Revision - Before Our Very Eyes

I have been troubled by something for ages, that I just haven't been able to put into words, but judging from the headlines, I have determined it is time. I am just sick that Saddam Hussein is facing execution at the hands of a puppet court with the US pulling the strings. I haven't been able to understand why I feel so strongly about this, as I am really no fan of Saddam, but there is just something intrinsically wrong with this picture. Everything he has been on trial for took place before the first Gulf War, yet when his troops left Kuwait, the US came home. Everything he has been found guilty of took place through the time we were more than glad for him to be dealing with Iran. The picture of him that was portrayed to America in the 80's was not the same picture we have been shown, recently, of that same era. And I guess the creepiest thing about all this, is that he hasn't been treated as a prisoner of war, yet that was supposedly how he came into US custody. And the "official version" of his capture was creative, to say the least, and nothing like what I read from the marines that claim to have actually been there at the time. So, if we have leaders and a military that can start a war, take down a leader of another country, change a nation's government, and convince them or coerce them to do the dirty work, all without direct cause and supposedly at our most vulnerable, what does that really say about America? And why are Americans so proud of this?

As I have listened to various comments these past three years, I have just been nauseated to hear such "fine Christian Americans" long for vengeance and death. I've heard preachers waste pulpit time commenting on it, I've heard radio call-ins just delight in the idea and hope it is available for viewing and I realize now why I am so distraught.

I live in the country where this sort of mentality is revered and with this mentality, apparently the memory is impaired. Americans are so excited about the death of Saddam Hussein that they seem to have completely forgotten that there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11. The fact that there are now al Qaida cells in Iraq is actually a tribute to Hussein, as there certainly wasn't the terrorist insurgency through his reign. And since Iraq is really just an annex of America, now, I am going to stand before the throne of The Almighty some day and have to give an account to my share of this event. That's right, I pay taxes that are covering this expense. I didn't speak out loudly enough to be heard about this war and this last election. And I have smiled and tried to avoid discord with all the people that did put this power into place and they truly do not seem to have the mental wherewithall to realize 9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein. I used to think the word 'ignorant' should be used in situations in which a person or persons didn't have the information, but actually it would appear that ignorant is better defined and more descriptive of those that simply choose to IGNORE the facts. Ignore does seem to be the root word of ignorant. So, I'm wondering, since he's being executed for something that took place in 1982 and the mock of a trial is planned to continue after his death regarding the death of Kurds in 1987 or 88, what will this inspire in the way of terrorist problems? Technically, Iraq was attacked by a country that really had no cause or just reason to attack them, and so a 25 year old grudge is revived and a democracy that is too weak and unstable to provide protection for it's people shout "hang him." And America is not only okay with that, they are actually supporting and promoting this program and spreading the propaganda. Well, actually America designed it! But Baghdad is scariery than it ever has been and our American leader is discussing with new leaders how to dig his way out of this hole. We have literally witnessed history revised before our very eyes and no one seems to know or care. Do Americans really believe justice for 9/11 will be served by this execution, or will it just whet their appetite for more?

I have a question about all this, since America is a world leader and we see where the world is being led. What happens in 20 years, if some madman on the other side of the world decides America would make a good target for a pre-emptive strike? For no reason, or maybe some terrorists attack his country and he decides it would seem more powerful to attack a sitting duck than actually find the perpetrator, and suddenly our leaders are faced with giving accounts from 20 or 25 years ago. Or maybe half the nation will be put on trial, you know like an entire party that has been exiled or stood trial in Iraq. And I'm not questioning the leaders. It is clear by now, whether it is Muslim or Christian, democracy or tyranny, power defies reckoning and certainly dares accountability. But I wonder what has happened to the people . . . When did following a political leader become more important than the footsteps and Instructions of the Messiah, they claim to follow? This country may be blustering about teaching and believing, but life actually demonstrates what a society believes. As I read the headlines and listen to the call-ins and know we have leaders that fully believe they have the right to exact death, I am truly afraid. I find it so frightening because the people that believe this Nicolaitan heresy, actually call it safety and security. Unfounded, man-made, pseuo-justice is now an overwhelming fact of life in America, and G~d's Word says, we will be judged as we judged others.

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.

The First Step is to Admit There is a Problem

A very famous organization comes to mind when that statement is used, and interestingly the Republicans have now come to this determination. Now they are finally willing to admit there is a big mess in Iraq and perhaps they were not prepared for the potential situation that has resulted. I guess at this point, we should all be glad there were no weapons of mass destruction for the insurgents to get ahold of, huh? As I read and hear various perspectives on the war in Iraq, something is becoming very reminiscent of Viet Nam: the need to blame, and the need to pass the buck. I have been infuriated by the number of soldiers that are coming home to face charges. I remember Lt. Calley and how years later, just the thought of that would literally cause me to shudder. I am not pro-war, as a matter of a fact, I fit the criteria for conscientious objector. Even though I do not believe in war and I was never for invading Iraq, I do not understand how our leaders can put a rifle in our young people's hands, put them in an American uniform, which is the same thing as a target in a war zone, and then tie their hands. Considering the fact that teenagers and grandmas are willing to strap on a bomb and self-detinate, I'm sure it isn't easy to differentiate between peaceable civillians and someone that wants to kill you. How can our leaders do this? I can see why our current President was glad daddy had some political favors to call in and keep his guard unit, state side through Viet Nam. And remember Cheney's comment, he had other priorities through the Viet Nam era. Apparently war, moved up on his priority list, as he was Secretary of Defense for Bush 41, of course he didn't have to actually fight, then. And I think John Ashcroft and Bill Clinton both realized school was a much safer place to be, than Viet Nam. So, now what do we do? The potential problem was not accurately assessed, the actual reason to go was not actually the problem, and now the reality of no exit strategy is apparent to everyone, so now what? According to much of news/talk radio, the answer seems to be to blame the media. That's right, blame the media, like that will make the killing stop! The same media that showed hours and hours and hours of the same footage of the twin towers collapsing as our nation was whipped into a warmongering frenzy. The same media that reported how well the war in Afghanistan had gone without any casualties and reported the President's claim to have eradicated the Taliban. The same media that covered that priceless moment on the USS Abraham Lincoln with the big banner behind our President in his flight jacket. The same media is now the reason the military has lost ground? Please . . . While the administration and the new Secretary of Defense discuss the plan, let's not forget that the Chief of Staff, US Army, claimed that the war cannot be won militarily. So if the military cannot win, why consider sending more young men and women into harm's way with no strategy or solution? If this guy says there is no strategy, then who would be organizing the plan? While we are reassessing the situation, let's consider just where Iraq is, now, nearly four years after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Iraq has elected leaders. Iraq has been able to establish it's own court proceedings and carry out executions. I say, if they can do that, it's time to let them run their own country. Iraq was supposed to have a military and police force trained two years ago. Iraq was supposed to be loving their new freedom and the US for bringing it. Of course, the rest of the world is holding America responsible for all this uproar that we keep calling a fledgling democracy! As I continue to hear the rants attempting to rally patriotism, I have begun to consider the founding fathers. Let's consider George Washington for just a moment. He actually went to Valley Forge, he didn't just send others and tell them to send reports and stay the course. But as I really consider what we now refer to as genuine patriots, they were men that had the courage to stand boldly and revolt against an unfair government that was not concerned with the best interest of the citizens at all, but rather only concerned with more power over more land. The very things that Geroge Washington and Paul Revere stood for and stood against, are the very things that a true patriot would stand for and stand against, now. The true patriots of our nation, stood boldly willing to die, and willing to fight, personally for what they believed in. The true patriots of our nation stood against an authoritative oppressive government that taxed excessively and claimed authoritative dominance. The true patriots of our nation weighed the cost of war before they engaged in battle to be sure they could cover the cost and the manpower. The true patriots of our nation didn't just make a lot of noise, point out the problems, or look for someone to blame. The true patriots responded to the troops that came ashore. The Revolutionary War wasn't pre-emptive and it wasn't aimed at a different country, just for the record. Our young people don't have an example of patriotism, they are all being ordered to war, by men that found their way out of the war that faced their generation. Now that we can openly admit there is a problem, perhaps it's time to admit war is not about peace, war is about death and conquest.

