I'M NOT A PARTY GUY..I BELIEVE IN VOTING FOR THE CANDIDATE, NOT THE PARTY...

JUST SAYING.......

"GUARD THE CHANGE??" - I feel we need to guard the American way of life and many others agree....

I am a firm believer in calling it straight - say it like it is, and you will never worry about being grounded in reality.

The president stated the following in a speech to the Congressional Black Caucus, " It's not surprising that a lot of people may not be feeling that energized or that engaged right now," - REALLY? No - say it isn't so Mr. President.

"The last election was a changing of the guard -- now we need to guard the change" - Which change were you talking about, Mr. President ??? The 95000 people that lost their homes to foreclosure in August 2010 (on top of hundreds of thousands of others who preceded them) - The millions who have slipped into poverty over the last year?? The BILLIONS of $$$ you handed off to Public Employee Unions instead of the majority of job-less workers in America (just for the record, only 7 % of Americans are Union workers) - The change of DOUBLING the National Debt in the short span of your term in office??? IS THAT the "change" you were talking about???

The FACT that more Americans find this man to be wholly unqualified, taking the country in the wrong direction and as partisan as any other President we have ever had, shows that he is just another empty suit who fed the voters a bunch of Bull and asks us to follow him blindly. No way, sir - YOU & your cohorts (Pelosi, Biden, Politano, etc.) make the previous administration look like Brainiacs (no small feat).

We need to guard the American way of life from YOU & your minions....get a grip, Mr. President because you are going to be re-grounded in reality when the American Voters tell you " ENOUGH " by voting down your party in November along with its misguided views of what our country should be.

CHANGE is coming, Sir - that much is certain. Changing your ability to inflict your idiocy upon the American people while still thinking we will believe what you say or blindly follow you down the wrong road.

Obama urges blacks to vote and "guard the change"
By Alister Bull -Reuters– Sun Sep 19, 7:15 am ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama, seeking to fire up an important part of his support base ahead of November's elections, told black leaders on Saturday he wanted their support to "guard the change" he was delivering.

"I need everybody here to go back to your neighborhoods, and your workplaces, to your churches, and barbershops, and beauty shops. Tell them we have more work to do. Tell them we can't wait to organize. Tell them that the time for action is now," he told the Congressional Black Caucus.

The words of America's first black president showed a deliberate effort to recapture the enthusiasm that had helped him win the White House in 2008, after polls showed African- Americans much less likely to vote than whites this year.

"It's not surprising that a lot of people may not be feeling that energized or that engaged right now," he told an annual awards ceremony hosted by the organization representing black members of the U.S. Congress.

"A lot of folks may be feeling like politics is something they get involved in every four years when there's a presidential election, but they don't see why they should bother the rest of the time," he said.

Republicans could make big gains in November as high unemployment and slowing growth turns voters away from Obama's Democrats, potentially costing them control of Congress.

A Gallup survey in early September found only 25 percent of blacks had given 'quite a lot' or 'some' thought to the November 2 congressional ballot, compared to 42 percent of whites.

This represents a much larger gap than during the presidential election in 2008, when the two groups were about equal in their intention to cast a ballot.

High turnout in the African-American community, together with the enthusiastic support of young voters, was a striking feature of the 2008 election and an important part of Obama's strategy in securing the White House.

Success in repeating at least part of that performance in the upcoming midterm poll, when voter turnout is traditionally low, could make a big difference to congressional Democrats running in close races. All 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and 37 of 100 Senate seats are up for grabs.

"The last election was a changing of the guard -- now we need to guard the change," Obama said.

The "non-denial denial" is alive and well at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington Post editor Benjamin C. Bradlee with the creation of the phrase " non-denial denial" to describe the evasive Oval Office answers given to the press in response to questions posed to the Nixon White House.

The phrase became more popular when featured by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein in their 1974 book "All the President's Men" describing evasive statements by then-Attorney General John N. Mitchell.

Now we are seeing history repeat itself, in much the same way based on what was released to the press today. According to Carla Bruni, wife of French Prime Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, a new book written in collaboration with Bruni claims that when she asked Michelle Obama how living in the White House was, she replied "Don’t ask! It’s hell. I can’t stand it!"

This statement supposedly took place this March during the Sarkozy visit to Washington. So the immediate response from the White House is the "non-denial denial" from Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. 'The words attributed to the First Lady of the United States were never said,' " Gibbs tweeted, linking to a news report saying Michelle Obama denied making the remark.

The whole issue here is that the remark sounds like the conversation that would occur between Michelle and Carla, with FLOTUS never believing that Carla would repeat the remark to anyone. If we take that in connection to her husband's recent remark of " They talk about me like a dog", the remark by FLOTUS sounds like something we would anticipate her saying. There is also no reason for Ms. Bruni to lie about the remark.

Life in the "Goldfish Bowl" that is the White House is likely not fun, and I am sure it must be a terrible burden to bear, always having to be "ON" all the time. BUT how about thinking about how life is more "hellish" for the 95000 families that lost their homes to foreclosure in August 2010?? Or how much life is hell for the families who are living on unemployment and trying to keep from going under ?? or maybe life is more hellish for more than 43 million people that are living in poverty and almost 51 million who have no health insurance coverage. The level of poverty is the highest since 1994 and "the number of people in poverty in 2009 is the largest number in the 51 years for which poverty estimates are available."??? I believe their life is a little more hellish than that of our First Lady.

It is often in unscripted moments when people have let their guard down that you will truly find out who they really are. This seems to be one of those moments and it does state a lot about a FLOTUS - She has a history of this kind of "hoof-in-mouth-disease" stating that when her hubby got the nomination that "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.".

Many might state that there is too much scrutiny of the reported off-the-cuff remark made by FLOTUS but it seems like the White House has paid homage to President Nixon and made him proud by how quick they are to refute any remark or story that could give the public insight into what the OBOT White House really thinks & says. The "non-denial denial " is alive & well in Washington.

Maybe the change that we could use is people who take responsibility for what they say & do, unlike the White House which perpetuates the mistakes of the past by denying what they said when it becomes public.

"HOW DID IT COME TO THIS ??"

The news reported lately has become very discouraging....Not that we didn't face tough times in the past, but the recent issues seem more daunting than the one we faced in our past.

The recent issues ofnote are the economy, recession, unemployment, housing prices, healthcare, the deficit, Mexico, illegal immigration, protests of burring of the Quran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, etc. etc. The pace at which new issues arise is also staggering....each day we have a new issue presented to rival all others.

Our parents lived under the threat of Nuclear War and had the Cold War as a constant companion. An energy crisis and inflation presented great challenges to our country but we were able to work out the issues. Was it easy for them?? No, but they had better leadership and men who took their position seriously and had been raised in simpler times.

