The Secret of the Best Christmas Gift

I learned what makes a Christmas gift the very best while picking out greeting cards.

Some think the perfect gift is getting that perfect something that causes a person to exclaim, "just what I always wanted!" My mother tells the story of one birthday of mine when I was very young, every gift I opened I said that coveted phrase. She was delighted by my reaction, as I am sure the other children at my little party were.

Unfortunately with the years, my enthusiasm diminished, and much to my regret now, I became a less than enthusiastic receiver of gifts. My regrettable attitude became, "that is NOT what I wanted." I had lost the true meaning of gifting, and in the process I fear I hurt the feelings of more than one person who had offered a gift to me.

A poor receiver of gifts is a person worthy to be a partner of Scrooge before his fateful visit by the Ghosts of Christmas.

Luckily, like Scrooge himself, I had my eyes opened to the true meaning of what makes the "Perfect Gift." You see, the Perfect Gift is NOT the item, it is the THOUGHT, the EFFORT, and/or the SACRIFICE of the giver of the gift. Slowly, over the period of a year or two, I learned this as I began to notice how much time some people take to pick out greeting cards. Like them, I had stood for long periods of time looking at card after card till I found one that conveyed a sentiment that was right. Then I noticed how little time the receiver of a card will often spend looking at a card . . . and then it hit me (finally).

It was the effort and time spent picking the card, picking the gift. Thinking about the recipient, and then the sacrifice of money and/or time. THAT was the true gift, THAT is what was really given.

Now I look at every gift, every card in a new light. I think of my friend or loved one spending time thinking of me, thinking about what might please me, or make me laugh and then sacrificing their time and money to present it to me. THAT is JUST what I ALWAYS wanted!

Why Am I Optimistic?

When people ask me how I am doing, I like to answer, “If I were any better it would be illegal.” Today I spoke to a dear friend who expressed great concern for our country and the world, feeling that there were so many problems it was overwhelming. As I pondered on this conversation, I thought I should write this, because it is REALLY the way I feel.

Why am I so optimistic?

I am optimistic because our nation overcame racial intolerance by electing an African American to be our President. While I share in the tears of so many of our African American brothers and sisters in the relief that this election has provided and the hope that our country can finally set aside the separations of the past, I also realize that vestiges of intolerance will remain for a long time to come. AND I must say that while I am grateful for this HUGE hurdle to have been overcome, I am concerned and hope and pray that Barack Obama will set his liberal roots aside and govern our nation from a more moderate position, that he will seek guidance from on high, and will listen to the wisdom of folks who disagree with him.

I am optimistic because the men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line in our military, law enforcement and protection services care about our country and about democracy. They serve with honor and distinction, and give me hope for a brighter future.

I am optimistic because although our government made some huge blunders leading to this financial crisis we find ourselves in, the best people in finance and markets are working hard to correct these mistakes. There are sharp differences of opinions, but they are taking action, looking for solutions, being flexible in their responses, and demonstrating to me that they are doing their best to put things right.

I am optimistic because I have worked with teens for many years as a Scout leader and soccer coach. I see in the rising generation enthusiasm, morality, concern for their fellow beings, dedication to service, and love of country.

I am optimistic because there are so many good people in our great nation. Good people who opposed Proposition 8 because the believed it was not fair. Good people who supported Proposition 8 because they believed it was important for our children and our freedoms. Most were not motivated by hatred or intolerance, but by love of their fellow man and love of country.

I am optimistic because I believe that our elected officials have learned some hard lessons, and I have hope that they will be more willing and able to stick to their principles and not be blown about by the wind.

I am optimistic because the sun still shines, the birds still sing, the ocean is still blue and when spring comes, the hills will be covered in flowers. In my half century I have learned that life goes on, there are cycles, there are tragedies, there is evil in the world. But spring always comes, hope overcomes, and good always triumphs in the end.

I am optimistic because I see in my children’s eyes the hope of better things to come, the faith in a Power greater than their own, the desire to do right, the determination to try.

