LAUTENBERG'S GOTTA GO! -DICK ZIMMER FOR SENATE

New Jersey is a state in crisis. A manmade crisis that has created a state that is unaffordable and a government that is inconsequential. For more than 5 years little has come out of it’s state capital to make much of a difference in the lives of it’s approximately 8,725,000 people. Yet from it’s lush green, rolling hills and mountainous peeks in it’s northwestern corner to it’s Victorian Painted Ladies along Cape May on it’s southern seaside corner, New Jerseyans are battered, burdened and brushed aside by a state legislature that is as effective as a sail boat without a sail. From it’s northern mountains to it’s southern shores and all the suburban sprawl in between, New Jersey’s citizens suffer. While most of the nation is realizing a national economic pinch, New Jerseyans are trying to cope with an economic punch.

Rising prices across the nation only compound the rising cost of living in New Jersey. Costs that have been increasing every month since the states liberal led assembly and senate went to work with disgraced former Governor Jim McGreevey and than his successor, former Goldman Sachs financial genius, Governor Jon Corzine. It is a liberal menage-a-tois that has done nothing with our state problems accept make them more expensive.

Ever since Corzine took office, all we have seen in New Jersey are new proposed taxes and rate hikes. Our Governor has proposed everything from ridiculously high, progressive, toll increases on our critical roads, to creating new tolls on roads that have not had a one before. When he first came into office he invented a whole new slew of taxes. One even took advantage of the state’s motto by implementing a tax on any landscaping or planting of shrubbery and flowers. Now that’s one way to keep the garden in “the Garden State”, isn’t it?

Despite the despair of it’s citizens, state government in New Jersey simply adds to the high cost of living in the state. They have done little to curb the excesses of it’s own governance or of public employee and teachers unions who hold us hostage to their whims, little to improve public transportation, public safety, education, or any quality of life issues that affect us. What they have done is cost us a lot more for a lot less and created one of, if not the most, unfriendly business environments in the nation.

But even though the state of the state is in the midst of malaise, you would never know that there was an election in New Jersey. It’s liberal loving legions are undoubtedly voting for Barack Obama to become our next President. It is so definite that neither Obama or McCain have wasted anytime or money in the state since they got their party’s nominations. But even putting the presidential election aside, you would think that there would be some acknowledgment of the fact that we have an election for the United States Senate going on here. Yet, you would never know it.

Even though it is an election for federal, not state office, you would think the people of New Jersey might have an ounce of interest in trying to better the conditions of our state by electing someone who’s representation of us in Washington, DC could help to benefit us here in New Jersey. But such is not the case.

Instead the four term incumbent Senator Frank Lautenberg is going to be sworn in to a fifth term in office as one of the two very best New Jerseyans to represent us in Washington, DC. It would actually be a laughable arrangement if it wasn’t so pathetically sad.
For twenty-four years Mr. Lautenberg has represented New Jersey in the federal government by promoting his own self interests. He has not made one iota of difference for the state or the nation since his first term in office.

Over two decades ago Senator Lautenberg spearheaded efforts to eliminate smoking on airplanes. During that same first term he was instrumental in effectively raising the legal age for drinking from 18 years of age to 21, throughout the nation. Lautenberg fought hard for the passage of his legislation that linked federal funding to states for their roads to their raising the legal drinking age. No state wanted to lose out on the federal money available to maintain and build their roads. So this resulted in a uniform legal drinking age throughout the nation and prevented teens from driving across state lines so that they could legally drink in one state and then get behind the wheel to drive back to their home state while intoxicated. The bill may have actually saved lives. It was a responsible and, at the time, a creative measure.

But since that first time in office, Frank Lautenberg has produced nothing. His name has joined many others on various liberal pieces of legislation but the extent of his efforts stopped after allowing a staffer to put his name on the bill.

Lautenberg has not been in the forefront of any legislative initiatives or in the lead in opposition to any legislation. Frank Lautenberg has provided no solutions to our nations problems. For display he has simply offered a press release or sound bite in regards to issues, but little, very little, more than that.

On taxes Frank Lautenberg has never opposed an increase that has been proposed. On the budget, the only thing he has endorsed cutting is spending on our national defenses. He has never once moved to significantly reduce government spending or it's size.

His spending habits are perhaps best exemplified by his staff. It is one of the three highest paid staffs in the entire US Senate. This is odd when you realize that he is one of the least active members of the senate. Yet his staff is occupied by countless consultants and a number of state directors. Even though New Jersey is a relatively small state, Mr. Lautenberg requires three state directors, including a number of South Jersey directors. These are obviously patronage positions made available to help consolidate Lautenberg’s power. South Jersey is where his greatest challenges to re-election come from. It is where Congressman Bob Andrew comes from and where he challenged Lautenberg for the nomination from.

Even though New Jersey ranks last among all states in the amount of return on the dollar we recieve from Washington, Frank’s staff is one of the highest paid in the federal government and for what? Two press releases a week and his seal of approval for a far left agenda?

The fact is that until this election rolled around one had to take pause and try to recall if Frank Lautenberg was still in the U.S. Senate. The man was scarce and his accomplishment are even more scarce. Now that he is running for re-election he has tried to demonstrate himself as a doer. He most recently proclaimed great pride in what one ad described as his forcing homeland security money to be allocated by need rather than politics. It might be a powerful issue if it were true. First of all, Lautenberg, as well as his senate cohort Bob Menendez, have brought back little money from Washington to New Jersey. In the case of homeland security money, what the state did receive was being allocated by a liberal led state legislature and governor who only gave the money to districts that were represented by Democrats. This pattern finally and only changed after Republican lawmakers took the issue to court. Then and only then was the allocation of homeland security dollars doled out based upon the security needs it was meant for.
The truth is that Frank has little to run on. It is hard to have to go back more than two decades in order to demonstrate ones effectiveness.

Not that it matters. This is New Jersey. Here. where liberals rule, two plus two does not equal four. In fact, here in New Jersey, just adding two plus two together costs you 5 in new taxes and then you must subtract the total of the equation and give that amount to the union whos leader slept with Governor Corzine and negotiated contracts behind closed doors.

So common sense is not something that you find a large quantity of New Jersey. It is something that we have to import from neighboring states and in the Northeast it is hard to find. But it explains why Lautenberg is being rewarded with a fifth term in office. That and the fact that the New Jersey Republican party is so unorganized and out of touch with the ability to tap into the political despair that we are in, all accounts for why one would not know that there was election for the US Senate in Jersey.

Lautenberg is the wealthy owner of ADP, the paycheck service that rakes in millions for producing the checks that many American’s receive for their livings. So he has oodles of dough and even has the financial backing of the Democratic National Committee and the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee.

The Republican nominee does not have Frank’s wealth, nor does he have the great deal of money coming to him from the RNC or Senate Republican Campaign Committees. They’re tapped out.

On top of that Frank Lautenberg even refuses to debate the issues and will not go face to face with his opponent.

All of this makes the fact that there is a race for the United States Senate in New Jersey, a well kept secret, much like Frank Lautenberg’s accomplishments.

But there is a race and it’s one that could truly help to turn the tide of inaction and lack of solutions or innovation in this state. It could come from Dick Zimmer.

Dick Zimmer is a former 3 term Republican congressman. While in office Congressman Zimmer brought about more productive measures in just one of his two year terms than any of Frank Lautenberg’s four, six year terms in office.

While in office Congressman Zimmer fought wasteful government spending. When it came to his own staff budget, unlike Frank Lautenberg who uses every dime given to him to have one of the highest paid federal staffs in government, Zimmer returned money that his staff budget didn’t require, to the federal government. He even tried to pass legislation that required unused portions of staff budgets to be returned to the federal government and applied to deficit reduction.

