Unless you've been on a deserted island, I imagine you know that Tim Russert died a few days ago.

I didn't watch his 'Meet The Press' show often, but when I did I was always impressed with how well he did interviewing a wide mix of guests.  The discussions about him, following the news that he had died, seemed to center on the words in the lead-in to this Blog.

He was so good at what he did because he was normal and fair and always well-prepared.  These thoughts were repeated regularly during the past week.  They speak volumes about this man who was born and raised in Buffalo, NY; whose dad was a garbage collector; and, who had a strong faith.  He kept his personal politics in check because he knew it was important that he present an impartial image.  Those who talked about being on his show mentioned that he was something of an 'equal opportunity' inquisitioner.  He was tough on everybody without regard to their politics.

It struck me that the very words being used to describe his uniqueness were also telling in that they were the antithesis of the usual fare we're fed by the 'talking heads'.  Tim Russert stood out amongst his peers because he was normal and fair and well-prepared.  And the words being used were being used by those very same 'talking heads'.  They were not, of course, aware that they were casting stones at themselves at the very same time they were lauding their former counter-part.

I suspect that we can all learn from the likes of a Tim Russert.  I know I can.  He loved his family.  He never forgot his roots.  He never forgot his faith.  He was always prepared when he went to work.  He gave every day his very best.  He remembered his friends and apparently had no enemies, certainly in his mind anyway.  He told people he loved them.  He was himself, not someone he thought he was supposed to be in order to fit into the world that he'd become part of after leaving his roots in Buffalo.

I hope I can remember Tim Russert for a good long time to come.  I probably will somewhat regularly as I see the antithesis on my television screen.

The mainstream media has taken up the fight now that Hillary and Barack have gotten their 'thing' settled; at least until the gathering in Denver. 

The learned political scientists on our college campuses have nearly unanimously opined that Obama is incapable of being defeated.  They have preordained that this election will be among the most lopsided victories for the left that we have witnessed in the entire history of our country.  Polls show Obama up by double digits over McCain.  It is all over but for the voting.

The election of Barack Obama as our next president is, apparently, inevitable.

So...there you go.  We conservatives can simply suck it up, pack it in, and decide how we're going to survive the coming four or eight years.  It is divined: Barack Obama is the next President of the United States...and will create a veto-proof majority for Democrats in both houses of our congress.

But wait.  Is it really inevitable?  Is the smugness of the left such that it will determine the course of history?  Is it really time for undefined change simply for the sake of change?  Are we in such dire straits that we will anoint Obama without so much as a discussion about that inevitable future?  Will the influx of young voters automatically accrue to the benefit of Obama?  Have the liberal professors that dominate our college campuses (98% + and counting) so indoctrinated the student body that inevitability is the only outcome imaginable?

Are 'we the people' so enamored of this man of change as to be taken with his oratorical skills in spite of the lack of depth of our knowledge of the details?  It is commonly discussed in political circles that the 'devil is in the detail', and yet, so far, there is very little flesh to be found on the skeleton of change. 

Will it remain the rule that any question of Obama's positions is akin to unfairly characterizing the man?  We smear him when we reflect upon the pastor that he followed willingly for twenty years.  We smear him when we talk about his very limited experience in politics, let alone on the national scene.  We smear him when we criticize his broadly-brushed position papers.  We smear him when he is forced to restate previous statements, sometimes more than once, to 'clarify' what he originally meant to say.

Obama has created a bubble that seems to surround him.  It is a protective bubble that keeps the hounds at bay.  One is to accept his speeches at face value.  One must not question the lack of substance.  One must not ask from where the money will come (although we know if we but listen to the tax increase rhetoric).  One must not ask which of the ladies in waiting the public would prefer in the White House.

Obama has created a protective bubble with the willing assistance of the liberal media.  Will that media be silent as well when we wake up to the second term of Jimmy Carter?  Will that media be silent when we throw away victory in the war on terror so that foreign governments will profess to like us better?  Will that media be silent when terrorists again begin to strike us in our homeland? 

Is it really Obama the Inevitable?  Or was the only inevitable thing about all this that the liberal media would fall into lockstep?

When I grew up almost everyone had a father living at home.  There were a few who had lost a father to illness or war or, sometimes, divorce.  But most everybody had a dad.  Our dads came in a variety of styles and flavors; some were very involved in the lives of their children; some were working two jobs to make ends meet and were not always home as the result.  But, most everybody had a dad.  We'd complain about our dads making us do this or that, but we had a dad.  I worked on paper routes when I was old enough to become a 'carrier'.  I peddled my bike all over Viroqua, WI delivering papers and collecting the weekly 35 cents that the paper cost in those days.  On the rare occasion when Dad thought the weather too tough, he'd get the car and drive me on my route.  That happened very seldom, but I still remember those times.

I learned a lot from my Dad.  The thing that surprises me the most is that I learned a lot that I didn't know I was learning.  He taught me that you always did what you said you would do.  He taught me that things weren't always going to be easy, but that we had to persevere in spite of the obstacles we encountered.  He wasn't perfect; none of us dads are.  But he taught me much even through my observations of his imperfections.

There is an alarming trend that has gone on for some time having to do with dads.  The result of this trend is that there are many more fatherless homes today than ever before.  Juan Williams wrote an article published in the Wall Street Journal today on this subject and gathered some startling statistics.  Startling to me at least, and I suspect to you, too.

According to a study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, 22% of white children do not have dads in their homes; 31% of Hispanic children do not a father in their home, and 56% of black children have no father present.  Of course, this is usually the result of the out-of-wedlock birth rate.  The overall out-of-wedlock birth rate in the country today is 38%.  Some 28% of white children are born to a single mom, 50% of Hispanic children are born to single mothers and 71% of black children are born out of wedlock.

There are fewer and fewer male role models in America's homes and that is leading us to some major problems, in my opinion.  About 40% of single-mother families live in poverty.  As Williams points out, "even in kindergarten, children living with single parents are more likely to trail children with two parents when it comes to health, cognitive skills and their emotional maturity."

It is easier to understand the current state of our society when we look at things of this nature.  What might our crime rates be if this were not the case?  Would we have the same rates of drug abuse if there were more two parent homes?  

To borrow the movie title, we really could use a good dose of "Back to the Future" to get our society back on track.  And, that is up to each and every one of us if it is to happen.  It isn't someone else's job.  It is my job and it is your job; and it is a very important job indeed!