Trashing Sarah Palin?

Unbelievable! Idiotic! Ridiculous!

At the conclusion of the Democratic National Convention, Barack Obama was a loaded freight train barreling down the tracks at an incredible pace, unstoppable by the bare handed John McCain standing in the way.

But then... John McCain did the unexpected, he put a mountain in the path of that train named Sarah Palin! The train narrowly avoided total destruction, but did come to a grinding halt, and for the FIRST time since the primaries ended John McCain took the lead in the polls almost overnight! Barack's big convention extravaganza was forgotten. Who else could have done THAT?

Blame McCain's loss on Palin? How STUPID is that!! What other Vice Presidential nominee has drawn the 10's of THOUSANDS of crowds that Sara Palin drew? In the SAME town in the SAME week Joe Biden drew a crowd of 800 while Sara Palin's crowds were over 10,000! Blame Sara for McCain's loss? I don't think so.

Who is going after Sarah? McCain's campaign staff who BLEW the lead that she handed them on a silver platter and are trying to save their pitiful careers by shifting the blame to someone else! Disgraceful.

Who is going after Sarah? The liberal media that fear what she will become and want to marginalize her as they successfully marginalized Dan Quail. Disgraceful.

Why did McCain loose? Because Bill Clinton did NOT listen to Paul Volker and repealed the Great Depression law that separated banks from investment firms and lead to the melt down of the financial markets in the middle of the election. With the economy in its worse condition in nearly 80 years, the voters (as they always do) blamed the party in power and went for the smooth talking Obama.

Blame Palin... give me a break!

Sarah Palin -- We love you, we thank you and we hope to see more of you!

The Audacity of MY Hope

Barrack Hussein Obama is President elect of the United States and the sky will NOT fall and there is a GOOD reason to celebrate.

An important barrier has been broken. It has been a great thing for most people in this country to be able to tell their children, "ANYONE can become President." Well, the honest will know that minorities, particularly black minorities, have never really felt that, and for good reason. When you grew up knowing that there were separate drinking fountains, separate bathrooms, separate schools, and places you could not enter because of your skin color, its pretty tough to believe that your child could someday be President of the United States.

I am glad that a black person was elected President, I just wish it were one that I had greater confidence would be someone I could trust to lead our country on a moderate path, if not a conservative one. I wish it were someone who understood the threat of Islamic Jihad to our nation, and I wish it were someone who would not appoint activist judges with a socialist and socially liberal agenda to our courts.

On the bright side again, President Elect Obama has shown himself to be a pragmatist, if not a moderate. He has shown, since his victory in the Democratic Primaries, that he will reshape his policies to match political realities. During the primaries he touted an immediate pull out of Iraq, "guaranteed." Since then he has not said that and in fact has taken a more practical approach and surrounded himself with advisors that know better and he seems to be listening to them. We will see.

On the brighter side, President Elect Obama has surrounded himself with some BRILLIANT financial advisors including Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker (who warned Congress and Bill Clinton NOT to change the banking rules that would have prevented our financial meltdown this year) and Warren Buffet, arguably the greatest mind in the world when it comes to financial markets.

On the brighter side, the people did NOT give President Elect Obama a filibuster proof congress, so he will have to tone his programs down from the extreme liberal side.

Most folks do not know or remember that the inspired Founding Fathers of this nation DESIGNED our government to be difficult. While people complain that "nothing gets done" they forget that the Founding Fathers wanted it that way. They did not want it to be easy to change the course of this Nation. They wanted it to be difficult, they wanted politicians to spend more time in argument and debate than in passing legislation.

Sometimes that will work in your favor, and sometimes it will work against your personal interests. If you are a conservative like me, it will now work in our favor.

At least, that is the hope that I have the audacity to believe.

Who is Barack Obama?

And WHY can't McCain frame the issue?

Why should we care that Obama sat in Reverend Wright's church for 20 years?

Why should we care that Obama worked closely with Bill Ayres on several projects and launched his political career in Ayres' living room?

