Sunday, December 21, 2008


Rick Warren says: "You Don't Have To See Eye To Eye To Walk Hand In Hand"

But that is not what God’s Word says:

Can two walk together, unless they are agreed? Amos 3:3

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matthew 7:13-15 KJV

With Rick Warren selling out to the Obama administration, and, yes, I mean selling out because it is, in the eyes of the World, his acceptance of the invitation for the prayer at the “coronation” is an endorsement of Obama who stands openly for abortion and the gay agenda as well. Warren’s failure to condemn Obama’s stand on abortion amounts to agreement.

I say this just as I stated it was true with TD Jakes who was present at the Saddleback meeting when Obama was asked about abortion, and he foolishly replied that it was above his pay grade. TD Jakes, a pastor of a predominately Black congregation in Dallas, Texas, sold out by not condemning Obama. Instead, he chose to “let it slide,” thus, giving the impression that he stood in agreement with Obama’s stand on abortion. TD Jakes endorsed ethnic genocide, yet, remains in high standing among the “Christian” community as well as the Black community across the nation.

In the news currently, one of the so-called leaders of the NAE seems to agree and now must step down, and I must add, none too soon. ( See article below)

When so-called Christian leaders fail to take a stand against the world, then what is the world to think about Christians.

Is it any wonder that Christians are laughed at and criticized as hypocrites, which in such cases as presented are evidently a true reflection?

Selling out for gain is certainly not what Jesus had in mind.

For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Mark 8:36

If you are not outraged by the actions of these so-called leaders, then I suggest that something is wrong in your thinking.

If you think that one can straddle the fence on these issues, then understand what Jesus has to say about those who are lukewarm. In Revelation 3:15-16, He is very adamant about such and spoke so to the church at Laodicea.

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

There is but one path that Christians can follow and that is the path of the teachings of Jesus. Jesus didn’t say that there are many paths to follow, but one and only one. "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John 14:6

How much clearer can the Word be, yet we have so-called leaders who do not adhere to what Jesus has said.

A son honors his father, And a servant his master. If then I am the Father, Where is My honor? And if I am a Master, Where is My reverence? Says the LORD of hosts To you priests who despise My name. Yet you say, ‘In what way have we despised Your name?’
Malachi 1:5-7

Someday an answer must be given, not only by these leaders but by all. Where will you stand?


Evangelical leader resigns amid controversial comments

Jim Brown and Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 12/12/2008 7:00:00 AMBookmark and Share

The controversial Washington lobbyist for the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) has resigned after he created a stir by expressing support for homosexual civil unions.

Richard Cizik has resigned as vice president for governmental affairs for the NAE. In a statement to NAE board members, acting president Leith Anderson cited "a loss of trust in his [Cizik's] credibility as a spokesperson among leaders and constituencies."

On December 2, Cizik acknowledged -- during an interview on National Public Radio's Fresh Air -- that he voted for Barack Obama in the Virginia primary, and suggested that Christians should not be afraid to vote for candidates who support abortion and same-sex "marriage." He also admitted on that broadcast that he was "shifting" on the issue of marriage and that he supports homosexual civil unions.

In addition, Cizik has found himself at odds with most evangelicals on the issue of global warming, which he believes is a climate crisis created by human activity.

Mark Tooley with the Washington-based Institute on Religion & Democracy welcomes Cizik's departure from the NAE. "Cizik has been very outspoken and in some ways 'off the reservation' for the last five or six years in terms of his global warming activism, which the board of NAE had initially somewhat disavowed -- but that had not discouraged him," he notes.

"So it left the impression that the board and the president of NAE were somewhat passive and that Richard Cizik pretty much could say and do almost whatever he wanted to do in Washington. But clearly that was not the case -- at least this time."

Tooley says Cizik's support for same-sex civil unions appears to be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

Reaction to Cizik's comments
In an interview before Cizik resigned, Tooley said he found it especially troubling that Cizik would consider the issue of same-sex marriage an evolving one for evangelicals, and in particular, younger evangelicals.

"The National Association of Evangelicals has official positions strongly supporting traditional marriage and opposing same-sex marriage, and certainly by implication same-sex civil unions," he pointed out. "So it seemed to be a very clear case where Cizik was ignoring the very obvious and official positions of his own organization, for which he is supposed to be the chief spokesman and lobbyist in Washington."

Tooley was not alone in his criticism. Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, considered Cizik's views to be "not anywhere close to biblical orthodoxy, traditional Christian theology, nor the bulk of Evangelicals who ground their faith in the Bible." She suggested that may be why the NAE vice president shared them on a forum to which most of his supposed "constituents" do not listen.

At least one Christian radio commentator delivered some biting criticism of Cizik in the wake of his remarks, suggesting that the NAE officer's comments are one of the reasons for the moral decay in America. "The moral anarchy in America worsens daily largely do the refusal of evangelical Christians to stand for biblical truth in all areas of life," said Ingrid Schlueter, co-host of Crosstalk America. "Those who are at war with God, the author of life, should be publicly confronted by evangelical Christians. Instead, they are aided and abetted in their evil by craven leaders like Cizik."

Earlier this week, The Christian Post published an interview with NAE acting president Leith Anderson, who suggested that listeners were confused by Cizik's words. His vice president's comments, Anderson admitted, "did not appropriately reflect the positions of the [NAE] and its constituents. Our...stand on marriage, abortion, and other biblical values is long, clear, and unchanged."

(Perhaps if Anderson is confused by very direct statements made by Cizik then he should step aside as well. )

TIME magazine had named Cizik one of its top 100 most influential people in the world for 2008.

ADDENDUM on Rick Warren:

I was scrolling the Yahoo web and ran across this article by Mellisa Etheridge in which she tells about her conversation with Rick Warren. If there was ever a question about this man "selling out", compromising his beliefs for the sake of a few moments of fame in the national spotlight on inauguration day this will certain cause one to put all doubt aside. Rick Warren has bowed to the "golden idol " of secular progressivism . Here is what Ethridge had to say about that conversation: "I told my manager to reach out to Pastor Warren and say "In the spirit of unity I would like to talk to him." They gave him my phone number. On the day of the conference I received a call from Pastor Rick, and before I could say anything, he told me what a fan he was. He had most of my albums from the very first one. What? This didn't sound like a gay hater, much less a preacher. He explained in very thoughtful words that as a Christian he believed in equal rights for everyone. He believed every loving relationship should have equal protection. He struggled with proposition 8 because he didn't want to see marriage redefined as anything other than between a man and a woman. He said he regretted his choice of words in his video message to his congregation about proposition 8 when he mentioned pedophiles and those who commit incest. He said that in no way, is that how he thought about gays. He invited me to his church, I invited him to my home to meet my wife and kids. He told me of his wife's struggle with breast cancer just a year before mine....."