Our country was founded with three equal branches of government: the judicial branch, the legislative branch and the executive branch.  The Constitution granted certain privileges to each branch and was careful to separate those duties as the country's founders saw fit.

That effort by our country's founders was overthrown yesterday when the Supreme Court usurped the powers of both the legislative and the executive branches.  The swing vote, as has become the norm in this court's decisions, was Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Justice Kennedy's vote means that non-citizens captured in the war on terror are to be granted the rights of habeas corpus heretofore granted solely to U.S. citizens.  Habeas corpus is the right of American citizens to challenge detention by the government.  This case involved a captured Algerian native who has been in Guantanamo Bay for several years.  He has never contested the finding of the military tribunal that he is an enemy combatant.  His attorney, to the contrary, has only asserted his supposed right to have a habeas corpus hearing in a federal court.

There are likely attorneys queued up this morning filing motions that can lead to the release of these enemy combatants based on the court's decision.  There can be questions posed that the government will feel cannot be answered on the grounds that the answers would give away intelligence sources or techniques.  If the questions are not answered, then the enemy combatant can be released.

Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, as pointed out in the Wall Street Journal's editorial this morning, contains the clause that says: "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the Public Safety may require it."

So, we see the liberal members of the supreme court aligned on the issue.  They see the Constitution as something to be twisted to meet their world view at the time.  The Constitution does not impact non-citizens.  It does permit habeas corpus to be suspended in the case of 'invasion'. 

The man in question is not a U.S. citizen.  The country was 'invaded' when the terrorists attacked the trade towers and killed 3,000 people on a single morning in September.  That was but one instance of attacks that had gone on for some time.

We are not involved in legal semantics; we are involved in the fight for our continued freedoms.  And now, it appears the terrorists have opened a new front in the fight located in Washington, D.C. with its allies in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The left is hung up on what it claims is the "Bush War"; this is an American War and it has dire implications if we should lose the war.  We have been safe in America since 9/11 for a reason; that reason is that we are taking the fight to the terrorists and not sitting on our haunches waiting for their next attack as had been happening through-out the 1990s and into the early 2000s.

Congress must step up to the plate, pass new legislation and take any semblance of ambivalence out of the language.  There must be three equal branches.  We simply cannot permit one branch being more equal than the others...no matter which 'side' has the voting advantage.  Politics has to stop when the welfare of our country is at stake...and it is at stake!

We are all too aware of the 'fabled' 9th U.S. Court of Appeals found in San Francisco.  This is the single most liberal-leaning court in the federal system and can be counted on for ground-breaking decisions that often run counter to the mainstream.

Now, we're being given the opportunity to make our own judgments about the chief judge of that court, a gentleman by the name of Alex Kozinski.  By all accounts, the judge has had a storied career.  He was appointed to the 9th Circuit by President Ronald Reagan and was considered as a possible Supreme Court nominee by then President George H.W. Bush in 1990 and 1991 according to an Associated Press story that ran in the morning Journal Sentinel.

How is it that we are now able to make personal judgments about the chief judge?  Well, he was forced to suspend an obscenity trial that he was presiding over when sexually explicit material was discovered posted to his family's web site.

Certainly anything can happen on the Internet; things can be made to seem something that they are not.  Slack needs to be cut for anyone in this respect.  But, when they open their mouths to defend themselves, they may tend to open the flood gates.

Judge Kozinski said he didn't believe any of the images were obscene. (They were, by the way, reported to have been scenes of a man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal as reported in the article.  A female painted as a cow was seen nude on all fours in another image according to the press.)  That seems to be along the lines of what I think of as bestiality and pornography.  He is quoted as saying, in response to the question of whether or not this was prurient, "Is it prurient?  I don't know what to tell you.  I think its odd and interesting.  It's part of life."

The judge is computer savvy.  He apparently builds his own computers, and has battled federal court administrators over Web filters they installed to block porn from government computers.  He seems to know his way around a computer and the Internet.

He said he must have accidentally uploaded the images to his server while trying to upload something else.

He is, or was, presiding over a trial for a man accused of obscenity for selling movies depicting bestiality.

Several thoughts come to mind:

This court is notorious for its liberal bent, and this seems to bear out the sense that many of us have about that court.  I view this court as an embarrassment but I understand that the ACLU would have a different take.

The press has written the story so as to tell us everything good about this judge while sort of lamenting that something like this could beset such a learned jurist.  I submit that had this been a conservative justice, we would see the equivalent of the smear that we witnessed during the hearings to confirm Justice Clarence Thomas.  This story would not have been buried in the innards of the morning paper; it would have, instead, been on the front pages in every newspaper and appear as the lead article on every newscast in the country for a week.

Will there be an investigation in this matter such as was conducted by the Cedarburg School Board?  There ought to be at least that level of scrutiny brought in this instance.

Will people finally admit that the 9th Circuit is an embarrassment?  A few of us will do so, but the majority just don't seem to see things the right way.

We have, it appears, survived the presidential primary campaign season. 

During this season just passed, we witnessed the significant defeat of the Clintons.  Yes, of both Clintons, not just Hillary.  There is no 'just Hillary'.  With her comes the other, Bill.  With her comes the remembrances of all that was the Clintonian presidency; the innuendo, the smears, the lost billing records, the huge trading gains, the eleventh-hour pardons and on and on and on.  It wasn't a significant defeat in terms of numbers of votes, but it was significant in terms of the name and the legacy.

During this season just passed, we saw the emergence of a first-term senator from Illinois who is now the Democrat candidate for President of the United States of America.  He is biracial, and that means that a historic 'barrier' appears to have been overcome.  He is inexperienced as compared to the typical candidate for our highest elected position, but he has an eloquence about him that seems to enthrall those to whom he speaks.  He is Barack Obama.  Of that we can be sure.  But, beyond that we are unsure.  There is much about him and his beliefs that needs to be fleshed out between now and November

During this season just passed, we saw the Republicans settle on an elder member of the senate who will be nearly 72 if and when he takes office.  The word 'settle' was chosen intentionally.  The conservative members of the Republican party were forced to 'settle' for John McCain.  They may take up the banner and charge ahead, or they may hold back, contribute little and vote begrudgingly.  We know that he has been bloodied in battle, and that is reality and not simply an expression.  We know the mettle of the man.

So, Hillary is expected to finally make her amends to Barack Obama today by suspending her campaign.  That means that she is still trying to finagle something more for herself.  It might be that promise of a nomination to become a member of the Supreme Court, or it might be the payment of her $20 million campaign shortfall that came from the Clintons' pocket, or it might be the selection as the vice presidential candidate.  We don't know, and we may not come to know anytime soon; but we do know the Clintons and we do know that there will be some price extracted by them.  That is the way it is with them.