Thou shalt not kill. ~ Holy Bible

A New All Time Low, Even for Our Government . . .

I read this article and I just had to post something about it. I could not believe my eyes, as I read this information. What audacity? While Mr. Obama is promoting his book, "The Audacity of Hope," I just keep thinking about our country and there is "no hope" for such audacity! Imagine, an 84 year old Michigan man, never before in trouble, is in jail with a $100,000.00 bond to post for "alleged kidnapping." That's right, he took his wife, of many years, to Florida. This is the same state that just a couple of years ago made horribly divisive headlines as a husband with a new woman and family had the right to starve his wife who was in a nursing home, while the governor stood by wringing his hands, helplessly. This elderly couple had been together for years whe she had a stroke, and he became her guardian after that. I don't know why husbands and wives would have to become each other's guardian, but he did. And then "they" decided he wasn't a good enough house keeper and he might have bitten her with his "broken dentures." So, she was placed in a nursing home and he was removed as her guardian, but he took her out. Now, some prosecutor is going to "sink his teeth" into this case and make an issue of the law. This particular offense happens to carry a possible punishment of life in prison. The alleged offender will be 85, December 25. Interestingly, the tip came from some medicaid bureaucrat in Florida, because the gentleman was seeking treatment of some sort for his wife. The more I read, the more infuriated I became. When "they" determined he wasn't able to care for her properly, couldn't "they" have offered both of them some sort of assistance together. She's living in their home, now; with care, while he sits in jail.
Where is the government in this case of protecting marriage and defending one man and one woman for life?
I have included a link if you'd like to read the article regarding this sad situation and the sad state of ridiculous enforcement of what is in "the citizen's best interest."
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061216/UPDATE/612160412
what G~d has joined together, let no man put asunder

Changing the Focus, Doesn't Change the Facts

As the emphasis becomes realigned in some major issues, I’ve begun to question, again, just what the real deal is.
Our new Secretary of Defense has already made some interesting comments and technically he’s really not even at that post, yet. Remember in the past months how we have heard all the bluster out of Washington about Iran and what Iran better do to get cooperative? Well, apparently Iran knew it was bluster long before Israel and the American citizens realized it, because Iran has just gone right ahead doing what their leader chooses with a few world leaders speaking authoritatively “Now, don’t make us back our words!” Then Robert Gates just takes all of the world a whole new direction by stating that Iran feels insecure being “surrounded by countries with “nukular” weapons. I only read what he said, I have no idea how he says the word “nuclear.” So far, Mr. Gates is not actually sworn in as the Secretary of Defense and he’s got the world talking about Israel and whether or not they have nuclear weapons. Look out Mr. Olmert, you aren’t terribly popular as it is, but your allies are not helping your cause, at all.
Did you read about Mr. Bush’s comment about Mary Cheney’s upcoming visit from the stork? He says he’s happy for her and she will be a fine mom. Well, he wasn’t talking that way in Iowa a couple of months ago. And you know, back when I was a single, heterosexual mom, I never heard a conservative say I would be a fine mom. As a matter of fact, most of his constituents vocalize their disdain and concern regularly, about all the children growing up with a single mom, without a “real family” with “family values.”
I did a bit of research about the Port Security. Remember back when the nation thought the politicians were listening because the American public said NO to the United Arab Emirates securing our ports. Well, as I read this past week, it turns out, the UAE already had control of the ports, before we heard about it. America didn’t have any say over those ports when the UAE purchased them in some other transaction, and now are you ready . . . The UAE is accepting America’s proclamation to not allow them to provide security in those ports, so they are selling them in a cash deal? Does everyone feel more secure now? And the real rub in the deal? America has no say in the ownership, the procedure of the sale or the maintenance. And we thought our politicians were listening. Can't you just picture them in their meetings deciding what they are going to throw at us next, just to keep us occupied in upheaval; so they can do what they really have planned?
And some sad statistics. There have now been more American lives lost in Iraq than in the WTC. Although there are no factual stats for the number of Iraqi civilians that have died in this horror, the lowest estimate exceeds the alleged genocide for which Saddam is being tried, and the almost forgotten fact . . . It would seem that most of America forgot it was bin Laden that supposedly claimed to have attacked the WTC and he’s still no where to be found.
They shall know the truth and the truth shall set them free.