As a congressman, Dick Zimmer’s fiscal conservatism and legislative initiatives earned him the title of “Taxpayer Hero” by Citizens Against Government Waste each year he was in office.
Zimmer’s zealotry did not stop with economic issues though. He proved himself to be a man of great social conscience and activism. When a toddler in New Jersey was brutally assaulted and murdered by a convicted sex offender who recently moved into the girls neighborhood, Dick Zimmer made government work for the people and he wrote and fought for passage of the federal legislation known as Megan’s Law which mandated that parents be notified when a convicted sex offender moves into their neighborhood.

Zimmer was also responsible for no frills laws which eliminated luxuries in federal prisons for criminals who were there to be punished instead of comforted.

He did this while also never allowing the United States to roll over in the face of international opposition or belligerent enemies. Zimmer knows that the best America is a strong America, not just militarily but economically as well as educationally.

These are but a few examples of Dick Zimmer’s active participation in government. They exemplify his ability to implement improvements into our lives through a government that he helps to make work for us, not be a burden on us.

Dick Zimmer knows that the purpose of holding elected office is not for the title or ability to hand out patronage to consolidate power. He knows that it is an opportunity to empower the people he represents and a chance to improve lives through legislative action as opposed to putting out press release announcing that he put his name on someone’s legislation.

Frank Lautenberg on the other hand has spent about two decades proving that he knows how to make government work for him. It finances his patronage mill and pays him well to do nothing more than repeat the words of some of his more active and innovative liberal buddies in the Senate.

Perhaps the most accurate description of Frank Lautenberg and his long, lackluster waste of time in the Senate is best exemplified by the Frank R. Lautenberg Rail Station in Secaucus, New Jersey. Built at a cost of more than 600 million dollars the transportation committee that Lautenberg chaired invested our tax dollars in it because of the dire need to expand and improve public transportation in New Jersey. Here in New Jersey one must drive everywhere. You must even drive long distances to catch a train to somewhere. So this terminal was built in Northern New Jersey where there is a need to help increase public transportation to and from neighboring New York City.

Well the genius of the transportation committee, under Lautenberg’s leadership, allocated the money and after years of construction it was finally finished. It’s a beautifully cavernous, multi leveled facility and it was humbly named after the man who designated the money for it…..Frank R. Lautenberg. Well years later it still stands but it does so empty. With no parking made available anywhere near the facility, it is impossible for commuters to access it and so except for the occasional tourist in world famous Secaucus, New Jersey, no one uses it.
So here we have a useless, hollow monument to Senator Lautenberg that cost a lot but does little. It’s just like it’s namesake. Senator Lautenberg is a useless living fossil who costs taxpayers a lot but does little for them.

It’s time to retire Senator Lautenberg. It was time for his retirement 8 years ago when he did retire only to be brought back to run for the senate when Senator Bob Toricelli was found guilty of accepting gifts and other bribes. When it became obvious that he was not going to win re-election, state democrat leaders illegally took Torricelli off the ballot and replaced his name with Lautenberg’s.

Let’s face it folks, we have gotten all that we can we out of Lautenberg. He was devoid of ideas and enthusiasm after his first term more than 18 years ago. Since than we have been waiting for him to do something worth anyone’s while. How many more terms in office does he need to provide us with something meaningful?

When all of New Jersey’s major daily newspapers, liberally biased newspapers, from the Asbury Park Press to the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Gloucester County Times to the Courier Post have endorsed Dick Zimmer, a Republican, you know that there is something wrong and that something is Frank Lautenberg.

With all the problems that are going unaddressed or worsening here in New Jersey, it is time that we shake things up. It’s time for some new thinking and representation in Washington that can help make the federal government work better for us than our state government does.
It’s time for Dick Zimmer.

So this Tuesday, November 4, 2008, regardless of who you cast your presidential vote for, be sure to vote for New Jersey and cast your ballot for Dick Zimmer for US Senate.

Even if his time hasn’t come, we know for sure that Frank Lautenberg’s time has gone.

Presidential Summit

There was a presidential summit and the presidents of the world were asked to propose topics to discuss about.

The president of the United States said, "I think we'd see about how to stop wars." Everybody applauded.

The president of Somalia said, "I think we'd see about how to stop hunger." Everybody applauded.

The president of Costa Rica stood up and said, "I think..." Everybody applauded.

LIBERALS GONE WILD AND THE AXIS OF IDIOCY

First there was “Girls Gone Wild” and their countless sequels. Then came “Boys Gone Wild” and even “Guys Gone Wild” and their continuous stream of subsequent follow ups. Volume after volume of guys and girls baring it all for hordes of horny, voyeurs hoping to satisfy their lusts through store bought compact discs.

Well hold on to your pants folks. Brace yourself for the newest edition of the “Gone Wild” series.

It’s “Liberals Gone Wild” and you wont have to call a 1-800 number and charge $19.95 for it with your credit card. All you have to do is vote for Barack Obama on Election Day and it will satisfy the lust of liberals all across the land. Their lusts. Lusts for bigger government and higher taxes. Their lusts for negotiating with terrorists and deciding America’s fate based on the opinions of the United Nations.

By simply voting for Barack Obama on Election Day all of this and more can be yours but it’s not free. It comes with a hefty price. It’s also broken. Liberals Gone Wild is not something you can turn off. You can’t just pop it out of your compact disc player and play something else. Liberals Gone Wild will stay on and run amuck, unimpeded and uninterrupted for at least two years.

Once your vote for Obama buys you a copy of Liberals Gone Wild, you will be revealing more than bare breasts or swinging schlongs , you’ll be revealing the naked truth of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the nations liberal leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives, and the revelation is not very attractive.

Their scantily clad objectives are not filled with any titillating sights or actions. The naked truth of their socialist agenda simply sets our nation on a course that is so radical and so closely aligned with socialism that our nation’s government will have more in common with Cuba than any of the intended principles of our own nation’s constitution.

In the past that constitution has insured that America’s greatest strength was always in it’s people.

Individual Americans have been the impetus to our success and history is strewn with examples of how our people’s sense of drive and responsibility won the day for us. Even when our nation faced it’s greatest challenges, any successful directions offered by our government was only made successful if and when the people were behind it. Yet, by voting for Barack Obama, we are essentially making it clear that we want the bureaucracy of a government to decide all that we should decide for ourselves.

Despite the importance of individuality and independent initiative and entrepreneurial spirit, Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have confidently and consistently pushed an agenda that attempts to legislate everything from the educational choices, quality and opportunities of our children to how much money can be made in the private sector. Their sense of fairness dictates that all must suffer the consequences of government fiats.

Since they took control of congress almost two years ago their efforts to adopt their socialist agenda have been stymied, to a point. Their small majorities were not large enough to totally steamroll the principles of freedom that Americans have come to appreciate.
But all that is about to change. By elevating the most liberal member of the government’s collective, elected leadership to the presidency, Barack Obama will make it possible for the combined socialist agenda of his liberal comrades to prevail. With Obama at the helm, Pelosi and Reid will have no obstacles.

Their class warfare will rage on and personal success will be treated as a goal that needs to be penalized in an attempt to “spread the wealth”. Beyond that, in this Obama, Pelosi and Reid, special edition of Liberals Gone Wild, the successful in America are blamed for the conditions of the less successful. They are put forth as the enemy and the source of all that ails people and government.

On top of their class warfare games, the far left menage-a-tois of Obama, Pelosi and Reid will rejuvenate failed policies of the past as false keys to a better tomorrow. Initiatives such as Jimmy Carter’s, 1977 Community Reinvestment Act and Bill Clinton‘s expansion of that in the form of the American Homeownership Initiative will not simply be reformed, they will be expanded. This will be done despite the fact that both programs helped to create the current banking crisis by forcing banks to engage in risky lending practices to those who could not afford to pay back such loans.