And the rest of us are left to make a monumentally important decision as to whom we desire as our next titular head.  I use the word 'titular' intentionally, as well.  The President of the United States influences but seldom decides policy.  The President lives in a world of 'checks and balances' that sometimes seems to be unchecked and imbalanced.  Congress will be very important as it always is.  That is frightening when one steps back and observes the ofttimes childish machinations that come from this body.

As it stands today, we would choose between an elder about whom we know a good deal and a junior about whom we know virtually nothing.  I am reminded of the phrase that refers to the 'devil we know versus the devil we don't know'.  I don't use that phrase in a derogatory manner.  This election is, to my thinking, a classic 'lesser of evils' election.  The campaign will be waged between one who is so far only a passable speaker but whom we know, and between the other who is as eloquent a speaker as any politician in my lifetime but about whom we know next to nothing.

And I confess to great concern since us voters tend to be swayed by eloquence more than substance far too often...and we often pay a dear price as the result.

I just read the 2007 version of this Memorial Day Blog once again.  Not a lot has changed except that we may be even further polarized politically than we were a year ago.  That is to be expected when we find ourselves in the midst of presidential campaigning, fighting an economic slowdown, watching fuel and food prices escalate almost daily...and as we watch flags in our village and state being flown at half-staff.

The one thing that has stayed constant is the resolve and spirit of our fighting men and women who are posted in many countries of the world.  Those of us who would criticize the U.S. for being the 'policeman of the world' need to step back and ask themselves these questions:  If not us, whom?  If not us, where would the world be today?  If not us, where would we be today?

Can we survive and prosper in an isolationist world?  I doubt seriously that this would be possible.  We cannot rely on the United Nations to send a military contingent here and there as hot spots erupt.  We are the military contingent that gets sent wearing blue helmets.  Those other 'wanna be' world powers simply do nothing but respond in token fashion, or respond with more behind-the-scenes-political maneuvering to worsen already aggravated situations.  Russia is on its way back into the early twentieth century courtesy of Vladamir Putin and his new puppet president.

Against this backdrop, we watch as our politicians posture to take best advantage of the wind's direction that day.  They 'debate' various things, always with an eye toward whatever camera appears in the room.  They say whatever is convenient at the moment and then backfill as they trip over their words a day or a week later.

The one constant is the resolve and spirit of our fighting men and women.  That is as it has been and always will be so long as our freedom endures.

We remember those who have given their lives that we may live in freedom.  We remember those who gave limbs and sight so that we might live in freedom.  We remember young families without a dad or without a mom or a son or daughter or a brother or sister so that we might live in freedom.

When was the last time you walked up to a person wearing the uniform of one of our branches of service and thanked them for their service and their sacrifice.  Too long ago I'd wager.

We remember the more than 50,000 who gave their all in Viet Nam.  We remember Korea and World War II and World War I.  We remember those who protect us today from the spread of world terrorism, and who will again report to that theater of operations for another tour.

Please take a moment of your freedom to say a prayer for those men and women both past and present.  Please take a moment of your freedom to walk up to someone wearing the uniform of the United States military and thank them for their dedication, their bravery and their courage and their readiness in the face of every threat so far seen by our country.

And, please take a moment to let your elected officials know just how important it is to you that they continue to truly support our military; not through lip service and posing for 'holy pictures', but truly support our men and women.  These are not something akin to chess pieces that become political playthings.  These are not the illiterate and underclass of our country.  These are the best and the brightest.  These are the true defenders of our freedoms, not those who serve in some government capacity or other that too often is a hindrance rather than a help to our men and women in uniform.

Thank you!

We are, by all signs, involved in an oil cost run-up driven by demand being greater than supply.  It is exacerbated for us Americans because our monetary policy has seen an intentional softening of the dollar (our money is worth less than other peoples' money, so it takes more of it to buy a barrel of crude oil).  I paid $4.20 per gallon yesterday with the price of crude oil standing at about $130 +/- per barrel.  Predictions of crude oil prices of $150 per barrel or more are seen or heard regularly now.  And, the cost of oil could well be higher than that by year-end.

How did we get to this point?  We got there by congressional law making, by presidents rolling over and signing those bills, and by our country's increasing needs/demand for gasoline and diesel fuel.  Why would we permit ourselves to become part of such a quagmire?

Politics!  Politics played by those on both sides of the aisle.  Conservatives seem to have lost their voices.  Liberals never seem to lose their voices.

Laws were re-written more than thirty years ago to make it nearly impossible for a new refinery to be built.  Those were the result of congress being rolled by the environmentalists and presidents either believing the rhetoric of the day or fearing the backlash should they stand up to the rhetoric.  This has continued to this very day.  We are forbidden from drilling within 200 miles of the California and Florida coastlines but the Chinese are already doing so as we sit on our thumbs.  We are unable to pursue the shale oil deposits that span our northern plains and southwestern states.  We have ample untapped resources that are readily available but our laws don't permit us to make use of those resources.

We see the 'global warming' group and the 'environmentalist group' driving our economy into the ground...and we have not found the moral outrage/courage to stand up to them and say "no more"!  We could easily build new refineries in any number of locations around our country but we're not permitted to do so.  We know how to drill and refine today without ruining our world.  It takes from 6 to 10 years to bring a new refinery on-line so the time to have declared a moratorium on the rules that made it impossible to build new refining capacity has come and gone.  But, the typical congressional response of "that will take ten years" should remind us that if we don't roll back those silly laws today, it'll take ten years from whenever we do roll back those silly laws.  The time to begin is now, not next week or next month.

We witnessed the ridiculous 'hearings' held by congress in the past few weeks.  We watched as Sen. Herb Kohl embarrassed himself by chiding the 'big bad oil companies' for making a profit.  He is a former businessman who certainly understands that profit must be derived in order for businesses to exist and grow.  He knew how that worked when he ran Kohl's Food Stores.  He certainly must have some comprehension as the owner of the Milwaukee Bucks.  His statement to the oil company executives that their profits didn't seem fair gives one a lot of insight.  He knows better but he will play/pander to the crowd he favors.  He 'feels' as do most liberals.  He doesn't necessarily reason.  He has his millions, so he can set out to control everyone else who aspires to similar success.