A son honors his father, And a servant his master. If then I am the Father, Where is My honor? And if I am a Master, Where is My reverence? Says the LORD of hosts To you priests who despise My name. Yet you say, ‘In what way have we despised Your name?’

A lot of folks would like to hear your answer Rick!

Monday, December 8, 2008

A Christmas Message

I am "borrowing" the content for this Blog. I have actually used this passage of scripture as a Christmas message in years gone by. My Pastor and I seem to run on the same track about some things so he will not mind my "borrowing" his words for this season's message. I hope that each of you will take away the true meaning of this message and realize that this is indeed what the Father did when He sent His Son to this world. The question , as in the message, is how will you decide to treat the Son?

To each and everyone of you my family and I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a Blessed New Year.

Mark 12:1-8 (NIV)
He then began to speak to them in parables: “A man planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. 2 At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. 3 But they seized him, beat him and sent him away empty-handed. 4 Then he sent another servant to them; they struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. 5 He sent still another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they beat, others they killed. 6 “He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 7 “But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ 8 So they took him and killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard.

As I was reading this passage thinking of Jesus coming into his Father’s vineyard 2000 years ago on that first Christmas, one phrase jumped off the page at me. It was the father’s statement – surely, if I send my son, “They will respect my son.”

It made me think of our celebration of Christmas in this country. You see what’s going on. Political correctness has taken over and, just like in the parable, we don’t respect the Son.

My pastoral prayer( and mine) for you this Christmas season is that you and I would be different than the other tenants. Not only would we respect the Son, we’d welcome him.

God bless you this week,

Pastor Jim

And I add my blessing to that for each of you. Again I thank each and everyone of you who have supported me and my family with your prayers. I am progressing well and growing stronger each day.

Monday, November 24, 2008

How Soon We Forget

"Every time that we try to lift a problem from our own shoulders, and shift that problem to the hands of the government, to the same extent we are sacrificing the liberties of our people." --John F. Kennedy

Looking at what is happening today, I don’t believe I need to write additional commentary.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Standing In Victory

“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come ... give glory, honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne and who lives for ever and ever ...” (from Revelation 4:8-9).

The surgery is complete as some may have heard by now, and it was successful, praise be to God. All of the cancer was removed, and there had been no spreading as was thought possible very early on given the aggressiveness of this type cancer. I will not have to undergo chemo or radiation. By His stripes I was healed. Let there be no doubt, God is still in the healing business, and He does not promise us one thing today and change with the wind tomorrow. I am still somewhat weak and have bouts of nausea from the antibiotics that I am taking over the course of the next two weeks. I will not be back at the keyboard on a daily basis or even a very regular basis except perhaps to check mail and to read some of your blogs as I can. Hopefully, within the next two weeks I will be able to begin commenting on your blogs and return to my own blog, but as it stands right now, I am a bit weak and unable to sit for more than just short periods of time. I do look forward to the time that I can return in full strength.

I thank all of you who have lifted me up in your prayers and your thoughts. It was almost overwhelming to read the comments and e-mails from all of you and even from many whom I had no previous contact. Again, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. My family also sends along their thanks for your prayers and thoughts of them during this time. God has sustained them and strengthened them daily, just as He promised in His Word.

Once again, thank you, and may God bless you with His peace, joy, and love and may you prosper in all that you do.


Friday, November 7, 2008


I want to take time to thank each of you who have read my blog, contributed by way of comments or perhaps just passed it along. I have enjoyed this year of blogging and have met a lot of great folks through these blogs. I have met only a handful of you but I feel as if I have known all of you for many years and I hope that we have become friends, friends who have never met but so be it. Perhaps one day we shall meet, if not here perhaps around His throne where we will be rejoice and be filled with praises for ever and ever.

I will be absent from this blog for sometime. How long I am not sure yet but it may be several weeks, I certainly hope not.

I will be entering the hospital and having surgery on Monday. I was diagnosed with a very aggressive form of cancer about three weeks or so ago but have chosen not to speak of it until now. I was standing in faith( and still am) that the cancer would be gone just as the lymphoma that I was diagnosed with in 2003 was healed by the Great Physician. This time no miracle has manifested yet and I perhaps must undergo the surgery with out divine intervention between now and Monday morning.

I trust that it this will be used as a witness for the Almighty and that His hand will be seen in and after the surgery. We, my family and I, are trusting in the Lord that the cancer will be removed and there will be no need for the radiation and chemo that usually follows this type of surgery and cancer. I ask that you stand in a prayer of agreement with us in this matter.

I have a very low immune system due to medication that I take for various complications, some from injuries received while in the military and for exposure to Agent Orange. This has increased the chance of complications, infection, pneumonia, and such to a very high risk level. The surgery will take about 5 hours or so they are telling me unless they run into something unexpected. I will covet your prayer during this time and prayers for my family that they may have the strength to stand regardless of the outcome. I will just continue to trust in the Lord and I know that I am in His hands and that He is in control of all things, great and small.

I will ask that someone from the family post the results on my blog and I will trust in Him that I will be re-joining you all in a matter of a short period of time.

I speak Blessings, Peace, Comfort and Joy over each of you and pray that God will keep all of you safe in His hands. For those who do not have a personal relationship with Him, I would hope that you will find it in your heart to turn to Him and put you trust and life in His hands.

Jesus said, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. The first thing necessary is to admit that you are a sinner, Second: believe that Jesus died for your sins, was buried and rose again and now sits on the right hand of the Father and Third: confess that He is Lord and King of your life. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

That is as easy as I can explain it. I call it as easy as ABC , Admit, Believe, Confess. By doing this if we should never meet here we will certainly meet in the here after.

