Washington Times Editorial: Obama flips and flops

Source: http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/08/obama-flips-and-flops/

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

As Barack Obama continues to campaign for the general election, his flip-flops increase along the way. Thus, he is jeopardizing the image he has cultivated as an authentic and principled candidate. His reversals are so egregious that, at this rate, he risks snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Mr. Obama's credibility was first breached during the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy. When video surfaced of Rev. Wright making inflammatory statements at Trinity United Church, Mr. Obama took a principled stand: "I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother." Yet, the Illinois senator subsequently denounced his pastor and then left Trinity United Church. Mr. Obama's statements throughout the controversy revealed that he was deceptive: Either he knew that Rev. Wright was a radical preacher and therefore initially feigned ignorance of his ideology, or, Mr. Obama did not know Rev. Wright had so many extreme viewpoints, which means he overstated his commitment and zeal for Trinity United Church. Mr. Obama's mishandling of the Rev. Wright controversy was the first major, visible crack in his public image as a man of principle.

Since then, the flip-flops abound - on small matters and large. Mr. Obama declared during the primaries that he would opt out of The North American Free Trade Agreement if it was not re-negotiated; he then stated that his rhetoric had been "overheated." He pledged to accept public financing; he then decided to forgo public financing because John McCain and the Republicans would "game the system." He stated that he was willing to meet rogue leaders "without preconditions" only to declare later that certain preconditions were necessary before engaging in talks. In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, he stated that he would support an "undivided Jerusalem;" he then said he had been misunderstood. He declared that the D.C. gun ban was constitutional, only to later praise the recent Supreme Court ruling that the gun ban is unconstitutional. He was opposed to granting immunity to telecommunications companies for wire-tapping and yet he now favors this. When he came under fire during the primaries for not wearing a flag lapel pin, he stated that he stopped wearing it because it "became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism." He now wears a flag lapel pin.

Perhaps in isolation, each of these incidents could be justified. However, there is a pattern emerging: Mr. Obama does not stand his ground when it is not politically expedient. When he reverses course, he is willing to blame others for his errors in judgement. He also makes convoluted, misleading statements. The Democrat is both a flip-flopper and a deceiver. This is indeed a manifestation of audacity - but does not offer voters much hope for "new politics."

Obama, Like Mondale, Changes Positions Place By Place

Source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/clinton-attacks.html

Retired Jews are the Florida key By Peter Worthington

Source: http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2008/06/16/5890101-sun.php



Mon, June 16, 2008


It's clear that both John McCain and Barack Obama want the Jewish vote in their run for the U.S. presidency -- but which one are American Jews likely to support?

The Jewish vote is important, not because of their numbers, but because of their influence and money -- not necessarily in that order.

Traditionally, Jews vote for the Democratic ticket.

This year may be different, because of the candidates.

To a non-Jew (me), the choice seems a no-brainer, especially if one is concerned about the security of Israel and its continued existence.



This latter, is not carved in stone, and more uncertain than at any time since the 1950s when the repeated Arab intent was "to drive Israel into the sea."

Since the rise of Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the "elimination" of Israel is again echoing across the Middle East, endorsed by Hezbollah and Hamas, both supported by Iran or, more precisely, by Ahmadinejad and those who reflect his hate.

Although he yearns for nuclear weapons (right now limited to enriched uranium), we (the outside world) shouldn't panic prematurely.

Rather, we should realize there's a vibrant democratic movement inside Iran which, if not exactly democratic, at least is uneasy about Ahmadinejad.

AIR ATTACK

Last fall, an Israeli air attack demolished an intended nuclear plant in northern Syria that resulted in minimum publicity -- outrage from the supplier, North Korea, and muted dismay from Syria and Iran.

How about Obama's and McCain's individual pledges to stand by Israel if elected president? Which of them has the most credibility?

Obama's words are silken and honeyed, as he pledges: "Israel's security is sacrosanct, non-negotiable ... I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our ally, Israel ... I will never compromise Israel's security ... do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon." And so on. Sentiments echoed by Hillary Clinton, who seems determined to be vice-president.

McCain, on the other hand, isn't as eloquent on the subject. To him it's a given that he supports Israel. His policies alone, if successful, protect Israel. Words are unnecessary -- his actions speak volumes.