Why should we care that Obama gave $800,000 to Acorn to assist his campaign in THIS 2008 election?

Why should we care that Obama has had a close association with Father Michael Pfleger?

Why should we care that Obama's wife said she "never felt proud of her country?"

Why should we care that Obama refused to put his hand on his heart during the National Anthem?

Why should we care that liberal leaders like Jessee Jackson and Jeremiah Wright are so sure that Obama will lead our country in the most liberal paths it has ever been taken?

Why should we care that Obama did not honor his word in using Federal matching funds in this 2008 campaign?

Why should we care that Obama got a huge financial benefit from a real estate transaction withTony Rezco?

Why should we care that Obama voted "present" 129 times in the Illinois State Legislature, mostly it seems on controversial legislative matters?

Why should we care that Obama has the MOST liberal voting record in the US Senate?

Senator Obama has a slick answer for each of these issues, but does NOT deny them. Each one he slyly explains away, dismissing them as unimportant. BUT, IT IS THE COMBINATION OF THESE QUESTIONABLE ASSOCIATIONS AND ACTIONS THAT SHOULD GIVE VOTERS GREAT CAUSE FOR CONCERN COME ELECTION DAY.

WHO IS BARACK OBAMA?

Prop 8 - YES to Preserve Marriage

OK. Putting aside the hateful rhetoric, lets look at WHY we should vote YES on Proposition 8 in California:

1. YES on 8 also defends Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. The "tolerance" that is being demanded by the proponents of same sex marriage is a total LACK of tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them. They have ALREADY attacked churches in states that allowed same sex marriage which proves their intentions for us. They had the tax exempt status of the Lutheran Church revoked in a New Jersey community and forcing Catholic Charities to close their doors on their adoptions services in Massachusetts because they refused to place children in same sex couple homes. Without a YES on 8, speaking against same sex marriage can and probably eventually will be considered as hate speech.

2. YES on 8 protects children from being exposed in ELEMENTARY school to discussions and instruction regarding same sex marriage. California law REQUIRES school teachers to teach about marriage and families and provide "age appropriate" instruction. FURTHER, as children enter middle and high school, sex education curriculum will sooner or later include instruction regarding homosexual and lesbian relationships.

3. YES on 8 does not take away ANY rights of same sex couples. California's Domestic Partnership act parallels in EVERY respect California law on marriage. YES on 8 does NOT change that. Reports that same sex partners cannot visit their partners in the hospital, have joint wills or trusts or have dual property rights is simply FALSE.

4. YES on 8 defends the traditional backbone of society. Jennifer A. Marshall oversees research in areas that determine the character of our culture: education, marriage, family, religion, and civil society as Director of Domestic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Ms. Marshall points out that non-traditional families are more likely to have children with problems and the state should not be attempting to institutionalize same sex unions when the data is too scarce to determine whether such relationships are harmful to children.

McCain's Mortgage Rescue

I enthusiastically AGREE with Senator McCain that we need to lower the interest rate on shaky loans to keep folks in their homes as that is the MOST likely way that they will pay off their mortgages.

I DISAGREE with his approach.

All the Congress needs to do is pass a law that lowers ALL adjustable rate mortgages made prior to [date] to a fixed/capped rate of 5% on any remaining balance AND add any amounts in default or arrears on such loans AS OF the effective date of the legislation to the END of the loan.

JOB DONE WITH NO TAXPAYER MONEY.

(I have a fixed rate at 5.25%)

Obama's Protests Are Nuts

Senator Barack Obama has denied or minimized any connections he has with ACORN. But his protests are NOT truthful.What the heck is ACORN? Well it is more than a nutty seed that's for sure. ACORN is an acronym that stands for "Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now" and is reported to be a very radical left wing organization that was attempting to get a LARGE portion of the financial bailout money AND is reported to have ties to Obama. Three articles that are helpful in understanding ACORN are "Inside Obama’s Acorn," By Stanley Kurtz. Sol Stern’s 2003 City Journal article, “ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities.” and Steven Malanga’s “Acorn Squash.”