Thursday, November 6, 2008


I wrote this article back before the 06 elections. I feel that it bears a repeat with some minor adjustments here and there to bring it up to date. In fact what I am proposing is something that I have been proposing for a number of years. In the past I used newspaper blogs and letters to the editor to get this message out. It was ignored or paid very little attention until 06 when I began to receive inquiries about this subject from people located in eleven different states. I feel it is even more important today ,given the results of the recent elections, than at any other time in our history.

When I originally wrote on this subject I called it REVOLUTION. Today I call it CHANGE WE NEED but I have not changed the meaning of the message. I ask that you read and take time to think about what is written and if you feel so inclined leave your comments.

There is more than one way to have a revolution, an uprising against the government. One that includes violence as the manner in which to overthrow would certainly be put down in a heartbeat if not before it started.

The best manner in which to form an uprising against the government is through the ballot box. Unfortunately too many can only manage to pull the lever marked R or D depending on how uniformed they are . Others are so lazy they can only talk about the government but are too lazy to get off the couch and go to the polls and vote. Ah, but that still does not solve the problem. To insure success of such an uprising the individuals going to the polls must be educated and aware of the issues needing changed and unfortunately the majority in this country are neither aware nor educated enough to even recognize the issue. We certainly saw this in this election and have the proof standing in the form of an empty suit, unqualified and unfit ready to be sworn into office in January.

I have stated often that one way of changing or overthrowing, if you wish to use such a term, the government was through term limits for Congress. By limiting the time elected officials can spend in government we also limit their power. We limit the ability those who seek to control the elected by limiting the time these manipulators have to bring enough pressure or money to bear in order to control the elected. When We The People control the elected instead of the other way around as it has gotten to be then and only then can true change in government occur.

True uprising is "We The People" control the elected instead of the elected controlling us.

Now if you wish to be part of that uprising, I suggest you educate yourself not only on term limits but on the other issues at hand in this country and not the "so-called" issues that all the parties wish We The People to be focuses on. The elect wish to keep power and in order to do so they must invent "issues" such as gay marriage, stem cell research, abortion, capital punishment, Katrina failures, etc etc etc. When they get We The People" focused on those non- issues then they can continue to do their mischief totally unimpeded. Of course now they have the economy which they will certainly use and invent problems that are not the real problems so they can spend and waste on what they wish and call it for the good of the people and disguise it behind a non-issue. They can continue to ignore the fact that this country needs alternative energy as they have done for the past 40 plus years which will in turn create more jobs. They can continue to ignore the fact that SS is broken and needs fixing, same as they have done for the past 30 years. They can continue to ignore that this country is becoming more and more Balkanized by the day as they have done for the past 20 plus years. They can continue to ignore the fact that this country is slowly being de-sovereignized ( not sure this is a word but it sure fits) with every so called agreement and treaty made through the UN but then they have done this for the past 60 years.

When "We The People" stop being hypnotized by the “so called issues " which the politicians wish us to concentrate on and demand action on real issues then we will have true uprising.

I am and have been for some time a strong advocate of Term Limits, for both the Senate and the House. It is a travesty to allow those who do nothing to be re-elected over and over so they can continue to do nothing. The time has come to clean house in Washington, and if they will not pass a bill to begin Term Limits, then “We the People” can insure their limited terms at the ballot box until we can elect those who will do the will of the people.

I have been told that this is near impossible and given the make-up of the House and Senate it would be impossible but there appears to be a way of circumventing the Constitutional Amendment that would be needed to change the term limits, and that is for the States to place limits on how long they will allow their representatives to serve. If it can be applied to the Electoral College, it can be applied to the Congress.

It’s time for a change, I agree, but I contend that the change must begin with Congress. Term Limits would certainly play a major role in reducing the do-nothingness of the Congress we have now.

Obama said the during one of his TV moments in the campaign, that to change the country, we have to change Washington. It was a good sound bite but one of the few things he has said that makes sense. In order to change Washington we need to start with Congress. As long as the power-hungry, money-hungry, do-nothing career politicians are allowed to continue to sit on their back sides and continue their overpaid, under worked careers, Washington will never change.

The choice and opportunity for uprising has been right in our face for years now but we have gotten lazier, more complacent, and less educated on the issues and believed the drivel of "let us fix it for you". If you want a real uprising, read over and over again what has been presented and see if there is not a true formula for real uprising contained here. If you wish to sit back and go along with the flow then ignore this post.

ADDENDUM: BB had a great post which certainly points out another good reason for term limits. You can read about it here:

Congressmen Who Rule


Wednesday, November 5, 2008

The War Is Not Over

Once again I step aside and allow Mark Alexander of Patriot Post to speak. Read well what he has written and then follow his advise.


Fellow Patriots,

Tuesday, 4 November 2008, is a date which will live in infamy. While most presidential elections are followed with calls for unity by both candidates, Barack Obama issued no such call in his speech last night, with the possible exception of his observation, "I may not have won your vote tonight, but ... I will be your president, too."

Of course, none was expected -- liberals have elected a Socialist with deep ties to cultural and ethnocentric radicalism, and his executive and legislative agenda poses a greater threat to American liberty than that of any president in the history of our great republic.

Obama has twice taken an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance to the same." He has never honored that oath, and, based on his policy proposals and objectives, he has no intention to honor it after again reciting that oath on 20 January 2009. Obama seeks to, in his own words, "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution."

For that reason, this morning, the symbol of our national heritage of liberty, the American flag atop the 35-foot mast at our editorial offices, was respectfully lowered, inverted, and raised to full mast as a sign of national distress. It will remain inverted until next Tuesday, when we right it in honor of Veterans Day.

Today, at least 55,805,197 Americans are concerned for the future of our nation's great tradition of liberty. Some 63,007,791 Americans have been lulled, under the aegis of "hope and change," into a state of what is best described as "cult worship" and all its attendant deception.

One of our editors, a Marine now working in the private sector, summed up our circumstances with this situation report. It aptly captured the sentiments around our office: "It's been tough, fellow Patriots; tough to stomach the idea that more than half of my fellow citizens who vote, have booted a genuine American hero to the curb for a rudderless charlatan. What a sad indictment on our citizenry that some are so eager to overlook his myriad flaws -- his radical roots, his extreme liberalism, his utter lack of experience or achievement. Barack Obama is the antithesis of King's dream: He's a man judged by the color of his skin rather than the content of his character. If it's God's will that Barack Obama is our next president, then so be it. We Patriots will pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and wade back to the war front, intent on liberty or death."