Together the trio will swear to move us into energy independence while they restrict the independence of participants in the market and make it impossible to drill for domestic sources of energy or limit the exploration for such natural resources.

Unchecked and in total control, the liberal Axis of Idiocy will implement the most liberal agenda we have ever seen. From expanding the current burgeoning government bureaucracy by raising taxes and making it more expensive to operate to increasing risks to our national security, liberals will be like children locked in a candy shop after the doors have closed and the staff has gone home. Even before their lies achieve any confirmed coup of liberal dominance, this trio has already begun to conspire over a trillion dollars of new spending. New spending that will be funded by the millions of Americans whom they wish to control. A control that they hope to have by legislating everything from our opinions and ways of thinking to the medical treatment available to us.

This liberal Axis will allow for the unimpeded approval of liberal justices who want to write law rather than interpret law. This goes not only for the selection of one or maybe even two supreme court justices, it involves thousands of judicial appointments that are given to a President after congressional approval. Approval that Pelosi and Reid will reinforce so long as Obama’s appointments pass the proper liberal litmus tests.

We are about to enter dangerous territory. It is the same type of territory that Republicans entered when in 2000 they added the White House to the list of government branches that they controlled.

After almost 6 years of total control, Republicans unchecked power allowed them to become complacent. The lack of true competition in government philosophies allowed them to stray away from their own intended missions. The power went to their heads and they paid a price for it. They lost in 2006. The cycle is about to repeat itself. Liberals will be in total control. The far fetched initiatives of their far left leadership will now become a staple of American government. The extremist policies of Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and other liberal icons are now about to become mainstream, American government policies. It will be a tough two years. And it will take at least 3 times as long to recover from, but it will done.

When America sees liberals in action, the full effect of liberals who are not held back in any way, they will quickly resort to change, yet again. Just like in 1994, when two years of a government led by liberals in the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate caused the electorate to put the breaks on that. If Obama does actually somehow convince Americans that he can do more than run for higher offices, and elect him President, they will undoubtedly correct that course quickly too. Hopefully the damage done by them in two years can be in fact corrected quickly. The only problem there is that we can not afford a damaging blow to our national security. When it comes to our nation’s security, it only takes one mistake to cost us more than we can afford.

Hopefully it will not take something so drastic to teach us a lesson . Something like the national security crisis that Joe Biden swears we will encounter if Barack Obama is elected President. It is not a risk I am willing to take. That is one reason why John McCain has my support. It is one reason why I am not willing to hand over the entirety of our government to a group of people who, for the last two years have, provided one of the most unproductive legislative sessions in recent history. It is just one among many reasons but it is one of the most important reasons.

4 Doctors Talk Politics!

An Israeli doctor said, "Medicine in my country is so advanced, we can take a kidney out of one person, put it in another and have him looking for work in six weeks."

A German doctor said "That's nothing! In Germany, we can take a lung out of one person, put it in another and have him looking for work in four weeks."

A Russian doctor said, "In my country, medicine is so advanced, we can take half a heart from one person, put it in another and have them both looking for work in two weeks."

The American doctor, not to be outdone, said "Hah! We are about to take an asshole out of Illinois, put him in the White House and half the country will be looking for work the next day."

POLITICS AND DINNER DON'T GO TOGETHER

I have to apologize here from the get go. The other night my partner Nick, and I went out to a local diner for a quick bite to eat. We were seated at a booth in between a group of four behind me and a group of three senior citizens behind Nick. While perusing the menu my ears caught the phrase “I don’t like Obama”. It came from one of the ladies in the group sitting behind Nick .

Being preoccupied by politics, certain buzz words like election, President, McCain, or Obama, catch my attention even when I am not paying attention.

So this older woman’s utterance of the word "Obama" lit up my on my radar screen. Even though it may have been impolite to pay attention to a conversation not involving me, I couldn’t help myself.

So I apologize for any impolite eavesdropping, that I may be guilty of. It wasn’t my intent but I’m a political junkie, and as such, this election season is for me what Christmas is to a wide eyed, little boy. It’s like the Super Bowl to football fans and I am just in tune to any references to politics. Besides, to put it nicely, this woman was not using her inside voice. So curiosity got the best of me and I paid attention to the political opinion that was unfolding.

The woman went on to say “I don’t like Obama but he’s got my vote”. The woman explained further “those Republicans are only for the rich and big business”

At this point the waitress came over to take the orders of Nick and I. Being distracted, I let my partner order first and I than quickly determined what I wanted. With my attention taken off of the conversation that I was not a part of, Nick and I started our own banter.

When the waitress returned with our drink orders, both Nick and myself happened to hear that same woman I overheard earlier say “and that “McCann”, “he just wants to give tax breaks to big companies”. At this point I had just begun to take a sip of my Pepsi with lemon and no ice when she continued “and who are those big businesses to make as much money as they do. They shouldn’t be allowed to make that much money in the first place”.

Upon hearing that , I gagged on my soda. Having caught that remark from right behind him, Nick knew what the cause of my discomfort was.

We were about to eat and after having heard what I just heard, I could not allow myself to pay any further attention and still be able to stomach the meal I was about to eat.

Nick knew my blood pressure was rising and quickly tried to establish our own conversation and provide a diversion from that which had me fuming. Our food came and we discussed the details of the event we were heading out to DJ.

Through it all, I could not help but allow the words of that woman to echo in my head. I couldn’t stop wondering if she actually knew what she said. Did she really believe, that in America, people should only be allowed to make a certain amount of money? Did she actually believe Democrat talking points and accept them as the truth?

I thought to myself, how little this woman really knew and how misinformed she was. Yet, despite her lack of understanding , awareness and information, she threw her words out with total conclusiveness and decisiveness. This is a woman who referred to John McCain as “John McCann”. She didn’t even know his name yet she acted like a brilliant sage who proclaimed Republicans are only for the rich and that businesses should only be allowed to make a certain amount of money.

What this woman neglected to realize was that Republicans and “John McCann” do not believe in penalizing success. They do not support limiting opportunity or making our government some type of communist politburo that does everything from control your wages to determining what, how and where your children are educated. She didn’t understand that Republicans were not for the rich or sponsors of class warfare but that they didn’t believe in penalizing success or taxation that goes so far that it taxes the dead and buried. This bitter, jealous woman could not wrap her head around the fact that “John McCann” is not trying to keep her down but that he is trying to prevent government from holding her back.

All these thoughts raced through my mind as Nick and I ate and as I tried to focus on our own discussion.

We chatted away and finished up our meal but in the back of my head I could not stop thinking about how gullible this woman was. She actually believed in the liberal bumper sticker slogans and campaign catch phrases that promoted liberal socialist policies in brightly colored wrapping paper and big ribbons and bows. She admitted that she didn’t even like Barack Obama. Yet because he was a Democrat and since they were against the rich, she was for them.

Beyond angering me, it worried me. I worried about how many more people in America held her thinking and how many despised the free market that comes with our democracy? How many Americans were actually supporting socialism and wanted to adopt it as our way of life?

With our meal finished, I got up before Nick to find our waitress. I put on my McCain-Palin jacket, prominently, found the waitress and asked her for not only my check but for the check of the people at the table behind Nick. I told her that I wanted to pay for it. The waitress was taken back for a moment and said “Oh, Ok, here ya go”. After paying and getting my change, I asked if she could give me a blank dinner check to write a message on and that she could give to the customers I paid for. She handed one to me and I wrote:

“Dear Fellow Americans;

I paid your check.

I did so because this is still America and in it I can still make as much as my ambition, skill, and willingness to make allows. In it I am also still allowed to keep enough of it so that I can spend as much of it as I want and on what I want.

If Barack Obama is elected he will determine all that for me. So enjoy my generosity while you can because if you get your way, we will all be losing our own ways.