Sen. Kohl is but one of the 535 members of congress.  Too many of those men and women are too intent on keeping their offices to actually vote the way they probably know they should.  You have probably heard the old phrase that states you must "go along to get along".  That should be inscribed over the doorways leading to the House and the Senate chambers since it is the rule that is followed by the vast majority of people who walk through those portals.  That is true on the national stage, the state stage and the local stage.

The people who go to Washington and who do not give in and play by the Washingtonian rules are few and very far between.

Whose fault is this dilemma in the final analysis?  Yours and mine. 

We're the men and women who have permitted this to happen.  We don't vote in the House or the Senate, but we do elect those who do...and we do not seem to unelect people very often once they've gotten into office.  Rep. Steve Kagen (D) from the Appleton area stands for re-election this November.  He is at his most defeatable point historically.  If he survives the first re-election campaign and keeps his seat, he is likely to be in that seat for so long as he desires without regard to how he votes or doesn't vote.

We're so unconcerned about our vote, it seems, that we don't even think voting is sacrosanct enough to require valid photo identification before we're permitted to cast a ballot. 

So, all this angst has been brought to us by us.  Remember that the next time you buy gasoline or diesel fuel.  Remember that the next time you go to the grocery store and try to make your food budget stretch.  Remember that when you ponder whether or not you'll be able to take a vacation this year, or buy new school clothing for your children, or go out for a fish fry.  Remember that when you try to stretch your retirement income to cover your basic needs.

And, when you've gotten yourself all 'cranked up', if that happens, make a resolution to get involved and stay involved and to talk with your elected representatives at every level of government and let them know what you think and what you want them to do on your behalf.  And, if they fail you, fire them with your vote at the polling place.

Had you and I done that two decades ago instead of simply going with the flow, maybe we'd not be in the situation we find ourselves in today.

That title to an opinion piece in this morning's Wall Street Journal caught my eye as it did yours.  The complete piece can be found on the Wall Street Journal website's public opinion page if you want to read it.

This piece traces the rise and fall of the Clinton machine within the Democratic party.  That rise and fall encompasses more than a decade of our country's history and includes discussion of things such as the technique of 'triangulation' that was used to occupy all sides of particular issues, the blaming of their own foibles and shortcomings on the Republican 'attack machine'.  It discusses the lost billing records, the cattle futures, the illegal foreign fund raising, the definition of the word "is", Paula Jones, and the Lincoln bedroom.  And, it reminded me of the pardons that President Clinton issued in his last days in office.  Those were so bad that even Representative Barney Frank (D) who had been a staunch defender of the President called them a "betrayal" and "contemptuous".

David Geffen, a major Hollywood Democratic contributor and king-maker was recently quoted saying, about the Clintons' ability to lie, "everybody in politics lies", but the Clintons "do it with such ease, it's troubling".  What a damning statement.

This reminded me of all that we've lived with and through when it comes to the Clinton family since their rise to national politics from their start with Arkansas politics.  It also presented the trouble that the Democratic party has today in trying to convince Hillary to just give it up and go away as a presidential candidate.

All this is happening because a rising star named Obama has arrived on the scene.  The Democrats seem to have found their next Clinton.  That he has virtually no experience that would qualify him to serve as our President seems to matter little, if at all.  He is a gifted orator and his populist message seems to be getting the job done.  'So be it' seems the Democrat chant.  Get the office and then we can worry about how he governs and leads.

So it appears that the Democratic party is in the process of more than a separation from the Clintons...but...they've been counted out before and have, so far, managed to return each time.  Maybe it is a bit too soon to count them out.  Hillary has very likely planned to run again in 2012 if Obama loses to McCain this year.  She'll still have a 'bloody pulpit' in the Senate from which to rebuild whatever she has lost in the current campaign.

But, what an amazing thing this has been to see the story of this past decade plus laid out so vividly to the detriment of the Clintons

Most accounts I read today show Wisconsin as one of the undecided and pivotal states so far as the November presidential election is concerned.  Supposedly we are part of the undecided group of states that includes Pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota, etc. that stretch across the upper middle west (or rust belt, as some are prone to calling us).

What does that mean for us and what will it do to us?

First, it means that television and radio stations will sell a lot of time and newspapers will get a bit healthier by selling a ton of space.  That means that we will be unable to avoid politics unless we join a badger and crawl into a hole in the ground.  And that isn't a sure thing either!

Second, it means that people will probably see the ugly, despicable 'cheese head' image, will probably be reminded of Laverne and Shirley, and will probably see the Fonz!  We will have a whole new opportunity to live all those things down as we interact with people outside this vaunted 'fly over' country.

Third, it means that turn-out will most likely be monstrous.  That means that, without voter photo ID, we'll have more than our usual share of voter fraud.  That means that, if Obama manages to hold off Hillary as it seems he will, we will see a very large number of younger citizens at the polling places.  They could make the difference in the presidential race.  They'll be choosing between the elder icon who represents some distant event in American history that has been vilified in every school tome they've read and virtually every discussion they've endured inside the hallowed halls of academia, and the charismatic, very well spoken communicator.  Hope will be their driving force while experience may not be a consideration or might be thought to be a detriment.

That also means that we'll be inundated by 'outsiders' who will descend upon us like locusts trying to cause us to vote one way or another.  It means that we'll see the race issue whether or not there is a race issue.  The issue/non-issue will be debated ad nauseum, and it will be almost impossible to ignore, ugly as it is.

And it could well sway the outcomes of other races.  If the race for our state senate seat is at all close, the expected massive turn-out could swing that one way or the other.  If Obama pulls the anticipated numbers of younger voters, does that auger better for Senator Darling or for Rep. Wasserman?  I have no idea, but I do suspect there will be some impact.

So, back to the original question...Are We Ready For November? 

The benchmark oil prices closed at just under $122 per barrel yesterday due to unrest in Nigeria and slumps in Russia's production.  'Experts' predict that prices for crude oil could go as high as $150 this year.  And, that would translate to about $4.50 per gallon prices at our pumps.

What to do, what to do?

A bright young Congressman has some ideas.  He is Representative Paul Ryan who was born and raised in Janesville and who has seen the impact of gas prices on the GM plant there that builds Tahoes among other vehicles.  You have probably heard that GM is laying off 750 employees due to poor sales.  The 'ripple effect' has already begun taking other suppliers' jobs out of the market with an announcement by one that it would lay off 132 employees.  Those layoffs will continue.