Just Call It What It Is

There were some interesting events in the news this week that really made me stop and think about whether it was a situation of Tolerance or Intolerance. I guess it's just which side of the issue one is on. The national Christmas Tree was lighted this week, and I'm personally glad they called it a Christmas tree, rather than a holiday tree. I don't celebrate Christmas and the holiday I do celebrate doesn't have a tree, so this year when the attempt to raise the argument of tolerance vs. intolerance, I thought "let the Christians have the tree, it is part of their holiday." What's the big deal? I don't expect Santa to pull a menorah out of his gift bag! I do get a bit confused as to how a Christmas tree and Santa makes a Savior the reason for the season, but they don't answer to me, so I'm glad they didn't have to use the term "holiday tree," because a holiday tree means nothing to everyone.

Another interesting paradox this week. The Cheney's are going to be grandparents again, but this is a first baby for this daughter. I've never understood why the gay issue has been openly and vehemently discussed by the conservatives, until it comes to Mary Cheney, then they are just abhored that anyone would even mention her "alternative lifestyle." These same people said horrible and unfounded things about the last president's daughter. Chelsea Clinton was actually still a child and just happened to be the offspring of very controversial parents. But the conservatives were just aghast and deeply offended when Kerry mentioned the fact that 35 year old openly "out" Mary was a lesbian. So what will the discussion be, now that the conservative camp has someone calling this alternative arrangement a family? I'm going to go ahead and put my foot in my mouth in this deal because there is an obvious matter here that just has to be noted. These two women have openly declared their alternative lifestyle and the right to be diverse from the majority heterosexual definition. So why should we see this the same or use the same terms? It is different. And basic reproduction 101 really hasn't changed. There is a man in this situation somewhere, so don't tell the rest of us two mommies is the same thing as a mom and a dad, because babies just don't happen with just two mommies. And gay couples never want to be called single parents, so it isn't the same thing. It doesn't mean I'm going to be as mean as Mary's dad's croneys have been, but it really isn't the same.

Which brings me to the topic I probably harp on the most. How in the world did we go from "Mission Accomplished" to "Stay the Course," to the "situation is grave and deteriorating?" So, if we were really going to just call it what it is, what would we call it? I've been kind of torn between WWIII and precurser to Armegeddon, all along. And I think this latest assessment to call it what it is indicates if the mission were accomplished there would have been no reason to continue to hear "stay the course." In this basic concept of calling things what they are, when something is accomplished, there is a finality of the activity or effort. How does anyone continue doing something that has been accomplished? Now, I am not in politics so all I can do is compare this to the average mundane things of life, but I think the point can be made. When my daughter was young and I told her to clean her room, she wouldn't have had to spend the entire afternoon "staying the course" if her mission had been accomplished, when I first sent her. And you can bet, when her mission was accomplished, she was "outta there!" If I come out of the laundry room and say the laundry is accomplished, that means there is no reason to "stay the course" at the washer and dryer. Of course the main difference in my mundane examples of life and the politics of war is there was no delegating the duty. Perhaps if our politicians actually had to face what they send others into, they would be more circumspect.

Having your conversation honest . . .

Round and Round it Goes, Where It Stops . . . Nobody Knows

I have to write a blog today, because the news is just accumulating too fast this week. I've been wanting to blog about Donald Rumsfeld and his "accomplishments" for some time now. Realizing he is about to be replaced, I feel it is time to give Mr. Rumsfeld his due. He has been quite an interesting man through the Bush administration, but I remember running across some old newspapers when remodeling a house. He was also Gerald Ford's Secretary of Defense. He's been familiar with all the ins and outs of war and peace for a number of decades, but he's done so much more than give us a war with no strategy. What really caught my eye was his career following his brief time in the Cabinet in the 70's. He became the CEO of G. D. Searle & Company. This famous company had a wonderful little chemical that they just couldn't get the FDA to approve through the Carter years, but once the Reagan administration reorganized the FDA, CEO Rumsfeld and company gave us Aspartame. Interestingly, there were many safety concerns about this chemical, that were published at the time, but quickly forgotten, covered, or ignored. Remember when aspartame first became an available sugar replacement, you couldn't cook with it? That's because heat can cause this sweetener to become toxic and there have been hundreds and hundreds of neurological mis-diagnoses that are pure and simply toxic reactions. I also noticed some other recognizable names in reading about G. D. Searle & Co., when Monsanto purchased Searle. One noted attorney in the transaction was Clarence Thomas, another well known name was our last Secretary of Agriculture. Rumsfeld left Searle in 1985 after the Monsanto buy-out and let's not forget those pictures of none other than Mr. Rumsfeld with Saddam Hussein. And the report was that the meetings were friendly, of course that was in the mid 80's when we needed an ally against Iran. Saddam Hussein was found guilty on charges of killing about 140 people after an assination atempt on his life. But this situation happened before the "ally pictures" of Hussein with Rumsfeld were ever taken. And now our news reports that over 130 Iraqi civillians are dying every day . . . in a war that has gone on 3 1/2 years after the Mission was Accomplished! I just can't guess what Mr. Rumsfeld has planned next, but I can't imagine it to be retirement.

Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:

What Happened to the "Downsize Government" Idea?

President George W. Bush already has our government larger than life and much bigger and more burdensome than can be feasibly maintained. I thought it was the conservatives that didn't believe in big government and I thought it was the republicans that didn't believe in the government's involvement in everyone's every day life. And I thought republicans believed in a balanced budget. Well, I've misspoken here, I didn't think all that, I just thought that's what they claimed to believe. When we get right down to the brass "tax" of it all, President Clinton was much more conservative, fiscally; as well as with his foreign and domestic policies. He's the one that established welfare limits and removed the generational hopelessness. And President Clinton is the one that aimed for a balanced budget and to reconcile the horrible debt racked up by Presidents Reagan and George the First. He is also the one that was leading at the time of America's involvement in Kosovo and Bosnia without causing an International incident and in alliance with other nations. Unlike what we are presently looking at, which is the "lone gunslinger approach" then ask for help. I think the icing on the cake for today was the article I read about giving a 4.4 million dollar grant for technological aid for sheep and goat herders in Afghanistan to find grass by satellite and obtain the latest stock market prices by cell phone. Hey, if I had such a huge area for my goats to graze that I needed satellite information, maybe I would find that helpful, but since their country is still wartorn and apparently the fighting is getting worse, wouldn't it be great if the same technology that could find grass in the mountains and analyze manure could find bin Laden, since that was the reason we were told we went to Afghanistan? As I listened to the conservative talk radio host this morning, discuss with a caller the various conservatives that need to compromise on their views that are dividing them, for a common strength. There are the neo-cons, the paleo-cons, the socio-cons, the moral-cons, fiscal-cons, even "crunchy-cons" and I just don't know how many other "cons" there are, but I do see the common denominator. Maybe that's what the rest of America has seen, and voted accordingly. We're just tired of being "conned."