P.S.: John McCain is the man trying to preserve democracy. Thom McCann is the company you buy your shoes from.”

Upon leaving the diner with Nick, and after paying for more meals than I expected, just to make a point, I realized that just like the government should do, I too should mind my own business.

A Quickie

One day George W. Bush and Dick Cheney walk into a diner. A waitress walks up to them and asks if she can take their order.

Bush leans close to her and says, "Honey, can I have a quickie?"

The waitress is appalled and yells at the President about women's rights and storms away.

Cheney then says to Bush, "George, its pronounced 'quiche'."

LIBERALS, TODAY"S REDNECK RACISTS

Pennsylvania has not awarded it’s electoral votes to a Republican President in twenty years. It is a state that I would not have invested any time or money in if I were John McCain. This isn’t because Pennsylvania isn’t worth the effort, it’s simply because, given the limited amount of resources available, Pennsylvania and it’s recent electoral history is not a place McCain can afford to throw his resources into.

That was the conventional thinking, but this election is proving to be anything but conventional.
With Obama successfully tricking people in places like Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina, the need to put Pennsylvania in play has become more pressing for McCain.

Beyond the need for it has also come a greater opportunity to win Pennsylvania. That opportunity has come from of all people, Democrats.

Barack Obama was the first person to roll out the red carpet for John McCain in Pennsylvania. He did so while running against Hillary Clinton for the nomination when he said that there were parts of the state that contained citizens who were bitterly clinging to their guns and religion.
Obama lost Pennsylvania to Hillary in a landslide. Since then he has done whatever he could to win the people of the state over. One of the reasons he chose his running mate, Joe Biden, was because of Pennsylvania. Joe Biden has roots there, in Scranton, where he grew up. It is a fact that you could not escape when Barack announced Biden as the Vice Presidential nominee. Between both of them, Scranton was brought up so much that you almost forgot that Joe Biden has been representing Delaware for more than thirty years.

Aside from putting someone who once came from Pennsylvania on the ticket Obama as well as Biden have been campaigning hard for the state. They have made countless appearances there and when not in the state, Pennsylvania has been bombarded by Obama television advertisements. Most of this activity is focused on the eastern part of the state and Philadelphia. Philadelphia has one of the highest African-American populations of any city in the nation. It is more than 43% black and almost 45 % white. When you consider that about 94% of the African American population in the country is supporting Barack Obama, Philly is very fertile territory for Obama. These are pertinent statistics that bring me to another Democrat who has helped to turn Pennsylvania into a more competitive state for John McCain. John Murtha.

Congressman Murtha is a liberal who has proven himself to be almost as big a living gaffe as Joe Biden.

Not long ago he ran around screaming that a number of U.S. Marines needed to be court marshaled because he was accusing them of murdering, bombing and torturing innocent Iraqis, including women and children. The marines in question were exonerated and the accusations were proven false but what does that matter? Murtha never apologized or corrected himself. I mean why should he? All he did was try to destroy the lives of innocent men serving their country. Who cares?

I do. So that was strike one.

More recently Murtha has explained the nature of the closeness in the race for president in his home state of Pennsylvania as being due to the fact that, as he put it, people in western Pennsylvania are racists. The statement included the very same people whom he represents, in western Pennsylvania.

That was strike two.

The remark got some heat and days later he tried to excuse what he said. In an interview, Murtha explained that what he meant was that some people in that part of the state want change but not that much. “Many of them are rednecks”. he claimed.

Strike three…..YER OUT!!!!!!!

Not only has this character betrayed the brave young men in our armed forces but he calls his own constituents racists and rednecks. For goodness sakes people, wake up! If an elected Republican official said that Colin Powel endorsed Obama simply because he was black, you liberals would be all over him. If a Republican had the gall to say that Philadelphia was supporting Obama because Philly is full of the “N” word” we would all be going out of our minds. There would be riots in the streets. Yet a lard ass, 17 term, liberal congressman calls white people in his own district rednecks because many of them are not voting for Barack Obama and there is not a single wimper.

What happened to the liberal edict of political correctness. You know, the philosophical tenet that requires that fat people be called horizontally challenged, short people to be called vertically challenged and the stupid to be called educationally challenged? I mean even if what Murtha said were true and the people of western Pennsylvania were racists, liberal sensitivity would require that he call those bigots racially challenged. But Nooooo, he doesn't even apply his own party's political correctness to his false charge. Murtha just comes right out and calls them rednecks. And that was his apology and explanation for calling them racists.

As of two weeks ago Murtha was coasting to re-election in his western Pennsylvania district. One poll had him at 57% while his closest opponent, a Washington County Commissioner, Diana Rey had 30%. I would hope that has changed since Murtha explained himself and concluded that his voters were not racists, just rednecks. If that early poll has not changed and the people of his district do re-elect him to his thirty fifth year as a congressman, than I have to tell you, those people in his district are not racists and they are not rednecks, they are buffoons! If Murtha represents their outlook, their sense of decency and logic than they should loosen their grip on the guns Obama has them clinging to, pick up their bibles and beat themselves over their heads with it. Maybe the good book could beat some sense into them.

If Murtha’s remarks and remarkable history are not enough for the people of his own district to vote him out of office, his comments have at least helped to do one thing. They have helped to put Pennsylvania in play for John McCain. Murtha has helped to point out the hypocrisy of liberals and the prejudices of Obama.

John Murtha has helped to remind people that racism is alive and well in the Democrat party and that they thrive on reverse discrimination. They need to play the victims or use the race card in an attempt to guilt people into voting for them. They apply double standards which do not cry foul when the preponderance of African-Americans vote for an African-American but they call it racism if a Caucasian dares to vote for a Caucasian.

All of these points have been highlighted by the comments of both Murtha and Obama and in doing so they have changed the playing field and put Pennsylvania in striking distance for McCain. So although I would not have had the McCain campaign spend too much in the way of time or resources in Pennsylvania, Obama’s and Murtha’s unconventional comments about western Pennsylvanians changes conventional thinking and requires McCain to go after the state and it’s citizens who have been disenfranchised and belittled by Murtha and Obama.

The Cannibal

A cannibal was walking through the jungle and came upon a restaurant operated by a fellow cannibal.

Feeling somewhat hungry, he sat down and looked over the menu...

Tourist: $5.00

Broiled Missionary: $10.00

Fried Explorer: $15.00

Baked Democrat or Grilled Republican: $100.00

The cannibal called the waiter over and asked, “Why such a price difference for the Politicians?”

The cook replied, “Have you ever tried to clean one? They're so full of crap, it takes all morning.”

Biden On Obama's Inevitable Crisis

So Barack Obama’s running mate has confirmed that within 6 months of a Barack Obama presidency, the nation will face one of it’s greatest foreign affairs crisis in history.
Biden implored voters to mark his words. In fact he stated “if you leave here remembering only one thing, remember this” that someone in the world will challenge Obama and test him out.
A comparison was even made to John F. Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis that brought confrontation between us and the former Soviet Union. It was a crisis that had all Americans holding their breath until Kruschev backed down and their deployment of missiles to Cuba was turned around.

Senator Biden's remark are greatly appreciated. They help to highlight the fact that we can not afford Barack Obama. He also reminds us that Barack Obama is no Jack Kennedy.
President Kennedy never agreed to unconditional negotiations with our enemies. He never vowed to raise taxes during tough economic times and he never promised to spread the wealth through Soviet style economic policies.

So given Barack Obama’s policy positions, the Cuban missile crisis is not an accurate comparison. Obama maintains none of the defensive thinking that Kennedy did. A more accurate comparison for Obama would be to Jimmy Carter. And a better example of how our enemies would react to his new administration is better exemplified by the man who defeated Jimmy Carter when he ran for re-election, Ronald Reagan.