This battle is lost, but the war is not. Let's roll.

Mark Alexander,

Last Week Was Campaigning, Yesterday You Voted

A real man gave a speech tonight at shortly after 10:20 CST. The speech given by this man was one spoken in sincerity and not arrogance or anger or in defeat but spoken like a true leader. A leader who should have had the opportunity to lead this country for the next four years. In defeat he was a man of honor who did not condone the boo’s put forth by his supporters but called for quiet and to listen to what he had to say. He spoke words of greater wisdom than have been heard by during this entire campaign by his opponent for what he said was not “just words”, they were heartfelt words of congratulation, and even sympathy for the struggle that he knows lies ahead and especially for one so unprepared . He showed the heart of a true patriot, one who puts country first as he has for his entire lifetime by reaching his hand across the aisle , something I am sure we will not see nor hear from the one who was proclaimed the victor tonight.

I will reserve my full comments on Obama until he speaks but I expect nothing more than what has been shown throughout this entire campaign by this candidate and that is arrogance and contempt for even those who elected him.

It is now after midnight and as I watched the elected candidate take the stage tonight I saw an empty suit with a swagger and a look of arrogance, a smile that was closer to a smirk. I listened to the words but again they were only words. As he made congratulatory remarks he turned his head, a sign of not being sincere, a sign of untruthfulness. The entire speech was filled with the same catch phrases that lulled the masses to sleep and caused them to cast a vote for something , someone they really don’t understand or know anything about. His promises are as empty as they were on a cold winter night 21 months ago as he so loved to talk about. His thanks to “the people” was as insincere as his promises for again he turned his head as he spoke and did not make the eye contact with the cameras and the crowd. He concluded his campaign as he began, with empty words and empty promises. But yet they chanted with him, Yes we can, over and over.

The promises have been made, the masses have fallen for them but today they learn that once elected the promises become, “just words” as their messiah so often said of others words.

The old story of the man who died and when he went to the eternal destination he first arrived at the gates of Heaven and there he saw people sitting around , singing and playing harps and he told St. Peter that this was a bit on the boring side for him and could he please check out the other destination. He was placed on an elevator and sent downward to Hades. When he opened the door there he saw a lush green golf course, beautiful women and many of his friends talking and enjoying their favorite beverage and he decided this was the place for him, a place more his style so he returns to St Peter and informs him of his choice. Once again he is placed on the elevator and he descends into Hades. When the doors are opened the golf course, the beautiful women and his friends with chilled glasses of libation are no longer there and it has been replaced with a scene of destruction, torment and unhappiness and the smell of sulphur fills his nostrils . He turns to Satan, who has met him there and asks, “what happened to all the beauty and fun?” It is then that he is told the truth. Satan says yesterday we were campaigning, and now you have voted “. Welcome to my world.

The elected one once made a statement of how he was a blank slate and the people would see what they wanted to see and thus vote but unfortunately for many there would be disappointments. The campaign is over and now you have voted your choice. I now await to see how you live with the consequences of your choice.

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

Selfisness and Foolishness

I am once again posting from Mark Alexander and the Patriot Post. Some of you may subscribe but many do not and I feel that the message presented here by Mark is of great importance especially today when the survival of this Nation hangs in the balance. The first section concerns the "Selfishness" remarks made by Obama toward John McCain and Sarah Palin.
The section titled Braying Jackass is very important in that this is what we can expect to see from the left when Obama is defeated. Can anyone see a recipe for violence and danger here? You can be assured that this is the plan of the far left. They will attempt to disrupt the functioning of the government for as long as possible.
You will also find some comments made by readers of the Patriot Post and comments made by various sources concerning the state of this nation. The last comment , which concerns voting and who should and should not, is one I found to be very informative and I could not agree more with the writer even if he is a member of the LSM.

Read and enjoy and then please vote. The Nation's future hangs in a balance.

A virtue out of selfishness?


"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual -- or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country." --Samuel Adams


Fellow Patriots,

Shortly after publishing my essay, "The audacity of deception," last Friday, I watched Barack Obama at a Florida rally, where he asserted, "[W]e want to do this, change our tax code [a.k.a. 'redistribute the wealth']. ... John McCain and, and Sarah Palin, uh, they, they call this socialistic. You know I, I, I don't know when, when, uh, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness." See the video.

I have never been so moved to anger by any presidential campaign comment.

John McCain has made "a virtue out of selfishness"?

You know, Obama insists, "I was just eight years old when [his benefactor Bill Ayers] was bombing the Capitol and Pentagon." (However, Obama was 34 when Ayers used his radical celebrity to launch Obama's political career.)

For the record, Obama was also eight years old when John McCain was a POW in Hanoi. McCain was subjected to more than five years of horrific torture by the Communist NVA, including two years of solitary confinement. As a Naval Academy graduate and aviator, McCain had requested combat duty and was assigned to the USS Forrestal. He was flying his 23rd mission as part of Operation Rolling Thunder over Vietnam when his A-4E Skyhawk* was shot down by a missile over Hanoi.

John McCain has made "a virtue out of selfishness"?

I don't need to read John McCain's biography to know his record of service, to know he puts his country first. A close friend and mentor, Col. Roger Ingvalson, had also been shot down, and was with McCain in the infamous "Hanoi Hilton." (As you recall, Obama supporter Jane Fonda posed for photos a few hundred yards away from where these two Patriots were near death.)

John McCain has made "a virtue out of selfishness"?

Which of these candidates has really made a virtue out of selfishness?

Wednesday night, Obama said in his infomercial: "Just because I want to spread the wealth around, they call me a socialist. The next thing you know, they will call me a communist because I shared my peanut butter sandwich in kindergarten!"

Of course, Barack Obama isn't proposing to "share" his sandwich. Instead, he's proposing to confiscate your sandwich, by force if necessary, and give it to someone he deems more worthy, assuming that you aren't charitable enough to share it yourself.

Truth is, it's unlikely Obama ever shared a sandwich with anyone. According to tax records released Wednesday, Barack and Michelle Obama had an average annual income of more than $500,000 between 2000 and 2006, but only gave two percent -- 2% -- of their income for charitable purposes.**

Further, it turns out that while Obama has been living well in his Georgian mansion on Chicago's south side, his illegal immigrant aunt has been holed up in public housing on welfare in Boston for the last four years, while other family members live in squalor in the shanties around Nairobi, Kenya.