Ryan issued a press release on Monday with some simple and straight-forward language (which is not always the case for government press releases).  He recognizes that Congress has had a big hand in creating the mess we find ourselves contending with today.  And, he has five examples of what can be done to alleviate these problems:

One:  Drill for oil.  There are reportedly some 10.4 billion barrels of crude to be found beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWAR).  Instead of begging the other oil producing nations to increase their production, we could solve our own problems and handle this nasty 'supply and demand' thing.  We could keep all the oil we produce from our land mass.

Two:  Build more refineries.  Congress can streamline the process for building new refineries.  More than thirty years has passed since a new refinery was built in the U.S.  Instead, we have gone offshore for refining capacity.  That not only increases our costs but it actually could be a very poor strategic move in case one of the other large countries in the world decided to take us out economically rather than militarily.  Can you spell C-H-I-N-A?

Three:  Streamline fuel blends.  Congress could end the mandates for so-called 'boutique fuels' such as that we burn in SE Wisconsin.  Those boutique fuels actually cost more and perform more poorly.  Then, when ethanol is added to that mix, the power production is further reduced and the cost to consumers is increased.

Four:  Don't rely on food for fuel.  Congress just passed an energy bill that quintupled the ethanol mandate.  The average grocery bill for Americans is reported to have risen by $70 per week in the last year as the result of the ethanol mandate.  Recall that I said a few days ago that Congress had played with the marketplace and had broken it?  This is an example of the dastardly 'unintended consequences' that we all know too well.

Five:  Stop stoking inflation.  The added impact of Federal Reserve actions to drastically reduce the interest rates has softened the dollar to the point that we pay far more for crude oil than other countries.  It takes more dollars than euros to buy a barrel of crude.  It takes more dollars than yen to buy a barrel of crude oil.

Rep. Ryan's final paragraph is an important one:

"The flaws and failures of Congress have done much to contribute to our current energy crisis.  There are concrete steps that Congress can take that will move us toward a coherent approach to a sustainable energy policy and put immediate downward pressure on energy prices.  The American people have rejected gas price pandering and finger-pointing; you deserve responsible leadership and must demand it." 

There are some moves going on today in Congress that need citizens' boosts.  An Ethanol reduction act is winding its way and has about twenty-four sponsors.  If you and I put enough pressure on our elected officials, we can make a difference and get some of these things moving more rapidly.  If you and I demand that our presidential candidates 'get real' about these issues, we can cause some movement.

On the other hand, if we expect the other person to do the heavy lifting, then we'll get what we deserve.  Each of us is but a small voice.  But we all know what a choir of a hundred small voices sounds like.  We all know what the cheers of 50,000 small voices sounds like.  You can call, write and email your representatives.  And you can do it over and over again.  You can encourage friends and relatives who are represented by other officials to do the same.  This is called a 'grass roots' movement and many, many politicians find themselves in office today because of grass roots movements.

It may not seem to you that elected officials listen to you, but they do if they're intelligent.  They especially listen when they hear the same thing in differing words from many people.  The words don't need to be fancy.  They do need to be heartfelt  Our Congressional representative is Jim Sensenbrenner and he is one of the originators of the Ethanol reduction act that I mentioned earlier.  Tell him you're behind him, too.

We are experiencing a significant increase in costs for two 'staples' in our lives, food and fuel.  Rice purchases are being limited in some stores because people have begun to hoard this basic food item.  Gasoline and diesel fuel are both at all time highs and are moving higher.  Grocery costs are escalating rapidly.

How is it that this can be happening?  What is driving this rapid cost escalation?  Is it the Republicans having been in office for the past seven plus years?  Will a Democrat president change all this?

We are seeing the results of years of marketplace interference.  Our government (both parties are guilty) has created the gasoline and diesel fuel situation through its stubborn refusal to approve the construction of new refining capacity and through its equally stubborn refusal to permit drilling for oil where there are known fields that could take care of our needs for many decades to come.

We are seeing the result of farm programs that cause farmers to do things that are encouraged by financial incentives.  We are seeing the results of corporate farm programs that reward the very wealthy people who own large pieces of land.  We're seeing the result of legislation that favors the ADMs of the world.  We are seeing the results of political interference in the areas of 'bio-fuels' (ethanol) that have begun consuming bigger and bigger amounts of corn, which has caused the prices of other substitute grains to rise accordingly.

Ethanol is a very poor fuel additive.  It does not burn as efficiently, it is difficult to carry over distances, it has a government subsidy that is just being reduced to $.45 cents per gallon from the original $.51 per gallon.  So, we put one of our basic food stocks into our gas tank because of government meddling and wonder why we're seeing the food and fuel price increases that we're seeing.  We get poorer mileage, pay more for the gas that gives us that poorer mileage and we wouldn't buy the ethanol-laced gasoline if it were priced at its true market price.

Our food costs are rising due to supply and demand.  Substitute grains cause flour prices to escalate.  There is a shortage of soy products due to the move from soy beans to corn because the price of corn has been artificially manipulated.  Fuel costs affect the cost of food transportation.  Livestock is being fed with more and more expensive grains.

Beyond all this in our own country, we have seen the economies of both India and China expand at significant rates.  That has made them able to be larger consumers of the things we're paying more for today.  More people in India and China have automobiles, more can afford to buy clothing made from synthetic materials that are produced from fossil fuels, and both countries have tens of millions of newly empowered consumers.

The long and short, from my perspective is this:  politicians have played around with the marketplace and they broke it; the movement to force 'green' into our lives has cost us refining capacity and crude oil to refine if we had the capacity; we're burning 'food' in our cars that is driving up the cost of edible food from a raw materials perspective and a transportation perspective.

This will not be a problem we solve overnight.  Refineries require nearly a decade to build...if they were able to gain approval from the politicians who don't want more refineries.  We import crude oil when we could be drilling and extracting it from our own fields.  We import gasoline because of the lack of refinery capacity.  People are trying to hoard basic food stuff because they fear where all this is going.

And finally, we are in the midst of a presidential campaign and I don't believe I've heard one peep out of any of the candidates about this issue.  They must see this as a net losing subject or they'd be all over it with their promises to resolve the 'crisis'.  They'd certainly not get the votes from agricultural states.  They'd not get the huge contributions that flow to them because groups think they're going to favor the members of those groups.

How will this issue get resolved if we cannot even include it in the presidential campaign discussions?  How will this issue get resolved if the economic drivers created by Congress continue to exist as they currently do?  They are all too eager to side with those who 'know' that global warming is upon us.  They are only too happy to jump aboard the Al Gore bandwagon even though his 'research' has never been proved out in the scientific community.

