminalized. But the media has for years been spinning out of control and until recently - with the explosion of the Internet – went unchallenged. They also began abusing their power.

This, of course, led to Dan Rather and the phony Bush papers. Thankfully, there are other ways of finding out the news. Unfortunately, these outlets are now coming under attack from the Democrats as well. With her recent comments about supporting the “fairness doctrine,” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has resurrected a very disturbing possibility. While Obama claims to oppose it, I find it very unlikely that he will stand against as President. Of course, this “fairness” doctrine will simply result in silencing conservative radio. It will cause radio stations to change formats rather than to deal with the regulations placed upon them. Of course, talk radio is popular because many Americans do not trust that the mainstream media is evenhanded. What the Left can not compete with in the marketplace, they will sue to destroy.

That doesn’t sound particularly “fair.”

Lastly, an Obama presidency will set back America’s relationship with Israel – The only consistent ally she has in the region (until Iraq). Although the Israeli government seems to be stuck on “self-destruct,” going back to days and policies of Jimmy Carter, or even Bill Clinton, is a recipe for disaster. While President Bush (or at least Condi Rice) has been short-sighted as of late, he has built a reputation as Israel’s friend. Obviously, this is not a claim Jimmy Cater can make. Judging by Obama’s history – regardless of his speech at Aipac, which he contradicted the next day – he can not be considered someone who will treat Israel as a friend. With Islamic terrorism being the most dangerous threat, that does not bode very well for America in an Obama administration.

These are simply a few of the reasons why I believe Obama should not be elected. Individually, they are troublesome. Combined, it could be lethal. Allowing emotions and hatred of all things Bush to cloud your vision is irresponsible and may just cause you to make the worst possible choice on Election Day. The damage an Obama presidency can do could set back this country 50 years or more, assuming the damage is reversible.

Don’t be fooled by the hype. Not when that’s all there is.

i haven't written for a while for a few reasons. One of them owning to dealing with my own private issues that seem to affect my emotions from time to time. Whether they are caused by the myriad of medications I have to take to treat my transplanted organ, or I need for the organ I need transplanted, I don't know. Regardless, the mood swings are painful enough without having to then put my heart into blogging.

The other reason is that I wanted to make sure the subject of today's blog was tackled in the most honest and non-reactionary way.

I haven't made a secret of my conservative beliefs and I've also not hidden my disdain for modern liberalism. I do agree that neither can succeed without the other and America's two-party system works because each side keeps the other in check.

So it isn't surprising that I would write about Barack Obama. However, I wish to be perfectly clear that I am not attempting to compare Senator Obama to Senator McCain. I personally believe that given the choice of the two men, I strongly lean towards Mr. McCain. However, I'm not particularly a supporter of the Arizona senator.

But this is not meant to be a comparison in the sense that I'm arguing for one over the other. In other words, my comments should be taken for where they are meant to be - simply as my own concern for the possibility of an Obama administration. Since so many who are voting for him claim they are doing so because of his policies, as opposed to his color - or the historic significance of his nomination, I too shall attempt to look solely at the issues.

Taxes and the economy
Senator Obama has said he intends to increase taxes in order to fund the largest expansion of the federal government since the New Deal. His plan is to raise taxes on small business, raise the minimum wage and raise social security taxes. In his speeches, he defends this as a way of spreading "fairness". What it will accomplish is a penalty for incentive and hard work. It is nothing but a plan to redistribute wealth between those who work hard and those who don't. Historically, the more you tax, the more damage you do to the economy.

According to well-regarded economist Thomas Sowell, "Lower tax rates have led to higher tax revenues many times...the Kennedy tax cuts in the 1960s, the Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s, and the recent Bush tax cuts that have led to record high tax revenues this April."

Another example of Obama's short-sightedness is gasoline prices. In fact, recently, Senator Obama was quoted as saying that the shock of rapidly rising gas prices are more of a concern than the actual price themselves. Furthermore, his plan to combat these prices are to go after the "evil" oil companies and their record revenues.

Unfortunately, he not only shows a lack of understanding between revenue and profit, but he also fails to recognize that the real causes of the rise in gas prices is due to speculation in oil futures. Much like it happened in the tech sector in 2000, the increase in speculative demand has fueled an unnatural bubble that is sure to burst.

According to former Clinton advisor Dick Morris, in the early 2000's the federal Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) - which had previously limited investments by those outside the business, to prevent precisely the kind of speculation now gripping the market - rescinded the limits on behest of institutional investors like corporate and government pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, university endowments and other investors, guided by brokerage firms like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, who had been most affected by the crash of the tech sector.