So much for "spreading the wealth around."

Ah, and he insisted Sarah Palin has made "a virtue out of selfishness."

This would be the same Sarah Palin who brought into this world a special needs child, to love and cherish. Sarah and Todd Palin chose a life of dignity for their child. Ponder what "choice" the Obamas would have made had they faced similar circumstances.

Once again, Obama asserts, "You know I, I, I don't know when, when, uh, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness."***

Egomaniacal self-interest is the centerpiece of Obama's campaign. As I have written previously, John F. Kennedy, who Obama and his political don John Kerry hold up as their patriarch, closed his 1961 inaugural speech with these famous words: "And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." However, today, Obama has turned JFK's national challenge on end, essentially proclaiming, "ask what your country can do for you, not what you can do for your country."

So, hypocrisy is also a centerpiece of Obama's campaign.

John McCain and Sarah Palin have a long history of third-person living, serving God and country before themselves.

Mr. Obama -- on behalf of all American Patriots, especially those who have served their nation sacrificially, an apology is due, NOW.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Mark Alexander

*John McCain could land his A-4E on a surging carrier deck at night, but Obama had the audacity to run campaign ads last month saying McCain was "out of touch because he could not use a computer."

**Obama's running mate is even more miserly. The Bidens' income averaged $260,000 over the last 10 years, but they averaged just $650 a year in charitable giving.

***I have consulted forensic linguists who have analyzed Obama's off-script campaign remarks, and they conclude that the surfeit of verbal non-fluency (stammering) in Obama's comments are consistent indicators of his intent to deceive.


"If your television declares John McCain the president elect on the evening of November 4th, your television will be lying. You should immediately pick up your pre-packed bags and head straight to the White House in Washington, DC, which we will surround and shut down until this attempt at a third illegitimate presidency is reversed. We may be there for days or weeks or months. But we must be there. We must be there by the millions. We must show each other, and the nation, and the world that we have had enough, that we will not stand for one more stolen election, that we will not give in to fear, lies, theft, and intimidation." --David Swanson, Washington director of and a board member of Progressive Democrats of America


"There's an old saying that you can't be half-socialist any more than you can be half-pregnant; get knocked up with a socialist fetus and you'll have to deliver a full-born Marxist. There's nothing in between. Try it, you'll like it, and if you don't, as the lads in the Gestapo used to tell people, they had ways to make them like it. ... Call Barack Obama's program socialism, however and he'll swear on a stack of Qurans it isn't. He calls it change. He says it's fairness, not Marxism. Oh? How does he explain the proven fact that he has been wallowing in a sty surrounded by fervent socialists and sharing in their swill for most of his life? According to Fox's Bill Sammon, his Messiahship recalled that when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles: 'To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully,' he wrote in 'Dreams From My Father,' his memoir. 'The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.' And that was his milieu for all his years in Chicago. To anyone familiar with socialism, Obama's programs fit comfortably within the pages of Karl Marx's playbook, the root of which is the redistribution of the wealth, the key to the entire Obamian vault. What's mine is yours, and he's the middle man. It's socialism lite, and it can only evolve into socialism heavy. Remember, you can't be half-socialist, and Barack Obama knows it." --radio talk show host Michael Reagan


"I happen to know the person who found [the 2001 Obama redistribute the wealth audio]. It is an individual person, with no more resources than a desire to know everything that he or she can about who might be the next president of the United States and the most powerful man in the world. I know that this person does not have teams of highly paid professionals, does not work out of a corner office in a skyscraper in New York, does not have access to all of the subtle and hidden conduits of information ... who possesses no network television stations, owns no satellite time, does not receive billions in advertising dollars, and has a staff of exactly one. I do not blame Barack Obama for believing in wealth distribution. That's his right as an American. I do blame him for lying about what he believes. But his entire life has been applying for the next job at the expense of the current one. He's at the end of the line now. I do, however, blame the press for allowing an individual citizen to do the work that they employ standing armies of so-called professionals for. I know they are capable of this kind of investigative journalism: It only took them a day or two to damage Sarah Palin with wild accusations about her baby's paternity and less time than that to destroy a man who happened to be playing ball when the Messiah decided to roll up looking for a few more votes on the way to the inevitable coronation. We no longer have an independent, fair, investigative press. That is abundantly clear to everyone -- even the press. It is just another of the facts that they refuse to report, because it does not suit them." --columnist Bill Whittle


"In Friday's edition, there was an editor's note: 'Should Barack Obama succeed in deceiving a majority of voters next Tuesday, our readers have suggested two methods of protest: Either displaying your flag upside down [a sign of distress] or flying it at half mast -- or both, for seven days, and doing the same on inauguration day, 20 January 2009.' Undoubtedly some of your readers will suggest that, when the election is over, as members of a constitutional republic, we are obliged to support the president. I would suggest you refer them the Samuel Adams quote oft published in The Patriot: 'If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!'" --Ft. Bragg, North Carolina

Editor's Reply: Indeed, Obama has never honored his Senate oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" or to "bear true faith and allegiance to the same." He subscribes to the errant notion of a "Living Constitution," which, in his own words, "breaks free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution." If elected president, Obama has already, by way of his proposed policies, indicated he has no intention of honoring his presidential oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Military officers in the service of the United States are bound by their oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States. We operate under the same constraint.

"If Obama wins next Tuesday, our flag will be upside down for the ENTIRE length of his presidency!" --Cathedral City, California

"As frightening as the prospect is, I found your comment, 'Let's not go there -- yet,' extremely encouraging. It lifted my spirit. Thanks for having to courage to put it in print." --Bakersfield, California

"You know, The Patriot will be outlawed under the Obama politburo if he is elected. We'll have to go underground!" --Columbus, Ohio

Editor's Reply: Yeah, but we will still be "bitterly clinging to guns and religion," with a smile!