ACORN has been tied to several investigations of voter fraud in several states and is currently under investigation. Just last night it was reported on the news that ACORN offices were raided by law enforcement in Nevada regarding voter registration fraud charges.

The story gets a little complicated here, so hang in there with me because Obama is banking on your attention span being too short to tie the pieces together.

Obama sites his "experience" as a community organizer on his presidential resume. This "experience" included working hand in hand with ACORN and as a staff trainer for ACORN.

Obama also stresses his board membership on two "charitable" foundations, the Woods Fund (where he served with Bill Ayres) and the Joyce Foundation. During his board tenure, both of these foundations are reported to have given substantial sums of money to ACORN.

After training ACORN personnel, representing ACORN as an attorney, and diverting substantial sums of money to ACORN through charitable foundations, is it any surprise that ACORN has been an enthusiastic supporter of Obama?

ACORN leader, Tony Foulkes, takes credit for Obama's 2004 Senate victory. "And while many reports speak of Obama’s post-law school role organizing “Project VOTE” in 1992, Foulkes makes it clear that this project was undertaken in direct partnership with Acorn. Foulkes then stresses Obama’s yearly service as a key figure in Acorn’s leadership-training seminars. . . Obama’s long service with Acorn led many members to serve as the volunteer shock troops of Obama’s early political campaigns — his initial 1996 State Senate campaign, and his failed bid for Congress in 2000 (Foulkes confuses the dates of these two campaigns.) With Obama having personally helped train a new cadre of Chicago Acorn leaders, by the time of Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate campaign, Obama and Acorn were “old friends,” says Foulkes." (Stanley Kurtz, Inside Obama's Acorn).

Why Vote for John McCain?

1. John McCain GETS IT. He understands that Islamic Jihad is the greatest threat to freedom ever, and he has the guts to tackle the problem. Why is it more of a threat than Hitler or Lennin? Because they were a small number of power hungry men, Islamic Jihad is a GRASS ROOTS movement.

2. John McCain GETS IT. He will NOT appoint another Ginsburg or Souter to the US Supreme Court (who Obama says are the Justices he admires). Why is this important? Let me give you an example from THIS year:

"COURT UPHOLDS PART OF CHILD PORN LAW
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court upheld criminal penalties Monday for promoting child pornography. The court, in a 7-2 decision, brushed aside concerns that the law could apply to mainstream movies that depict adolescent sex, classic literature or innocent e-mails that describe pictures of grandchildren."

Ok, that’s the GOOD part of the story. No one I know would think that was a bad decision... BUT wait... it was a 7 to 2 decision! Why wasn’t upholding the conviction of a child pornographer a 9-0 decision?? BECAUSE dissenting opinions were filed by Justices Souter and Ginsberg – Obama’s examples of who he would appoint to the US Supreme Court!

Ask yourself, “Do I want the MOST liberal Senator in the US Senate to pick the next Supreme Court Justice?”

Not a "bailout" -- "An Asset Purchase"

So you think that EVERY home owner is going to default on their mortgage? That the homes that are the collateral for these loans are totally worthless?

Make no mistake, I think EVERY head of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Bros, AIG, et al., including members of congress who were "in the know" should be stripped of all their assets and their US citizenship and ridden out of the country on a rail.

Having said THAT... The 700 Bil will buy hard assets (hopefully at a nice discount) and if congress is smart enough to lower the interest rates on these shakey loans, the home owners will continue to make their payments and in time not only do I expect all the money to come back, but if properly handled (yeah I know, can we trust them...) the taxpayer's should make a profit on the deal.

The root cause of the current financial crises lies in the desire to make home ownership available to people in lower income brackets. This idea was (to my recollection) first put forth by Jack Kemp who was the Secretary of Health and Human Services under Ronald Regan. The belief was that home ownership would help them to be more stable.

After that time, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae began buying loans from lending institutions who loaned money to home buyers with lower credit scores.