The President complained the other day about the issues he has had with his political rivals.

CBS NEWS reported it this way, [ " Rebuilding the middle class, (The President) said, has "meant taking on some powerful interests -- some powerful interests who had been dominating the agenda in Washington for a very long time."

"And they're not always happy with me," Mr. Obama added. "They talk about me like a dog. That's not in my prepared remarks, it's just -- but it's true."

It was not entirely clear what the president meant by "like a dog." ]

I have written at length about the fact, an indisputable fact, that we have an embarrassing lack of LEADERSHIP in Washington, DC. To compare the political leaders of our past with POTUS, Biden, Pelosi, Reed, and the rest of the Administration & Congress in Washington is frankly embarrassing. I feel that Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and FDR would all be shocked at hearing the President whine about ""They talk about me like a dog." They all took criticism from rivals, even within their own White Houses as part & parcel with the job- They were made of tougher stock and were true leaders - POTUS acts like a petulant 7-year old whining to his parents after not getting picked first for sandlot baseball.

As I was writing this post, the movie " LOTR -The Two Towers " was on in my bedroom. JRR Tolkien's epic story features the Kings of Middle Earth facing an insurmountable evil that threatens to destroy their world and enslave all free men.

Of the three movies, I am drawn to this chapter as it presents the maturing of the characters as they struggle to fight Saruman the White Wizard and his Orc army.

The leader of Rohan is King Theoden. He is a wise and brave leader, who is beset on all sides by the destruction of his kingdom, the loss of his men in battle and the loss of his own son. Theoden displays the LEADERSHIP that we could use today. He is confident but not arrogant - He is wise and not afraid to share the wisdom of his years - He values the lives of the citizens of his kingdom and will do whatever is required. His character is that of a true leader, one who has been tested in battle, listens to the advice of others and places his own needs below the needs of his people.

A pivotal scene occurs just before the battle for Helm's Deep. Theoden is trying to understand what has occurred to bring him & his kingdom to Helm's Deep, to fight this key battle.

He speaks with Gamling, the leader of his Army:

Inside the Great Hall Gamling is helping Theoden to put on his armour

GAMLING: Every villager able to wield a sword has been sent to the armoury. My lord?

THEODEN: Who am l, Gamling?

GAMLING: You are our king, sire.

THEODEN: And do you trust your king?

GAMLING: (places his breast plates on him) Your men, my lord......will follow you to whatever end.

Gamling puts more armour on Theoden. The Uruk-hai are shown marching towards Helms Deep.


THEODEN To whatever end. Where is the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing?

The men are seen sharpening swords. The villagers are handed staffs. A boy has a over-sized helmet put on, and another handed a huge axe, which he looks at in disbelief.

THEODEN: They have passed like rain on the mountains. Like wind in the meadow. The days have gone down in the West... ...behind the hills......into Shadow.

THEODEN: How did it come to this?

That is the key question we all are facing - How did it come to this? How did we allow ourselves to be in a position of having an obviously unskilled, incompetent President setting a course for our country, a course that the majority of citizen feel is wrong? How have we allowed him to tell us that while the rest of the world burns our flag, we are in need of another lecture from him? Why is our position in the world seen as WORSE now than when we had GW Bush in office?? All of POTUS' supporters said it was Bush's fault that we were seen poorly, but POTUS' World Apology tour made it only worse for us....the world sees us as weak and unwilling to defend ourselves. The President condemns his critics quickly but fails to condemn out-of-control idiots that riot, kill and burn our flag.

Theoden asked the key question. He understood the nature of the peril he faced. Our President worries more about his own popularity & standing than the fate of millions of Americans who need jobs.

I echo Theoden's words by also asking, " How did it come to this???" - We need to answer the question along with putting in place good leadership and a plan to allow us to beat back the peril marshaling outside the wall's of our own Helm's Deep.

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE??? Thugs overseas burn our flag - Where is the condemnation for their actions from our President????

Nine Years ago today, we were all in shock. The nation & the world watched as the Barbarians stabbed at our heart. They thought we would be mortally wounded, but they were wrong. A Japanese Admiral figured it out right after Japan struck us at Pearl Harbor:

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." — Japanese Naval Marshal General Isoroku 12/07/41

Al Qada accomplished the same thing, as they filled us with a "terrible resolve" to rid the world of their filthy existence. We are now 9 years into the struggle to stop these thugs who are trying to use the Muslim Religion as justification for their criminal acts.

On this day, we saw ceremonies and many recall the day. We also saw the media act as Enabler, as a Florida Preacher acted out and stirred up Muslims with the threat (threat) to burn the Quran.

In response, Muslims went out and burnt (as in actually did it, not just threaten to) American Flags. There were many burnt in countries like Pakistan (who we send billions of aid $$$), Afghanistan (where our sons & daughters die in defense of Afghanistan) and England (where the good British citizens had to watch idiots act out on their streets).

MY question is " WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?". A Florida preacher "threatened" to burn the QURAN.....he didn't do it - just threatened to. The idiots overseas in multiple countries mentioned BURNED our flag.....they didn't threaten to, they DID IT! So, I ask again, WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?? Why are our Allies silent??? Why is the Governments of the countries where the flag-burning happened quiet??? WHY isn't the burning of our flag as offensive as a threat to burn their holy book???

Americans and many others should treat this as a greater outrage than a threat to burn the Quran. There should be as much condemnation from our President (a.k.a. Mr. Empty Suit) for the burning of our flag. Instead, he acts like a substitute school teacher who cannot control his classroom and scolds the American people to be patient. MR. PRESIDENT, you SHOULD condemn those idiots overseas burning OUR FLAG as quickly as you are willing to lecture us about tolerance. It is your JOB to defend our symbols, ya know???

WE (America) stand by while we get slapped in the face by idiots who do not represent Muslims, only stupidity. We allow the thugs with guns to act out and we do not punish their actions.

As one who has defended the flag at the risk of my life while in uniform, I AM OUTRAGED. I feel that the actions of these idiots should be reprimanded, and we should show that a "threat" to defile the Quran cannot be a "free-pass" to burn our flag, act out or not be accountable for their actions.

I say hit them where it hurts, take back the aid until the Governments of the Muslim Nations stop these idiots from acting like burning our flag is not as offensive to us as it would be to them if the Preacher in Florida actually burned the Quran.

I'll ask the question again - WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

When every problem looks like a nail...

YUP - President HAMMERHEAD takes on America like we are all a bunch of nails...........and his toolbox is full of nothing but hammers. Let's hope the Voters take away his toolbox in November.

It's all the fault of the American Voters, because you're stupid, uneducated, bigoted, greedy racists....