"In Mark Alexander's essay, 'The Audacity of Deception,' he notes, ' "Hope" and "change" may be pleasant catch-all bromides, but as Benjamin Franklin wrote in Poor Richard's Almanac, "He that lives upon Hope will die fasting." On change, John Adams wrote, "A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever." ' I would add that Franklin also famously wrote, 'A penny saved is a penny earned.' I guess under Obama's plan to 'spread the wealth around,' that would read, 'A penny earned is a penny to be confiscated and given to someone who did not earn it'." --Boston, Massachusetts

"In a recent issue of The Patriot, typically devoted to self-sufficiency and clear thinking, you ask for help after having given away over $6,000 in Shield of Strength tags, and for $7,500 for outstanding requests. While no one wants to deny the value of these, don't you think you ought to live within your means? Since when is the Army a charity?" --Col. (USA Ret.), Buffalo, New York

Editor's Reply: In the matter of Operation Shield of Strength, a side ministry undertaken voluntarily by our staff on behalf of our Armed Services, we rely less on "our means" than on faith that God wants His promise offered to men and women serving our nation. Our Patriot readers understand that calling, just as they do the calling to support their Christian brothers and sisters on our staff at the end of each year.


"I keep hearing how important it is for everyone to vote. Let me be politically incorrect and say that maybe some people shouldn't vote. I know I'm swimming against the tide. Get-out the-vote groups now register young people at rock concerts. HeadCount cofounder Andy Bernstein told me: 'We registered over a 100,000 people. It is so imperative that this generation's voice is heard.' But wait. Is that really a good idea? Many kids don't know much. At a HeadCount concert, [ABC's] '20/20' asked some future voters, 'How many senators are there?' One said 12, another 16, and another 64. One girl guessed, '50 per state.' Most kids didn't know what Roe v. Wade was about. 'Roe vs. Wayne?' asked one. 'Segregation, maybe?' 'Where we declared bankruptcy?' Headcount's Marc Brownstein concedes, 'there's a lot of uninformed voters out there.' But he argued: 'Democracy is not about taking the most educated portion of the society and having them decide who's going to run the entire society. Democracy is about every individual having a voice.' I suggested that when people don't know anything, maybe it's their civic duty not to vote. 'It's an argument that really, really smacks against everything we hold dear as Americans,' Bernstein replied. ... Economist Bryan Caplan, author of 'The Myth of the Rational Voter,' points out, 'the public's knowledge of politics is shockingly low.' He scoffs at the idea that 'it's everyone's civic duty to vote.' 'This is very much like saying, it's our civic duty to give surgery advice,' Caplan said. 'We like to think that political issues are much less complicated than brain surgery, but many of them are pretty hard. If someone doesn't know what he's talking about, it really is better if they say, look, I'm going to leave this in wiser hands.' Isn't it elitist to say only some people should vote? 'Is it elitist to say only some people should do brain surgery? If you don't know what you're doing, you are not doing the country a favor by voting.' ... Voting is serious business. It works best when people educate themselves. If uninformed people stay home on Election Day, good." --ABC "20/20" co-anchor John Stossel

Friday, October 31, 2008

Deception and Truth

Another Marx brotherFrom the Patriot Post: Mark Alexander has summed up why people vote for Obama and why they should not. He lays it out in very clear terms that any clear thinking person can understand. This sums up Obama: “I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views... I am bound to disappoint some... of them.” For those who continue to think they will not be among those disappointed, keep reading because you are one of those he is talking about. Just today his own campaign is now making excuses and saying, Obama may not be able to carry out all the promises that he has made. They put the blame on the economy but that is simply a smoke screen because Obama and his camp, from the start, knew that the promises made were empty and to put it in their own candidates words, they were “JUST WORDS”. Empty words from an empty suit.


“Forbid it, Almighty God!” —Patrick Henry


The Audacity of Deception

By Mark Alexander

If you are perplexed, even bewildered, by the number of Americans who normally make logical and rational decisions but now support Barack Obama, I refer you to a lucid explanation for this phenomenon in the opening pages of the candidate’s political autobiography, The Audacity of Hope. He writes, “I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views... I am bound to disappoint some... of them.”

Beyond the projection and deception, however, elections have consequences. Some of Obama’s supporters, the formerly logical and rational, will be first in the soup line of deceived disappointees expressing buyer’s remorse. They will awaken from the stupor of all the good feelings that attracted them to Obama and face the hard realities of the Socialist agenda they enabled.

In this, the final week of the ‘08 presidential campaign, Obama bought 30 minutes of prime time on several networks to air an infomercial in which he endeavored to pass as something other than the ideological Socialist he is. Feigning the fiscal conservatism of Ronald Reagan, Obama claimed he would review the budget, line by line, and cut waste. He even made taxing and spending, a.k.a. “the collectivist redistribution of wealth,” sound like a noble democratic gesture.

At one point he said, “Just because I want to spread the wealth around, they call me a socialist. The next thing you know, they will call me a communist because I shared my peanut butter sandwich in kindergarten!”

Cute. Of course, Barack Obama isn’t proposing to “share” his sandwich. Instead, he’s proposing to take your sandwich and share it with someone else. He’s assuming that you aren’t charitable enough to share it yourself.

Truth is, it is unlikely Obama ever shared a sandwich with anyone. With an average annual income of more than $500,000 between 2000 and 2006, Barack and Michelle only gave two percent—two percent—of their income to charity. Obama’s running mate is even more miserly. The Bidens’ income averaged $260,000 over the last 10 years, but they averaged just $650 a year in charitable giving.

So much for “spreading the wealth around.”

Meanwhile, Sen. John McCain centered his soapbox message on Obama’s penchant to redistribute wealth, even uttering the word “socialist” in several interviews—and not a minute too soon.

Of course, Socialist policies are now the centerpiece of the once great Democratic Party, packaged under the aegis of “fairness and equality” or “investments in our infrastructure and people.”

Obama uses code words such as “political and economic justice” and “coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.” In the last two months, however, given the crisis of confidence in our economy, Obama’s Socialist rhetoric has become bolder. Perhaps he’s heeding the counsel of his mentors’ mentor, Karl Marx, who wrote, “A new revolution is possible only in consequence of a new crisis.”

The fingerprints of Obama’s radical Socialist mentors are all over his “vision for America” —from his early childhood tutor, Communist Party USA member Frank Marshall Davis, to his black radical spiritual advisor, Jeremiah Wright, to the benefactors who launched his political career, radical terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

These are the Leftists who fed Obama’s unmitigated narcissism and shaped his warped worldview, which he now seeks to inflict upon the entire nation. Even his campaign icon implies “Obama over America.”