The next big event was when Bill Clinton signed legislation that allowed Banks and Financial Institutions to cross lines and offer products that since the Great Depression had been limited to one or the other. Suddenly Banks could sell securities and Financial Institutions could make home loans.

During the Clinton administration, Freddie Mac and .Fannie Mae were encouraged by a Republican controlled congress to continually lower their standards for buying lower credit scored loans. Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Fed warned against this practice as did many others who saw and understood the depth of the problem. Which continued to grow year by year as the banks and financial institutions developed their new co-operative product "Mortgage Backed Securities" which were sold to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and then to investors and between financial institutions.

FIVE years ago, the Bush Administration actually drafted legislation for congress to limit and cut back on these practices. However congress, led by Democrat Charles Rangel in the House, would not allow the bill to come to a vote.

The "gold rush" of the housing market, between 2003 and 2006 exacerbated the problem to the extreme. Now, lower income people were reaching higher than ever before with the hope and dream of finally hitting it big, wealth through real estate. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were the catalyst for this frenzy, buying ANYTHING that the banks or financial instutions offered them, giving the banks and financial instituions NO ACCOUNTABILITY for the bad loans.

Do we need reform? YES.

Do we need to bail out these foolish financial instituions? YES. If we do not, WE THE PEOPLE will be hurt the most. Our investments and our retirement plans will deteriorate. We will not be able to borrow money, we will loose our jobs and our businesses. It is a distasteful thing to have to do, but we have to do it for our OWN sakes.

Do we need to install stricter regulations to prevent this from happening again? YES.

Do we have responsibility? YES - WE THE PEOPLE are the borrowers, we had responsibility to not over extend ourselves. WE THE PEOPLE are the lenders, we had the responsibility to act in a prudent manner. WE THE PEOPLE elected the politicians who created Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to interfere in financial and real estate markets.

Will we get our money back? Probably. Most of these loans will not default. They will be purchased by the government for less than full value and so the ones that do not default, will make up for some or all that do.

NOT Obama Part 1

THINGS THAT CONCERN ME ABOUT BARACK OBAMMA. These bother me more because they are not isolated, they are taken together to make me concerned about what is really going on in his head:

His failure to give any credit as role models to his WHITE grandparents, while he idealized his father who had abandoned him, his sister and his mother. (I am also troubled by his failure to include his sister when he talks about how he was the center of his mother's life).

His relationship with William (Billy) Ayres (a convicted terrorist bomber) with whom Obama served with the Woods Fund, hosted "meet the candidate dinners for Obama in the 90's, etc.

His 20 years at the Trinity Church with Jeremiah Wright and then saying he did not know about Wright's hate America speeches, and had not in 20 years heard them. DVD's obtained from the churches own bookstore show that this was not a recent turn for him, but had been a regluar topic for some years.

The fact that he has been reported to have the #1 most liberal voting record in the Senate (left of Hillary, left of Kennedy).

Michelle Obama's public statement in February 2008, told a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, crowd, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country."William (Billy) Ayres
Source: Wikipedia.com (Heavily footnoted)

The Obama–Ayers controversy arose during the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign by Hillary Clinton regarding Presidential candidate Barack Obama's contact with Bill Ayers, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and a former leader of the Weather Underground communist terrorist organization. His position as a professor led to him serving on two nonprofit boards with Barack Obama, who lived in the same neighborhood. Ayers and Obama made several joint appearances and Ayers was an early contributor and supporter of Obama’s political career.

Ayers participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the United States Capitol building in 1971, and The Pentagon in 1972, as he noted in his 2001 book, "Fugitive Days."

In an interview he gave to the New York Times (2001) on the occasion of the memoir's publication. The reporter quoted him as saying "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" as saying "I don't want to discount the possibility." Ayers has not denied the quotes.

Ayers was asked in a January 2004 interview, "How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?" He replied: "I’ve thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it’s impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don’t think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable."