THIS is the message that the Democrats are sending the voters, if not directly, through their proxies in the media.....columnists and Op-ed writers who support the agenda of the DEMS have been sending this message to us for months....." You just don't get it - you're not sophisticated enough - you're bigoted, etc., etc.

WELL let me clue them in - WE, the American Voters GET IT alright - and from what I have seen of the polls for the upcoming November Elections, the DEMS are really going to get it - In Spades.

I for one, am tired for being lectured by POTUS, FLOTUS, BIDEN, PELOSI, REED, GEITNER, POLITANO, HOLDER and the whole group of pin-heads who think they are the smartest people in the world when I wouldn't put them in charge of a bake sale. They are not only NOT the smartest, they have underestimated the intelligence of the voters along with not being in tune with American Voters values.

Get over yourself Mr. President & Madam Speaker - You aren't doing what the American people want and all the name-calling in the world will not change our opinion of your lame agendas...you'll get the message when the voters make the President a "lame-duck" for the last two years of his term and send Ms. Pelosi out of her lofty perch.....and none too soon.

Colonel Allen West - Let's send a warrior to Congress to teach the Politicians about REAL LEADERSHIP

Florida Politics has never been something that anyone would use for a "role model". After the Debacle that was the 2000 election that showed the world that FLA didn't know what the heck they were doing, I have been skeptical of anything political coming from Florida.

In this case, I will make an exception.

Colonel Allen West is running for Congress and I am fully in support of sending some sharp military men & women to take on the establishment in WASH DC. The past has shown us that those who have been tested in Battle make better leaders than those who only watched from the sidelines.

Case in point being the "empty suit" that occupies the Oval Office. I give you an interview with Colonel Allen West. As the Author so succinctly puts it, GODSPEED Colonel West.

---------------------------------------------------

September 07, 2010

A Candid Talk with Allen West
By James Simpson

Freelance writing doesn't pay much, but a compensating benefit is the opportunity one finds to meet and speak with really interesting people. Congressional candidate Lt. Col. Allen West (USA, Ret.) is one such person, and I interviewed him for this article recently.


Col. West is one of the most promising candidates on the GOP horizon for this election. He is a genuine conservative, unafraid to speak his mind and, more importantly, take action to demonstrate his commitment.


His candidacy has gone national on the strength of his inspiring speeches like this one, this one, this great Tea Party speech here, and his challenge to Democrats here. But many forget, or are not aware of, the controversy that first put him in the national spotlight.


Sent to Iraq in 2003, West's battalion settled in a town north of Baghdad named Taji. West received a tip about a forthcoming ambush. At the behest of interrogators, he questioned an Iraqi detainee, a policeman who had been covertly assisting the enemy. Finding the man uncooperative, West took him outside and discharged his Beretta 9mm service pistol close to the man's head.


The man became very talkative. The ambush was averted, and two insurgents were arrested.


West reported the incident to his superiors immediately. You can hear the story in West's own words here. Of course, the Army denizens of political correctness launched an Article 32 investigation, charged West with assault, and fined him $5,000. I wrote a protest article in support of West. You can read it here.


The Colonel was ultimately able to retire with full benefits, but his career with the Army was essentially finished. At the Article 32 hearing, West was asked whether he would do the same thing again. He responded, "If it's about the lives of my men and their safety, I'd go through hell with a gasoline can."


The Colonel has a way with words.


Wonder if his liberal Democrat opponent, Ron Klein, would have had the stomach to cross that Rubicon? Hmmm...somehow I doubt it. Watch this hilariously transparent speech announcing -- are you ready? -- an April 2010 "welcome home" event in the contested district to honor Vietnam Veterans. Klein says, "Better late than never." Indeed, but one would ask why he waited until 2010! He was elected in 2006. Could it have anything to do with those plummeting poll numbers? In any event, it is pathetic watching a leftist Democrat trying to pretend he's patriotic. Memo to Klein: Don't bother.

According to West, there were no further ambushes in Taji until he was relieved of command in October. Despite the Army's witch hunt, West's actions were enthusiastically supported all across America, but as with the subsequent trials of Marine Lt. Ilario Pantano, the outrageous Haditha trials spurred by the now gratefully deceased Congressman John Murtha (Corrupt D-PA), and the absurd trials of three U.S. Navy SEALs accused of beating up a terrorist, the ordeal revealed how the U.S. military has become an over-lawyered PC swamp. Ultimately, 94 congressmen signed a letter supporting West to the Secretary of the Army.


Anyway, West challenged Klein in 2008 and held him to 55 percent, an amazing feat given that West had little money and little support from the GOP establishment. This time, he is loaded for bear. With $4.3 million in the bank, $1.5 million more than Klein, the Colonel is ready to deliver the "Southern-fried butt-whipping" he has so colorfully promised to Nancy Pelosi and Co.


Simpson: Colonel West, you did not sign Americans for Tax Reform's Taxpayer Protection Pledge. How do you answer people who may be concerned that you are unwilling to commit to no new taxes?


West: As I told Grover Norquist [President of ATR], on July 31, 1982, I took a pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and have put my life on the line since then to demonstrate that commitment. Many politicians sign pledges, then go to Washington and do whatever they want anyway. The American people need to elect candidates they can trust -- people who keep their word. I have been keeping my word to the American people for over 28 years.


I am in favor of lowering taxes and reforming the tax code, preferably to a flat tax. I might also support moving to a national sales tax (the "Fair Tax"), but only if the 16th Amendment were repealed first. Otherwise, the Fair Tax will just become another new tax.


Simpson: I agree. In fact, I wrote an article against the Fair Tax back in 2006, when the idea was getting a lot of play. Many politicians would find the added revenues of a national sales tax too tempting if it were not first preceded by a repeal of the 16th. We would simply get more taxes. Do you believe our current tax system is unconstitutional?


West: I oppose the current "progressive" tax scheme. It contradicts the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution by seeking equality of results rather than equality of opportunity. It accomplishes neither. Instead, it creates destructive class warfare, with an ever-growing dependent class feeding off an increasingly overburdened productive class. This is wrong. Everyone needs to have skin in the game.


Simpson: Can't argue with that. Why do you believe the Democrats persist in promoting this class warfare?


West: As long as people have no skin in the game, they will keep voting themselves raises, and the Democrats are all too willing to demonize the productive class to deliver those raises for votes. However, if the Democrats achieve their ultimate goal, they will not benefit the welfare class, despite all their rhetoric about saving the poor and oppressed. Their real strategy is to throw the country into Socialism, and that will be the downfall of this country.


Simpson: You have enthusiastic support from Tea Partiers. After that answer, it is not hard to see why. What is your opinion of the Tea Party movement?


West: The American people are smart. They get it. The Democrat agenda will turn this country upside-down, and they know it. I know it, too. I have read Alinsky, the Communist Manifesto, I know about the Cloward-Piven strategy.