None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.

Raising Issue with a Statement frequently Illustrates the Point

Have you ever noticed that people tend to prove the point, when they take issue with someone's observation on a particular topic? I think one of the most compelling examples in the news, these days would be the reaction by Muslims to the Pope's comment. And the Pope's excuse and apology regarding the comment. Then there was the comment to my blog the other day in which I must share my appreciation for the comments that simply proved the status of our police state. I'm sure the "trigger happy" ones would feel better, if they only had more control. Now back to the Muslims that were so distraught with the Pope's reference to a violent religion, that they were making threats. How did their reaction prove the Pope wrong? And I don't agree with the Pope on too many topics, but they really gave illustration to his comment. And we cannot forget all that happened over a cartoon a few months ago. The posters and mayhem was not peaceable at all. If, in fact their Quran teaches peace, then they need to live it. If they are living what it teaches, then quit telling the world that the threat of jihad is peace. I consider our President to be a fairly aggressive man, but he takes cartoons in stride. He must, there is a new one every day somewhere that certainly doesn't portray him to be a reasonably intelligent human being, and he's being a very good sport, there are only two US led wars. Another individual I don't agree with frequently, but he takes this on the chin, pretty well. What about the Pope backing down? What kind of leadership is this to let another religion intimidate the Vatican? I think it's commendable that he is trying to resolve things peaceably, but there are many, many people that simply don't want to kowtow and walk on eggshells about everything. If he's going to back down from a statement, say it wasn't really his anyway, and then put the pressure on everyone else, he's proving the same point the protestants claimed 500 years ago. If the message changes or waffles, don't expect the rest of us to consider the speaker to be the infalible leader or spokesperson of an entire religion or culture.

If Muslims really want to be perceived as peaceable, maybe they should tell the suicidal grandma bombers to knock it off. She really didn't help the cause . . . If the Pope wants to be seen as a voice of reason and authority, then he needs to stand on what he says, or check his sources better before he says it. And as an American, I would love it, even though I'm not a republican and not in the Bush camp, I would love for a day to go by that didn't inspire a political cartoonist.

Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Where's A Cop When You Need One?

I read about the 92 year old woman in Atlanta that was killed by three narcotics officers and when I read the first article, it mentioned something about a warrant that gave immediate access to the premises without requiring them to announce their presence. Of course, now I can't find that article and there has been ample time to coordinate the information, and the only person that could disagree with the present version, is dead. So, I'm guessing the present story will be the one that stands on record. Where was a cop when a 92 year old woman was getting her door kicked in, in a rough neighborhood in Atlanta? Could she have called and gotten help? How did shooting first become proper procedure? This story reminded me of a personal incident that I experienced about a month and half after 9/11, although, thank G~d, it did not end so tragically. The Patriot Act had just been implemented and "the police state" now had foundation. I was on my way home from synagogue on a Friday evening. I was attending one that was about 70 miles from where I lived, so I was on my way home on the highway, when I saw red lights in my rear view mirror. I pulled over and then realized I was blocking a major exit and remembered something about the latest law to protect those that are supposed to protect and serve us. The law had something to do with enough room for traffic to leave a lane clear when drivers come upon an officer pulling someone over. I don't know what it was, but it crossed my mind and I attempted to at least pull on up out of the exit lane. At that same split second, another patrol car appeared on the scene, spinning through all the lanes and coming to a screeching halt right in front of my vehicle. This "Barney Bad Asterisk" jumped out of his cruiser and pulled his gun on me. Now the officer that had originally put his lights on, was now at my window, as I had been ordered at gun point to put my keys on top of my car and of course keep my hands visible. The reasonable officer at my window just stood there and said, "Ma'm you changed lanes without signalling." I immediately said, "I'm sorry." He asked me what I was doing, where I was going. I told him and he looked at the "other officer" and just shook his head. He asked me for my driver's license so I got it out and gave it to him. The other officer still had me at gunpoint, except I had permission to get in my purse. Which if I was going to be a danger, that would be where I could obtain something, I would think . . . But, I'm just a citizen, what do I know. Anyway, did I mention I had two bumperstickers? One said "Jesus, changing the world, one life at a time." And the other, "Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem," and a "Clergy" sticker in the window. I obviously gave every indication of a potential combatant. The officer asked me why I had moved my car after I started to stop. I told him about the exit lane and that new law. The goofball that still had a bead on me, asked what new law? [I wish I could type his tone.] I told him, I didn't know exactly, but it had something to do with keeping him safe in traffic while he took aim. The original officer, who was very nice and very much just wanting to resolve the entire situation, gave me my license back and told me he wasn't writing a ticket, but warned me about signalling a lane change. I said, "Thank you." As I put my license away, he noticed my badge and asked. I told him I was a police chaplain. I asked him to please be careful, as the behavior that I had witnessed tonight was really frightening and could result in panicked reactions. He indicated, he was well aware of that fact and then realized the other officer still had his gun out. He told him to put it away. By the time, I got back into traffic and on my way home, I saw that the "Barney BA" had already pulled over some other car and was reading them his riot act. I surmised frustration from the last incident.

Then, this week after reading about the 92 year old and remembering my own experience, I heard another situation. A woman was taking her elderly grandma to the hospital and was speeding on a low traffic road. A police officer saw her when she was on the hospital road and turned on his lights and "followed her" to the hospital, to give her a ticket. That's right! When he did see where she was going, he simply followed her, rather than escort her. He then got rude, belligerent, and wrote her the ticket, because that was proper procedure. What happened to the days, when there was an emergency, you tried to get a policeman's attention, so he would provide an escort? Since we keep hearing about a shortage of manpower in law enforcement, what crimes are going on while they are keeping the world safe from "old ladies" and middle aged women drivers? What happened to the days when a "policeman was our friend?" We've all realized and come to accept, when we feel victimized or violated or fearful, it is very difficult to get a quick response from law enforcement agencies, but when did they become the entity that makes us feel victimized, violated and fearful?

The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.