I am tired of the disingenuousness of way too many of our politicians, from both parties, who are in office because it is a nice cushy job with great 'perks'.  I'm tired of those politicians who sit in a handful of staged hearings and emerge as the expert on any given issue.

And, I'm tired of ethanol in my fuel that raises the cost and reduces the mileage rate.  And, I'm tired of seeing our grocery bills climb weekly when I know that it is caused by artificially-induced government policies.  And, I wonder if I'm alone?

It is expected that Corsair Capital, a New York based private equity group will sign a deal with National City today that will affect Germantown.  You've guessed by now, if you're a regular reader, that the effect is to keep our newest bank name, National City Bank, in Germantown, at least for the foreseeable future.  Corsair and some other individual investors will put around $6 billion into National City at a share price of some $5.00.

We earlier traced the evolution from St. Francis Bank to Mid America Bank to National City Bank in the first Blog that discussed the plight of National City.  It's shares closed at $8.33 on Friday and that marked a 52 week decline in value of 78%.

So, it appears that my friendly, efficient bankers in Germantown will continue to be there when I need them.  I'm happy for them and for me and the rest of their customers.  Changing banks is a nuisance.  If there are direct deposits, those must be changed.  If there are automatic withdrawls, those must be changed.  New checks and bank cards must be obtained, and decisions as to which of the numerous accounts offered is the right account need to be made.  If Internet banking is involved, there is another level of change, and if telephone banking is involved, yet another level.

We sometimes are oblivious to the things that happen on Wall Street and the world but many of those distant happenings directly involve us in one or another ways.  This whole subject has been one that most of us has not followed...and yet it has an impact on our nice little village.  Our economy has truly become a global economy whether for the better or not.  IBM sold its laptop computer business to a company in China.  The Jaguar and Range Rover nameplates are now owned by a company in India.  GM is building a new engine plant in Brazil.  Medical x-rays are read off shore.  When the Far East markets hiccup, Wall Street flinches.  The demand for gasoline and diesel fuel in India and China have thrown our prices into a seemingly unending upward spiral.

Perhaps more important, these changes have occurred in a relatively short span of time..in decades rather than centuries.

The HBO network has retained the services of Bill Maher for some time now.  I don't watch HBO only because it isn't part of my DirectTV package.  I likely will not watch HBO in the future, but for another reason.

Mr. Maher has chosen the time of the visit of this Pope to our country to launch into a vitriolic attack on Catholics and the Catholic church.  I am not Catholic, but I do consider myself to be a Christian.  I am not favorably disposed toward pedophilia nor toward members of the priesthood who have engaged in and/or tacitly condoned that despicable conduct.  I do know that pedophilia amongst clergy has not been limited to the Catholic church.

Mr. Maher has chosen this subject as his tool to castigate the Pope and the Catholic church during this visit to the U.S.  Among his comments, supposedly the comments from one of those who poses as a member of the literati in America, are the reference to the man who is now the Pope having been conscripted into the German military during the period of the rise of the Nazi movement in Germany.  The man who is now Pope was reportedly twelve years of age when this occurred.  Maher calls the Pope a Nazi but I've so far seen no evidence that this man who is now Pope ever was a member of the Nazi movement.

Mr. Maher has called the Catholic church a cult that supports pedophilia.  Mr. Maher has referred to the Catholic church as the 'Bear Stearns' of organized pedophilia in the world.

These comments are likely within Maher's rights as a citizen of our great country.  HBO has so far remained silent thus giving Maher its blessing to proceed unchecked.

This is an example of just how repugnant free speech can be.  This is an example of just how permissive some of our news and entertainment organizations seem to be.  That so few of the literati have had anything to say about this is telling indeed.

Nearly all of us are bombarded with information tidbits from the time we awake until we retire at the end of our day.  We live in the world of 24 hour news cycles unlike our forefathers.  We have electronic access virtually no matter where we find ourselves.  We are truly the 'plugged in' generations...and I submit we may well be too 'plugged in'.

If you're old enough, you may remember Mad magazine and the caricature character who graced its cover...Alfred E. Neumann.  The caption that accompanied the picture was..."What?  Me Worry?"  This was published before we became so well connected, back when print was more the primary conveyance for information.  I sometimes think back to Alfred E. Neumann and wonder if he would've been the happiest person on earth today, or if he would've also succumbed to what I've chosen to call "Subliminal Self-Fulfillment".

Again, if you're old enough, the term 'brainwashing' may carry memories.  This was supposedly a technique of erasing certain memories and replacing those with new memories.  It often involved the steady bombardment of the senses over many months and years.  Prisoners of war returning from the Korean 'Conflict' (thank goodness it wasn't a real war) were sometimes thought to have been the victims of brainwashing.

You, me and most everyone else in our world are subjected to a steady stream of messages that cannot help but be absorbed by most of us.  For example, 'Global Warming' has become "fact" even without scientific evidence confirming the theory.  That has largely occurred as the result of constant hammering by the press and the rest of the disciples for that movement.  For example, we seem to have talked ourselves into an economic 'recession' even though it very closely resembles an economic 'slowdown'.  For example, we feel the need to reward people who made bad home-buying decisions by bailing out Wall Street bankers that knew better but also knew that Uncle Sam would most likely bail them out...and they were right.

We seem to now believe that 'ethanol' is the savior for our country's appetite for gasoline to power our vehicles even though it is costing us a tremendous increase in the cost of our food stocks as well as costing us in the decreasing 'miles per gallon' arena.  Even though this product is being subsidized by our tax dollars and mandates since none of us would likely be inclined to pay more for something that delivers less than we were accustomed to receiving.

On top of all this 'noise', we find ourselves in that cycle of presidential campaigning...and there can be absolutely nothing good achieved by the administration currently in office no matter the political party involved.  It seems that we no longer have three years 'off' in between presidential elections.  Almost as soon as the President is sworn in, the opposition mounts the proverbial loudspeakers on the trucks and begins parading up and down the streets in our neighborhoods with the 'gloom and doom' message they desire to have implanted on our collective psyche.

This is what I choose to label 'subliminal self-fulfillment'.  We have become like the sheep following the 'bellwether'.  We have become like Pavlov's dogs.  Are we now nearing the point where we give up thinking for ourselves and simply let whatever others will to happen because we simply don't want to be involved?

Have we neared the point of becoming a nation of Alfred E. Neumanns?  Have we crossed over the mid-point?