Due to Ronald Reagan’s no nonsense foreign policy views, Iran set free the American hostages that Jimmy Carter could not bring home. The newly installed Islamic theocracy that overthrew The Shah of Iran with Carter’s urging, had the American hostages on a plane and outside of Iranian airspace at the exact moment that Ronald Reagan was sworn in as our new President.
Ronald Reagan’s promised aggressive defense of American interests contrasted Jimmy Carter’s tolerance for the intolerable. Knowing that, Iran avoided the expected reprisal that Reagan would have brought to them. It is an example of how our enemies will react to a policy that contains a bare knuckle message which indicates, that if you screw with us, you will be screwed.
Biden’s wholehearted knowledge of the fact that our enemies will test and challenge Obama with an historic national security crisis helps to hammer home this point to the electorate. It makes one wonder just how far our enemies will go in attempt to prove their point or humiliate what they call “the great Satan”, the United States.

What moves will they make in trying to see how deep the terrorist friendly policies of Obama are? How much leeway will Obama’s “friendly” policies give Iran if they give us a sincere explanation as to why the oil rich nation needs nuclear power or how much territory will Obama’s U.N. based faith allow Russia to reclaim despite the sovereignty of their neighbors?
With Obama as President, the liberal Axis of vulnerability is completed. Nancy Pelosi’s “tea with terrorists” foreign policy and Harry Reid’s “white flags of surrender” are perfectly complimented and advocated by a President Obama. It cements any doubts that our enemies may have in America’s resolve to stand up to them and their objectives.

Obama is no Jack Kennedy or Ronald Reagan, neither is John McCain but like Kennedy with communism and Reagan with terrorists, you know where he stands and so do our enemies. They need not question or test John McCain’s resolve.

So Biden’s statement promising a crisis that will be driven by our enemies doubts about him are probably accurate. In fact, according to the language Biden used to articulate the point, he is even more sure of it than I am. Who am I to doubt it? I am not Obama’s running mate. He is. It leads me to conclude that Biden knows Obama better than I do and so, on this one, I’ll take Biden’s word for it.

Barack Obama was seated next to a little girl on an airplane trip back to Washington. He turned to her and said, “Let’s talk. I’ve heard that flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger.”

The little girl, who had just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to The Obama, “What would you like to talk about?”

“Oh, I don’t know,” said the Obama. “How about What Changes I Should Make To America?” and he smiles.

“OK,” she says. “That could be an interesting topic. But let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?”
Obama, visibly surprised by the little girl’s intelligence, thinks about it for a second and finally says, “Hmmm, I have no idea.”

An Open Letter To Keith Olbermann and MSNBC

Dear Depraved, Liar:

I happened to see your low rated program “Countdown with Keith Olbermann”. I would have turned you off like most Americans do but I was curious. I wondered if you were as big a schmuck as I have been told you were. Like passing a car wreck on the Garden State Parkway, I just had to look and see if it was possible for a news station to be as irresponsible as I have been told NBC is.

Not only did I find that it was possible, I was stunned by the outright lies of the so called program you attempted to get through, and by the offensiveness of it all. For almost thirty minutes you polluted the air with disgusting innuendos, blatant lies, and the greatest amount of disinformation ever transmitted since Tokyo Rose tried to discourage American troops from carrying out their valiant missions to defend democracy. For me, you were even more offensive than Tokyo Rose. She was not an American. She was not operating under any rules of decency or fairness. You however, are, and yet you flout those qualities as if they were Sunday comic strips.

You conduct yourself in a way that strips any sense of integrity or decency away from NBC. It is no wonder why they have placed you on their sagging cable news outlet, MSNBC. It would also explain why MSNBC is sagging in the ratings.

What I do wonder about is how they can possibly keep putting you on any air?
You failed at your job, as a sportscaster, and somehow got utilized by NBC for delivering the news. Since then you proved incompetent and along with your sidekick, Chris Mathews, got booted from that job and now you are left only with your 30 minute appearance in a goofball, commentary segment.

After seeing your performance, I have concluded that you must be offering sexual favors to some important troll at NBC. It is the only apparent reason that anyone could possibly have for employing you.

On your program you lied exactly 13 times about John McCain and 9 times about Sarah Palin, the only two people your show discussed. Additionally, you called them racists and liars. In the past you have even accused John McCain of treason and through it all you never once made a reference to any facts.

Your despicable conduct, irrational behavior, prejudiced judgment and skewed logic has no place in an intelligent society.

Beyond that, the blatant hatred that you conveyed in your fairy tales, during this program, carried over. They conjured up the same sense of hatred for you that you aired for those who are not liberals, So much so that I must relay my own wishes for you.

After your despicable program, it is my deepest hope that you are blown out of your ivory tower and have your legs and arms broken as you fall to the earth where a group of wild thugs spit on you while punching and kicking you. Then, with almost every bone in your body broken, I sincerely hope they throw you into a New York City sewer for 5 years, where you are fed a piece of bread a day and left to drink the raw sewerage that flows around you. And through it all, I want NBC to repeatedly report, day after day, that for your efforts, you are being accused of turning your back on any and all sense of journalistic integrity and for treason to the United States.

You should be forced to endure the same conditions that the man you ridicule, belittle and lie about, endured in his service for our country.

But you, Mr. Olbermann, are not alone in the need for public denunciation. The corporate goons who afford you the opportunity to play the role of a modern day Tokyo Rose should pay even more dearly.

NBC’s dwindling ratings, due to mediocre programming, has been forcing them to scramble for survival for more than two years. Their hopes for MSNBC to help alleviate the suffering of it’s parent company has failed. MSNBC loses out to all other competitors and now they having trouble selling air time to advertisers. Circumstances such as this are not only expected, but their irresponsible conduct in airing people, such as yourself, makes these results well deserved.
NBC is allowing you to fan the flames of hatred. They are allowing you to exploit a polarized electorate by polarizing them even more. NBC is allowing you to plant the seeds of anger during one of our nations most important moments, a national election. IT is a time when we must all be responsible in determining the direction we will head in and yet NBC uses it as an opportunity to breed anger.

Mr. Olbermann, I write these things not in an attempt for ratings or the undeserved, lucrative paycheck that you receive, I write this to you because your behavior can not be ignored and because it should not be kept the great secret that your low ratings allow it to be. I write this because responsible people should take it upon themselves to denounce such conduct and demand that it not be rewarded. I also write this to let you know that through your lies, false accusations and deceit, your hateful objectives have achieved their goal. They have created anger, but that anger is not aimed at the targets you hoped. It is directed towards you.

Photobucket src="http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z53/kempite/Stars01.gif" border=0>

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. Congress said someone may steal from it at night; so they created a night watchman, GS-4 position, and hired a person for the job.

Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?" So they created a planning division and hired two (2) people, one person to write the instructions (GS-12) and one person to do time studies (GS-11).

Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?" So they created a quality control (QC) division and hired two (2) people, one (GS-9) to do the studies and one (GS-11) to write the reports.

Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So they created a payroll division with a time keeper (GS-9) and a payroll officer (GS-11), and hired two (2) people.

Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?" So they created an administrative division and hired three (3) people: an Admin Officer (GM-13), Assistant Admin Officer (GS-13), and a Legal Secretary (GS-8).

Then, one year later, Congress reviewed the operation of the desert scrap yard and said, "We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $18,000 over budget. We must cut back overall costs!" So they eliminated the night watchman.

Photobucket src="http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z53/kempite/Gun-Toting-McCain.jpg" border=0>

The Last Debate: SENATOR GOVERNMENT vs. JOE THE PLUMBER'S ADVOCATE

By far, this final debate, was the most productive of all in this season. It did not change an Obama voter into a McCain supporter or a McCain supporter into an Obama voter but it may have helped that small minority of undecided people in the electorate to inch closer to a decision and it is my opinion that many of them were swayed in McCain's direction. Not because John McCain is a Republican but because he is not a liberal.