American Problem Solving 101

Our method of resolution is becoming alarming. By "our method," I am referring to the American way of managing problems and resolving issues. As our President traveled through Asia last week, he made more than one interesting comment that just made me shake my head and say, "he is entitled to free speech, he is an American." An interesting comment regarding Israel and Iran made me rethink many of the things that have gone on in the name of spreading democracy. Well, we are spreading something, but . . . When President Bush said, he wouldn't blame Israel for going to war with Iran, there was something fundamentally flawed in that statement. We are the ones that have been challenging Iran and apparently now by his statement, knowingly placing Israel in the line of fire. I hope Mr. Olmert remembers that America is just bluster and won't actually be available for any ally duty, if he decides or feels threatened to have some sort of altercation with the leader of Iran. Mr. Olmert needs to remember, as he builds his monument to the American President, that for now, America has a very unique problem solving method. When our allies need military support, we're busy. When our military takes photographs of prisoner abuse, cameras are forbidden in the war zone. We started this problem solving method, some time ago. You see, we're not just exporting this method of problem solving. We've been utilizing it in our country for some time now. The Institute of Medicine gave the statistics that 98,000 people die annually from medical errors, so we solved that problem. We now have tort reform and cap limits for medical malpractice suits. When there is a problem, American leaders know how to limit the evidence or distance the accountability.

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.

Help Me Follow the Logic, Here, Please . . .

My topic has changed by this Friday. Wednesday, I had planned to write about the International Court and the FDA, by Thursday, Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates, but this morning all that had to change as our President truly deserves blog focus on his war strategy. And here we thought he didn't have one. He gave us just a glimmer of what he has in mind while speaking in Hanoi. That's right, Hanoi, reminding all of us that Iraq is not the first quagmire in American history, and by the report this morning, sounds like they're doing all right, even though they didn't embrace the American way of life. Listening to President Bush discuss what went wrong in Viet Nam, while in Viet Nam was disconcerting enough, but his summation regarding Iraq, was mind boggling. "We'll succeed, unless we quit!" Now he's telling other countries, "we're going to stay the course." I still remember the conservative radio call-in show, in which the broadcaster hung up on me, because I noted the comparison between Iraq and Viet Nam, in 2003. Now our President is discussing Iraq in Viet Nam.

"For decades, you had been torn apart by war," Bush said later at a state banquet. "And today, the Vietnamese people are at peace and seeing the benefits of reform." He said that, apparently, as if these people didn't know the years of war didn't bring the reform. Well, maybe all the things I remember reading about Viet Nam and hearing in school while he was in the Air Guard, happened those days he was absent.

While we're discussing military, we're sending 57,000 more troops to Iraq in January. This lame duck Congress is going to legislate like crazy. Maybe we could reduce the troops if we could just get the new Iraqi government to legislate their own Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act of 2006, or better yet, adopt ours. You know, if those Iraqi citizens just had the same healthy fear of their new democratic government, that has been legislated here, our troops could come home. Say did you hear about the Marine Reserves Toys for Tots deal? We're all familiar with this program that goes on every year to give Christmas toys to underprivileged children. This year, a toy company offered them 4000 talking Jesus dolls. From what I can tell, it's about the size of Ken or GI Joe, only no Barbie and no guns, and he speaks Scripture. Anyway, at first they turned the generous offer down. Now, I don't celebrate Christmas, but I thought it was a very kind gesture. They have since announced that they would accept this generous gift from the toy company, but their reason for originally refusing was just priceless. The spokesman Wednesday stated in the CNN report: As a government entity, Marines "don't profess one religion over another," Grein said Tuesday. "We can't take a chance on sending a talking Jesus doll to a Jewish family or a Muslim family." My question would be . . . just how many Jewish families or Muslim families that might be offended by a Jesus doll, celebrate Christmas?

Come now, and let us reason together . . .

Timing, More than Coincidence

Usually we have so much nonsense going on in American news that I refrain from commentary on incidents in other countries, but this one takes the cake. Israel, what's the deal? You will declare war over one kidnapped soldier and then back down and agree to a release of 1000 for one? And you want support in this thinking? What you are thinking? If that isn't enough, and your plate of unpopularity isn't already full enough, what's with the gay parade? It is getting obvious to me by now, that the gay promoters really have the same mind set as Fred Phelps. Intolerant behavior in our face in the name of Tolerance and Free Speech. Fred, you're just a mean cranky old man. You gay paraders, your approach was no different than the terrorists. It was mentioned that if the government agreed to same sex unions, the parade would be cancelled, so it really is about control, now isn't it? I personally have acquaintances that are gay men, and a few woman that I have my doubts about, but we have a line no one crosses. They know where I stand and I know where they stand and we both know, we don't agree. Insisting upon a protest at a funeral is no different than me showing up to Westboro Baptist and insisting that Fred give me time to have my say. Which would be to inform them that they are all nuts. A gay parade in Jerusalem is no different than me going into gay bars to tell them they are committing sodomy, and what G~d says about it. I don't even argue that people can be born with a tendency toward being gay. Scripture says we are all born into sin. We all have certain areas of temptation. I don't have a problem with men that don't like women, for the most part, I don't like women either, and that isn't so G~dly on my part. Why Jerusalem and why this week? I don't know how many around the world outside of Judaism know that this week's Torah reading is the account of Sodom and Gomorrah. Torah reading for this week is Genesis 18: 1 - 22: 24. I hardly think this is coincidence, but I don't know why Jerusalem has accepted this ultimatum from the Gay Pride movement. Gay folks, if your lifestyle is so wonderful and so few of us have the sophistication to accept and embrace, why don't you just establish your little exclusionary group like every one else? What if we decided all heterosexual men that don't take viagra should have a parade? I can assure you, men that don't need viagra have a better way to spend their time than in a parade. Why not a menopause parade? Menopause is perfectly natural and the world just doesn't understand what we women go through when we realize we are no longer young and the nest is empty. People are mean about it, they are just down right cruel about it. Ask me, I can tell you. Hey, how about a PMS Parade? Well, never mind, that sounds more like a scary march than a parade. But you see my point. If the gay community cannot see what we see in the opposite sex, why do they insist upon making us view their perspective. If it's so good, live it, and quit acting like Fred Phelps. And Israel, if you don't stand your ground on something, no one is going to take your statements seriously.

because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of YHVH;