In an interview published in 1995, (when he was first supporting and promoting Obama) Ayers characterized his political beliefs at that time and in the 1960s and 1970s: "I am a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist ... [Laughs] Maybe I'm the last communist who is willing to admit it. [Laughs] We have always been small 'c' communists in the sense that we were never in the [Communist] party and never Stalinists. The ethics of Communism still appeal to me. I don't like Lenin as much as the early Marx."

In 1970 Ayers was called "a national leader" of the Weatherman organization and "one of the chief theoreticians of the Weathermen". The Weathermen were initially part of the Revolutionary Youth Movement (RYM) within the SDS, splitting from the RYM's Maoists by claiming there was no time to build a vanguard party and that revolutionary war against the United States government and the capitalist system should begin immediately. Their founding document called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism." In June 1974, the Weather Underground released a 151-page volume titled Prairie Fire, which stated: "We are a guerrilla organization [...] We are communist women and men underground in the United States

Both Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, hosted Alice Palmer's meet-and-greet for Obama at their home in 1995 in the Hyde Park section of Chicago, where the Ayers and the Obamas lived. (The meeting has also been called a fundraising event.) It was at this meeting that then State Senator Alice Palmer introduced Barack Obama as her chosen candidate for the 1996 Democratic primary. Although the exact date of the meeting is not known, it was sometime in the second half of 1995, according to Ben Smith, a reporter for The Politico. Chicagoan Maria Warren wrote in 2005 on her Musings & Migraines blog: "When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the livingroom of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him — introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread."

Obama served as president of the board of directors for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a large education-related nonprofit organization that Ayers was instrumental in starting. The board disbursed grants to schools and raised private matching funds while Ayers worked with the operational arm of the effort. Both attended some board meetings in common starting in 1995,retreats, and at least one news conference together as the education program started. They continued to attend meetings together during the 1995-2001 period when the program was operating.

Obama and Ayers served together for three years on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an anti-poverty foundation established in 1941. Obama had joined the nine-member board in 1993, and had attended a dozen of the quarterly meetings together with Ayers in the three years up to 2002, when Obama left his position on the board, which Ayers chaired for two years. Laura S. Washington, chairwoman of the Woods Fund, said the small board had a collegial "friendly but businesslike" atmosphere, and met four times a year for a half-day, mostly to approve grants. The two also appeared together on academic panel discussions, including a 1997 University of Chicago discussion on juvenile justice. They again appeared in 2002 at an academic panel co-sponsored by the Chicago Public Library. One panel discussion in which they both appeared was organized by Obama's wife, Michelle. Ayers donated $200 to Obama's 2001 state senate campaign.

At the Democratic Party primary debate in Philadelphia on April 16, 2008, moderator George Stephanopoulos questioned Obama about his association with Ayers, asking the candidate: "Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?" Obama responded as follows:

"This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis. And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was eight years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense, George"

WE NEVER GET THE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS:

What do you mean, "on a regular basis?"

But, Senator Obama, it is NOT a matter of simply knowing him, he was a supporter of you, he contributed to your early campaigns, he promoted you, it appears that he had influence in having you appointed to charitable boards to serve side by side with him AND you made joint appearances with him, one organized by your wife. AND it is not just a matter of "engaging in detestable acts when you were 8 years old" he has not repented, recanted or expressed regrets, he continues as a self proclaimed communist who TO THIS DAY does not regret his "detestable acts."

Senator Obama, if such a man is an enthusiastic supporter and promoter of YOU, how does that reflect on YOUR beliefs, politics and how you will govern as President of the United States?

THINGS THAT CONCERN ME ABOUT BARACK OBAMMA

These bother me more because they are not isolated, they are taken together to make me concerned about what is really going on in his head:

His failure to give any credit as role models to his WHITE grandparents, while he idealized his father who had abandoned him, his sister and his mother. (I am also troubled by his failure to include his sister when he talks about how he was the center of his mother's life).

His relationship with William (Billy) Ayres (a convicted terrorist bomber) with whom Obama served with the Woods Fund, hosted "meet the candidate dinners for Obama in the 90's, etc.