Simpson: Wow. You may well be the only GOP politician out there who knows about these things -- at least this is the first time I have heard a Republican politician mention them.


West: I don't consider myself a "politician." People are sick of politicians. I think we are called to be statesmen, leaders, and that is what I am. As a leader, I have always believed it is important to understand history, tactics, etc. Sun Tzu said "... if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a thousand battles ... "


Simpson: Amen. You received 76.6 percent of the primary vote against your challenger, David Brady. Congratulations. I hold nothing against anyone who decides they want to seek public office, but it seemed to me he was tilting at windmills, given your significant momentum in the race and national recognition. What was his story?


West: Brady didn't qualify to get his name on the ballot until April of 2010. Despite no name recognition, he was able to collect 4,742 signatures in March [Ed. note: 4,647 were required for Brady to have his name on the ballot]. He spent no money, never filed an FEC report, and no one had ever heard of him. We think that perhaps the opposition was trying to distract us, but we handled it.


Simpson: You had a debate with Brady before the primary on the Joyce Kaufman Show. It drew some clear distinctions between yourself and your opponent, especially with regard to illegal immigration and the Arizona law. Can you talk some about your views on illegal immigration and Arizona's SB 1070?


West: As I said then, I fully support the Arizona law and hope we can get a similar law passed here in Florida. Illegal immigration is about the rule of law. If we don't have the rule of law, then we don't have a republic. Article 1, Section 8 and Article 4, Section 4 both talk about the federal government's responsibility in repelling invasion, and that is what we have. We have to secure our borders. It is a national security issue. The number-one language being learned by terrorists right now is Spanish, and we are finding prayer rugs and translation books all along the border. It is also an economic issue, a health care issue, an education issue, and a criminality issue. But Obama and the Democrats think it is more important to get 12 to 15 million new voters than protect our borders, so it is up to us to take care of matters ourselves. The 10th Amendment provides for this, and I strongly support the Arizona law.


Simpson: I believe you also support making English the official language of the U.S., correct?


West: I do. Making American culture subservient to others is a dangerous consequence of political correctness. Multiculturalism is stripping us of our culture and American exceptionalism. When tolerance becomes a one-way street, it leads to cultural suicide. English should be the official language of the U.S.


Simpson: How do you feel about Obama's health care bill? Are you on board for repeal?


West: Yes. And if we don't have the support necessary to repeal it, then we simply shouldn't fund it. I would support real reform, such as health savings accounts, more competition, and liability reform.


Simpson: I believe this administration is engaged in a war with the American people, or more accurately, our Constitutional republican form of government. I believe all of their legislation is directed to that effort -- in other words, there is nothing worthwhile in the legislation passed since President Obama was elected. Would you support repeal of other legislation -- for example, the financial "reform" passed this July?


West: I would absolutely support repealing all of Obama-passed legislation.


Simpson: Now, if we can only find 289 more Congressmen and 67 Senators of similar mind and backbone, we might be able to save the Republic. I won't be holding my breath... What about criminal investigations? This administration has engaged in many activities that are questionable at best.


West: There is so much. We have seen stimulus monies earmarked for blue states, TARP monies showing up in foreign bank accounts, the administration providing taxpayer dollars to support a Soros-owned oil exploration company drilling off the Brazilian coast while he shuts down drilling in the Gulf...it boggles the mind.


I would support investigations into the many unconstitutional czars this administration has appointed aimed at revealing the kinds of activities they have engaged in. I would support investigations into this administration's interactions with Wall Street cronies, unions, ACORN, and the SEIU.


Simpson: What do you think of Eric Holder?


West: Ever since he called America a "nation of cowards," I have had no regard and no respect for the man. He is pursuing a nefarious "social justice" agenda, and, especially with regard to the Black Panther voter intimidation case, it is unconscionable what he has been doing.


Simpson: What do you think of this administration?


West: This administration, Reid, and Pelosi are all about making people wedded to the federal government.


Simpson: What do you think of President Obama?


West: A community organizer is nothing more than a low-level Socialist agitator, and that is what we have sitting in the White House.


Simpson: Couldn't have said it better myself.


Unfortunately, time ran out before I could discuss Iraq, Afghanistan, and other issues with Col. West. But his message is pretty straightforward. It resonates because he speaks the truth -- powerfully, articulately and unapologetically. This is the kind of leadership America has been dying for, the same need that has inspired the spontaneous explosion of the Tea Party movement. As Col. West said, he is not interested in being a politician, but a statesman, a leader.

Godspeed, Col. West.

For those interested, his website is www.allenwestforcongress.com.

BIG SURPRISE - Oval Office rug gets history wrong...and why this isn't so surprising

“Never neglect details. When everyone's mind is dulled or distracted the leader must be doubly vigilant.” - Colin Powell

It seems as POTUS likely never heard that quote or paid much attention to the details...The hap-hazard way he manages our Country demonstrates that all too clearly.

NOW, we see that even extends to the decor of the Oval Office....The new Oval Office Rug contains 4 quotations around the edge, three from former Presidents, and one attributed to Martin Luther King. And there in lies the problem. The quote in question IS NOT from Martin Luther King BUT RATHER from King quoting a famous Bostonian. Some will blame this on a staffer BUT I find it highly, highly, highly unlikely that the decision of using these specific quotes was left up to a staffer. Not only is this POTUS' fault BUT a biographer who worked with him made the same error.

POTUS was too busy focusing on being in perpetual campaign-mode, taking off on another world apology tour or his next vacation to pay attention to the " details " of how the most important office in the world is decorated - He handled this issue with the same care & attention to detail as all other issues he handles.

This is what I have called a " self-identifier " - It is when someone you observe does something, or acts out in away that tells you all you need to know about who they really are, or what they are really all about. It is something they do that cannot be separated from their true self because it is who they really are.

Way to go POTUS - in this one case, you didn't let us down. You "self-identified" exactly like we expected you to....marvelous.

-------------------------------

Washington Post

Oval Office rug gets history wrong

By Jamie Stiehm
Saturday, September 4, 2010; A17

A mistake has been made in the Oval Office makeover that goes beyond the beige.

President Obama's new presidential rug seemed beyond reproach, with quotations from Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. woven along its curved edge.

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." According media reports, this quote keeping Obama company on his wheat-colored carpet is from King.

Except it's not a King quote. The words belong to a long-gone Bostonian champion of social progress. His roots in the republic ran so deep that his grandfather commanded the Minutemen at the Battle of Lexington.

For the record, Theodore Parker is your man, President Obama. Unless you're fascinated by antebellum American reformers, you may not know of the lyrically gifted Parker, an abolitionist, Unitarian minister and Transcendentalist thinker who foresaw the end of slavery, though he did not live to see emancipation. He died at age 49 in 1860, on the eve of the Civil War.

