Archive | Politics & Government

RSS feed for this section


Senator Barack Obama has been accused of speaking in ethereal terms, promoting hope and justice, rarely engaging in specifics about his proposed policies. That’s not exactly true.

There is a 52 second video floating around the Internet circuit in which the senator looks directly in the eye of the camera and announces his intentions about global weaponry and war systems, and what the United States would do if he were in the top position. 

Click here: YouTube

This is good. Now we know. Americans should listen closely to those 52 seconds because — in a few words — it tells us much about what to expect if this man ascends to the Oval Office.

Evaluate for yourself:

* He will end the war and immediately start pulling troops out. He’s already told us this. Ending the war is a good thing. We all want to see an end to the war. The questions remain, however: In what manner, how rapidly, will there be chaos, mass murders and destruction in the path, what will happen to the 100,000 civilian workers in Iraq, how will this affect the current government in place, and how will our image play out to the world …

Read full story Comments { 22 }


There is an old saying about watching out what you wish for. You might get it.

Very often, new presidents are elected, not because people vote for a candidate, rather, they vote against a candidate. I fear that’s what will happen in 2008.

Those of us over fifty will well remember. By the time 1976 came around, the national electorate had become so mired with negativity within the Nixon administration, we were ready for a change at any cost. Decent as he was, Gerald Ford’s two year stint did nothing to alleviate the image of the Republican party which had sunk to its lowest of depths following the Watergate scandal, the embarrassment of Spiro Agnew, the administration jailbirds and the whole Nixon enchilada. “Out with the Republicans, those dirty bastards.”

In 1976, we desperately sought honesty. We wanted morality. We wanted a new squeaky clean image. We wanted pacification, not aggression. We wanted compassion not intolerance. We wanted a uniter, not a divider. The nation was ready for a “change.” (Hmm…that word sounds familiar)

We got what we wanted. Jimmy Carter.


Now, 2008 is a mirror image of 1976. Americans are fed up with G.W. Bush and his lot, …

Read full story Comments { 32 }

The Perennial Race Card

Enough, already.

“Racial divide.” “Racial harmony.” Racial prejudice.” “Racial this, racial that.”

Until this presidential season, I’ve never heard so much racial bantering since the civil rights movement of thirty and forty years ago. This is supposed to be a good thing?

The media walks on egg shells. Politicians carefully choke over their rhetoric. Whites dare not utter a word that can be remotely interpreted as… (Oh God no!) “Racist!” In today’s America, it is a worse stigma to be labeled a racist, than a serial killer.

Barack Obama is a brilliant man. He stands on his feet and dazzles people with oratory. Yet, his greatest defense weapon, is just being black. If someone utters a truism about him that is not favorable, watch out. You could be labeled a “racist!”

Geraldine Ferraro said, “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position…He happens to be very lucky who he is, and the country is caught up in the concept.”

She’s a racist? Well, Mr. Obama thinks so, so does the media and much of the black community. They came out shooting with both barrels. Ms. Ferraro stepped down from the Hillary campaign as an instant …

Read full story Comments { 35 }


“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”

Pretty scary, coming from a U.S. Senator running for President of the United States.

That quote from Barack Obama’s book, The Audacity Of Hope, is splattered all over the Internet, particularly on hundreds of blogging sites and e-mails, denigrating the senator and pleading with folks to prevent his ascension to the Oval Office, at all costs.

First, my position: I am opposed to the election of Mr. Obama, for a number of reasons. I feel an Obama presidency would be a major mistake. I am not among those who are aglow with oratory eloquence and charisma that so often electrifies people into a false sense of love and security. To my way of thinking, there are too many red flags about the man which causes great skepticism.

But, for the sake of blogger credibility and honest reporting, I must stand up for the senator in this one issue. The quotation is incorrect and totally out of context. Such spreading of false statements cause great damage to the credibility of those who try to impart valid information.

I obtained a copy of The Audacity Of

Read full story Comments { 27 }


Folks who think the transfer of power from Fidel to Raul is going to make a big difference in the Cuban/American situation are living in La La Land. And now that the regime has been fixated into power for nearly fifty years, and the generations of children have grown up in the culture, it’s doubtful that Raul’s future successor will suddenly switch to more democratic ideals. Either way, maintaining the embargo ad infinitum makes no sense.

In 1962, while embroiled in the Cold War, the United States government imposed economic sanctions upon the island nation of Cuba, cutting off all trade and imposing prohibitions against Americans who purchase Cuban products. The intent was three-fold. First, to alienate Castro from the free world and expose him as a communist dictator. Second, instigate an uprising of the people, then re-establish a democratic regime; and third, to put an end to Cuba’s threat as a satellite nation to the Soviet Union, whose dictator, Nikita Khrushchev had promised to bury us.

The embargo was justified…then. It is not justified any more.

The Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. Ergo, Cuba is no longer a satellite threat. Many thought …

Read full story Comments { 21 }


Shame on the New York Times.

It’s time for some entity within the private sector to establish a watchdog organization for yellow journalism. Reporters and newspapers should not, and cannot, get away with publishing unsubstantiated and scandalous stories for no other reasons than to derail a candidate and sell newspapers. Public agencies like police and military are constantly subjected to public scrutiny, why not the print media? The first amendment is not a free ticket to slander for sales.

Senator McCain did not have an affair with the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman. So says Ms. Iseman and so says Mr. McCain. Nor did he give special favors. There is absolutely no evident to support those allegations — none, zilch — and without that evidence there should not have been a story. Nuff said. Anonymous sources are just that: Anonymous. They are ghosts in the wind with no backing and support.

Any journalist can invent anonymous sources. If those sources did exist, what would be their motive for revealing such information to the media? Sour grapes? Fired for a job? Passed over for a lucrative a contract with the government? Why anonymous? How can those sources be held accountable — if they, …

Read full story Comments { 24 }


Not long ago, a good friend and I engaged in the taboo — a discussion about politics. When I said something critical of President G.W. Bush, my friend lashed out, “Well, that makes you a liberal and me a conservative.” Not so. But we ended the conversation and remained friends.

Labels are everything. It’s how simple minded people relate. It’s how we define one another, it’s how we define celebrities and politicians. We like the one-word pigeon holes, it makes it easy for we humans to identify who and what people are. Bush, the conservative. Clinton, the liberal. Bin Laden, the terrorist. Britney Spears, the mental case. Jack Kervorkian, Doctor Death. Pavarotti, the voice. Jeffrey Dahmer, the killer. Nixon, crook.

Much ado is being made these days of Senator McCain’s credentials as a “true” conservative.

Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t. What does it matter? All that matters is his loyalty to the nation as an American, and his ability to lead the nation in fiscal responsibility and to make our citizens secure from foreign invaders.

These days, if a politician is opposed to abortion, that makes him a conservative. Pro-choice, means liberal. If a Republican dares to join with …

Read full story Comments { 20 }