But to Obama and the Democrats, it's easier to go after the "big oil" bullies.

Furthermore, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised at the time of the 2002 mid-term elections, that only the Democrats had a policy to lower the price at the pump. Since then, the Democrats took control of both Houses of Congress. The price of gas at the time of the election was just under $2 per gallon. Why should we believe her (or them) now?

In my next post, I will discuss the issue of foreign policy and how the policies of Senator Obama again proves that resurrecting failed policies are not the answer.

I graduated high school exactly 27 years ago today. What does that mean? I dunno, I was just thinking about it.

On my graduation day, Ronald Reagan had just been inaugurated and it seemed the whole country had breathed a huge sigh of relief.

Disco officially died a slow and painful death.

Gasoline cost $1.38 a gallon. A gallon of milk was $2.22. A dozen eggs was ninety cents. The Dow Jones Index reached a high of 1024 and a low that year of 824.

Wow.

I was 18 years old, with my whole life ahead of me. It was the summer I drove from school in northern California back home to Dallas is a flat-bed Ford 150.

The more I think about it, the more I realize it was a long, long time ago.

***************************

I've discovered a pretty funny new cartoon online, called Attack Cartoons. The author leans right, but neither side is immune from his scathing wit. After perusing his library, I have to say this is clearly my favorite. I warn you, though. His humor can be a bit inappropriate.

***************************

Why is anyone giving Gore Vidal a platform? He hates Bush. Big deal. But his attack on McCain was just disgusting. I'm not a big fan of the Republican nominee, but I would never be so crass as to call him a liar about his suffering in a POW camp.

Although I have to admit that the fact that Vidal's comments were published in the New York Time's Magazine is not surprising.

***************************

Keith Ellison should be deported to Iran. At least he'll feel at home. When he demanded to be sworn in on a Koran, I argued that although I found it disgusting, it was his right to do so. But now he's gone overboard. His latest outburst proves he is a despicable tool of the jihadists.

Read it and weep -- here.

***************************

Did you know that Robert Kennedy would be alive today if Israel never existed?

Yep, according to this idiot, RFK's assassination was all the Jooos fault.

Those British! So proper, so poised, so anti-Semitic.

***************************

I've got to admit, not all Americans make me proud:
























Courtesy of foundsh*t.com

In a little while from now
If I’m not feeling any less sour
I promise myself to treat myself
And visit a nearby tower
And climbing to the top will throw myself off
In an effort to make it clear to who
Ever what it’s like when you’re shattered
Left standing in the lurch at a church
Where people saying: "My God, that’s tough
She's stood him up"
No point in us remaining
We may as well go home
As I did on my own
Alone again, naturally

To think that only yesterday
I was cheerful, bright and gay
Looking forward to well wouldn’t do
The role I was about to play
But as if to knock me down
Reality came around
And without so much, as a mere touch
Cut me into little pieces
Leaving me to doubt
Talk about God and His mercy
Or if He really does exist
Why did He desert me in my hour of need
I truly am indeed Alone again, naturally

It seems to me that there are more hearts
broken in the world that can’t be mended
Left unattended
What do we do? What do we do?

Alone again, naturally
Now looking back over the years
And whatever else that appears
I remember I cried when my father died
Never wishing to hide the tears
And at sixty-five years old
My mother, God rest her soul,
Couldn’t understand why the only man
She had ever loved had been taken
Leaving her to start with a heart so badly broken
Despite encouragement from me
No words were ever spoken
And when she passed away
I cried and cried all day
Alone again, naturally
Alone again, naturally

I find myself becoming more and more angry with what is happening in the world. When I began blogging, I understood that there were many different opinions about justice, honesty and truth. But as I've become more educated on the ways of the world, I have become less empathetic and clearly, more pessimistic.

I know that everyone has there own theologies and beliefs and I know that that there are always three sides to every story. But I never for a moment believed that truth would not prevail. I guess my own naivety was just stopping me from digging beneath the surface.

What has really driven this moment for me has been a few issues. First and foremost is the media's love affair with Barack Obama. Here we have a man with very little experience in government on the threshold of becoming the President of the United States. Generally, I suppose it could be looked upon as a momentous occasion in the history of this great nation. After all, a black man winning the White House would be absolutely unthinkable as early as 40 years ago.