A century later, during the civil rights movement, King, an admirer of Parker, quoted the Bostonian's lofty prophecy during marches and speeches. Often he'd ask in a refrain, "How long? Not long." He would finish in a flourish: "Not long, because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

King made no secret of the author of this idea. As a Baptist preacher on the front lines of racial justice, he regarded Parker, a religious leader, as a kindred spirit.

Yet somehow a mistake was made and magnified in our culture to the point that a New England antebellum abolitionist's words have been enshrined in the Oval Office while attributed to a major 20th-century figure. That is a shame, because the slain civil rights leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate was so eloquent in his own right. Obama, who is known for his rhetorical skills, is likely to feel the slight to King -- and Parker.

My investigation into this error led me to David Remnick's biography of Obama, "The Bridge," published this year. Early in the narrative, Remnick, the editor of the New Yorker, presents this as "Barack Obama's favorite quotation." It appears that neither Remnick nor Obama has traced the language to its true source.

Parker said in 1853: "I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one. . . . But from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice."

The president is at minimum well-served by Parker's presence in the room. Parker embodied the early 19th-century reformer's passionate zeal for taking on several social causes at once. Many of these reformers were Unitarians or Quakers; some were Transcendentalists. Most courageously, as early as the 1830s, they opposed the laws on slavery and eventually harbored fugitives in the Underground Railroad network of safe houses. Without 30 years of a movement agitating and petitioning for slave emancipation, Lincoln could not have ended slavery with the stroke of a pen in the midst of war. Parker was in the vanguard that laid the social and intellectual groundwork.

The familiar quote from Lincoln woven into Obama's rug is "government of the people, by the people and for the people," the well-known utterance from the close of his Gettysburg Address in 1863.

Funny that in 1850, Parker wrote, "A democracy -- that is a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people."

Theodore Parker, Oval Office wordmeister for the ages.

Jamie Stiehm, a journalist, is writing a book on the life of Lucretia Mott, a 19th-century abolitionist and women's rights leader.

Taliban paid bounties for kills by Iranian sources - The Sunday Times of London

The knowledge detailed in this news report from The Sunday London Times that Iran is funding the Taliban in such an open and obvious manner is unsettling. Either our present Leadership (Military & White House) are planning an over arching strike on Afghanistan based Iranian Spy networks, hopefully also hastening the downfall of the present Iranian government, thereby ending this funding of the Taliban OR they are so hapless they have not a G-D clue as to what to do, which means we have placed our defense in the hands of a White House that couldn't fight it's way out of a bar-fight, let alone a serious global conflict. If the latter is the issue, it amounts to dereliction of duty by those who are charged with our defense. If the former is being planned, then let it begin sooner rather than later and end the lives of these soulless bastards killing innocents & our soldiers.

The inference here is not regarding our military fighting men & women, who are both valiant & excellent at their chosen profession, but rather the Leadership at the top in the 5-sided Wind Tunnel across the Potomac and the Doofus Empty Suit-in-Charge who is on perpetual campaign-mode or vacation.....I can't remember which.

I am all for taking the fight to the enemy, to hit them where they stand and make them regret the day they decided to take up arms against us. Once again, I must defer to Sir Winston Churchill, who had more knowledge of what to do in these situations in his weakest moments than the whole of all the idiots in WASH DC have combined. His words are important as the Bastards we are fighting mean us no less harm than Hitler & Tojo did in the 40's...They wish to see us & the rest of the free world subjugated to their will.....

" You ask, What is our policy? I will say; “It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy.”

You ask, What is our aim? I can answer with one word: Victory—victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival. "

Sir Winston Churchill

----------------------------------------------

Taliban paid bounties for kills
Sunday London Times

IRANIAN companies in Kabul are using their offices to covertly finance Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.

They are paying bounties of $US1000 ($1090) for killing a US soldier and $US6000 for destroying a military vehicle, a treasurer for the insurgents says.

Afghan intelligence and Taliban sources said at least five front companies, set up in the past six months, provide cash for a network of district Taliban treasurers to pay battlefield expenses and bonuses for killing foreign troops and destroying their vehicles.

The Iranian companies win contracts to supply materials and logistics to Afghans involved in reconstruction. The money often comes in the form of aid from foreign donors.

The profits are transferred through poorly regulated Afghan banks - including the Kabul Bank, which is partly owned by President Hamid Karzai's brother, Mahmood - to Tehran and Dubai.

From these countries, the money returns to Afghanistan through the informal Islamic banking system known as hawala to be dispersed to the Taliban fighters.

"This means the companies involved in funding the insurgency can cover their tracks easily. It makes it harder for us to trace the cashflow," a senior Afghan intelligence officer said.

He said the Iranian companies had been formed with the intention of winning contracts funded by foreign aid so the donors' cash could be channelled into the insurgency.

Western officials believe the network may have been set up by the al-Quds force, an elite branch of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard.

The Iranian embassy in Kabul refused to respond to the claims. But one Taliban treasurer confirmed that Iran was paying bonuses of $US1000 for killing a US soldier and $US6000 for destroying a US military vehicle.

Nobody would have noticed the Taliban treasurer's arrival at an office in Kabul with his assistant in tow: he had dressed in Western clothes and clipped his beard to avoid attracting attention. Directed to a small room furnished with a single table and chair, he was told to wait.

Ten minutes later, he was joined by a smartly suited Iranian businessman carrying a briefcase full of cash.

The treasurer lifted one bundle of notes after another from the case, counting $US18,000 in all. Then he wrapped the money carefully in old clothes and stuffed the bundles into a large sack of flour.

He left the office of the Iranian construction company as unobtrusively as he had come and jumped into a taxi.

After 20 minutes, his assistant emerged into the early August sunshine with the sack, hailing a cab of his own.

The two men met on the outskirts of the capital for their journey home to the neighbouring province of Wardak. There, they handed out the cash to Taliban commanders.

It was the commanders' eagerly awaited reward for killing several Afghan and foreign soldiers when they blew up two local army pick-up trucks and an US armoured vehicle on July 12.

According to the treasurer, he has picked up almost $86,000 in bonuses from the Iranian company in the past six months.

Even larger sums have been collected to pay the wages and expenses of the 200 Taliban fighters in his area: they earn about $245 a month, more than an Afghan police officer or soldier.

The Sunday Times arranged to meet the treasurer through an intermediary with links to the militants. The treasurer, a poor farmer, said he joined the Taliban as a foot soldier four years ago after "seeing the destruction America was bringing to my country". He was taught to read and write last northern winter at a camp near the Iranian city of Isfahan, where he was also trained in basic accountancy.