In this final forum two America's were laid out. One was articulated by Senator Mcain where "Joe the plumber" lived a life of choice and opportunity that was unrestricted by government intrusion and limitation. The other was Barck Obama's America, where Joe the plumber's life was limited and directed by government.

Although Barack Obama was more eloquent in his description of his version of America, John McCain was more correct in his description.

McCain was able to articulate a direction in domestic policies that was rooted in the principles of a free society. A society that allows individuals to go in the direction that is best for them. Not in the direction that is dictated by government under the control of government bureaucrats.

This philosophical difference was perhaps best portrayed in a statement that was a slip up. A slip up that was probably the most accurate name that either side has yet called the other. It came from John McCain who accidentally referred to Barack Obama as "Senator Government".

McCain quickly corrected himself but the Freudian slip was out and the jury, in this case, cannot be asked to disregard the statement.

Senator Obama is Senator Government. He comes to us from a philosophy that believes government should do all that people should do for themselves. Barack Obama stems from the school of thought that believes government is the answer to all things. This type of thinking is more than wrong, it is dangerous. It leads to an expansion of government that grows into an endless bureaucracy that costs more money to operate than the problem it was created to solve. It is the type of thinking which requires two government agencies, and a third for oversight, to hire three people to change one light bulb.

This thinking was consistently displayed in Senator Obama's government solutions to such things as education and health care.

On health care Barack Obama proposed a government run bureaucracy that financially penalizes some so that government can demand to all, the type and amount of health care they can get.

John McCain offered a plan that allows government to make health care more affordable and gives you the freedom to choose the care you want. Senator McCain also addressed the need to focus on awareness and early physical education that helps people to avoid severe health conditions. Conditions such as obesity.

On education, Senator Obama rejected expanding school vouchers and increasing the chance for the natural raising of standards that comes with competition. He stated that vouchers were not a worthy effort because there weren't enough of them. Instead he proposed a litany of government run policies that would eliminate choice and limit opportunity.

Senator McCain made it clear that that which has worked should be expanded, including school choice and vouchers. He pointed out that such a program should not be eliminated because, as Obama put it, there were not enough them. But it should be implemented by creating more of them.

Through it all, "Joe the plumber" became the quintessential embodiment of both Senator's vision and the victim or benefactor of their policies..

In Barack Obama's America, Joe the plumber must pay the government more money so that he can be forced to educate his children the way the government wants, be forced to get the health care that the government limits him to and be forced to layoff people from his company and make less money because the government is taking more money.

In John McCain's America, Joe the plumber is allowed to keep more of the money he earns which gives him the ability to hire even more people. In John McCain's America, Joe spreads the wealth through freedom and his ability to increase his own wealth without the intrusion of government and it's fees. In McCain's America Joe the plumber can choose the kind of care he wants and the quality of the education that his children can receive.

So John McCain was right, Barack Obama is "Senator Government".

Barack Obama is a Senator who wants government to intrude into every aspect of every American's life. From their pockets to their education, Senator Government wants to govern it all and he wants to do it with a government that increases in size and spends more of your money.

Under "Senator Government", Joe the plumber is not safer, not richer or more free. He is just a tool of government. A tool that is used to fund it's bureaucracy and be restricted by it's regulations. Under Senator Government, Joe the plumber is not better he is just more controlled.

The only other point of real note in this final face-off was John McCain's reminder to "Senator Government" that if he "wanted to run against George Bush," he "should have done so four years ago." But beyond that clarification, this debate did make things a bit clearer and all the Joe the plumbers from Toledo to Texas and Seattle to Sarasota should surely know which America is the best America for them and everyone in between.

THE HOT TEMPERED SENATOR

A member of the Senate, known for his hot temper and acid tongue, explodes one day in mid-session and begins to shout, "Half of this Senate is made up of cowards and corrupt politicians!"

All the other Senators plead to the angry member that he withdraw his statement, or be removed from the remainder of the session. After a long pause, the angry member accepted.

"Ok," he said, "I withdraw what I said. Half of this Senate is NOT made up of cowards and corrupt politicians!"

BARACK CARTER AND JIMMY OBAMA

In 1976 Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter campaigned for President by preaching “change” and urging Americans to “clean out Washington”. The peanut farmer turned one term southern governor, eked out a relatively close victory. After Watergate, Americans fell for the freshness of Carter’s appearance on the national stage. Some even liked the fact that he spoke about his evangelical Christian faith and even more believed in his mantra for change.

Well they got that change. It came in the form of one of the most dismal economic times in our nation’s history since the Great Depression. It was the type of change that brought about double digit inflation and unemployment rates, out of control interest rates, long lines for gas, higher taxes, stagflation and even a new economic index….the misery index. The change he brought us was what Carter himself called “a national malaise”.

Change also came in foreign affairs. Here, America’s standing in the world was reduced to one of empty words, no influence and utter humiliation.

In Carter’s pursuit of human rights, he supported overthrowing the Shah of Iran who was friendly to the United States. That led to the Shah being overthrown and replaced with the Islamic theocracy that is still our enemy today. It also resulted in their taking over of the American embassy and humiliating the United States by holding American citizens hostage.

When Soviet backed revolutionaries killed Adolph Dubbs, our Ambassador to Afghanistan, and began the march to invade Afghanistan, Carter was powerless and reduced to being a mere spectator.

Carter’s friendly, pearly white smile projected sincerity and confidence. He was seen as the change we needed, a change for the sake of change. What we got was a nation that needed it’s economy rebuilt, our military rebuilt and a direction in foreign affairs that stood up to our enemies and allowed the United States to change the events in the world rather than be changed by the events. A direction that allowed us to shape history rather than be sidelined as a witness to history.

Carter believed that we needed to give our enemies a chance to vaildate their conduct and the opportunity to negotiate acceptance of their unacceptable actions. He tried to negotiate the release of our citizens by Iranian Islamic radicals who had no reason or willingness to negotiate their release and give up their ability to humiliate America. It was a humiliation that we endured until the very moment that Ronald Reagan was sworn in as the new American President. It was only then that the Iranians suddenly feared military reprisal from the new Commander and Chief.

Jimmy Carter came out of nowhere and stepped on to the national stage. The novelty of his newness and his attempts to be everything that everyone wanted won him the Democratic nomination and eventually the White House. It was a victory that took decades for us to overcome and in many ways it’s negative effects have helped blossom into some of the major international conflicts that we face today.

Enter Barack Obama, a community activists turned state senator and junior United States Senator from Illinois. His newness is refreshing to many and he is campaigning on “change”.
Much like Carter, Obama’s sense of change in the economy is rooted in Carter’s philosophy of raising taxes on some and redistributing it to others. It is a policy that leads to a reinventing of the misery index, higher unemployment and an unraveling of the economy that goes well beyond Wall Street and directly to the kitchen tables of every American family.

Obama preaches the virtues of reaching negotiated agreements with our enemies. He has called for unconditional talks with our enemies and discounts the fact that we should not negotiate intolerable conduct and that which is unacceptable. Like Carter he, promotes a tolerance for the behavior of others even though their behavior is akin to poking a finger in our eye.

I would suggest that our enemies must be compelled to stop poking us in the eye before we look them in the eye and negotiate any agreed upon deals. But Obama and Carter want to reward bad behavior.

They may be different people but they have the same mind when it comes to policy.
Perhaps one of the greatest similarities between Carter and Obama comes in the form of their own words.

In July of 1979: Carter said:

“I ask Congress to give me authority for mandatory conservation and for standby gasoline rationing. . . . And I’m asking you for your good and for your Nation’s security to take no unnecessary trips, to use carpools or public transportation whenever you can, to park your car one extra day per week, to obey the speed limit, and to set your thermostats to save fuel. Every act of energy conservation like this is more than just common sense — I tell you it is an act of patriotism.”

