On Capitol Hill, it's business as usual.

When Donald Trump won the 2016 Presidential Election, I believed that the Republican-controlled Congress would confidently pass the agenda that was responsible for dispatching Hillary Clinton and Company.  The issues that were most important to me- safe borders, immigration enforcement, rolling back unnecessary regulations, re-negotiating terrible Trade Agreements, and support for our veterans, were part and parcel of the platform that President Trump embraced during the election.  Given that those same issues are also traditional Republican concerns, I assumed that Majority Leader McConnell and Speaker of the House Ryan would have little difficulty corralling their respective Republican majorities and pushing aside the Democratic opposition.  Unfortunately, it just hasn't happened as I envisioned.  Although President Trump has been able to pass some of the agenda, he must be frustrated with the lack of urgency demonstrated by Congress.  Ten months into the Trump presidency, why hasn't Congress been more aggressive on implementing his agenda?

Most of the more prolific Republican members of Congress have voted in line with President Trump.  More accurately, they have voted as conservatives, which is what is expected by their constituents.  My Congressman, who has been in office over three decades, traditionally votes as a conservative, but I'm not ready to concede that his voting record this year is an indication of support for President Trump.  I think the same can be said for many of the more influential Republican Congressmen and women.  Voting conservative is something that is expected by their constituents, and not necessarily an indication of support for President Trump.  Since my district voted heavily in favor of Donald Trump, I expected my Congressman to take a leadership role in shepherding the Trump agenda through the House of Representatives.  He's been in Congress a decade longer than the Speaker of the House, and currently chairs the Science, Space, and Technology committee.  I can only assume that he wields enough influence to make a bold stand calling for unity behind our Republican President, and the issues that swept him into office.   On the contrary, since the inauguration, what I've observed is one Democrat member of Congress after another aggressively attacking President Trump and his policies.  Since the Republican Party has a forty-six seat majority in the House of Representatives, why is it always the Democrats who seem to control the debate?

For a Congressperson to be accountable to his or her constituents, it must take more than a positive voting record.  Our nation sits at a crossroads, and our elected officials must be ready to stand up and be heard, because the left has shown no hesitation in taking over the bully pulpit.  President Trump deserves a Congress that will use its majority to push aside the opposition and pass the legislation that will make our nation safer and our economy stronger.  For too many years, the polite, business-as-usual style of negotiating in the House of Representatives has allowed the Democrats to dominate the agenda, regardless of which party is in the majority, and every year, Congress seems to become less responsive to the people.  We need a Congress that tackles its responsibilities in a responsible fashion, and the last one to leave the Chamber turns out the lights.  Instead, we have a never-ending process of brokering, deal-making, behind-the-scenes negotiating, additional deal-making and still nothing gets accomplished.  This is not my idea of smaller government, folks, and any member of Congress who calls themselves a Conservative and has been in office more than a decade, needs to explain to me exactly what steps they have taken to make our government smaller, cheaper, and less intrusive on our lives.

The election of Donald Trump as the forty-fifth President of the United States was the first step taken by the American people in returning responsible, accountable leadership to Washington DC.  In order to provide President Trump with the legislative support he needs to make our nation safer, shrink the size of government, and grow our economy, we must elect a Congress which demonstrably supports the Trump agenda and is willing to toss aside convention when necessary and use the majority which was provided by the American electorate.  Its time to look beyond the Congressional voting record and ask the all-important questions, "what has my Congressperson actually accomplished, how dedicated are they to a smaller government, and just how aggressive is he or she willing to be in support of the Trump agenda?"

Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich, out of step with Spurs fans, will never bring another championship to San Antonio.

Spurs Coach trashes President Trump....again.


Sunday afternoon, Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich once again took the opportunity to complain about President Trump to the media.  During his long and highly successful career, Popovich seldom discusses anything but basketball during his pre-game interviews, but recently he has broken with habit in order to remind all us idiots out here in the real world who voted for Donald Trump, just how stupid we are.  Given that the Spurs were just embarrassed on national television, losing to Golden State in the Western Conference Finals by thirty-six points, my advice to Popovich would be to think more about basketball in pre-game interviews, and less about politics.  Be that as it may, Popovich must know that the majority of Spurs fans do not agree with his politics (its a guess on my part, but Trump handily won Texas and the south), and will never have the chance to let him know how they feel about Hillary Clinton and the rest of the snakes running the Democratic Party.  Lucky Gregg, a multi-millionaire just because he's a good coach, and he keeps getting lucky.  Because we love our basketball team and we want to hear the pre-game perspective from the head coach, Popovich gets to lecture to us, and he never has to listen to us in return.  Actually, the more I see of the Anti-Fascists and Black Lives Matter Nazis shutting down free speech all over the country, the clearer it becomes to me that Democrats like Popovich think that they shouldn't have to hear what other people think. 