"It's important for documenting the money," he said. "I have to sign off on all the receipts, and I have to add up how much each fighter deserves after each operation. I also have to communicate in the Iranian language."

The $245 a month paid to each fighter supports their families and covers their living costs and expenses, such as motorcycle fuel and phone cards.

The treasurer moves between his district and Kabul on the orders of the Taliban's provincial governor in Wardak, a shadow of the official post. The shadow governor calls the Iranian company in Kabul and uses code to arrange a time for the money to be picked up.

"I come to Kabul wearing smart clothes. I don't have a beard, I don't wear a turban. I keep a low profile. I have never faced any problems collecting the money," he said.

He parks on the outskirts of the city, takes a taxi to the company offices, where he gives a false name at the gates, and is escorted to the first floor.

"There are lots of computers in the office. It is some kind of construction company. There are about 50 people working at their desks there. Some are Afghans and some are Iranians," he said.

US and British military intelligence have received numerous reports Iran is secretly backing the Taliban fighters. Its support includes supplying components for improvised explosive devices responsible for most of the deaths of NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.

A compendium of military intelligence documents sent to WikiLeaks, the whistleblowers' website, and released in July, contains a good deal of raw intelligence about Iranian support for the insurgents, including claims Taliban delegations have visited Iran to procure weapons, that wounded Taliban fighters are treated at hospitals in Tehran, and that fighters are trained at bases in the eastern Iranian city of Birjand.

In May, The Sunday Times revealed how Taliban militants received military training at camps inside Iran. "Iran's support for the Taliban is incredibly discreet and clandestine," one Western official said last week.

"Their purpose is to bleed America on Afghan soil, to act as a thorn in their side. They are playing a very clever double game."

Iran also supports the Karzai government, funding Islamic schools, television stations and candidates in parliamentary elections due next week.

"Iran is basically hedging its bets to ensure political leverage in Afghanistan once the American forces leave," the official said. "It is supporting both sides while trying to do as much damage to America as possible before NATO leaves."

The relationship is particularly striking because the Sunni-dominated Taliban view Iran's Shia population as heretics.

"We don't care who we get money from," said the Taliban treasurer, who agreed it was a marriage of convenience for both sides. "Iran will never stop funding us, because the Americans are dangerous for them as well. I think the hatred is the same from both us and Iran. The money we get is not dirty. It is for jihad."

The Sunday Times

300 - A lesson in LEADERSHIP for today's politicians

One of the luxuries of being back home, is that I have time to relax and watch some movies.....while overseas, there were plenty of movies available at the Bazaar and the PX, but there was little time to watch them.....

Caught up with one of my newer favorites...300. While I would have done some of the story differently, the essential message behind the story of the 300 brave Spartans facing off against a half-million Persians resonates even today. I found it odd that the liberal press tried to demonstrate that the movie, which was released in 2006, had a pro-Iraqi war message....then again they could find a conspiracy in a box of corn flakes....

The lessons of LEADERSHIP demonstrated by King Leonidas and his brave Spartans are not lost on those who understand what " REAL LEADERSHIP" means....not like the false leaders we have in our present political arena....ugh. The so called "leaders" we have today are on par with the less than honorable politicians we see in the Spartan Senate.

The beginning of the movie features one of the key scenes where we see the wisdom of Leonidas and how he relies on the support of his Queen.....a wise man indeed.

(A Persian Messenger has ridden to Sparta to try to persuade King Leonidas to submit to the will of the Xerxes, the Persian King - The messengers displays the heads of conquered Kings from other lands and has a highly misplaced sense of who he is really speaking to...)


Messenger: All that God-King Xerxes requires is this: a simple offering of earth and water. A token of Sparta's submission to the will of Xerxes.
King Leonidas: Submission? Well that's a bit of a problem. See, rumor has it the Athenians have already turned you down, and if those philosophers and, uh, boy-lovers have found that kind of nerve, then...
Theron: We must be diplomatic.

King Leonidas: [ignoring Theron] ... and, of course, Spartans have their reputation to consider.

Messenger: Choose your next words carefully, Leonidas. They may be your last as king.
King Leonidas: [to himself: thinking] "Earth and water"?

[Leonidas unsheathes and points his sword at the Messenger's throat]
Messenger: Madman! You're a madman!
King Leonidas: Earth and water? You'll find plenty of both down there (as the Messenger is backed up to the edge of a seemingly bottomless well)

Messenger: No man, Persian or Greek, no man threatens a messenger!
King Leonidas: You bring the crowns and heads of conquered kings to my city steps. You insult my queen. You threaten my people with slavery and death! Oh, I've chosen my words carefully, Persian. Perhaps you should have done the same!
Messenger: This is blasphemy! This is madness!

King Leonidas surveys his people who are watching him and glances at his Queen who nods her approval of his actions)

King Leonidas: Madness...?
[shouting]
King Leonidas: This is Sparta!
[The King deftly kicks the messenger into the well and watches as his men cast the remaining Persians into the well]

Sounds like King Leonidas is a guy we need around right about now.....

The Iraq Experience....This Seabees' view and why the MEDIA has no standing.

The picture above shows Seabees from my unit showing their pride in the New England Patriots and being proud of being from New England. Good Stuff.

I have listened to the political wrangling, posturing & all the noise coming from the media regarding the Iraq conflict and the close of combat operations.

I was there in Iraq for the Battle of Fallujah. It was a difficult mission and the Iraqi people needed our help before and after we ousted a ruthless Dictator who brutalized his people, and allowed others (especially his sons) to rape & murder at will.

The key was that we did our duty, we upheld our core values and we had empathy for those who were there who only wanted to live in peace.

The measure of victory that I gained was that we went into Fallujah at the height of the battle with 130 Seabees and when our tour was done, we brought 130 Seabees home safely.

No other measure of success was more important or mattered more to me & my fellow Seabees.

That we were able to help Iraq start on a path toward a better country was important, and the ability to help her citizens cannot be understated, but most importantly, we brought ALL our troops home to their families alive and in one piece.

I'll leave the blathering to the pundits, mainly as they have no standing as they were only observers and they didn't have "skin" in the game. Me & mine did and that is why we can speak with an understanding of what was important and what isn't. The pundits can all just go about their business, thank you very much. They are highly inconsequential and their opinions rendered moot.

Royal Navy to share aircraft carriers with the French - Have the BRITS lost their minds?

THIS is the prime reason why Americans are not interested in modeling ourselves after the " European" way of doing things....The Euro has been a terrible idea as proven by how strong economies like Germany have to pay for the irresponsible ones like Greece.....and now, this is only one more warning sign that we need to steer clear of anything that resembles the European model.

Our forefathers established this country after seeing how poorly things were done back in Europe. I salute their foresight and also stand steadfastly with them on our sovereignty and independence.