His 20 years at the Trinity Church wtih Jeremiah Wright and then saying he did not know about Wright's hate America speeches, and had not in 20 years heard them. DVD's obtained from the churches own bookstore show that this was not a recent turn for him, but had been a regluar topic for some years.

The fact that he has been reported to have the #1 most liberal voting record in the Senate (left of Hillary, left of Kennedy).

Michelle Obama's public statement in February 2008, told a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, crowd, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country."

One LIBERAL columnest responded to her by asking:
Were you proud of this country when you graduated cum laude from Princeton University in 1985?
Were you proud of this country when you graduated from Harvard Law School in 1988?
Were you proud of this country when you were hired by the law firm Sidley Austin?
Were you proud of this country when the Berlin Wall was torn down in 1989?
Were you proud of this country when Colin Powell became the first black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1989?
Were you proud of this country when we liberated Kuwait from Saddam Hussein in 1991?
Were you proud of this country after your husband was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996?
Were you proud of this country when Colin Powell became the first black Secretary of State in 2001?
Were you proud of this country after it came together following the 9/11 attacks?
Were you proud of this country when -- despite Iran being our mortal enemy -- it led a massive international rescue operation after a devastating earthquake hit Bam in 2003?
Were you proud of this country when your husband gave a Keynote Speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004?
Were you proud of this country when your husband was elected Senator in 2004?
Were you proud of this country when Condoleezza Rice was named the first black, female Secretary of State in 2005?
Were you proud of this country when Essence magazine named you among "25 of the World's Most Inspiring Women" in 2006?
Were you proud of this country when Harvard named you amongst its 100 most influential alumni in 2007?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/02/19/mark-levin-tells-michelle-obama-stop-putting-down-my-country

Pickens Plan

I am all in favor of developing alternative forms of energy, however after registering on Picken's website (WAY slick, by-the-way) I was sad that it seemed really self serving. I had thought him to be a patriot, but it seems that his personal financial interests are the things that he is mostly promoting. Why does the Picken's Plan ONLY include energy sources that Mr. Pickens is heavily invested in personally? (e.g. no mention, that I could see of clean burning coal, did I hear geo-thermal? NO.)

I stated my concerns on his website, hoping I was wrong but was attacked immediately as an unbeliever... but alas... no answers from his people.

Why does his plan NOT include cost projections?

Why does his plan NOT include who will pay for the infrastructure (we will of course) and what is the cost benefit analysis of doing it now rather than letting these energy sources rise to the top of their own worth?

I am a believer in getting out of Arabia, and drilling more in the US, etc. but why does this plan from such a smart and resourceful man seem less than comprehensive and lacking in detail.

I visit Palm Springs often. There have been windmills there for years, thousands of them -- it looks like about HALF of them are inoperable! They went from being a marvelous curiosity to a blight. Why are half of them inoperable if they are so cost effective?

WE NEED TO TAKE aggressive action as quickly as possible and was excited when I saw this on TV. I am frustrated by the way we are "locked in" to a single way of doing things, and hopeful that finally someone with some financial clout and a VERY slick marketing idea, would be able to light a fire under Washington's butt. I am now unhappy that instead what I seem to find is half of an idea cemented in the financial holdings of the promoter.

Hey, I could care less if Mr Pickens made billions from this, IF ALL alternatives were explored as part of the answer.

What I have learned is that wind power is great -- When the wind blows. BUT the wind does NOT always blow, and often it does not blow with sufficient force to make the generators cost effective or provide sufficient power. WHAT happens then? No answers.

The interesting thing about his 4,000 Megawatt wind power farm is that it will take nearly 800 square miles in order to have room for these wind turbines and I am told they only operate at 20% efficiency (I hope I am wrong about that). For the same amount of money as the proposed wind farm, you can build a 4,000 megawatt nuclear reactor that will take up on 1 square mile and operates at 97% efficiency. The difference is one of subsidies and tax breaks. It would take 10 - 20 years to permit and build a reactor while it would only take a few years to build the wind farm and start reaping the tax benefits.

