So maybe it's just me. But there a re just a few things that I don't understand. Let's start with all this nuclear disarmament talk with the Russians. What exactly is the point here? A little background first:

President Barack Obama and Russian leader Dmitry Medvedev on Monday agreed a target of cutting vast Cold War arsenals of deployed nuclear warheads by around a third from current levels to 1,500-1,675 each. ...25 operationally deployed warheads below a range of 1,700-2,200, which both sides had already committed to reach by 2012 under the 2002 Moscow Treaty.

We know the Russians are opposed to American plans for a missile defense system in Europe. Washington says the system is intended to protect the US and its allies against a possible Iranian missile attack but the Kremlin argues that the system could be used against its nuclear arsenal as well.

So does that mean that the Russians want the ability to nuke Europe? I mean, what could Russia's possible reason be for opposing missile defense, other than it hinders them from firing missiles at people?

So instead of telling Medvedev - or really Putin, who calls the shots - that he sees through the Kremlin's smoke screen, Obama agrees to play politics with our nukes and gives into the Russian demands for disarmament.

And what is Herr Obama's rationale?

Officials say an agreement on a START treaty that slashed nuclear weapons would help Washington and Moscow to set an example to other countries ahead of talks next year on revising the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). (Reuters)

That's right, boys and girls, because Obama believes if only the US would lead the way, despots like Achmedinajad and Kim Jong Il will abandon their dreams of wiping Israel (and America) off the face of the earth.

Really!

It's a good thing the American press is so careful to question our President and insure that he has the knowledge of world history and a deep understanding of what makes despotic rulers tick.

I mean, if Obama were in the White House in 1944, do you really think D-Day would have happened?

Yes, I said it. Europe would be speaking German and all the incredible inventions and discoveries that Jews have made in the fields of science, math and entertainment, would be as non-existent as the Jew would himself be.

So here's another thing I don't understand....Honduras.

Here is a free, democratic nation that is governed by the rule of their Constitution. They have a leader who decided he no longer wanted to be beholden to his country's rules and instead set into motion a way to go the route of Hugo Chevez, and appoint himself President for Life.

What happened next was that his government stood up to him and when they said no, he tried to do it anyway. So they had him arrested and removed from office.

Suddenly, here comes the American President and he's telling Honduras to reinstate their deposed leader because he should not have been removed.

Well, excuse my ignorance, but just who the Hell is Barack Obama to tell Honduras, or any other sovereign nation what to do? Isn't this the same Barack Obama who so eloquently stood down when the Iranian protesters begged him for his support - only to be crushed when he aligned himself with the very people who stole the Iranian elections?

Now granted, when it comes to not meddling, we aren't talking about Israel. Of course, Israel is the exception to the Obama-no meddling-rule, right? So now add Honduras.

In the mean time, what does it say about Obama? He stands with the thugocracy in Iran, he stands with the thugocracy in Venezuela, he stands with the thugocracy in Russia and he stands with the thugocracy in Saudi Arabia (and yes, I know Bush did as well).

Yet, as far as the democracies are concerned? Against Poland. Against Israel. Against the Iranian protesters. Against Honduras.

Sense a pattern? The only possible explanation I can muster as to why Obama is standing against the Honduras government is because he has every intention to be in this same position as their deposed leader when his term ends. Don't be fooled. Obama - like his fellow Democrats, some of whom have already written legislation towards this effect - will do whatever he can to cling to power, well past their elected time expires.

The last thing I don't understand is why are we not screaming from the rafters over the selection of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Look, I could care less if she was Latino, if she was Asian or if she was even Martian. I don't even object to her being a liberal, for goodness sakes.

What I do object to is that she is a major player in the group La Raza (the Race). La Raza is an Hispanic "civil rights" organization that is often at odds with American law and freedom. Their goal is to do away with the "melting pot" that brought prosperity to millions of immigrants nationwide and instead seek to separate the Hispanic community from the rest of the country. They are strongly aligned with the Aztlan Underground, which calls for the violent cessation of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and southern Colorado into a new nation: Republica del Norte, "the Republic of the North."

From the Canadian Free Press:

Sounds like a far-fetched idea save for the fact that the 56% of Mexicans and Mexican Americans, according to a Zogby poll, favor the reconquista.

The creation of a “Hispanic Homeland,” Charles Truxillo, professor, University of New Mexico, maintains, is “an inevitability” that should be brought into being “by any means necessary.”

But the “reconquista” won’t end with territorial occupation and secession. The final plan for the La Raza movement includes the ethnic cleansing of Americans of European, African, and Asian descent out of “Aztlan.”

Miguel Perez, a La Raza spokesman at Cal State-Northridge, says, “The ultimate ideology is the liberation of Aztlan. Communism would be closest [to it]. Once Aztlan is established, ethnic cleansing would commence: Non-Chicanos would have to be expelled — opposition groups would be quashed because you have to keep power.”

And so, our new Supreme Court appointee and self-professed advocate of La Raza approves of the reformation of the United States, the creation of a separate Chicano country, and widespread ethnic cleansing. Other La Raza supporters who have appeared at Aztlan gatherings include George W. Bush, John (Juan) McCain, and Barack barrio-loving Obama.

The plans of La Raza and the Aztlan Movement may not raise conservative eyebrows, let alone Christian opposition to Sotomayor’s ascendancy to the Supreme Court, save for the fact that La Raza and other Latino activist groups have expressed widespread anti-Jewish sentiments and support for radical Islam.

I just don't get it. We are all like sheep. Just hope and praying what we see right in front of our eyes is not true. We think - just like our grandparents and great-grandparents did - that "it can't happen here."

And yet, it seems to me it is. And this is exactly it happened before. With our eyes closed. That goes for both our own individual eyes and the eyes of our own media.

Don't be fooled.