The campaign for President of the United States seems, to me at least, interminable at this point.  It has been going on for years now in one or another forms.  We might think that we would, by now, even if trying to avoid the process, know the candidates almost as well as they know themselves.  The answer is that we do...and we don't.

Each candidate is artfully packaged by his or her 'handlers' to be just what the handlers' believe we all want in our next President.  Each candidate has been drilled on the policies and pitfalls.  Each has had multiple lines written for them that have, by now, become their own.  Different questions in different parts of the country elicit responses with slight variations on the central theme.

Every once in awhile, though, there comes the break-through moment when the candidate speaks from his or her heart...and thus reveals more about who and what they really are, their true beliefs and motives in an instant than has been revealed to us over the course of many months of appearances, and things we call 'debates', and countless articles penned by countless reporters.  In these rare moments, we are able to peel away the polished surface and see inside the person.

One of those moments occurred for Hillary Clinton when she 'mis-remembered' the situation the day she and Chelsea landed in Bosnia.  Another occurred when her husband, the former President, mis-mis-remembered on her behalf.  These two are, in my opinion, pathological liars.  They conjure up their own form of the truth and it pours out to we the people.  We the people scratch our heads and wonder if we are 'mis-remembering' or if we have just witnessed another of the seemingly regular prevarications to which we've become accustomed.

Another of those moments occurs on differing occasions with John McCain.  Those moments, for me, are the fleeting glimpses we get of the anger inside the man.  Some would say that is simply the 'set of his jaw' and that he is solid and steadfast.  I want to believe that because he will get my vote, but I still find a bit of concern welling up within me whenever I think I witness that.

Another of those moments occurred on April 6th and involved the 'great orator', Barack Obama when he opined in an off-the-cuff response to a question.  He conjured up the image of America that resides deep with him, and he saw small town middle Americans as being angry, since life was passing them by, since they had seen all their employment opportunities taken from them, etc.  And, he saw those middle Americans as now being relegated to holding on to their religion and their guns.  Barack Obama delivers one heck of a speech.  Speeches that have been pre-written and massaged over and over again.  Speeches that present the Barack Obama we are supposed to think is the real Barack Obama.

I believe we had another of those 'insightful incidents' on that April day, and it turned my stomach...for want of more descriptive terms.  It seemed to play to his wife's 'mis-speak' when she opined about finally finding something about which she could feel proud as an American.  This couple scares me.  I understand that he could easily become our President, and I am concerned for what that might mean to us all.  I know that he is the most liberal person in our U.S. Senate...and that takes some doing.  I know that he has served so little time in any elected office that we know virtually nothing of him and his ideas.

I know that John McCain has been tested as few among us have been tested.  I know that he is, for me, an imperfect candidate and not my first choice, or even my second choice.  I know that he will be a staunch defender of our country, and that is of utmost importance to me.

So, my intention to vote for John McCain has not changed, but my reasons for not voting for either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton have been reinforced.

Has anyone ever thought that psychological testing might be a good idea before we annoint a candidate and subsequently elect a President?  I'm sure the United Nations would be happy to be the dispassionate arbiter of those test results.

Just kidding....

The Center on Wisconsin Strategy and the Wisconsin Council on Children & Families, both found in Madison, have released a report that reaches the startling conclusion you see in the headline above.

Wow!  What a surprise!  Further into the article in today's Journal Sentinel that discussed this amazing statistic, we find out that Wisconsin actually ranks quite well so far as this measurement is concerned...but apparently not well enough to make these groups comfortable.  The report shows that the gap in Wisconsin is actually smaller than on average across the country.  The report found that Wisconsin actually ranks 11th out of the 50 states in this regard, and that means the gap between top and bottom fifths of the population are lesser.

But, there are the usual suggestions made to 'correct' this terrible situation:

• Increase the minimum wage and then index it to inflation.
• Improve worker skills and education.
• Expand subsidized childcare and health care for low-income workers.
• 'Update' unemployment insurance.
• Make taxes 'more progressive'.

This 'minimum wage' canard is so old and tiresome but it just keeps coming back.  There are positions in the workforce that do not command more than the current minimum wage.  Every time the minimum wage is increased, it displaces workers at the bottom end of society because the jobs simply go away. The majority of minimum wage jobs are held on a part-time basis by students and homemakers, and not be sole bread winners.

Improving worker skills and education is a noble undertaking, it is one that we are engaged in already, and it speaks to the need to get MPS working since it seems intent on not graduating 53% of its students thus relegating them to those minimum wage jobs and/or welfare programs (except that you have to read for many of those, so I guess that is out).

I don't know where the people have been who built this study, but every time we turn around, we are expanding childcare and health care for low-income workers.  Look at BadgerCare and BadgerCare Plus.  Listen to the radio commercials begging people to come in to sign up for welfare programs.

Apparently unemployment insurance should be 'updated' (read increased) so the people who are unable to hold jobs get more money until the benefit runs out.  Maybe a better tax climate in our wonderful state would prompt the creation of more jobs and remove the increasing need for the unemployment insurance program 'update'.

Finally, the ultimate liberal solution for every ill to be found in society:  let's take more money away (tax increases) from 'the rich' and give it to the poor.  This class warfare shot is being heard all too often in the current presidential campaign, and it fails to define just who the 'rich' are; be careful middle class; you may be rich.  We don't need to resort to the use of this class warfare tactic in Wisconsin.  In case the 'ruling class' hasn't figured it out, our taxes are already too progressive.

These studies drive me nuts (as is plainly seen from this Blog).  Lower our taxes as Texas has done for its citizens and employers, and watch what happens to unemployment, etc.

What a surprise.  The rich get richer faster than the poor.  The real surprise is that liberals have yet to figure out how cause and effect function in this equation!

Our politicians are dancing along merrily plotting to see just how they can use your money and mine to reward less-than-desirable behavior.  They have forgotten, if ever they knew, that when we reward bad behavior, we get more bad behavior.  On the other hand, if we permit some kind of 'pain' to follow poor decisions, we tend to see modified behavior.

What has this to do with the sub-prime mortgage debacle?  Plenty!

First, our government swooped in to help save the mortgage bankers that had encouraged this irrational activity given the lax oversight of federal agencies.  And, it continues down that same path.  What lesson will be learned from this?  Simple: we can continue to do stupid things with money because the government will bail us out just like always.

Second, the politicians fell all over themselves to earn 'points' (also known as votes) from the people who had over-extended and gotten themselves into this mess voluntarily.