But there is a tremendous danger in electing someone like Obama. Certainly not because of his race. While many on the left continue to criticize the right for our "racist" behavior, in truth most conservatives could care less about the color of one's skin. Somehow, over the past number of years, the party who opposed the civil rights legislation and gave us such people as Robert Byrd were able to convince everyone that they are the party of racial harmony.

From all I've seen, for the past 40 years, the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate for all but 8 years. Furthermore, during 4 of those years, Democrats controlled the White House. And what has happened to America during that time? Our education system has become a joke, we rely on foreign countries to supply us with energy. We refuse to acknowledge that we are at war with a religion hell-bent on our destruction. We belittle our military and destroy our faith in our police departments.

Hell, I could go on and on.

And you know what? The conservatives are just as at fault. The Republicans had the control and had the plan, but pissed it away as well. Like with what seems to be every human being that goes to Washington, they lost there way, got greedy and basically turned into exactly what they were elected not to do. No wonder they're on the brink of losing a record number of seats in the Senate and House.

I truly believe that President Bush has made some very glaring errors in his presidency. However, they are not the errors most people blame him for. Unfortunately, he has made enough stumbles to allow those who oppose him to get a stranglehold on the psyche of the American people. How else can you explain that a man with no experience, a man who makes more gaffes that Dan Quayle, a man who has clear Socialist and Marxist policies and a man who acts as if he believes he is the Messiah, can actually have a place as his party's nominee?

What has got be all bothered is that the media is so caught up in the "anyone but Bush" frenzy that they are "tingling up the leg" (to quote Chris Matthews) with love and affection for a man who has been attending a racist church for 20 years and not only has ties to anti-American nutjobs, but actually befriends these ass-holes!

We are at a time where we have lunacy hitting us from all sides. From the right, we have schmucks like Pat Buchanan who just wrote a mesmerizing essay on why Hitler wasn't such a bad guy after all. The fact that townhall.com would allow it to be posted infuriates me!

In Iran, we have the lunatic, Ahmadinejad no longer just calling for Israel's destruction, but now telling Japan to "prepare for a world without the U.S." And Obama thinks he can "talk" to this idiot? We have hundreds of millions of Muslims who have been brainwashed to believe that its all the Jews fault. On top of that, we have the Israeli government (and many, many Americans - especially on the left) AGREEING!!!

We are being attacked by environmentalists whose sole obsession is the end of capitalism, while Barack Obama and his party ADMIT that they want to take from the rich and give to the poor - as if this was some game.

History is constantly being repeated. But unfortunately, either we are too lazy or too stupid to see the smoke and mirrors blinding us from the truth. Writing about this has washed the clouds from my eyes and have forever changed my vision of this world. Writing has also proven to me that it will get worse long before it will get better.

I hope its not too late.

I don't have much that hasn't been said better by someone else. I am convinced that the world (and by extension, the country) is quickly losing it's moral compass and common sense. And it's not just the Jihadists who are causing this downfall - although they are doing a pretty good job of it themselves. Anyway, here are some links to make you cry (or laugh, if that's your thing):

Girl's Locker Rooms Declared Open to Perverts in Colorado

Religion of Peace Strikes in Pakistan

Who is teaching Your Kids About Islam?

Philippines: Bishop Backs Islamic State in South, "Muslims Should be Governed by Sharia Law"

Obama's Peace Partner says Israel's End is Near

Blame Islam? How Dare He! We Are The Religion of Peace!

Tolerance Will Not Be Tolerated!

You don't Need a Driver's License to be a Moron

Optimums Prime Must Be on the No-Fly List

And that's just for today! By the way, when can I question the influences surrounding Barack Obama? I'm not suggesting that he holds each and every viewpoint expressed by those who he considers mentors. But on the other hand, what proof do we have that he doesn't?

His campaign is all about "hope" and "change." Change from what? All of the changes I have heard him express are ones that Jimmy Carter attempted and failed miserably at. o paraphrase a bumper sticker I saw this week, instead of "McCain '08 = Bush III," I prefer one that says "Obama '08 = Carter II."

And as much as I dislike Hillary Clinton, I believe with all my heart that she got hosed with the Michigan and Florida delegates. How ironic that the party that fought in 2000 that "every vote should count," find themselves not counting every vote.

Of course, the Democrats can do what they did in Illinois in 1960 - vote early and vote often. It worked back then, didn't it?

Perfect!

Courtesy of pixdaus