In May of this year, Obama said:

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK.”

There is nothing wrong with conservation. It is something that even in the best of times we should all employ. However, Obama and Carter’s use of conservation in addressing problems neglected to point out that there are things that government can do to keep up with the needs of it’s people. Both remarks are a strange twist on J.F.K.’s call to “ask not what your country can do for you but what you could do for your country”. It is their way of saying….. ask not what your elected officials should do for America, but what you have to do because your elected officials refuse to do what is right.

Rather than allow government to lift it’s bans on access to natural resources, they tell us to fill our tires with more air and drive less. Rather than trying to solve our problems, Carter and Obama tell us to just deal with the problems that they are a part of.

On foreign affairs, instead of telling our enemies that certain conduct must cease before we negotiate any agreement, they suggest that we will negotiate an acceptance of their reprehensible behavior.

These are roads that we have been down before. Both men are partisan liberals with instinctual liberal tendencies. Both men ran for President at time when they had little experience and no substantial records of accomplishment. Carter was the fresh face that would be the agent of change that we needed and now Barack Obama is the messiah that will be the new agent of change that we need. It sounds good, but history repeats itself and the nice sound of change that Obama offers is an echo of the same change that Jimmy Carter offered us. It’s the type of change that America can not afford and it is the type of change that voters can help prevent our nation from repeating only if we understand the similarities between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.

Clinton & Pearly Gates

When Bill Clinton was put under during his heart surgery he saw himself at the at the Pearly Gates.

After knocking at the gates, St. Peter appeared. "Who goes there?" inquired St. Peter.

"It's me, Bill Clinton."

"And what do you want?" asked St. Peter.

"Lemme in!" replied Clinton.

"Soooo," pondered Peter.

"What bad things did you do on earth?"

Clinton thought a bit and answered, "Well, I smoked marijuana but you shouldn't hold that against me because I didn't inhale. I guess I had extra-marital sex -- but you shouldn't hold that against me because I didn't really have 'sexual relations.' And I lied, but I didn't commit perjury."

After several moments of deliberation St. Peter replied, "OK, here's the deal. We'll send you someplace where it is very hot, but we won't call it 'Hell.' You'll be there for an indefinite period of time, but we won't call it 'eternity.' And don't abandon all hope upon entering, just don't hold your breath waiting for it to freeze over."

HOW TO MAKE THE LAST DEBATE MATTER

The next debate is a final opportunity for both presidential candidates. It is their last chance to have all Americans focused in both of their candidacies at the same time. The last chance for any impromptu reactions or unscripted responses that help give any indication of the natural instincts which the next President possesses.

From hereon, after the debate, every word uttered, by either side, will be rehearsed, poll tested and formatted with precision. That is the nature of modern day politics and whether we like it or not, that’s the way it is. Even the debate will be as scripted as possible. The candidates and their responses have been programmed to the very best abilities of their campaign organizations.

The likely as well as the unlikely questions that might be asked in this debate have already been raised by each respective side behind closed doors. The candidates have practiced a response to those questions that polls have indicated to be popular with the people or segments of the electorate that each candidate is targeting.

So despite the excitement over the perceived opportunity for spontaneity during a debate, there is very little in the way of spontaneous, unscripted reactions during them. Even those answers which may seem off the cuff or spontaneous are rehearsed. In fact, modern day political debates are conducted in such a way that the greatest challenge to each candidate is finding the right opportunity and moment to answer a question with certain, rehearsed talking points that they want to give air time to. This makes the question asked less than something which must be answered and more an opportunity to fit I a charge or provocative point that polls shows hits home with the sector of the electorate that one candidate or the other needs to appeal to.
Given these points and seeing as how none of the previous debates in this election shed new light on the perspectives of either man running for President, what in this final debate could possibly be asked and make a real difference? A difference in the minds of voters? What question and or it’s answer could change the minds of people with strongly held opinions of the candidates for President?

The way this election and it’s debates have gone so far, I do not think there is any question or answer that can achieve such a goal.

All except for one.

In this last official debate, I believe the most important and valuable thing that Bob Schieffer, the moderator, can do or say is:

“Senator Obama, Senator McCain,…I can ask you about the economy. I can ask you for specifics regarding foreign affairs, homeland security, immigration education or your reasons for choosing the your running mates but I wont. Instead I am going to ask you to ask your opponent a question.”

I would like to see the candidates have to ask each other two questions on the economy, two questions on issues dealing with foreign affairs, and two each on energy and immigration. If each candidate came into this forum expecting to just answer questions, it would be interesting to see how Obama and McCain would react and how they would use the opportunity. Would they use this rare and valuable chance to pull off a political gotcha or would they use it as an opportunity to shed new light on policy differences and their directions for our nation?

Would they use the opportunity for political exploitation or honest issue and policy clarification?
In some cases, they the type of question they ask could be even more telling and important than the answers given to those questions asked.

Reality dictates that this type of mutual candidate query will not take place but Bob Schieffer can still give John McCain and Barack Obama the chance to ask one question of each other.
Being limited to only asking one question could be even more telling. It would give a true sense of what is most important in the mind of the questioner. Are they more concerned with a politically driven questions that is geared towards electoral politics? Or are they more concerned with the issues facing the people of our nation who do not divide themselves up by class, race, religion, orientation or party affiliation? You know, the average, non-political citizen who calls themselves an American.

This final debate is suppose to be dedicated to foreign affairs. That’s quite an important issue and one that deals with the most essential, constitutional responsibility of our government. Yet, given the information produced from the past few debates, I expect no new information or mind changing explanations to come out of this one too. Surprising the candidates with a chance to ask one question of one another might provide one of the most insightful moments in this entire election to date.

A little boy wanted $100 badly and prayed for two weeks but nothing happened.

Then he decided to write GOD a letter requesting the $100.

When the postal authorities received the letter addressed to GOD USA, they decided to send it to President Bush.

The President was so impressed, touched, and amused that he instructed his secretary to send the little boy a $5.00 bill

President Bush thought this would appear to be a lot of money to a little boy.

The little boy was delighted with the $5.00 and sat down to write a thank you note to GOD, which read:

Dear GOD,
Thank you very much for sending the money, however, I noticed that for some reason you had to send it through Washington D.C. and, as usual, those idiots deducted $95.00!

Submitted by boloo2

LEAD BY EXAMPLE - NAME MITT ROMNEY TREASURY SECRETARY

In an earlier post I presented a campaign strategy for McCain to pursue . It included a number of sub themes to hit upon in addition to a homestretch strategy that laid out a schedule of releasing a new policy initiative on some of the most important issues facing us and to present them every other day. This would help McCain to control the news cycles rather than be controlled by them. It would also allow Americans to see the kind of President that he could be rather than see how well or poorly he can campaign for President
.

As we all know, the economy is the issue dominating our minds at the moment. In light of that, if McCain were to use the strategy that I have previously proposed, he should present an economic stabilization package.

If I were managing his campaign I would assemble his economic team and hammer out the details. Then I would have that package carefully reviewed. Weigh the pro and cons, rip it apart to the same extent that Barack Obama would and be prepared to tear down and disprove those criticisms.

Once that has been done, give the media six hours notice and present the following press release.

At this press conference, as alluded to in the release, John McCain should start off by explaining how we got to where we are today. Outline the lack of responsibility practiced by the government, the unethical practices of private sector loaning practices and the lack of personal responsibility that many Americans have exercised.

McCain should use this press conference to signal his intention to gear us in a new direction. A direction that forces our society to deal more with hard money than fake and speculated money. A direction that focuses on what we have more than what we don’t have and living within our means as opposed to beyond our means.

State that such a direction begins by example with our own government.