What will be learned when a couple earning less than necessary to support the payments, is 'given' a mortgage loan using the adjustable rate feature in spite of credit scoring?  And who, when the rates went up, were given a 'pass' on the deal?  The lesson being taken away when there is no 'pain' associated with the decision is this:  it's okay to do things like this because the government won't let us hurt ourselves!

The answer is that each of us has to pay the price for our decisions.  If we are not forced to pay a price, we will repeat the same behavior or worse.  We can all remember that 'little urchin' in the neighborhood who could do no wrong in the eyes of his or her parents.  They were the worst little kids in the neighborhood.  We can probably each remember how we 'got away' with something, and we can likely remember just how that experience tempted us to continue doing whatever it was that we had 'gotten away with'.

Why is it that politicians think the way too many of them do in these situations?  Because, if they can succeed in getting the majority to think like this, they will have achieved their goal.  What is that goal?  The goal is to get the majority to believe that without big government involved in every decision we take in our daily lives, even if we hurt ourselves, it doesn't matter; it doesn't matter because big government is there looking out for our best interests. 

This is a decidedly liberal point of view.  We don't often hear conservatives espousing this kind of action.  The solution to this 'slippery slope' mentality seems obvious to me: elect conservatives and re-elect other conservatives if the first group loses sight of reality from having been in office in Germantown, West Bend, Madison or Washington for too many terms.  This is how we influence the direction of our community, our county. our state and our country in a representative form of government!

Our ignoring such problems is how the politicians who want the 'nanny' state to evolve past the tipping point get that to happen.  And it will happen at the rate our country is moving down that pathway.  Once it happens, there will be no turning back.

The New England Journal of Medicine, yesterday, published results of a study on prostate cancer and the various treatment regimens employed.  I selected this as today's topic since I'm a man, I've had friends who've died from the disease, I have friends who now have the disease, I'm in the target age group and fully one in six males will be diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer is the most common form of cancer in men and the number two killer second only to lung cancer according to the American Cancer Society.  It is predicted that there will be some 186,000 diagnoses this year and some 28,700 deaths are expected from the disease.

The New England Journal of Medicine reported on the study of a group of 1,201 men and their partners after three kinds of treatment had been administered.  Those were: removal of the prostate; implantation of radioactive 'seeds'; and, radiation therapy.  Of the group who had received either radioactive 'seeds' or radiation therapy, one-third also took hormones.  The Journal was careful to note that the patients and doctors had made decisions independent of this study so the conclusions drawn were said to be suggestive rather than conclusive.

The conclusion drawn by the urologist who led this study, Dr. Martin Sanda of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, was this (as he was quoted saying): "Doctors or their patients should think twice if they're considering hormone therapy.  Most of the cancers treated nowadays are not really that aggressive."

The good news is that more than 99% of patients survive at least five years.  Thirty years ago, only about two-thirds survived that long.

This study showed that too much treatment can make a patient needlessly miserable. Complaints with hormone therapy centered on lack of sexual drive, problems with urination and bowel problems.

I remember very well my conversations with my friend John, of whom I've written before.  He was adamant that the quality of his life was more the issue than the length of his life.  He was encouraged to take hormone therapy and refused to do so after reading of the possible side effects.  He knew that was the right decision for him and maintained his quality of life until very near the end.

What lesson can we all draw from this?  I think the most important lesson is this:  Men should not avoid being examined for prostate enlargement and PSA counts for fear of what might be detected.  That is a very, very small price to pay for the peace of mind that flows for most of us as the result.  And, early detection is by far and away better for the patient because treatment can be begun before the cancer has grown too large to control.

The rule of thumb that I've always heard was that we men should begin to be examined for prostate issues at age 50.  My  feeling is that even earlier would be better.  My friend was diagnosed at about his age fifty and the cancer had already gotten a good start by that time.

Obama the speaker...

Barack Obama is among the very best speakers I've heard.  His delivery is excellent.  His turn of phrase is excellent.  His pace is perfect.  His audience contact is solid.  He appears genuine when he talks.

He will continue to out-speak his opponents no matter what happens or doesn't happen, and no matter whom he faces if he wins the Democrat nomination for President.

Obama the candidate...

Barack Obama, in my opinion, harmed his chances to become the Democrat nominee for President with his speech on race in America.  The speech was one in which he attempted to put the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's bombastic sermons behind him.  He contradicted himself by saying that he had heard these remarks while in the church, when he denied that very thing on the preceding Friday.  He talked about his grandmother whom he, essentially, described as a racist for her remarks while he was a child.

He tried to dismiss the rants of his pastor, and that doesn't appear to be working for him.  His poll numbers have slipped significantly since this 'issue' arose.  He stands the real chance of defeat in Pennsylvania.

His wife is a net drag on his campaign, and isn't likely to be muzzled.  Her speeches seem to reflect the anger that we've all heard in those sermon bits that have been aired ad nauseum.

Several writers have raised the question of how this was similar to the 'religion in America' speech of Mitt Romney.  Romney continued to sink in the polls following that very solid speech.

Finally, Sen. Obama is up against the machine that is the Clintons.  And, he played right into their hands by establishing himself as the 'black' candidate, saving the Clintons from having to find a better way to do that than Bill Clinton did in South Carolina a few weeks ago.  Having said that, where did this 'issue' come from?  Who found the tapes or DVDs of the sermons?  Who posted those to the Internet?  Maybe the Clintons, or their surrogates, did find the better way after all.

Remember the 'super delegates' that will decide the nominee for the Democrats.  Hillary could very well be the nominee regardless of delegate counts from primaries and regardless of the popular vote.

Obama the President...

Beyond all this hoopla lies the very real concern that he is ranked as the most liberal Senator of all the senators we have today.  That is quite a distinction!  He will tax and spend like no other has.  He wants to 'invest' in this and that and the other program designed to help the downtrodden.  Those very programs will do little other than to create an economy that continues to decline.  Those programs will result in an even greater sense of entitlement that will cause the downtrodden to remain the downtrodden forever.  We will have national health care and that will prove that national health care is not the panacea some seem to think it will be.  We will be taxed for many more billions and billions of dollars.  Our military will be diminished.  Constitutional rights such as the right to keep and bear arms will disappear.  We will no longer have to be concerned about being the 'policeman for the world'.  We'll have more than enough policing to do at home. 

With that accomplished, we can then truly be made the socialist country that the extreme liberals desire us to be.

We are, I fear, on the edge of a precipice, and the wall beneath our feet is threatening to crumble and fall away.