When It's All Said and Done

Well, I guess the nation is supposed to be headed in a new direction, now. I'm thinking Nancy Pelosi is just experiencing some sort of euphoric power rush. This nation is headed in the exact same direction it was headed before the elections. Just to clarify, the Democrats took the house, the Senate was still up for grabs over Virginia, Donald Rumsfeld is resigning, and according to CNN, President Bush acknowledges responsibility for the election results. I'm thinking the democrats will have their hands full, as I don't really expect gridlock. President Bush seems to know how to deal with dissatisfied voters and outspoken politicians. He appears to do what he chooses and then just say, Yeah, I did it, I'm the President. My thoughts on this matter are this. While Nancy Pelosi is consumed by being the first woman speaker of the house, and the Virginia Senate race gets counted, and President Bush says, "I dun it" or "Mission Accomplished" or 'Let's Talk Texan,' I'm thinking something else is going on. What did he mean by taking responsibility for the election results? Didn't his party know how detrimental it was to be in his party, at this point? Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is just interesting. Now the president says, it's been in the works for awhile, but he didn't want to make this resignation an issue before the election. Why? Since the Iraq war was a major issue in this mid-term election, why wouldn't the Republican President allow a resignation by Mr. Rumsfeld before the elections, to garner votes for a change? Since CHANGE was every plank of every democrat's 2006 platform! What was he really thinking, since this fact either escaped him or wouldn't suit his purpose? Donald Rumsfeld has quite a history in American politics. He held this same position in President Ford's administration. He had a political position through the Reagan years and the years of George the First, H. W. I've been wondering something about his "tenure" though. If Mr. Rumsfeld was around through the Iran / Iraq conflict and then on into the first Gulf War era, why didn't somebody recommend that we move on into Baghdad in 1991? According to US history and the recent trial of Saddam Hussein, all of these atrocities had already been committed and were known to have been committed by 1988, so why didn't we do something through the first Gulf War? When Mr. Reagan answered to a shocked nation through the Iran / Contra hearings, was the focus on Oliver North just a distraction? Mr. Reagan very clearly stated that the Vice President knew about this Iran deal and Iran and Iraq were in a conflict from 1980 to 1988. So why now? Why a mockery of a trial in the new "democracy" of Iraq? Why another war? Why a resignation "the day after" because we need change, when change might have retained the party's power? Does Mr. Rumsfeld have a position on the board of some techno-power company, awaiting him, like so many of the rest of the 'resignees' of the Bush administration?

And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass . . .

A Parable for Election Day

I felt so stupid when this dawned on me, this morning. Now I realize why Messiah used agricultural parables. We can learn so much watching the behavior of animals. We live out in the country and this time of the year, mice are seeking shelter. I don't mind if they "camp out in the barn" but they become fair game when they enter the house. This morning, my husband checked traps. Before any PETA people get ugly about our use of mouse traps, just send me your address and I will be happy to try to catch them alive and send all these little creatures to you. Now, on to the real point. We respect the life cycle with the catch of the day by allowing the cat and the poultry access to this treat. It was in watching this, that the truth just unfolded before my very eyes. The cat could care less, since he didn't get to enjoy the hunt and the kill. The chickens on the other hand . . . This must be the inspiration behind the politics of fear. First you have to get everybody thinking like a chicken. And fear is the best way to do that. Then when everyone is thinking like a chicken, just toss out a harmless, dead issue and watch what happens. The chickens will just come running and fluttering and gather round. Then one will grab up that dead topic, run with it for a moment, until another takes it and runs, and all the while the flock is watching all this just scrambling, clucking, and carrying on. Then another runs up and takes this issue and pecks it and scratches some dirt around it, and then when it is so enthralled in it's endeavor, another chicken just grabs it and runs, and this continues and continues and continues . . . Meanwhile, the real issues can be tended to without the chickens in the way. As I listened to the ballot issues, I realized, it's the chicken and mouse game. See, while everyone is thinking cat and mouse, the cat isn't even involved. Have you heard all the nonsense about Ammendment 2? I think it's amazing that the religious right seem to actually believe man creates life in a Petri dish. What happened to G~d? Ammendment 2 isn't about making anyone well, it's about money, power, and playing god, as always. There will still be Dr. Frankenstein experiements with or without passage of this ammendment, but if NO wins, at least we don't have to fund the experiments directly, and the government won't have the control over cloning, at least for now, and the religious right will think they've won. WIN/ WIN / WIN. The last thing our nation needs is the federally funded, potential ability to clone politicians! I haven't heard so much about gay issues on the ballot this week. It seems when President Bush brought it up in Iowa, it really backfired in Colorado, so back to the topic of terror. What about the verdict for Hussein? Now, I see why we had to play the chicken mouse game over international courts a couple of years ago. I remember all the clucking that went on. America has so much more power over this new Iraqi court than it would the International Court. The International Court wouldn't have even entertained the idea of the death penalty, and I've read how strongly that would offend so many Americans. I think American Christians and Mulsim extremists are about the only ones that believe in the death penalty, so not only was the US sponsored court in Iraq, the obvious choice, it was the only option. Maybe it accomplished the mid-term election rally that was so desperately needed. Well, tomorrow is election day. I have no idea what anyone stands for or believes in, or even promised . . . Wow! Politicians don't even make empty promises anymore, they just tell you how bad the other choice is. Maybe next time, while the chickens are all clucking and squawking and fighting over the dead mouse, I should watch and see what the cat is up to.

. . . fear not little flock . . .

The SPIN Cycle

Can you believe the news this week? I was really aggravated that Senator Kerry gave into the ridiculous demand, to apologize. Most people have the intelligence to know what he meant. I heard Bill Bennett, the first morning of the big hullabaloo talking about asking Mother Bush to reconfirm G.W.'s high SAT scores and starting that diatribe from the old campaign. And then, later that same day, or maybe the next morning . . . he just knew Senator Kerry was bashing the troops. So, Bill . . . do you need to make your program a little later in the day, so you have time to think about such matters? Then I heard that Rush Limbaugh felt that had to waste his time addressing Kerry's blunder. I thought trashing democrats was how he spends his time! Did he have other candidates with more to target, if so . . . Rush, was this a wise use of time? I really can't believe that the conservatives can be so consumed by a mispoken sentence. But maybe it was enough to get a few more republicans out to vote. Again, nice job Mr. Senator. I understand Saddam Hussein is scheduled to hear the verdict Nov. 5, right before our election. So, will this verdict have any bearing on the election outcome? I'm guessing a guilty verdict just might rally the Bush camp. Say, he was in my state today. That's right, he made two stops. I live in Blunt country, and the land of Talent. Now, on to the Rev. Ted Haggard's situation. Ted or Art, what were you thinking? You had to know as famous as you are, this would make the news. What is this statement about meth? You bought it, but you didn't use it. Do you remember what your people had to say when Bill Clinton said he didn't inhale? And we won't even address, yet, the potential comparison to Bill and Monica's little situation, because frankly the homosexual aspect really does make it a different issue, conservatively speaking. Of course, it's all about which side of the fence one is, on when it comes to matters of indiscretion, now doesn't it Art? James Dobson went way out on a limb for you, buddy, I hope his favorable comments weren't made erroneously. And Mr. Jones, unusual name, so your conscience got to you and you had to do the moral thing? You had to go public about your drugs and homosexuality, four months after you realized that Ted Haggard was Art, and just days before a big ballot issue? So is your the reference to doing 'the moral thing,' what caused the reported discrepency in your polygraph? Well, it looks like you've got yourself an interesting claim to fame! Just think, by next Wednesday, the accusations and comments should be aiming at 2008. Are we a nation with vision for the future or what?