If the Liberal Elite in our country like the European way of doing things so much, they can move there. The United States is a steadfast ally of Britain & France but will always maintain it's military Independence. As JFK quoted Pericles in his speech before the Massachusetts Legislators in 1961, "We do not imitate," Pericles said of Athens, "but are a model for others."

Sage words from a true warrior. The USA is also a model for others and should not imitate. EVER.

Barking mad! Storm of protest over controversial call for Royal Navy to share aircraft carriers with the French

By Ian Drury Sept. 1, 2010 UK Daily Mail

A proposal for Britain and France to share their aircraft carriers was last night described as 'barking mad' by military experts.

Fury erupted after it was claimed that David Cameron was preparing to announce the measure in an attempt to save money.

Sources in Whitehall said it would allow the Ministry of Defence to downgrade or even scrap one of the two 65,000ton replacement carriers being built at a cost of £5.2billion.

It is believed the proposal will be announced by David Cameron (left) and French President Nicholas Sarkozy (right) in November

But critics said the plan would jeopardise the UK's military independence and place security of the nation in the hands of France, our oldest enemy. Commander John Muxworthy, a Falklands veteran-who is chief executive of the UK National Defence Association - which campaigns to ensure the Armed Forces have the right weapons and equipment - branded the plan 'absolutely barking MAD'.

He said: 'Sharing aircraft carriers with the French is a cute idea but it is highly impractical and certainly not in the national interest.

'When push came to shove, France would put its own national interest first. We would lose national independence.

'The Royal Navy is Britain's oceangoing police force, and if you haven't got a proper police force you are going to get robbed.'

An MoD insider said: 'We could find ourselves in a very difficult situation if we wanted to carry out an operation using the French carrier, and it was blocked by politicians in Paris.

The War You're Not Reading About

Having recently returned from Afghanistan, there are always two or more different stories going on when it comes to reporting the news of the day. The first is the news that the Media puts out, and then there is the other stories you never hear, the "real deal."

The difference is that those who want to shape the message to fit their political goals have no intention of telling you the "real deal" as it would invalidate their POV. Most combat Veterans will tell you that they know the real deal and will tell it like it is, as HONOR dictates their course of actions.

Tonight, POTUS will try to claim the mantel of success for the conclusion of combat operations in Iraq. The real credit belongs to those who paid of it in blood, sweat & tears.

Vice President Biden was quoted in 2007 as saying the planned surge was a "failure" and would not succeed. You won't hear him coming out tonight to state he was wrong as that is something he is incapable of doing.

Instead, read the words of the man who knew what was best, along with what would work as he has experienced combat firsthand and has HONOR, a quality that POTUS & VPOTUS sorely lack.

------------------------------------

The War You're Not Reading About
By John McCain
Sunday, April 8, 2007

I just returned from my fifth visit to Iraq since 2003 -- and my first since Gen. David Petraeus's new strategy has started taking effect. For the first time, our delegation was able to drive, not use helicopters, from the airport to downtown Baghdad. For the first time, we met with Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province who are working with American and Iraqi forces to combat al-Qaeda. For the first time, we visited Iraqi and American forces deployed in a joint security station in Baghdad -- an integral part of the new strategy. We held a news conference to discuss what we saw: positive signs, underreported in the United States, that are reason for cautious optimism.

I observed that our delegation "stopped at a local market, where we spent well over an hour, shopping and talking with the local people, getting their views and ideas about different issues of the day." Markets in Baghdad have faced devastating terrorist attacks. A car bombing at Shorja in February, for example, killed 137 people. Today the market still faces occasional sniper attacks, but it is safer than it used to be. One innovation of the new strategy is closing markets to vehicles, thereby precluding car bombs that kill so many and garner so much media attention. Petraeus understandably wanted us to see this development.

I went to Iraq to gain a firsthand view of the progress in this difficult war, not to celebrate any victories. No one has been more critical of sunny progress reports that defied realities in Iraq. In 2003, after my first visit, I argued for more troops to provide the security necessary for political development. I disagreed with statements characterizing the insurgency as a "few dead-enders" or being in its "last throes." I repeatedly criticized the previous search-and-destroy strategy and argued for a counterinsurgency approach: separating the reconcilable population from the irreconcilable and creating enough security to facilitate the political and economic solutions that are the only way to defeat insurgents. This is exactly the course that Petraeus and the brave men and women of the American military are pursuing.

The new political-military strategy is beginning to show results. But most Americans are not aware because much of the media are not reporting it or devote far more attention to car bombs and mortar attacks that reveal little about the strategic direction of the war. I am not saying that bad news should not be reported or that horrific terrorist attacks are not newsworthy. But news coverage should also include evidence of progress. Whether Americans choose to support or oppose our efforts in Iraq, I hope they could make their decision based on as complete a picture of the situation in Iraq as is possible to report. A few examples:


· Sunni sheikhs in Anbar are now fighting al-Qaeda. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki visited Anbar's capital, Ramadi, to meet with Sunni tribal leaders. The newly proposed de-Baathification legislation grew out of that meeting. Police recruitment in Ramadi has increased dramatically over the past four months.


· More than 50 joint U.S.-Iraqi stations have been established in Baghdad. Regular patrols establish connections with the surrounding neighborhood, resulting in a significant increase in security and actionable intelligence.


· Extremist Shiite militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr is in hiding, his followers are not contesting American forces, sectarian violence has dropped in Baghdad and we are working with the Shiite mayor of Sadr City.


· Iraqi army and police forces are increasingly fighting on their own and with American forces, and their size and capability are growing. Iraqi army and police casualties have increased because they are fighting more.

Despite these welcome developments, we should have no illusions. This progress is not determinative. It is simply encouraging. We have a long, tough road ahead in Iraq. But for the first time since 2003, we have the right strategy. In Petraeus, we have a military professional who literally wrote the book on fighting this kind of war. And we will have the right mix and number of forces.

There is no guarantee that we will succeed, but we must try. As every sensible observer has concluded, the consequences of failure in Iraq are so grave and so threatening for the region, and to the security of the United States, that to refuse to give Petraeus's plan a chance to succeed would constitute a tragic failure of American resolve. I hope those who cite the Iraq Study Group's conclusions note that James Baker wrote on this page last week that we must have bipartisan support for giving the new strategy time to succeed. This is not a moment for partisan gamesmanship or for one-sided reporting. The stakes are just too high.

The writer is a Republican senator from Arizona.

Oikophobia and how the Liberal Elite have taken their cues from the TALIBAN

Definitions are extremely important as you need to understand the words you use to be sure that your prose conveys the essential ideas & concepts to your reader.