From that point on, get into the details of the stabilization package. Outline initiatives which explain budget cuts. Call for a legislative reform of the process which allows unassociated riders to be placed on bills which produce wasteful pork barrel spending and funding for things that have nothing to do with the bills that they are attached.

Outline the tax cuts which will stimulate the economy, help to increase employment and grow our economy.

Senator McCain shod also announce an executive order that would put a halt to the long standing Clinton National Homeownership initiative which forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to enter into hundreds of thousands of sub prime, high risk loans. Loans which helped to inflate the housing bubble that recently burst because it was over inflated by extending loans to people who could not afford to pay them back.

There are several other aspects to an appropriate stabilization package that must be announced as a part of this proposal and after doing so John McCain needs to tie the package up with a ribbon that makes his initiatives more than acceptable but hopeful.

He should announce that Mitt Romney will be the person who will implement this package and oversee the treasury of our nation as John McCain’s secretary of the United States Treasury.
This would be seen by some as cocky. To present a cabinet before you have the house you will put them in may seem unusual but in this case it is more than appropriate. In this case it is a move that doesn’t leave Americans open to surprises. The man running against John Obama is full of surprises. He has no record of accomplishments for us to get a sense of what he would do and he is associated with some of the most corrupt, shady and dangerous characters that politics has to offer.

From fundraiser and friend, convicted slum lord Tony Rezko to racist, American hating Rev. Wright and domestic terrorist William Ayers, one must wonder who and Obama will bring into his cabinet. What kind of people would he have steer our economy?

This is John McCain’s opportunity to be bold and upfront. Leave no doubt in in the minds of Americans about John McCain’s judgment. Announce his economic team. Put forward names like Carly Fiorna of Hewlette-Packard and Meg Whitman of Ebay. Suggest a position for Michael Bloomberg. Tell us who your director of the Office of Management and Budget would be and declare Mitt Romney as the chief financial director of our nation.

Mitt Romney understand s how the economy works. He has operated under budgets both as a head of state and CEO. He has created wealth in the private sector, grown business and economies. He has increased employment in both the state that he ran and the companies he helped to build.

Additionally, Mitt Romney has never failed at any responsibility given to him. He took a corruption strewn, beleaguered Olympics in Salt Lake City that was losing money and turned it around . He made it one of the most secure, smooth running and profitable Olympic spectaculars in history.

He took the state of Massachusetts and overcame it’s Taxachusettes moniker by lowering taxes and meeting budgets.

Mitt Romney has never led a business into bankruptcy and required a government bailout or exited from the stage with a golden parachute. He grew businesses and helped others to grow their own. All in all Mitt Romney has been a solution to problems not a part of the problems and that is what we need . It is what McCain needs and any future President needs.

Therefore McCain should be bold. He should not only use this campaign to outline his direction, he should make public, the names of the people who will help him carry out that direction when he is President.

A guy was lost in the mall at the Washington Monument.

He stopped a cop and asked, "What side is the State Department on ?"

To which the cop answered, "Ours, I hope."

OBAMAGATE - BARACK OBAMA CAMPAIGNING FOR A COMMUNIST KENYAN COUSIN

This is a tale of two campaigns. An honest tale that involves a young, newly elected United States Senator named Barack Obama and a Kenyan cousin from the African Luo tribe named Raila Odinga.

Obama took his family on what was an official United States “fact finding mission” to Kenya in 2006. What facts were to be found on this taxpayer funded expedition are not clear to me, but they are also unimportant when compared to the facts about the trip itself.

While there, Barack Obama not only found facts he found a candidate that wanted his support.

That candidate was his cousin, Raila Odinga, the leader of Kenya’s largest opposition party. A socialist party called the Orange Democratic Movement and Raila Odinga was the ODM’s nominee for President.

Odinga is the son of the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga , the former Kenyan communist opposition leader. Before the end of the Cold War , he was educated in the communist nation of, what at the time, was called East Germany. He even named his eldest son after Cuba’s communist leader, Fidel Castro.

All of this gives you a clue as to where Raila Odinga’s political allegiances lie, at least it would to most people, but not to Barack Obama.

No, apparently Barack didn’t know, or if he did, he didn’t care because Obama decided to go out and campaign for Odinga. This sitting United States Senator actually used the money of American taxpayers for a trip in which he campaigned for another nation’s President. Not only that, but all along the way, at each and every campaign event for Odinga, Barack Obama handed out American flags with his own face imprinted on them.

Now, the more liberal among us might, at this point be saying “so?.”

If you are wondering what the big deal is, let me spell it out for you.

Barack Obama used a taxpayer funded, government sanctioned, fact finding trip to campaign for a presidential nominee in another country. Not only was that wrong, it was poor judgment, especially when you consider the fact that the candidate he campaigned for was the communist leader of a socialist party.

But it goes much deeper than that.

Ralia Odinga did not win his election. He ran a campaign that oddly enough was quite similar to the one that Obama is running now. Official ODM campaign documents, which were shared with Obama, run with the themes of change and hope, among other things.

Odinga lost by 231,728 votes. Out of about 9 million votes cast, it was a close race but a defeat nonetheless. However, Odinga did not accept the results of the election. Instead he actually called for demonstrations which led to ethnic warfare. In regards to Raila Odinga’s efforts, the group Human Rights Watch stated there is “evidence that the ODM formented post election violence” and as a result thousands were killed and more were injured and displaced.

Because of Odinga’s refusal to accept the results of the election, his tribal faction participated in an ethnic cleansing of the Kikuyu opposition and Christians who did not support Odinga. With chants of “No Raila, No Peace“, a church was even overtaken and it’s inhabitants beaten and stabbed and left to burn as they set it on fire. Those who were able to flee were tracked down and killed.

The violence raged on for weeks until the duly elected President, Mwai Kibaki caved in and in an attempt to save his people, entered into a persuading arrangement in which Kibaki kept the title of President but Odinga was named prime Minister.

Since then the conditions have been tenuous. And the two have agreed to split the selection of cabinet ministers but Odinga has been operating on his own and those actions have not been in the best of democracy. In August of 2007 Odinga signed an agreement with the National Muslim Forum. In exchange for their support he vowed to end Kenya’s support with the U.S. in the war On Terror.

All of this begs to question why Barack Obama used taxpayer’s money in an attempt promote Raila Odinga’s elevation to President of Kenya? How could he use a government sanctioned event to elect a communist leader to a nation that was allied with us in the War On Terror? The issue calls into question, not only his judgment, but his ethics.

There are some quarters, which I am not among, that call into question whether or not this would-be-President of the United States ’s actions for Odinga, violated the law and if he should be indicted.

The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 [1948]) prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization. That being the case one, must now ask, what arrangement was made between Raila Odinga and Barack Obama?

I do not see this as meeting the legal standards of an impeachable offense that could strip Obama of his senate seat, but others do. Such a determination, in my opinion, would hinge on the fact that at the time, any arrangement that Obama made with Odinga cannot be construed as one being conducted with “the nation” (of Kenya), as explained in the Logan Act. Odinga was not President at the time. He was only running for President so I do not believe that it can be said Obama negotiated or made a deal with Kenya.

Even if my determination is correct and the Logan Act does not apply to this case, my greatest concern is Barck Obama becoming President Obama. As President, will he carry out the same kind of judgment that he did in endorsing Ralia Odinga for President of Kenya? Will Obama apologize for working to put a murderous despot like Ralia Odinga into power? And even if he did, can we trust that he will not take the side of those who enter into opposition of freedom and the United States?

I have consistently repeated that Barack Obama has no record of accomplishment. Well I was wrong. From unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers to Raila Odinga, Barack Obama has a consistent record of tying himself to those who work against America. To those whom oppose all that we represent and strive for. Barack Obama has a consistent record of being wrong and if you want proof, all you have to do is look to Kenya and Raila Odinga.