What would MY plan be? I am a long way from being an expert. But like I said, someone with the resources of Mr. Pickens should have been more comprehensive and reached beyond his own investments to INCLUDE nuclear, solar, geothermal, and clean coal as well as off-shore and Anwar drilling. Lets get the truth out about Anwar proposals - the foot print is small, risks are minimal, and the benefit is HUGE.

I had a small hope that Mr Pickens would look at what I have written and provide the detail and include other alternatives to give his plan more clout. I WANT him to be successful at this, but if you read the pundits, they are saying what I have been saying and his Plan is being dismissed as self serving.

I am sorry, but a man with the means of Mr. Pickens could have and should have done a better job providing detail. Instead, I am getting a real feeling that this website is a FANTASTIC advertising and marketing ploy for his businesses, rather than an attempt at finding real solutions? To be taken seriously by more than just frustrated people who have no "leader" it needs to have meat.

Why we HAD to take out Sadam Hussein

The real issue with Sadam is NOT if he had weapons of mass destruction, it is that he WANTED them, did use them, and will use them again. What makes him different from other tin horn dictators is that he had the oil reserves that gave him the wealth to buy them or the technology to make them. AND he had delusions of grandeur that made him a terrorist without par.

Assume that President Bush and PM Blair were completely wrong, that Sadam currently had NO weapons of mass destruction and the most powerful weapon he has is a shotgun, then what? The sanctions are lifted? Inspector’s leave? Then what will he do? He would sell oil, amass wealth and begin to buy and build these weapons to use on his neighbors and us, either directly or indirectly.

There is no dispute that he started 2 wars for the sole purpose of gaining power.
There is no dispute that he tried to trick the UN inspectors.
There is no dispute that he used weapons of mass destruction.
There is no dispute that he would have used them if he had them.
There is no dispute that he had a biological weapons program
There is no dispute that he had a nuclear weapons program
There is no dispute that he had chemical weapons
There is no dispute that he USED chemical weapons on the Kurds
There is no dispute that he sponsored terrorism.
There is no dispute that he had ballistic missiles.
There is no dispute that he ignored the UN.
There is no dispute that he has murdered thousands of his own citizens
There is no dispute that he was a liar.

Now, with an UNDISPUTED record like that, did the world really want this man to continue to be in a position to amass wealth? It doesn’t matter if he was directly linked to 9-11 or not, he is of the same ilk, he had the same desires, and even greater resources than Al Qaida.

Much has been made lately about how much our government knew before 9-11 and whether it could have been prevented. President Bush knows the intent and capability of Sadam and is trying to stop him. Let’s give him that support so we will not mourn more thousands who die at the hand of Sadam and his henchmen. Regime change was the only way to effectively stop this murderous madman from prevailing in his diabolical schemes.

To those who NOW say that other alternatives would have been better (see my posting on who supports the Iraq War, you may be surprised), while I respect your desire for peace, your ideas are dangerous. This is not Vietnam, this is Hitler, only Sadam has more money that Hitler ever had. Freedom and peace have never been free. They are purchased by blood, sweat and sacrifice. They have been purchased by thousands of young men and women who understood what you do not.

And to those U.S. Congressmen who stood on Iraqi soil and criticized our President, you are traitors, pure and simple. Exercise your freedom of speech in the halls of our government, voice your descent, by all means, but never again give aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States outside of our borders.

Who Supports the War in Iraq?

These are REAL quotes! I did NOT make them up!!

Bill Clinton
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."

Hillary Clinton
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members . It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Al Gore
We need national resolve and unity, not weakness and division when we're involved, engaged in an action against someone like Saddam Hussein, who is trying to get weapons of mass destruction and threaten his neighbors...[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He's already demonstrated a willingness to use these weapons; he poison gassed his own people. He used poison gas and other weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors. This man has no compunctions about killing lots and lots of people."

Nancy Pelosi
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

John Edwards
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."