Of course, when asked about his relationship with these radicals, Obama responds, “[These people] are not advisors or donors to my campaign,” at which point an adoring press corps dutifully moves on to the next question.

Despite having spent 20 years as a disciple of Wright, the man who officiated at Obama’s marriage and baptized his children, the man whom Obama describes as “a father figure,” he claims he never inhaled any of his spiritual mentor’s racial hatred—never even heard any of it.

Obama claims that Bill Ayers was “just a guy in my neighborhood,” and “I was just eight years old when he was a terrorist.” However, Obama was 34 when Ayers used his radical celebrity to launch Obama’s political career, and he was 40 when this unrepentant terrorist was featured in a New York Times article (on the morning of September 11, 2001) and quoted in the opening paragraph proclaiming, “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.”

Ayers added, “America makes me want to puke.” Obama was working on his second major “philanthropic” project with Ayers at that time.

In addition, there are Obama’s ties to the Socialist New Party, the ACORN crowd, Father Michael Pfleger, Khalid al-Mansour, Kwame Kilpatrick, Louis Farrakhan, Tony Rezko, Rashid Khalidi, Raila Odinga and other haters, hard Leftists and convicted felons.

George Bernard Shaw once wrote, “A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.” All committed Socialists understand this principle.

For example, when Obama asserts, “We’ll ensure that economic justice is served—that’s what this election is about... I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody,” that is tantamount to buying votes.

Michelle Obama echoes her husband’s redistributionist philosophy: “The truth is, in order to get things like universal healthcare and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”

In 1916, a minister and outspoken advocate for liberty, William J. H. Boetcker, published a pamphlet entitled The Ten Cannots . “You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man’s initiative and independence. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves.”

A century later, Democrats are utterly ignorant of these principles. In fact, Barack Obama’s campaign is built around their antithesis—“The Ten Cans.”

I was speaking with a friend recently, a man who lived most of his life under the Communist regime in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic. He has spent several years and continues to incur many legal expenses in his endeavor to become a U.S. citizen, but he has since lost his enthusiasm.

“The prospect of an Obama presidency is like dèja vu for me,” he explained. “The socialist goal back home was that everyone had equal wealth. They met that goal—eventually no one had anything. Any attempt to work harder to achieve a better standard of living for your family was considered contrary to the welfare of the state, and dutifully discouraged. Socialism is a big hole, easy to fall into and hard to climb out of.”

He lamented, “The American dream is not something I want to wake up from—but too many Americans have no idea what they have, and are about to lose it. Socialism seems an appealing ideal, collective ownership, equal society, ‘sharing the wealth,’ et cetera. But it has a downside: It doesn’t work.”

Indeed it doesn’t work. It creates wards of the state—slaves, if you will.

In the 1980s, I spent enough time in Socialist countries, including the old USSR, to know that we want to avoid, at all costs, a USSA. If we could gather up all Americans who, knowingly or unknowingly, support collectivist policies like those espoused by Barack Obama and transport them to the old USSR for a week, they could see the terminus of such policies—the walking dead—and the wisest among them would rethink their support for statist concepts such as “sharing the wealth.”

It is no small irony that as the younger generations of former Communist countries around the world are moving rapidly toward liberty and free enterprise, our nation is moving rapidly toward Socialism and a tyranny of the few.

Barack Obama recently said, “I don’t find myself particularly scary or particularly risky.” It was a weak attempt at self-effacing humor, but make no mistake: Barack Hussein Obama’s Socialist policies are both scary and risky.

“Hope” and “change” may be pleasant catchall bromides, but as Benjamin Franklin wrote in Poor Richard’s Almanac, “He that lives upon Hope will die fasting.”

On change, John Adams wrote, “A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”

To that end, in 1787, the year our Constitution was adopted, Thomas Jefferson, wrote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

Let’s not go there—yet.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Obama's prime-time ad skips over budget realities


I couldn’t watch the sickening pack of lies last night. The longer I watched the more angry and sick to my stomach I became. Angry and sick because there are a lot of folks out there who are too ignorant, uninformed, lazy , stupid and a list of other adjectives that describe those who have swallowed the Obama koolaide just like the folks swallowed the Jim Jones Koolaide in Ghana. The only difference is they won’t die as fast as those who drank the Jones koolaide, they will just be strangled ever more slowly in socialism and the freedom they once knew is just as dead as the Jim Jones followers. Of course there are some who like those in the Jones crowd that welcome such an ending and will continue to drink the koolaide and attempt to force others to do the same.

Anyhow I managed to find this piece that hopefully those who are not totally brain dead or Zombieized will read and understand, YOU’VE BEEN LIED TO… AGAIN!

WASHINGTONDemocratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.

Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are — beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

A sampling of what voters heard in the ad, and what he didn't tell them:

THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."

THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.


THE SPIN: "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."

THE FACTS: That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.


THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."

THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years — and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."


THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open. "

THE FACTS: His proposals — the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more — cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged — although not in his commercial — that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Why People Are Still Undecided

I’ve read several articles this week about who is ahead in the polls and who is behind and what the one behind has to do to catch up and what the one who is ahead has to do to stay there. I have also read one or two articles about those who are undecided even at this late date in the campaign. Surprisingly it is a rather large number, percentage wise, who make up these folks who can’t seem to make up their mind. I have read that the undecided numbers range from 8% to 14.7%. That is a lot of votes to be cast that the pollsters have absolutely no clue as to how they will vote but evidently have decided to discount these folks as non-voters. Statistics show the opposite and that these folks are more apt to vote than those who are the most anxious to state who they will vote for in no uncertain terms when asked by these number gatherers. I suppose we will have to wait until the votes are in to decide who does and who doesn’t get to live in the White House for the next four years.

Frankly I have never trusted the media polls since the days of Nixon and Kennedy. I would say since Truman but I was a bit young in those days to actually be paying attention to such an unimportant question at least the time since I would rather have been playing in the sandbox with my trucks, than considering such as who would be running the country or as some have done ruining the country.