To every thing there is a season . . .a time to refrain . . .and a time to lose . . .

G.W., John, You're Not Helping!

Every morning, for the past few days, I have awakened to the same tired discussion, by some wanna be that gives the term political pundit new definition in the negative direction. I'm sure the man has a good reputation amongst his followers, don't they all? But really, it was one line that has become as tired as "mission accomplished." I really am disgusted by both parties right now and have resigned myself to this for one more week, unless . . . or until the votes are all settled, and then the whining and complaining will at least change topics, I hope. Now, on to the two boys that are disrupting the parties! We all know that Iraq is the mid-term election issue for Congress and Senate. But please hear this, both of you, with all due respect. You both had your turns in 2004, and Iraq was the election issue then, too.
Mr. President,
We know you think we should all want to fight all the time, but we don't. And I do pray for our troups and I know there are many young men and women with intelligence and degrees in Iraq right now, but according to the news of the past 3 1/2 years, there are also people over there that don't know how to play by the rules of the Geneva Convention and then have the stupidity to take pictures. And in the news there are military personnel brought home, regularly, to face courts martial charges. I've personally cleaned up and repaired damages to an apartment in rental arrears left by a young man that was "all signed up and going to Iraq." I am related by marriage to a recruiter, and I don't know if his recruiting office is by the college or the video arcade, but I know where the recruiting office was in the town where I lived when the war started. Now, your fear, fear, fear and fight, fight, fight is getting tiring to the people who are on your team. The rest of us have really had more than enough!
Mr. Senator,
What were you thinking? Whose side are you on? All your party had to do was change name plaques on doors and parking places and you pull this stunt. I do believe you were "taking a shot" at the President, [can I say that in a blog without upsetting Homeland Security?] but it wasn't necessary to say anything. Your party was ahead. The democrats were winning! There was even talk of you thinking about '08. Now it's 2004, all over again, and I think we know how that turned out for the Dems. Good thing you didn't give up your day job. Listen, John, you're a nice guy, but you're not a comedian, and you do seem to have difficulty staying on topic or at least the same side of the topic, so maybe you shouldn't put yourself out on that limb. Stay with your strengths. I don't like the war in Iraq, either, but I was never in favor of it, I didn't change my mind after we got there.
So, now you two, it's not your party, quit making everybody cry! I remember when Clinton started schmoozing the Republicans in 1994 and now he's fund raising and spending more time with Daddy Bush than G.W. is. Mr. Kerry, you gave the Republicans a much needed boost, and that raises questions in my mind. Mr. President, if the Republicans manage to retain Congress or Senate, it will not be because of you. As a matter of fact, you've left several republican candidates whistling in the wind without endorsement, and I don't know why, but I have my ideas. What 2006 has made me realize and just may cause the entire nation to realize is the fact that we just didn't really have much of a choice in 2004, at all. Thank you both for giving us this election deja vu of 2004, it momentarily distracts from the fact that we are really living George Orwell's 1984?
From which some have been turned away, giving themselves to foolish talking;

Perception is 90% . . .

Have you heard after the big meeting about Iraq? We have a new plan. President Bush isn't going to use the phrase "staying the course," any more. The worst month for American deaths, this year in Iraq and this is what came out of the special meetings? No more "stay the course!" President Bush really should not be blamed for that phrase, anyway, and as tiring as it has become in the past 3 1/2 years, the phrase is actually from the Reagan administration, so it's been heard for 25 years. No wonder we're tired of it. I was reading about how much scripting and choregraphy was done by the White House staff in the Reagan administration. Mr. Reagan really seemed to be more or less treated as a figure head. Of course, we'll never know when the horrible disease of Alzheimer's began wreaking havok in his life, but apparently "stay the course" was a good safe statement to make without going into details and strategy. Or, maybe it's been a good safe statement to make when there is no strategy.

Life is certainly getting interesting as another election approaches that is already fraught with "what ifs" and possible voting recalculations. I can still remember a time when we knew who our elected officials were, right after the election. With all this technology and effeciency, it may take months to know the outcome, but we can always know ahead of time, by the polls, where the potential malfunctions will be . . . Rather than discussing the candidates and who will win or who has the best campaign or plan, it's more now a matter of discussing which strategic precinct will have problems. It would seem, the democracy we are demanding of the Middle East isn't going much smoother there. Abbas has decided democracy or at least free elections just may be a destabilizing factor for Palestine. So what happens when free elections don't work? Perhaps an electoral college would be the next step . . . I remember the promotional propaganda regarding the electoral college in recent years, then as I listened to the news regarding Tom DeLay and all this redistricting, it simply made so much sense. Redistricting didn't just make life a little easier to get the party of choice into Congress, redistricting has the power to change a state from blue to red at the level of the electoral college.

Let all things be done decently and in order.

So Much in the News

Once again, it seems, I am reinventing this blog. My mom used to tell me I was always reinventing myself, but that was just because in dealing with her, all my "other selves" were just never good enough . . . I'm so glad G~d gave me peace with me.