Unfortunately Popovich will not read this commentary; he's an incredibly intelligent guy, and maybe he might have recognized that Spurs fans want to know how Coach Popovich plans on shutting down Stephen Curry and the Golden State Warriors, not how much Popovich truly despises President Trump.  If it has nothing to do with basketball, Popovich, then don't bring it up during a pre-game interview.  Otherwise people like me are going to get a case of the red-ass and comment on your lifestyle and just how misguided your political perspective is, not to mention misplaced.  In the world of Gregg Popovich, athletes and coaches make millions upon millions of dollars because of their direct involvement in professional basketball.  Popovich, just like the like-minded geniuses in the entertainment industry, have lost all concept of what life is like for average people, which is why the elites in America today vote Democrat, and the working folks vote Republican.  Since Popovich likes to discuss politics so much, I would love to show up to his next pre-game interview disguised as a sports journalist, and ask him this question: "Are you comfortable making in three months what it takes the average teacher to earn in a twenty-five year career?"  I will never have a seven or eight figure salary, but I have no problem with someone working hard, earning loads of money and living well.  Frankly, I would rather it would be nurses, teachers, soldiers, police officers, bus drivers, medical researchers, and librarians as opposed to entertainers and athletes, but I can't change the way our society has evolved.  Regardless, I will never be comfortable being lectured to about politics, be it from the right or the left.  Maybe its a bit of jealousy on my part, but these turds already have the market cornered on financial security, do they think they get to influence politics as well?  Sadly, that's exactly what they do.  Many young people who are voting for the first time, will go into the voting booth and choose a candidate just because George Clooney or Katy Perry said they should.

I guess I shouldn't complain too much.  I wouldn't exchange our system with another, and at the end of the day, we really do get the government we deserve.  That being said, I don't want a political lecture from anyone unless I'm watching a debate or the evening news.  It's interesting that the famous folks who feel entitled to preach politics to the rest of us average, middle of the road nobodies always seem to be Democrats.  When was the last time you heard a sports personality or an entertainer (or a Drag Queen- it seems everytime I turn on the television I'm looking at a transgender person or a Drag Queen) take the microphone and start promoting conservative values?  Don't hold your breath; it rarely happens.  Normally, conservatives don't feel comfortable sharing their political opinions with strangers.  As for Gregg Popovich and the Spurs, I can only hope that the series will turn around in San Antonio and the good guys in silver and black will win. Oops, I almost started lecturing about my favorite sports team, and nobody wants to hear about that!      

As part of the effort to silence the leaks, President Trump needs to question how personnel were hired in his Administration.

Link: Trump incensed by continued White House leaks.


Last week, after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, he was met with a barrage of hostility and criticism, at first from the predictable Democratic loud-mouths, and followed up by the media, which now editorializes everything.  Not surprisingly, many Republicans in Congress took their marching orders from the Democrats and the media, and joined in the criticism.  Would President Barack Obama have face this type of response?  Of course not, but the "eat your own" Republican Party, many of its members singularly focused on re-election, leave President Trump with no real political support.  Some will blame President Trump, but the problem is much more a symptom of why Trump chose to run for president in the first place.  He should be able to rely on a Republican-controlled Congress for support, and to leave the criticisms and calls for Independent Counsels to the Democrats.  But GOP Senators and Representatives have become so worried about getting re-elected, that they obsess over the vagaries of public opinion.  First and foremost, President Trump had every right to fire Comey.  The Democrats had been calling for his head ever since Hillary Clinton announced to the nation that Comey is the reason she lost the election.  Recently, many of Trump's supporters started questioning why the FBI wasn't tackling the problem of leaks more aggressively.  Since former National Director of Intelligence James Clapper and Comey had publicly stated that no evidence has yet to be discovered linking the Trump Campaign Staff to Russian efforts to impact the election, why is the FBI still knee-deep in that investigation?  Just when was Comey planning on winding things down?  It had become a serious distraction, especially when the only illegal activity that had up to now been uncovered was the politically-motivated "unmasking" of 1,934 citizens, in an investigation which had yet to find even a scrap of evidence of wrongdoing by the Trump team.

Attorney General Sessions needs to take the lead in putting a stop to the leaks.  Trump needs to explain to his staff that all phone calls to the Washington Post and the NY Times must stop, and make a point of finding the next culprit and summarily firing said person.  Frankly, President Trump needs to revisit the list of people who have become his closest advisers.  The media continues to claim that much of the leaking can be attributed to the Trump Administration's hiring of so many people who are unfamiliar with the White House and politics in DC.  The last time I took a good look, most of the mid-level staff in the White House are professional political workhorses.  What about draining the swamp?  I am truly surprised by the number of highly qualified loyal Trump supporters who applied for positions with the Transition Team, and never so much as heard a burp in reply.  I happen to be one of those individuals.  As an author with a successful career in the CIA on my resume, along with time as a Federal Agent, and a vocal supporter President Trump during the election, I am just the kind of person the Transition Team should have considered for one of those mid-level positions, which doesn't provide the opportunity to speak, but allows one to observe and listen.  I believe the majority of the leaks in this White House comes from the numerous unspoken bodies in the room, who stand in the background in case their Cabinet member boss needs something.  Once previously I wrote a blog questioning the hiring methods of the Trump Transition Team, and I received hundreds of email responses from persons in positions similar to my own.  Professionals in the Department of Justice, Department of State, and in the Department of Homeland Security, who had chosen early retirement because of their unwillingness to continue working for the Obama Administration, but had volunteered to return in support of the Trump Administration and his desire to Make America Great Again.  Why weren't we considered for any of the thousands of jobs that were supposedly being filled?  The truth is, most of those jobs were filled with former Obama officials and others who have no interest in seeing President Trump succeed.

President Trump needs to re-evaluate the team he has put in place to hire the staff which has access to the daily routine of the White House, and ask his Cabinet members to take stock as well.  Anyone with Obama on their resume should be given the boot.  In addition, Cabinet members and anyone with similar access, including the CIA and FBI Directors, need to monitor their personal staff with the goal of identifying anyone engaged in leaking.  For President Trump to be distracted in this manner is as devious as it is unfair.  Those opposed to the Trump Agenda, with the media at the front of the pack, are using this access to paint whatever picture matches their narrative, of an administration in crisis and a White House in conflict. I don't believe the Trump Administration is in crisis and I certainly don't believe the juicy tidbits about Bannon arm-wrestling Jared Kushner for the President's ear.  Anyone who has had the pleasure of ever knowing President Trump understand that he expects a lot from his team, as he tackles the real challenges of North Korea, Russia, Syria, ISIS and our broken immigration system.  Everyone in the White House who is truly loyal to this administration needs to prioritize the identification and removal of leakers, and whatever mechanism is currently in place to hire qualified persons who will support this President without reservation, needs to review the stacks of resumes they received in December and January.  We haven't gone anywhere.

The Washington Post and New York Times have dropped all pretense, and now see it as their duty to destroy both President Donald Trump and the Conservative Movement in the United States.

This weekend, the NY Times will publish a front-page story on former Donald Trump advisor Paul Manafort.  Can you guess what shocking revelation the Times will be sharing with its readers?  No doubt it will highlight Manafort's long-time business activities in Russia, and close with a comment from another ubiquitous anonymous source, reminding the reader that the justice Department is investigating certain Trump advisors and their "alleged" contact with Russians during the 2016 Campaign.  You can be sure that the Times article will not mention that this investigation, which is becoming more disturbing everyday, has yet to find the slightest bit of evidence indicating wrong-doing on the part of Trump or his staff.  Between the Washington Post and the Times, its beginning to appear as if these two once-respected newspapers are taking turns, publishing stories about Trump advisors or cabinet members, which provide nothing but the same basic allegation, dressed up with the all-important comment from the secret source.  Currently, journalists in DC seem to have an endless supply of inside government sources.  At first, these leakers caused a firestorm by providing the Associated Press and others with the identity of three Trump advisors or confidents who had met with Russian government officials during the campaign.  What should be most disturbing is the willingness of the AP, the Post and the Times, to print information which is obviously classified and illegally obtained.

 If the FBI or another government entity finds it necessary to surveille and "listen in" to the conversations of foreign nationals, occasionally that effort will pick up the identity and incidental comments of U.S. citizens as well.  Whoever has been given the authority to collect intelligence on the foreign national is required by law to mask the identity of any U.S. citizen who has "inadvertently" picked up in conversation.  Before the FBI or whoever are allowed to start the surveillance operation which might involve a U.S. person, they are required to obtained FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) authority from a Judge.  Trump's nominee for Attorney General Jeff Sessions and advisor Michael Flynn were picked up during a FISA-approved collection effort.  How can we know this?  Because an anonymous source, probably within the Justice Department, provided this information to a journalist.  First and foremost, only a select number of people in Washington DC are supposed to have "unmasking" authority.  One of these individuals unmasked both Sessions and Flynn, which gave the media the opportunity to create a firestorm of innuendo and unproven allegations regarding both Trump and Flynn.  I have yet to hear one Democratic Congressperson express concern regarding the unmasking of U.S. citizens.

Some things in life are guaranteed. Ice is cold, kittens are irresistible, and the American people have no faith in the mainstream media.  Have you noticed that since the GOP has taken over both the Senate and the House of Representatives, the media is anxious to publicize any and all polls that illustrate Congress' low approval rating?  At the same time, you will rarely see poll results on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, or CBS that highlight the complete lack of trust the American people have for the mainstream media.  Regardless, journalists continue to have no clue.  Even after the fiasco of anointing Hillary Clinton as the winner of the 2016 election while the Campaign was still in full-swing, the media remain convinced of their intellectual superiority over almost all Americans (they probably rank themselves somewhere just below tenured Ivy League Professors).  This knowledge burdens them with the heavy responsibility of editorializing every piece of news.  From where they stand, the job of a journalist is not only to report the news, but to do so in a selective and nuanced fashion, ensuring that the audience comes away with the "correct perspective".  For the press, the fact that no evidence exists connecting Trump advisors and staff to alleged Russian efforts to impact the 2016 Presidential Campaign, makes it imperative that the American people are reminded, ad nauseam, that the Justice Department has not completed its investigation into this matter. 

The environment in DC at present is bizarre, to say the least.  From 2008 to 2016, Democrats and the Obama Administration, with the assistance of an active, aggressive media, frightened and intimidated Republicans into playing dead.  Now that President Trump is the White House, and the GOP controls both Houses of Congress, the high-tide of the Conservative Agenda should be sweeping away all sorts of Obama legislative leftovers.  Don't hold your breath, folks.  The Democrats act as if they own Capitol Hill, and Obama is still sitting in the Oval Office.  Why do Republicans continue to avoid serious confrontation with Democrats?  The first reason is fear of being labeled a racist or a Nazi.  The Left can manipulate just about any issue, so that with the help of the press, opposing the Democrats will result in being called a racist and/or a Nazi.  The second reason the GOP has become so non-confrontational is, of course, the media.  You don't want to defend Conservative principles too loudly, just ask Ted Cruz.  Devin Nunes, Head of the House Intelligence Committee, temporarily distracted the media away from the Trump/Russia narrative, by visiting his own source and being shown intelligence which demonstrates how leakers passed classified intelligence, including the unmasked identity of a U.S. Senator, to the press.  Once the Democrats on his own Committee discovered that Nunes had been to the White House and shared information with President Trump (which is authorized), the indignation was palpable.  No one gave a rats ass that the Obama Administration went out of its way to spread classified intelligence about the Trump Campaign before Obama left office, nor did anyone on the Left express even the slightest concern regarding the shocking amount of leaked classified intelligence that regularly ends up in the hands of the media.

I'm hoping that the Trump/Russia issue can be put to bed once the Justice Department Investigation is complete.  Can you imagine how much money has been spent to date?  More resources than were expended investigating Hillary and her special server, no doubt.  Once Attorney General Sessions has finally exterminated all the hold-over rats that seem to be lurking in every nook and cranny of the FBI, State Department, and Homeland Security, we can expect internal and external investigations in numerous Agencies, and hopefully prosecutions.  Leaking classified information for political and ideological reasons is not acceptable justification, and a message needs to be sent so as to avoid this situation in the future.  Throw the book at 'em.  It will be interesting to see just how the Post and the Times attempt to keep the Russia story on the front burner.  I might bother to check out a NY Times headline or two, but I don't like trying to read the paper than lines my cat box.          

Dynamics in U.S. politics in 2016 capable of damaging all manner of relationships.

As is typical of someone from my generation, I always find myself comparing the present to the past.  The United States of 2016 is no doubt split by political ideologies that could not be more further apart.  When I think about the different stages of my life, I am unable to recall a time when Americans were so politically polarized.  The Red State voter is motivated by a deep resentment for Barack Obama, and the Blue State voter is exhibiting the same kind of emotion for Donald Trump.  Personally, I hate this time of year.  It seems to be impossible to express oneself politically without offending a friend here and there.  Recently my blog posts have been more political, and I also post the occasional news link on Facebook.  Each time I post a political blog, I find myself worried about possibly offending friends with different political ideas.  I wonder, am I the only one who feels this way?  I can think of three friends in particular, one in Washington, one in Tennessee, and one in New York City, for whom I have tremendous respect and admiration.  All three work very hard, and have created successful careers and relationships.  I don't know how or why we ended up on the opposite end of the political spectrum, but here we are.  With Social Media at everyone's fingertips in one form or another, it only takes a few seconds to write a political comment or link an online article.  Recently, one of my friends posted his thoughts about Donald Trump, and I agreed with much of his assessment.  In totality, though, I did not agree with main thrust of his argument.  I wanted to reply, and provide my perspective. Then I remembered, how many times have I written something that rubbed him a bit raw?  Probably more times than I would like to admit.  Don't get me wrong; none of my friends are thinned-skinned.  All three love to laugh and reflect on some of the more absurd daily details of life.  The problem is with me.  Actually, the problem is with a bunch of folks, not just me.

Lets face it: roughly one-half of the country is conservative and one-half is not.  You know just as well as I do that the two separate voting groups are for the most part, cemented to their overall political perspective.  Nothing I post in my blog is going to change someone's mind about not voting for Donald Trump, and no amount of reasonable argumentation is going to convince someone in Midland, Texas, to vote for Hillary Clinton.  No doubt the recent past was different.  During the elections of the 1970's and 80's, the Independent voter accounted for more than ten percent of the electorate.  It was possible to sway an undecided voter here and there with a well-argued commentary or speech.  You would think that in 2016, if the Independent voter is down to three or four percent, and the rest of the country is evenly split, that the Independent voter would be even more valuable today.  I just don't buy it anymore.  When Trump spends the next week, screaming himself hoarse before thousands and thousand of supporters, he will not be impacting his final vote tally, and neither will Hillary, campaigning with Elizabeth Warren in Rhode Island one day and Joe Biden in Delaware the next.  This election will work itself out in a fashion very similar to 2008 and 2012.  The side that motivates its voters to not only get to the polls, but to drag two or three like-minded voters along for the trip, will reap the rewards of victory.  The Democrats have run circles around the GOP when it comes to registering and getting people to the polls on election day, so the Republican Party had better be working up a sweat chasing down those unregistered conservative voters.  I think that this election will highlight the importance of the precinct workers more than every before.  In 2012, a number of odd things accurred in certain respective precincts across the nation.  It was nothing that would have impacted the final outcome, but both sides are being very careful to ensure precinct representation.

So why do we keep writing blogs, and linking stories, and watching debates, when we all know that our efforts aren't changing the mind of even one voter?  Since I know that turnout and getting voters to the polls will have the real impact on this election, then why did I link that article today on Facebook which trashed Obamacare in Alaska?  Can anyone out there who reads my blog (U.S. citizens only, please) honestly say that some random blog post of mine from the last year caused you to reconsider your choice for president?  I have been trying to keep my political commentaries and links to a minimum, but inevitably something I read online will nag at me until I offer a rebuttal.  The truth is, I like my friends and I don't want them to think that our political differences have the power to put a strain on our friendships.  The three individuals of whom I speak are truly amazing people and I am fortunate to know them.  I am beginning to consider the possibility that we have become so different in the way we view our nation and how we believe society should evolve, that the time has come to separate.  I realize we tried it once before, but I dare say the circumstances are different.  Red State and Blue State citizens seem to be so polarized, that maybe we would all get along so much better if we just went our separate ways.  Have you looked at the violence that accompanies political rallies today?  Its disengenuous to blame Trump; American flags were getting burned and Mexican flags waved long before Donald decide to bully his way into this election.  The truth is, we are like an old married couple that have grown apart, and for some reason, sentiment probably, we refuse to even begin the discussion of separation.  Here is the reality, folks.  Red Staters were not happy with many of the developments of the Obama years, and if Trump wins, I can guarantee you that the Blue Staters will be at least as agitated with some of Trump's actions.  Keep in mind, he has already announced his willingness to utilize Executive Action in the same manner as his predecessor.  At the end of the day, I hope we can find a way to reach across the divide and not aggravate our friends with opposing viewpoints.  Maybe we can get past this election without having to split apart as well.  Its possible that an emeny may invade our towns and cities and force us to remember the things that kept us together all these years.  God Bless America.  

Recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court....

Links: A. U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage.
           B. U.S. Supreme Court rescues Obamacare.


What a week to be a Conservative in the United States of America.  The Supreme Court of the land, in back-to-back decisions this past week, obliterated the Constitution that is supposed to guarantee how rights are protected in our Republic.  The first decision (6-3 in favor), which upheld each individual state's obligation to utilize and fund Obamacare, totally ignored the right of each state to govern its own commerce, a right which has been delegated to the states since the birth of our nation.  The second decision, which at 5-4 was much closer, was even more perplexing.  We live in the end of times for our own American Empire; I believe most people are coming to grips with that reality.  We are collecting debt at such a rate that within the next decade or so, our ability to borrow on the international markets will be decimated.  Ninety percent of this debt has been accrued during the last six years (and cannot been blamed on the military buildup and subsequent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan).  Simply put, the debt that is strangling the life out of our children and grandchildren's future, is because our of government's unwillingness to address and reign in entitlement spending.  That includes the need for Social Security reform; a new, simpler tax code would be welcome as well, but all we get from this administration is lip service.  Our media and politicians spent the week lecturing use about the issue of gay marriage.  Why does ten percent (at most) of the population get to monopolize the attention of our nation in this manner?  We have become the Republic that is truly led by the minorities.  If I hear another sob story about a transgender person I'm likely to lose my mind.  What did all of these trans genders do a century ago, or two centuries ago?  Would General George S. Patton have been able to tell the Nazis, "hold off on your Bastogne Offensive; I'm having my wiener removed in the morning."  And the pioneer family trying to homestead in Kansas in the 1870's, could the wife have woken up one morning and declared, "Cecil, I'm really a man.  I'm leaving you and the six children to go live my true identity."  Be that as it may, it has become the latest bizarre subject that the media and reality television are trying to force down our throats.  Personally, I want all of these people to find happiness.  Their body is theirs to do with as they please.  Messing with the institution act of Marriage, though, impacts American couples back to 1776.

My mother and father were married in 1962.  They entered into a union which had particular boundaries and guidelines.  It excluded NO ONE.  Every American had the choice to marry someone of the opposite sex, as long as consanguinity wasn't an issue.  When people argue that this is an issue of inequality, it makes no sense.  In fact, they want to CHANGE something that has existed in its present form for centuries.  At least be honest about the effort!  But its the truth of the matter that really burns my ass.  Same-sex couples can enter into civil partnerships that give them the same rights as married folks, including those reasonable and sensitive rights relating to medical issues and inheritance.  But no, they want to force everyone to recognize them as being in the same type of relationship as the millions and millions of Americans who have been married up to this point.  Its about FORCING people to accept something.  This week's Supreme Court ruling is supposed to protect individual churches from the obligation of marrying same sex couples if it is against the teachings of that particular faith.  So explain this to me: if a baker in Colorado doesn't want to make a wedding cake for two lesbians because it conflicts with their religious beliefs, how is that different from the exclusion given the churches?  It doesn't.  That's the intention.  It gives these groups another battle to fight, and I can guarantee you its coming.  This won't end until every American has been forced to sign a letter of declaration that gay people are wonderful and that there is nothing wrong with their lifestyle.  I for one believe that (most) gay people are wonderful, and I don't have a problem with their lifestyle.  But I do have a problem with being forced to accept something that is against the teachings of my faith.  What is it with the gay community anyway?  If you want to be accepted as part of our culture and community, why not GIVE BACK for a change instead of always demanding things? 

For those of us who call ourselves Conservatives, the funeral bells are tolling.  And its our fault.  We had a chance once, with the advent of the Tea Party movement.  But we allowed the leftist media to create a false image of Tea Party members as Jim Crow Racists and Bigots.  I have been to countless Tea Party meetings and I have yet to meet "a racist".  What have I seen?  A group of mostly older, middle-income folks who are worried about the economy and what will happen when they retire.  I have NEVER heard a discussion about race or sexuality.  But accordingly to the media (and even Howard Stern, who usually makes up his own mind but who has never taken the time to actually research the movement himself), the Tea Party is one step to the right of the Nazi Party.  The next time you hear a lefty besmirching the Tea Party, ask them which Tea Party meeting they attended, and when?  I guarantee you they will have never even met a Tea Party member.  Again, we have lost the agenda and the bully pulpit.  It is the left who are demonizing the issues and leaving people to consider their "guilt".  And for whom?  Where is their sacrifice?  Sure they had a struggle, and just like all of us at one time or another in our lives, were treated like shit.  It happens.  But no one owes you anything.  If you want to be part of the country and our history/traditions/culture, JOIN us, don't try and change things.  Here is an important question:  Has anyone seen even one study done on the marriage statistics of nations that have legalized same-sex marriage?  Try Canada for example...want to guess the rise in the number of divorces?  Or Holland?  Or maybe the argument is, since straight people have already started divorcing at a fifty percent clip, why not just put a nail in that coffin?

Obama and the radical left continue to set the Agenda and run this country like a dictatorship.  He has executive action and the Supreme Court, what else does he need to finish putting the last few holes in the hull of the U.S.S. Liberty?  Again, our fault.  I knew that electing Obama guaranteed that the Supreme Court would become rife with leftist activists, and what do you know?  He has the court he wants, and we have the court we deserve.  Just because we sent a message in the last election and chased just about every Democrat up for re-election from office obviously MEANS NOTHING.  I have yet to see anything from this Congress except whispers about getting a Republican in the White House in 2016.

By the way, did you see the White House bathed in the lights of the Rainbow Flag?  Those of you who oppose gay marriage, did you feel as if this government represented YOU at that moment?  There are more German-Americans in this country than gay Americans....will the White House change the color to Black, Red and Yellow during German National Day?  What about Mexican Americans?  I can only assume that there are more Mexican Americans in the United States that gay Americans....when will the Green, White and Red of Mexico light up the Oval Office?  Just curious.  Time for me to get off of my pedestal; my sister and I are headed to the City Hall to get a marriage license.  Why not?  How exactly are they going to refuse us, in this "anything goes" society?

A bit of politics: The Republican field begins to take shape...Dr. Ben Carson.

Soon Americans will be bombarded with advertisements, billboards, television commercials and radio messages, explaining why one particular Republican candidate is the best choice to run against Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.  The majority of registered voters are Democrats, but the difference doesn't appear to be an issue for the GOP.  In fact, when Ronald Reagan was burying Walter Mondale in an electoral landslide in 1984, the majority of registered voters were Democrat. This fact speaks volumes for the idea that in some instances, you really don't know who someone is going to vote for after the curtain closes.  Along with many others, I thought Mitt Romney would beat Barack Obama in 2012; the polls showed Romney ahead in both Ohio and Florida on the day before the election.  Obviously, some persons who were projected Romney voters, closed those curtains and voted for Obama (not me, I promise).  The point being, that it is very difficult to handicap the U.S. Presidential Elections.  The primaries, on the other hand, don't present nearly as much of a problem.  Take for instance the Democrats in 2016; we have known that Hillary Clinton was going to be the Democratic nominee for years (provided she didn't unexpectedly expire or run off to join the circus).  True, the party pretends that a few other possibilities exist, including Martin O'Malley, the former governor of Maryland, and Elizabeth Warren, Senator from Massachusetts who can occasionally be mistaken for Pocahontas.  But the nomination has been Hillary's since Obama took the oath of office in 2012.  In my mind, Hillary is a very flawed candidate.  If I were a Democrat, I would be very worried.  Hillary is dealing with controversies about emails and a private server, the Benghazi tragedy, the alleged "Quid Quo Pro" for companies and persons who contributed to the Clinton Foundation, and a less-than-impressive turn as Secretary of State.  But, to my surprise, HRC continues to lead all the GOP candidates in every poll I have seen.  This fact leaves me both disgusted as sad.  After looking at the Bushes and Clintons for decades, I would think that everyone would be as ready as I am for a new face, even if it requires taking a chance on an unknown.

The Republican polling machines already have created a two-tier separation between the candidates.  In the top five or six, we have Governor of Wisconsin Scott Walker, Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, Florida Senator Marco Rubio and Texas Senator Ted Cruz, with former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee not far behind.  The next group is usually led by Dr. Ben Carson, famed Neurosurgeon and my personal choice, and former Hewlett-Packard/Compaq CEO Carly Fiorina.  The rest of the list includes the "unknowns"; those who have yet to decide, including New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Louisiana Governor and another favorite of mine (sorry Jennifer!) Bobby Jindal, former New York Governor George Pataki and recently retired Texas Governor Rick Perry. A big question mark seems to follow former Pennsylvania Senator and 2012 candidate Rick Santorum.  I really like Santorum.  I have tremendous respect for Santorum; he shows no fear when the time comes to stand up for this issues that are important.  When he is given an equal playing field and access to the electorate, Santorum does very well.  He speaks well and with conviction, and he is a very intelligent man.  Unfortunately, the media and the Democrats (and some of his former Republican opponents), have pinned the ultimate Scarlet Letter to Rick's lapel.  You see, Santorum is TOO conservative to be president.  He doesn't budge on any of the issues; he's against Gay marriage, pro-Life, supports the Second Amendment, opposes amnesty, and is strongly in favor of entitlement and tax reform.  To someone like me, Santorum is not TOO anything.  He is just the right amount.  He talks about the issues that just might be the keys to turning our country around.  No, my issue is not that Rick is too conservative.  Its that he is running for an office that he knows in his heart he can't win.  If Santorum were to get the GOP nomination, he would unite and mobilize the left in a way we haven't seen since Barry Goldwater.  We need a candidate that will appeal to the level-headed Democratic voters who  sense the need to abandon the current socialist agenda.  I am bothered that Santorum would take a chance on putting another Democrat back in the White House, which is what will happen if he wins the election.  It makes me consider that possibly he has fallen victim to the Bush/Clinton fog, which convinces every member of those two families that the United States CAN'T FUNCTION without them.

You probably are able to discern the reasons why I'm supporting Dr. Carson.  Many of you may criticize me by pointing out that Carson has about as much chance of beating HRC as Santorum does.  I don't accept that argument.  Once Carson gets familiar with the podium and the pace of campaigning, he will be a natural.  it may seem a bit strained at the moment because he is a neophyte.  I find his "newness" refreshing.  As for qualifications, Carson has written a number of wonderful books, he has spent a good part of his life caring for other people, and he has dedicated himself to public service OUTSIDE of his occupation.  You would be hard-pressed to find a more well-spoken, polite, learned man, and importantly, he is humble.  I had some questions regarding his grasp of the wide spectrum of issues that face the president (heck, ignorance of those issues certainly did not affect Obama's decision to run), but lately he has made a concerted effort to address foreign policy, economics, and the social troubles that seem to be about ready to catch this nation on fire.  Does it matter to me that he is African-American?  Yes, it does.  Only in the fact that it might provide him with more access into those communities that are bleeding and suffering the most.  I have heard Dr. Carson discuss the inner city neighborhoods of Baltimore, his home.  Dr. Carson did not grow up in wealth and opportunity.  He is a true American success story, as is Herman Cane.  But he never fails to discuss the plight of the poor, inner city youth, who wake up every morning to another day of no options, no opportunities, just suffering.  It will be a priority for Dr. Carson, who will, I believe, create a cabinet-level position to focus exclusively on the people who haven't been able to escape to the suburbs.  It is an issue worth serious attention and funding.

Forgive Me For A Bit Of Politics

Links: A. Real Clear Politics Senate Polling
           B. The National Debt In Dollars

As the Fall of 2014 wraps itself around me, and Halloween is just around the corner, I find myself anticipating some trick or treating a few days after October 31. . . at least in Washington DC.  The mid-term elections are almost upon us, and one would expect the Republicans to be excited.  Normally mid-term elections favor the party who does not occupy the White House.  At first, this particular mid-term election seemed like a no-brainer: a president who at the moment appears to be unpopular; an economy that can't seem to get out of second gear; and more Democratic seats up for grabs than GOP seats.  In fact, I recall watching a few CNN politico-talking heads predicting that the Republicans would wake up November 5th 2014 with somewhere between 53 and 55 seats in the U.S. Senate!  I had to admit, when I examined the Senate seats in contention, I was convinced the GOP might hit the 55 mark as well.  But hey, through most of October 2012, I was convinced that Mitt Romney was going to be president.  What do I know?

Taking Control of the Perception as well as the Congress
Lets get one thing out in the open up front.  Yes, I am hoping that the Republicans take control of the Senate and keep control of the House of Representatives.  I'm not a rabid conservative who waxes poetically about the good ol' days of Ronald Reagan.  On some issues I'm conservative, on others I'm not.  The reason I am supporting the GOP in the mid-terms has to do with two issues: immigration and the national debt.  In a post earlier this week I laid bare the immigration issue for all to consider.  If Harry Reid continues on as Senate Majority Leader, we can expect to hear the Democrats and the Obama Administration persist in their claims that: "the Republican Congress has no ideas" and "the Republican Congress does nothing".  These claims continue to be made even as Harry sits on a very large pile of House Republican-sponsored Bills that will never see the light of day.  I'm not saying that the answer to our problems will be found in Harry's pile of Bills, but I would like the process to proceed as The Founders intended.  What we have now is Obama preparing to rule by decree, using the "lazy" and "do-nothing" Republican Congress as justification.  C'mon, folks on the other side, you can't think that this is healthy for our political system.  If the shoe were on the other foot, and Republican Senator Mitch McConnell were sitting on a huge pile of Democratic-sponsored Bills so President Romney could rule through Executive Action, people would be screaming in the aisles.  I believe that if the GOP takes control of the Senate, President Obama will think twice about using Executive Action to reform the immigration system.  Everyone will be asking, why doesn't he just wait until the New Year and see if the new Congress is willing to work together?

Seven Trillion Dollars in New Debt
The issue of the National Debt usually makes temperatures rise.  I remember in the late 80s and 90s, it was fashionable to say, "accruing national debt is good for the country".  I never did get an explanation, but I went along with it like all the other shlubs.  As for recent figures, I'm using the numbers provided in Link B because they seem to be a bit conservative, and I want to be optimistic.  On January 20, 2009, the National Debt was 10.6 trillion dollars.  Today, the National Debt is 17.6 trillion dollars.  In six years alone, we have added seven trillion dollars to the National Debt.  Prior to that George Bush was able to fight a two-front war for five years and the price tag, including National Guard, military equipment et al, did not come close to seven trillion. So what did be get for our seven trillion "extra" dollars in these recent six years?  This money disappeared into that empty hole labeled, "Entitlements".  To put it plainly, the number of people in the United States who suddenly were deserving of a U.S. Treasury Check once a month, just exploded.  That seven trillion dollars was spent creating an entirely new generation of people who are dependent on Uncle Sam.  Why does this bother me?  I have no kids.  By the time the bill collector shows up, I will be dust.  But I do have grandnieces and nephews, and friends with grandchildren, and President Obama has been taking THEIR credit card out of his wallet whenever budget time comes around.  He is spending your grandchildren's money.  What is so hard for some people to understand?  Its not racial, its not ethnic, its not about rich or poor, and its not really even political.  You know what it is?  Its unforgivable, that's what it is.

Those are the two reasons why this year I'm hoping the GOP takes control of the Senate.  What really fascinates me is that the trends in national elections are beginning to repeat themselves.  The Republicans start looking strong, and then a few weeks before the actual election, polls start to change and the media detects "something in the air".  By November 4, the Republicans will have managed to screw-up another election that was "in-the-bag" just a few weeks previously.  I don't buy it.  The media creates this narrative and supports it by disseminating selective polling results (Foxnews does it too, folks).  But all of the conversation is just window dressing; what matters are the actual votes that are cast on November 4.

• Georgia.  As I look at the polls (both those that lean left and those that lean right), Georgia is very close to electing a young white female Democrat to the Senate.  Huh?  For all purposes, Georgia is one of the reddest of red states.  Just take a look at their General Assembly.  The young lady happens to be the daughter of former Senator Sam Nunn, but is that enough to get Republicans in Georgia to vote Democrat?  "Hey down there in Georgia! Do you have any clue how important this election is?"  Let's talk about Kansas and North Carolina.
• Kansas.  Most Kansans have historically been proud of being known as the most conservative state in the nation.  Don't look now, but the intelligent people of Kansas are about to be hoodwinked.  A liberal Democrat is running as an Independent.  A Tea Party candidate may also be in the mix, and the people of Kansas do seem to be in the mood for changing incumbents.  When they had the chance to retire Pat Roberts in the Republican Primary (he probably had no opposition), they didn't.  Mr. "Independent" Greg Orman probably kisses a framed photograph of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz before he goes to bed at night.  And the good people of Kansas are falling for it, hook, line and sinker.
• North Carolina.  I won't spend much time on North Carolina.  The race is close, but Republicans always seem to lose close races here, at least lately.  I know North Carolina.  I was born in North Carolina, for goodness sake.  I can't imagine the Tarheel State sending a liberal Democrat back to the Senate for six years.  Come to your senses, North Carolina!

You too, Louisiana.  If you vote for Orman, or Nunn, or Kay Hagan, you are voting to keep Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader.  I have some concerns about Kentucky as well, but I reckon I've made my point.  Republicans will not take control of the Senate at the November 4 mid-term elections.  If the Republicans are having trouble in states like Kansas and South Dakota, I can only pity the poor souls who are running in Michigan and Minnesota.  The Democrats will keep control of the Senate, and the Republicans will retain control the House of Representatives.  And if I'm correct, and Obama is allowed to paint the "Republican" Congress as ineffective and inept, he will feel justified to swing that Executive Action hammer in all sorts of directions.  Addressing the immigration issue will be his most important use of Executive Action (for now).  Then, once Amnesty is in place, the stage is set for the death of two-party politics in the United States (and in my lifetime, no less).  Granted, the undocumented individuals have to meet the requirements and follow through with certain obligations, and that may take a few years.  But regardless of whether its 2014 or 2018, adding even ten million votes to the Democratic ticket will be enough to end competitive politics in the USA.