It seems that the media has always had a favorite and that is the one that seems to get the most favorable numbers reflected in the polls and the most favorable coverage. This unfortunately is the first election that I have experienced such one sided favoritism but yet I am not surprised by such given the state of the media and the direction of the left turns made by the media since the Viet Nam War era . This was the beginning of the “blame America first” syndrome , the hatred of conservatism and capitalism leanings of the American media. During that Viet Nam era I thought that the media would return to the somewhat middle of the road reporting after the situation in Viet Nam had settled down. I was wrong, totally wrong and watched as the media became more and more left leaning. In the early days the talking heads on TV at least attempted to be subtle about their leanings and favorites but that is certainly not the case anymore especially when you hear the talking heads speaking of one candidate who gives them “tingles up and down their leg” . Years ago I would have suggested that they make an appointment with a neurologist or a urologist after first either standing up and walking around for a bit or checking to see if there was a puddle under the chair. Today I am not surprised by anything I hear from the media in regards to their favorite candidate.

Anyhow the question still remains as to where the undecided will go and how will they vote and why on earth are they still undecided.

On the why of being undecided I have heard and read most often that “ I still don’t know enough about the candidate to make a decision.” To some that is surprising but to me I find it to be probably the most honest answer given. Why would they still not know enough about the candidate after being bombarded by thousands of hours of repetitive ads and info commercials and news blurbs? Perhaps those folks are a bit like me and a few million others who really don't trust the media, given their one sided approach to the candidates and the issues or perhaps non-issues in this election. All folks have heard are the sound bites that each of the candidates camps want the people to hear. The media has done little , especially toward their favorite candidate, to bring out any facts other than what they have been given while on the other hand with the candidate that they seem to dislike they have gone out of their way to show them in a negative light. To me and I am sure those undecided the other candidate is still much of a shadow figure. All they know is what the candidate and his handlers have wanted the people to know and they have controlled the media in such a manner that anything negative would be cast as racism. The candidates themselves have refused to discuss any of the negatives that may have arisen and basically blown the American voter off and said , “it’s not important”. Well evidently to the 8 to 14.7% of the undecided voters it was and still is very important. Perhaps the candidate(s) who have used this attitude toward the voters have made a huge mistake, a costly one that they did not foresee and one that could or will cost them the election.

Of course we know which candidate(s) have done this and basically have gotten away with absolutely no scrutinization by the media. Just last week Sen. Joe Biden was a guest on a talk show in Florida and was asked about the statement his running mate, Sen. Obama made in regard to “spreading the wealth” and asked if this was in some way socialism. Joe Biden had the perfect opportunity to ,for the umpteenth time, to actually explain to the people who were viewing the show exactly what Sen. Obama’s plan for doing such was and how in his opinion it was not socialism at all but rather an opportunity that some had not been given. Instead he chose to become hostile and asked the interviewer if the question was a joke. Of course it was not a joke or the interviewer would not have asked it and Biden blew it off, the media gave him a pass and gave Obama a pass and the undecided once again stayed undecided. Biden canceled further interviews with that station. How very transparent. Not!

Earlier Sen. Obama was asked about his relationships pertaining to a number of undesirable individuals and once again he chose to not be straight forward with the voters and blew the questions off or threw his “friends” under the proverbial bus and once again missed an opportunity to tell the undecided voters something that would allow them to make a decision. Even an admission that yes, he had been in a relationship, either in business or friendship or both with these folks, and that yes they were not the kind of folks that you would expect someone who wants to be the POTUS to have and that yes, I made some very bad choices in judgment about these folks but I have learned from that and have absolutely no desire to be acquainted in any form or fashion with this type of person again . He didn’t, he lied for the most part and made excuses and again the undecided voter was even more undecided.

The internal squabbling within the McCain camp over how to present Gov.Sarah Palin, on what to allow her to do or say has also left the undecided voter in a predicament. Of course the media who has taken every opportunity to cast this lady in an unfavorable light has made the most of such occurrences. I have read at least a dozen or more negatively slanted stories on this squabble in just the past 5 days and that came just from the Yahoo news blurbs that show up on the computer screen when one signs on or at least on my computer and those who use Yahoo or Foxfire. The McCain camp, rather than joining together, at least publicly, have done as much or more to damage their own candidate and campaign than anything other than a major scandal would induce. In doing so the undecided voter wonders what is going on and remains undecided.

Of course there is the “race” question. The question that Sen. Obama said would not be an issue in this campaign but yet he threw out the first “race card” in a speech given on July 31, 2008 in Springfield ,Illinois when he said, "We know what kind of campaign they're going to run. They're going to try to make you afraid," Obama said at the fundraiser. "They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black? He's got a feisty wife."

Until that time no one on the other side had mentioned race period. And once again the media made a big show of this statement, gave Obama a pass for throwing out the “race card”, attempted to make it appear that it was the other side who had made or was making this an issue and once again the 8-14.7% of undecided voters didn’t get the real story or enough of the story to decide and they remained undecided.

Because of the media’s approach of not reporting anything but positive on one candidate and being heavily negative toward the other side the undecided voter still feels that they “don’t have enough information to decide” and they are correct. All they know of one candidate in particular is a lot of fluff and stuff and no real meat ,potatoes and gravy stuff, which is the real stuff that they base their decisions on. These undecided voters are much more intelligent than the media would give them credit as being. The media looks at those who are still undecided as uneducated, slow witted dolts, the kind who cling to their religion, their guns and values. The media is so wrong in this case that they will not admit it at this late date and so they will cling to their “polls” even though the undecided see them as huge question marks.

One Ohio State professor sumed up the undecided voter and said that for the most part 50% of the undecided will definitely vote for the white candidate and the remaining 50% will split demographically and vote the way they have always voted. Given the polls of late showing either a few points differential, that remains in reality under double digit or in many places a dead heat, it will be the undecided who will have the final word in this election year. The candidate who wakes up to this fact first and makes the most of the situation and gets the right kind of information out to these undecided will win come November 4th.

Either way, it’s going to be a long night regardless of the media’s plans for a short night and throwing in filler of some sort for the remainder of the evening. The $2million bash in Chicago for Obama may turn into a very expensive wake.

I have done my part and voted early this year and no one need ask who I voted against nor why I voted the way I did. I have made it very clear from very early on as to my stand in this election. I did my homework early on and found one candidate failing drastically to meet the expectations that I have always looked for in a candidate for any office from mayor to POTUS. I have based my decision on Character, values, and ability to lead. Only one candidate meets all three of these points in my opinion.

If you are undecided, I suggest you use these three guidelines as your guide in making you choice and I feel sure that you will no longer have to say, “I am undecided.”.