Now back to this new and improved blog. It may be that the news items will slow down after the election, but until then, I'm going to cover a few topics, so, first I just cannot leave former Congressman Foley on a back burner any longer. I have listened to this for nearly a month now and I actually heard some pseudo intellectual try to compare what he did with congressional pages to the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky situation, stating she was 19. First, I will address the simple math, which seems to be quite a problem for many in this country. Monica was born in 1973 and didn't have her affair with President Clinton until 1995 which was confirmed by geography and Kenneth Starr. So, she was not 19 as the psuedo intellectual declared. Even if she were born in the last month of 73 and the affair began the first month of 95, she was not under 21 years of age! Lets talk about age, next, a woman is a legal adult at the age of 18 in most states, whereas congressional pages from high school are still minors. It should be a foregone conclusion to a legislator that a high school student is under age. I would go on with more non comparisons, but I will mention just one more and move on. The democrat party has not exactly maintained their platform to be the high moral standard for everyone to aspire, as has the GOP, and Monica is a female. Considering all the morality and anti-gay rhetoric from the GOP, I am shocked and abhored that they are having difficulty discerning the difference in the situation. Do they have this much trouble in other matters of morality or judging immorality?

Now on to the school safety summit. My heart just breaks for the parents and the classmates of the victims in the school shootings. I continue to pray for comfort in their grief. It certainly makes me want my granchildren homeschooled. I was flabbergasted, however; to see that our President has promised school safety, by undoubtedly locking down our society, further. Doesn't he remember where he was on 9/11 and how quickly he left the school to go to an undisclosed place of safety?

And about this special meeting regarding the Iraq war, but Tony says it's a regular meeting to discuss "staying the course." In case you haven't noticed, the Iraq war is no longer a war with no direction, it is a war with a spiral downward direction!

Japan, I hear we've promised protection and backup. Well don't forget, we're Israel's ally, also and you saw how effective we were in helping them just a couple of months ago, against those our President labeled as terrorists. Something about not having the manpower, but would help with logistics . . . that's right, good ol' American know-how.

Now, a note of congratulations are in order. It would appear that all those collecting Social Security have a raise coming next year. Wow, only in America can you get paid to breathe! Isn't this just a great country and the absolute best time ever for happy, golden years, as long as you don't think about the children's future . . .

. . . violently putting the young men to death, and crushing the young women; they have no pity for children, and no mercy for the fruit of the body. Isaiah

Let's Talk Conspiracy

Has anyone else noticed, for the last five or six years, the references to conspiracy theories regarding politics? What I have noticed is that both parties feel "the other" party followers are conspiracy theorists. It's so interesting to hear one side present their observations about "the conspiracy" of the other party. Then the other party shares their views of the paranoia of the "other party." I'm thinking it's not a conspiracy between democrats and republicans, but rather the politicians verses the common citizen. Don't get me wrong here. The politicians aren't "out to get us," they need us. The politicians simply want to be aristrocrats and the common citizen maintain their mere peasant status, willingly and blindly. I've been tickled this week at the "house cleaning" on Capitol Hill. It has reminded me of the old Rice Krispies commercial when the mom dusted her face with flour right before presenting the Rice Krispies treats to the awaiting crowd of children, giving the illusion that she had been slaving in the kitchen to make such a treat. The republicans are giving the impression that they will hold a high standard, even for "their own" in matters of protecting the public. And the democrats are just quite the moral high roaders, these days, drawing the parameters and lines for what is good and decent. And I just don't know how much of the public is swallowing this hook, line and sinker.

It gets a bit scary as I listen to those that re-elected the same administration in 2004, now making comments regarding some of the decisions. The scary part is that these individuals that make up the constituency for the present administration are "never wrong." As a matter of fact, they possess great insight as to what is suitable for the rest of us, and they will share it at every opportunity. So will they say enough is enough? Doubtful until it affects their pocketbook . . . The democrats, on the other hand, see their opportunity to run away with the election based upon the illusion that so many republicans have been caught at deeds "unbecoming" to a politician. Will the democrats regain the House? The real problem is not the continual argument between the democrats and the republicans and yet it is the real problem. Bottom line, the politicians are hoping to keep the American public arguing party lines and focusing on blame, rather than realize there is no party that can fix the mess and no party that is above reproach and both parties like the prestige of being American aristocracy. If the partisan arguments cease and the conspiracy accusations become silent, the people might see the truth.

The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that ruleth among fools.

Wow! The old "Divide and Conquer" Plan

I was going to blog about the latest saga in Washington and offer some insight to so many educated spokespersons that have attempted to make comparisons between Foley's actions and the situation between former President Clinton and Monica. Sadly, I expected this, but I still am just disgusted by the fact that these people truly cannot discern between apples and oranges and continue to incite their faithful listeners. It's just a cruel, cruel thing these "masterminds" are doing to the blind, loyal listeners that are just awaiting the next topic to be told the perspective for drawing the "proper" conclusions. And I hope to address this in another blog, soon, but I have happened on to some startling information that made so many pieces of the puzzle just "click" into place.

Before the next election, please tell everyone you know this startling information. All this partisan polarization is just propaganda to get American's side tracked while the real power sets it foundation. I owe the middle class moderate conservatives a real apology. I have been putting them in the same category as the extremists and although I do not necessarily agree with their politics, I do need to acknowledge that they many of them are reasonable people.

I've been watching Bill Clinton and George Bush make many appearances together and work for many of the same causes. I've said Bill Clinton did more for the Republican party than Eisenhower did and in one sense he did, but actually Bill Clinton did more for the extremist party that is working through the ranks of the republican party. I really didn't catch on very quickly, until I began reading about several republican candidates that were not being endorsed by the White House and some prominant governors.

When I discovered that the republican candidate had been abandoned for Joe Lieberman, I realized, the "perfect" plan was in place! And so much controversy right before an election? Please. This just makes more sense than anything. America has been so programed to keep the democrat party in check with a fear of Communism and love of money which provides two very real check points. One, extreme democrats are socialists and communists and Americans are entirely to selfish to "give all you have and take what you need." Let's keep the reality checks here. The next check point for the democratic party is money, specifically taxes. But George the first and Bill are collecting millions from Americans and it isn't taxes, but charity. Now Americans will give the same or more to charity willingly, than they will agree to give up in taxes, at election time. This ideology is really subtle, and I don't know how many are actually "breaking down the partisan wall" behind the scenes, but I'm sure it will be forthcoming after November.

It looks as though there is a group of politicians with a following that wants more aggression and more control and they are determined to keep moving that direction if they can keep the majority politically polarized, with moot points. America has literally been divided and this division has been orchestrated. And while Americans squibble over topics that are completely out of their hands and attempt to control things that are only in G~d's hands, we have literally set ourselves up to be conquered through our division.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed . . .