The Supremes Got One Right!

I was up early today and had a restless night. I was wondering about the pending decision at the Supreme Court on the 2nd Amendment.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The High Court had been considering the case, District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290, for nearly 4 months and today was the day they were supposed to hand down their decision.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

The Court voted 5 to 4 to affirm the 2nd Amendment!

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police."

But there were some interesting dissenting opinions.

From Brietbart... http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D91HS2EO0&show_article=1
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."
He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."

The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.

This is really good news, but it's just the beginning. Now the lawsuits will be coming out of the woodword with a challenge to nearly every gun law. The work ahead will be some real heavy lifting. I just hope we're up to it!

Did You Say Fear, Mr Obama?

This Obama guy sure thinks a lot of himself.
Now he’s saying that the right, I guess he means us Conservatives?, or maybe he means Republicans?, or does he mean everybody to the right of his position?(which includes most of the free world), will use race to scare up votes for John McCain. He said, his GOP rival has already used ‘fear mongering’ when it comes to foreign policy.

He said, “We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid.” They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he has a funny name. And, did I mention he’s black, and has a ‘feisty’ wife?”

I really don’t think it’s going to take any prodding at all from the GOP, or anyone else for that matter, to provide an element of fear and mistrust about this guy. He does a pretty good job all on his own!

He’s the guy that has spent 20 years in a ‘church’ that espouses hate and anti-white and anti-American sentiment. He’s the guy that chums around with the likes of Weatherman bomber Bill Ayers. He’s the guy that hooks up with the convicted felon, crooked real estate developer, Tony Rezko. He’s the guy that said he wants to sit down with the likes of the Iranian mouthpiece and the Venezuelan dictator and the N. Korean dictator without any ‘pre-conditions’. He’s the guy that has promised to disarm America. He’s the guy who’s wife has said that she is finally ‘proud of America’.

Nobody said those things about him or his wife... The Obama’s said and did all those things themselves! Does he really believe we’re that stupid???
This guy must be living in an alternative universe!

Why wouldn’t Americans fear a guy like him? He hasn’t been very forthcoming about his past. We know very little about him.
So what are we to think?

There are still questions about this ‘preacher’, Wright.
Mr. Obama, you mean to tell me that you sat in the pew for 20 years and you never heard this fella spout this vitriol and hate against the white man? Against America?
Do you really expect me to believe that?

Then there is the recent ‘guest performance’ in his ‘church’, by a Catholic priest that seems to be cut from the same cloth as Wright. Again, spewing hate and anti-white, anti-Clinton rhetoric from the pulpit.
Mr. Obama, you’re telling me that you have never heard anything like that in your church... ever? In 20 years?

And, there are questions about his background. Was he ever a Muslim? He has a Muslim name, Barack Hussein Obama, and his father is a Muslim and the religion is passed down from father to son – so what is the truth?

Evidence seems to point to his attending Muslim schools and attending the mosques as a child. His half-brother says he used to recite the Koran very well. He was raised in a part of the world that was predominately Muslim.

So which is it Hussein? Are you a Muslim? Have you ever been a Muslim? Why can’t you put this question to rest?

And these acquaintances he hangs with. Ayers, an unabashed ‘bomber’ that says he should have done more to bring America to her knees. And this Rezko guy, a true Chicago gangster real estate developer. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that there are several ‘bodies buried’ somewhere on one of his many properties! Who in their right mind would want a President that hangs with those kinds of ‘fringe elements’?

Sure I’m afraid of this guy. I think he’s dangerous and naive.
He’s the kind of reckless individual that would hug and embrace Chavez and Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong IL. They’re all Marxists, why not?!
He fits right in with those maniac America Haters!

And he wants to disarm America!
He wants to cut investments in ‘unproven missile defense systems’. Does he have any idea how missile systems get ‘proven’?

He wants to slow the development of any combat systems for the future. He wants to set up a ‘defense review board’ to ensure we don’t spend money on defense! He wants to negotiate with Russia to get them to dismantle their nukes and to take our nukes off line.

He wants a world without nuclear weapons… well, don’t we all? It just ain’t gonna happen anytime soon! And your plans will only leave the US completely undefended and vulnerable. Nobody wants that.
Why wouldn’t we be afraid?

To top it off, this guy has very, very little experience.
How did he even get this far?
How does a first term Senator from Chicago rise in national politics so fast? It makes you wonder…Who is behind this guy?

I don’t know about you folks, but when I hear something that sounds too good to be true, I know that it most likely isn’t true. There is no free lunch.

This guy is NOT the messiah.
He is not going to lead us to any ‘land of milk and honey’.

He says he's above politics, but, when all is said and done, he's just another slick Chicago politician. He will not be able to deliver on these outlandish promises of ‘hope’ and ‘change’ because those are just words and his plan will disarm America and make us weak.
America will not stand for it!

And he has no clue as to the complexity and difficulty of foreign affairs and delicate negotiations with treacherous men. He want us to trust him to get a good deal with those monsters? They’ll have him for breakfast!

And all these acquaintances of his will be hanging’ around the White House? I don’t think so.
It was bad enough when Bill Klinton was using 'our house' for sexual rendezvous, but to have this group of America haters sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom??? No way!
Not if I have anything to say about it!

You’re darn right I’m afraid of this guy!
He has the charisma, the silver tongue, and the backing from wealthy supporters to go far in this election. If we don’t stay vigilant he just might end up on Pennsylvania Ave!

We can’t let that happen!
Republicans must come together. Conservatives must come together. The right must come together and stop this Marxist Menace.
We cannot allow this great country to be led by a Marxist, period!

Whether the GOP uses fear tactics or Americans begin to feel the fear themselves, it really doesn’t matter. Americans just need to be very afraid of this guy, this Marxist, this wolf in sheep’s clothing, this imposter.
NO Obama!

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! [mo’lon la’ve]
What does that mean?

I created the image with a Spartan helmet on the left of this page as a avatar on a number of message boards and a friend asked what the Greek letters 'ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ' meant.

I thought it might be a good time to explain it here on the blog, so...

In 480 B.C. the forces of the Persian Empire under King Xerxes, numbering in the hundreds of thousands of men(some have said closer to a million!), bridged the Hellespont and were marching on Greece.

King Leonidas of Sparta pleaded with Spartan leaders to go out to meet the threat, but his plea fell on deaf ears. Leonidas and his Thespian allies marched out alone. With 300 hand-picked troops, Leonidas and his small force marched to Thermopylae on the north coast of Greece.

Thermopylae was the best of three possible defensive areas in which Xerxes' invading army had to advance. This mountain gap along the coast was about 60 feet wide, and was the best location for a blocking action. The confines between mountains and sea were so narrow that the Persian multitudes and their cavalry would be at least partially neutralized.

When Leonidas was preparing to make his stand, a Persian envoy arrived. The envoy explained to Leonidas the futility of trying to resist the advance of the huge Persian army and demanded that the Spartans surrender and lay down their weapons.

Leonidas replied, "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ ", or "Come And Get Them."

"Our archers are so numerous, that the flight of their arrows darkens the sun!", said the Persian envoy.

Dienekes, a Spartan warrior, then said "So much the better, for we shall fight them in the shade!"

After sending the Thespians back to warn the other Greeks, King Leonidas and his 300 Spartans held Thermopylae for three days and, although they were ultimately annihilated, they inflicted serious damage upon the Persian army, and most importantly delayed its progress to Athens, providing sufficient time for the city's evacuation to Salamis Island.

They were finally overrun after being betrayed by a traitor who showed the enemy another pass that allowed the invaders to approach from behind the defenders.

Though a clear defeat, Thermopylae served as a moral victory and inspired the troops at the Battle of Salamis and the Battle of Plataea, where the Greeks won their freedom and arguably saved the Western World.

Two memorials remain today at Thermopylae.
Upon the modern one, called the Leonidas Monument in honor of the Spartan king who fell there, is engraved his response to Xerxes' demand that the Spartans lay down their arms:
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - 'Come and get them.'

The second monument is a plaque dedicated to those heroes at the site.
It reads: "Go tell the Spartans!"

Molon Labe has been repeated by many later generals and politicians in order to express an army's or nation's determination to not surrender without a battle.

The motto ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ is on the emblem of the Greek First Army Corps, and is also the motto of United States Special Operations Command Central (SOCCENT).

In our everyday world, both the original Greek phrase and its English translation are often heard from pro-gun activists as a defense of the right to keep and bear arms. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent defiance of Federal court orders by the New Orleans government to return seized weapons, the phrase has gained popularity.

For comparison, these elements happen to be present in the English phrase, "over my dead body", or the similar phrase that Charlton Heston uttered at a past NRA convention, “You can have my guns when you pry them from my cold dead hands!”

Molon Labe has been recently used in the feature film '300' , a stylized depiction of the events leading up to and including the Battle at Thermopylae.

But on a more personal note, my high school mascot was the Spartan. So, I've long held the legend of Leonidas and the 300 very close.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

What's A Liberal?

The other day a fella aksed me, "What the heck is a Liberal anyway?"

I told him that a liberal was someone that believed in letting folks do just about what ever they wanted to do. He chuckeled and said, "You mean like that guy Obama?" I replied 'Yeah, he's a liberal."

He just laughed and said, "Well, we don't need anymore people like him runnin' this country! We need some anti-liberal people in the government!"

That conversation got me to thinking about what being 'liberal' meant.

Liberalism used to refer to a broad array of related doctrines, ideologies, philosophical views, and political traditions which hold that individual liberty is the primary political value… a 19th century political idea which championed individual rights, civil liberties, and private property.

Now, liberalism means, among other things:
- The favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression – you can think or act any way you want without regard to traditional values;
- To put emphasis on “fairness” in taxation, denunciation of "tax breaks for the rich“, the re-distribution of wealth, and has a fixation on poverty, multi-cultural education, and affirmative action.

A fella named Brewton said:
“Any.. claims to the moral high ground in (the present day) variety of liberalism has two problems: (1) the moral concepts used to justify liberalism’s preoccupation with ends rather than means are Christian morality, not liberal socialist doctrine; (2) in practice, without a religious, moral rudder, New Deal(and Great Society) regulatory government has turned into “pluralistic democracy,” a system based on every interest group seeking to maximize its own personal wants, motivated by pure greed, without a unifying concept of the public good in the sense of the Constitution’s preamble.

By definition, in a liberal society that eschews value judgments, there can be no principle other than raw political power upon which to make choices between competing public demands. As long as the mechanical procedures of “democracy” are observed, literally anything goes. The Federal judiciary can arbitrarily demote certain fundamental rights, such as the Bill of Rights protection of private property, to secondary status (an action that is an unacknowledged value judgment).”

I couldn’t have said it any better.

But, in today's climate, liberalism has become a dirty word.

It’s so reviled that now, even the liberals don't want to use it!
They have gone to calling themselves ‘progressives’ with the hopes of again confusing us as to the true meaning of their intent.
It won’t work.

Their insistence on being ‘fair’ identifies their true goal. They just never do get it that life isn’t ‘fair’, that nothing about living is ‘fair’ - that there will always be the “haves” and the “have-not’s”.

Liberals want us all to be alike.
Except, that is, for them and their circle of close friends.
They’re different.
They deserve all that they have earned.
They deserve all the wealth and fine homes the government has bestowed upon them.
They want us to believe that they have our best interests at heart.
They want the government to help us become better citizens.

These people are truely ill and don't know it!
Liberalism is a mental disorder!

We shouldn't look down our noses at them though. We should really try to help liberals everywhere to come to grips with their disability - Help them to get out of politics and seek the therapy they need so badly.

To liberals, progressives or what ever they are calling themselves, I say, NO THANKS!

The Supremes Screwed Up! - BAD!!!

On Thursday of this week the Supreme Court of The United States handed down a decision that will change the face of how we fight wars, forever!

In BOUMEDIENE et al. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., they have given armed terrorists the right to use the US Constitution for their defense in a court of law.

That means that the suspected terrorists, the enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Naval Base, have the right of habeas corpus.

Habeas Corpus has historically been an important instrument for the safeguarding of individual freedom against arbitrary state action - FOR United States CITIZENS!

Do you get it?
They have given terrorists rights equivalent to the rights of US Citizens!

I am just outraged! I could spit nails! How dare those liberal bastards do this to our Armed Forces! The vote was 5 to 4, with all the liberal judges voting in favor of the terrorists. This is Liberalism at it's zenith.
The left must be dancing in the street!

Obama has hailed the decision! Obama issued a statement calling the decision "a rejection of the Bush administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantánamo" that he said was "yet another failed policy supported by John McCain."
"This is an important step," he said of the ruling, "toward re-establishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus. Our courts have employed habeas corpus with rigor and fairness for more than two centuries, and we must continue to do so as we defend the freedom that violent extremists seek to destroy."

The Rule of Law my foot! These jokers are battlefield combatants!
They were captured during a time of WAR!
Just more empty suit - blah, blah, blah...

Today, McCain finally weighed in - a day late.
John McCain said Friday that the Supreme Court ruling on Guantanamo Bay detainees is “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

The presumptive GOP nominee said the decision, a 5-4 ruling Thursday that determined Guantanamo detainees have the right to seek release in civilian courts, would lead to a wave of frivolous challenges.

“We are now going to have the courts flooded with so-called … habeas corpus suits against the government, whether it be about the diet, whether it be about the reading material. And we are going to be bollixed up in a way that is terribly unfortunate because we need to go ahead and adjudicate these cases,” he said at a town hall meeting in New Jersey.
It seems that McCain has grown a set over night!

But, these Supreme Idiots don't have a clue. They have just tied the hands of all our soldiers. Now when a prisoner is taken, they will of course be given their one phone call, and of course they will use it to detonate the bomb they left on the battlefield!

Liberals just don't understand warfare.
They believe that we can sit down and talk with these monsters and negotiate some sort of peaceful agreement. HAH!
These militant Islamo-Facists want to cut our throats!
They have sworn to cut off our heads!
They will stop at nothing until we are all dead- or they are!

The Muslim mission is to spread Islam throughout the world.
They believe that Islam will dominate the entire world and they will try their best to make it happen!

The 5 Judge's argument was that all people should have rights. All people should have the protection provided under our Constitution. We should be so magnanimous that we extend our hand in friendship and compassion even unto those who would saw off our head! To hell with that!

Now, don't get me wrong. I believe that everybody does have a kind of ‘human right’, the right to exist and be treated with respect and compassion, but that kind of human right is one derived from one’s sense of God and religion and morality. And, I believe we become more aware of the human condition when we contemplate the higher power.

But as for national rights, or rights of citizens of a particular country, those rights are granted or revoked according to the laws of that particular country. Some countries treat their citizens poorly, other countries treat their citizens very well. Most free countries fall in the latter category.

For instance here in the US, in the preamble of our Constitution, it says, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Those words are for US citizens, not for the citizens of England or China or India. If citizens from those countries wish to visit our country they may do so after they apply and are granted a ‘permit’ to enter our country as a visitor. If they would like to become a US Citizen, then they have to go through another process where they have to learn our language, our laws and our customs.

The 14th Amendment to our Constitution defines "citizens" this way, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”And since our form of government is a representative republic, “supreme power is held by the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives governing according to law”.
That’s US Citizens.

One cannot become a Representative unless one has been a citizen for 7 years, and cannot become a Senator unless one has been a citizen for 9 years. These rules are for US Citizens, not citizens of other countries.

Nowhere in our Constitution are rights granted to anyone other than citizens of The United States of America. No rights for any citizen of any other country whether they are honest citizens or enemy combatants.

Thursday's decision infers that our country will not defend it’s own military. That we will allow enemy combatants to come and go as they will. That we will allow people who are not American Citizens to use our Constitution to defend them selves in our own courts!
This decision is nothing short of treachery, and near treason!

The ramifications of this decision will be felt far and wide.

We have reached a place in our history that will define our future for the next 100 years - maybe longer!

The five members of the High Court, The Jihadist 5, should be ashamed of themselves for condemning our armed forces to fight terrorism with one hand tied behind their back and for corrupting the sovereignty of this great nation.

Obama... On The Issues

Well, well, well. The primary season is finally over. It certainly looks as if 'Operation Chaos' did just what Rush Limbaugh wanted it to do. Prolong the race and allow Obama to be bloodied up along the way.

Mrs. Bill Klinton couldn't pull it off, but history was made anyway. We now have a black man with a muslim sounding name representing the Democrat Party in the race for the White House. How cool is that?
Well, not very, if you consider the candidates record.

I think everyone knows about the right reverened Wright and his anti-American views. We all know about Father Pfleger and his anti-Hillary rants(but I found it odd that a white priest would try to emulate a black preacher at all!). And we all know about the candidate's questionable relationship with the likes of convicted felon Rezko and the Weatherman bomber Ayers.

But how has he voted in his short time in the US Senate? How did he vote when he was an Illinois state Senator? Where does he stand on the issues?

Lets take a closer look at just a few, shall we?

He's Pro Choice and trusts women to make their own mind up about partial birth abortions.

He says it OK if a minor crosses the state line to get an abortion without their parents consent.

He supports affirmative action in colleges and government.

He says homosexuality no more immoral than heterosexuality and is pro-gay rights.

He says 'it's a scandal that this president did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban', and wants to ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

He supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, and voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.

He voted YES to factoring global warming into federal project planning and voted YES to ban drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

That's just a sample of his voting record, but for me, he exhibits a stance that is far, far too liberal to support.

My main concern about this man is that he insists on having one-on-one talks with the likes of Irans mouthpiece and those commies from Venuezuela and N. Korea. He believes we should run from Iraq and try to make friends with the world. He wants to curb military spending and reduce the size of the military. I really don't think he understands the war on terror at all.

Obama is just too liberal and too inexperienced for me.
Vote for this guy at your own peril!!!

The Political Circus

I really need to vent about this political season.
I have been watching and listening to the candidates from the left and the candidates from the right for over 6 months now, and I can't put it off any longer.
I have never seen such a side show!

I'm constantly reminded of my youth, when our town would be visited by a traveling circus or a carnival train, as I have witnessed the events of the last 180 days. I've seen everything from several of the traditional snake oil salesmen, to trained animals with the ability to speak, to jugglers that use all four appendages - at the same time!
What an assemblage of 'unusual' performers!

As of this date, the candidates have been narrowed down to, is it 2 or 3? - er, well, nearly. We still don't know yet.

The Republicans have decided on a candidate, although half-heartedly, but the Democrats can't seem to make up their mind.

Mr. McCain has had the lead in delegates for the Republican nomination for some time, but he just doesn't have what it takes to excite conservatives. His base seems to be the so called 'blue dog' Democrats, the Reagan Democrats, and the NeoCon's, or those 'new conservatives' that so many people look upon with a certain puzzlement.

The Senator's history of liberal legislation and his position on illegal immigration does not sit well with many Republicans.
They just don't trust him to do what's right.

And, McCain doesn't seem very interested in mending fences or achieving any support whatsoever from the conservative side of the party. He has even gone so far as to disavow and condemn conservative leaders about their views and stated positions. Real Conservatives are going to have a difficult time voting for this 'wolf in sheeps clothing'.

As for Mrs. Clinton, well, we all know about the Clintons don't we? They will say anything, do anything to get what they want.
Bill will get down on his knees and beg like a dog, if that's what it takes!

The Senator has banked on her experience as First Lady and her limited experience in the Senate to rally her troops during the primarys. For many, that 'experience' just wasn't enough to sway them. Even though she felt she had earned the position, voters looked at her with a jaundiced eye. Her years of suffering were not enough to tip the scales in her favor.

I think they remembered the years of Bill's indescretions and balked at the thought of refering to him as Mr. First Husband.

And, the perspective of four more years of the treachery, double-talk and the politically correct nuances of the Clintons have proved too much for younger Democrats. Younger voters have thrown in with the newcomer with all the fervent zeal of a highschool homecoming. Mrs. Clinton may be a force at the convention, but obtaining the nomination looks to be merely a fading dream.

And, what about this newcomer? Who is he anyway? Where is he from? What has he done? Who are his friends? Why haven't we heard of him before? What does he stand for? Is he to be trusted? Is he to be believed? Is he what he seems to be? Why does he want to be President?

I guess we only ask these questions of the newcomer because we already know all there is to know about Mr. McCain and Mrs. Clinton. McCain has a long history of family service to America and was a war hero in his own right. Mrs. Clinton has been investigated by nearly everyone in America, and while she has been accused of many things, she is still a free woman.

But, this newcomer...
His name is Barrak Hussien Obama. He was born in Hawaii. His father is a black man(African), his mother is a white woman(Caucasian American). The father is a Muslim. He was raised as a muslim and attended muslim schools and went to the mosque as he was told. Then he says he became a Christian.

He says he goes by the name 'Barry'. He went to Harvard and became a lawyer and moved to Chicago to 'organize' people. He got elected Senator a couple of years ago and hasn't done very much while in the Senate except to vote against the war, vote against the 'surge' and complain about the 'failed policies' of George Bush. But, we know from his voting record that he is quite liberal - maybe even the most liberal Senator in the Congress!

Oh, yeah, then he began his run for the Presidency - after being a Senator for just 2 years. Obama has extremely limited experience in the Senate and we don't know if he can even run a committee - let alone a country!

We don't know much else about him except for a few recent events. We have discovered that he has been a long time friend of Bill Ayers, the Weatherman bomber. And for 20 years, has been attending a Chicago church that espouses a kind of 'black liberation theology' that borders on insurection!

And, then there's this... We're not supposed to mention that he is black(or we'll be labeled a racist), or that he was once a Muslim(or we'll be labeled haters of the religeon of peace), or that he has spiritual mentors that preach insurection and hate(or we'll be labled America lovers)!

And this guy wants us to trust HIM???
And wants us to elect him to be our leader??? The leader of the Free World???

He's UNQUALIFIED - pure and simple!

This guy has HUGE stones! If he thinks that a candidate with very limited experience - (NONE) - and a candidate with a backround like his - (one that he hopes will go un-detected or un-noticed or overlooked, or treated as inconsequential) - will be elected President, then he's a complete fool! ... or, the voters are!

But as an after thought, I wonder...
How can a Muslim leave Islam?
Don't they have a name for that kind of person?
It's called Apostate. An unbeliever. One who must be killed.
Are we to believe that Obama is an apostate?
Or is he a 'wolf in sheeps clothing' too?

My assessment of the the quality of the performances is not good. After 6 months, or longer in some cases, the candidates still seem stilted... unsure... unsettled. None of them look 'Presidential' to me at all.

I wonder if this circus will pick up stakes and move on?
Or, are we doomed to endure the sights, sounds and smells for another 4 years!?!