Consider the following definition :

Taliban--fundamentalist Islamic clerics currently attempting to control Afghanistan; the Taliban have achieved worldwide notoriety for their drastic imposition of their own severe interpretation of Islamic law on the Afghan society

In the enclosed article by James Taranto, he describes what has been called "
Oikophobia or "fear of the familiar: - the disposition, in any conflict, to side with 'them' against 'us', and the felt need to denigrate the customs, culture and institutions that are identifiably 'ours.' "

He describes that the Liberal Elite alledges that Americans are either uninformed, dullards, bigots or all of the above because the majority of Americans don't agree with their warped view of right & wrong." A prime example is that critics of the President have been labeled " racists " simply for not agreeing with him or openly objecting with his point-of-view on issues.

I make an additional supposition... that the Liberal Elite in America are using the same methods as the Taliban. If the Taliban "have achieved worldwide notoriety for their drastic imposition of their own severe interpretation of Islamic law on the Afghan society", it is my supposition that the Liberal Elite " have achieved worldwide notoriety for their drastic imposition of their own severe interpretation of Liberal interpretations of our laws on the AMERICAN society."

The only difference is that those who are trying to make us feel shameful about the America we love have not started beheading "Infidels", re: YOU & ME.....

It's time the voters went JIHAD on the "American Liberal Taliban"....November is the time and the best weapon is your right to vote for the candidate of YOUR choice - send them a message - Fire for full effect.

MY message to the American Liberal Elite Taliban - " STAND BY FOR INCOMING " - You find out what Americans REALLY think about you & your warped views of America in November.

-----------------------------------------------

Oikophobia
Why the liberal elite finds Americans revolting.

By JAMES TARANTO - WSJ

If you think it's offensive for a Muslim group to exploit the 9/11 atrocity, you're an anti-Muslim bigot and un-American to boot. It is a claim so bizarre, so twisted, so utterly at odds with common sense that it's hard to believe anyone would assert it except as some sort of dark joke. Yet for the past few weeks, it has been put forward, apparently in all seriousness, by those who fancy themselves America's best and brightest, from the mayor of New York all the way down to Peter Beinart.

What accounts for this madness? Charles Krauthammer notes a pattern:

Promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

-- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.
-- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.
-- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.
-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.
Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

Krauthammer portrays this as a cynical game: "Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. . . . What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument."

But this has its limits as a political strategy. Krauthammer writes that "the Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November," and no one will credit him for boldness in that prediction. Some may disagree with his reckoning as to the reason for that likely loss: that "a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them."

But can anyone argue that a show of contempt is a winning political strategy? The question answers itself and implies that the contempt is genuine.


What is the nature of this contempt? In part it is the snobbery of the cognitive elite, exemplified by a recent New York Times Web column by Timothy Egan called "Building a Nation of Know-Nothings"--or by the viciousness directed at Sarah Palin, whose folksy demeanor and state-college background seem terribly déclassé not just to liberals but to a good number of conservatives in places like New York City.

In more cerebral moments, the elitists of the left invoke a kind of Marxism Lite to explain away opinions and values that run counter to their own. Thus Barack Obama's notorious remark to the effect that economic deprivation embitters the proles, so that they cling to guns and religion. (Ironically, Obama recently said through a spokesman that he is Christian.) Here's Robert Reich, Bill Clinton's labor secretary, explaining "The Anatomy of Intolerance" to readers of TalkingPointsMemo.com:

Many Americans (and politicians who [sic] the polls) don't want a mosque at Manhattan's Ground Zero. . . .

Where is all this coming from?

It's called fear. When people are deeply anxious about holding on to their homes, their jobs, and their savings, they look for someone to blame. And all too often they find it in "the other"--in people who look or act differently, who come from foreign lands, who have what seem to be strange religions, who cross our borders illegally. . . .

Economic fear is the handmaiden of intolerance. It's used by demagogues who redirect the fear and anger toward people and groups who aren't really to blame but are easy scapegoats.

So if some Americans are afraid of people "who have what seem to be strange religions," it must be a totally irrational reaction to "economic insecurity." It couldn't possibly have anything to do with an act of mass murder committed in the name of the religion in question.

And Reich doesn't just fail to see the obvious. He dehumanizes his fellow Americans by treating their values, feelings and opinions as no more than reflexive reactions to material conditions. Americans in fact are a very tolerant people. Even in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there was no serious backlash against Muslims. What makes them angry--what makes us angry--is the bigotry of the elites.

The Ground Zero mosque is an affront to the sensibilities of ordinary Americans. "The center's association with 9/11 is intentional and its location is no geographic coincidence," as the Associated Press has reported. That Americans would find this offensive is a matter of simple common sense. The liberal elites cannot comprehend common sense, and, incredibly, they think that's a virtue. After all, common sense is so common.

The British philosopher Roger Scruton has coined a term to describe this attitude: oikophobia. Xenophobia is fear of the alien; oikophobia is fear of the familiar: "the disposition, in any conflict, to side with 'them' against 'us', and the felt need to denigrate the customs, culture and institutions that are identifiably 'ours.' " What a perfect description of the pro-mosque left.

Scruton was writing in 2004, and his focus was on Britain and Europe, not America. But his warning about the danger of oikophobes--whom he amusingly dubs "oiks"--is very pertinent on this side of the Atlantic today, and it illuminates how what are sometimes dismissed as mere matters of "culture" tie in with economic and social policy:

The oik repudiates national loyalties and defines his goals and ideals against the nation, promoting transnational institutions over national governments, accepting and endorsing laws that are imposed on us from on high by the EU or the UN, though without troubling to consider Terence's question, and defining his political vision in terms of universal values that have been purified of all reference to the particular attachments of a real historical community.
The oik is, in his own eyes, a defender of enlightened universalism against local chauvinism. And it is the rise of the oik that has led to the growing crisis of legitimacy in the nation states of Europe. For we are seeing a massive expansion of the legislative burden on the people of Europe, and a relentless assault on the only loyalties that would enable them voluntarily to bear it. The explosive effect of this has already been felt in Holland and France. It will be felt soon everywhere, and the result may not be what the oiks expect.

There is one important difference between the American oik and his European counterpart. American patriotism is not a blood-and-soil nationalism but an allegiance to a country based in an idea of enlightened universalism. Thus our oiks masquerade as--and may even believe themselves to be--superpatriots, more loyal to American principles than the vast majority of Americans, whom they denounce as "un-American" for feeling an attachment to their actual country as opposed to a collection of abstractions.

Yet the oiks' vision of themselves as an intellectual aristocracy violates the first American principle ever articulated: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ."

This cannot be reconciled with the elitist notion that most men are economically insecure bitter clinging intolerant bigots who need to be governed by an educated elite. Marxism Lite is not only false; it is, according to the American creed, self-evidently false. That is why the liberal elite finds Americans revolting.