Unlike some, McCain I believable when he says: "There's only one thing worse than military action, and that's a nuclear-armed Iran."

If elected, he intends to keep American troops in the area until there's no need for them. Obama, on the other hand, wants to withdraw U.S. troops -- but would send them back if Israel's survival were threatened. If you believe that, you probably believe in Ahmadinejad's pacifism.

Without mentioning Israel, McCain has made it clear he intends to reduce the threat of Ahmadinejad and Iran. Obama favours unconditional talks with Ahmadinejad, Hamas and other Mideast factions. Small wonder the anti-Israel faction want Obama as prez -- and are uneasy about McCain.

DOMESTIC ISSUES

So how will American Jews vote? I'm told by people who know, that two-thirds of young American Jews base their vote on domestic issues, one third on the Israeli question.

California, New York and Florida are states with the most Jews. It's likely California and New York Jews will vote for Obama -- which won't affect the outcome, because these states are Democratic bastions.

Florida Jews are older (retired), and more concerned about Israel. These are likely to vote for McCain, and are a significant factor in a swing state.

In other words, the Jewish vote is irrelevant in California and New York, but critical to both candidates in Florida. Here, McCain's prospects are better because his policies make Israel more secure than Obama's.

Indonesians report Obama was more active as a Muslim than he admits

Source: http://obamawtf.blogspot.com/2008/04/indonesian-papers-report-on-obamas.html

The Indonesian Newspaper Banjarmasin Post sheds light on Obama's early years. This report suggests that Obama has not accurately reported his early religious education. It also raises several legal questions relating to the fact that he was an Indonesian citizen, and whether he now needs to renounce his dual nationality. Clarification from Team Obama would be helpful

In summary the article states
1) Obama was active in the prayer room
2) Barry was at one time quite a religious Muslim
3) All his father's relatives were religious Muslims
4) Barry was registered as a Muslim and an Indonesian citizen at his school in 1968
5) Obama has now moved onto be a Christian
Here's a machine generated translation of the article, with the original directly below:

On Sunday, on July 09 2006 02:31

Obama small still was remembered by his teammates in Jakarta. Barry, the Barack call during small, flexible and easy-going. Apart from often played marble and football, he was active to the prayer room.

Barry was previously quite religious Islam. His birth father, Barack Husein Obama was the Muslim economist from Kenya. Before marrying Ann Dunham, Husein Obama married Kenyans and produced seven children. All the relatives a Barry's father were religious Islam. "We previously often asked him to the prayer room close to the house." If with the sarong, funny deh, said Rony Amir, Barry's teammate when living in Street H Ramli, the region Menteng Dalam, Jakarta. In fact, without wearing the sarong, Barry also appeared funny. This was because his body was fat, tall, and he had curly hair. Ronny when remembering the memory with Barry always laughed. "Funny no matter what," he said while terkekeh.

But, at this time Barry has moved the Christian religion. He lived happy with his wife, Michelle, with two daughters. Since being chosen as the US senator from Illinois, Barry's name was increasingly famous. About the challenged taken on by Barry in the USA, Rony took part in feeling proud. According to him, since childhood, Barry indeed liked to socialise. Perhaps this became important for Barry, so as to become a politicians who was respected in the USA. Be most startled enough also Rony when hearing Barry becoming the great person in US. Padahal, since small, Barry did not differ from children Menteng Dalam that liked to play marble and football. "That distinguished with us only, at that time his body was high big and black," said Rony.

In the beginning of the life in Jakarta, Barry the school in the Franciscan PRIMARY SCHOOL. Here he was registered by the name of Barry Soetoro. He entered this PRIMARY SCHOOL with the serial number 203. In his report, Barry was written was born in Honolulu, on August 4 1961. In the school document, Barry was written as the Indonesian citizen.

Barry entered the Franciscan PRIMARY SCHOOL on January 1 1968 and sat in the class of 1B. Agama Barry that was written in the document was Islam.

While his father had a name L Soetoro Ma that worked as the official of Director General's Geography of Topografi TNI Angkatan Darat of the Service.
Barry only went to school three years in the Asisi PRIMARY SCHOOL.
He only studied until the class 3.

In 1970, Barry moved to the Percobaan PRIMARY SCHOOL 04 Besuki, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat.
When moving to the Besuki PRIMARY SCHOOL, Barry also moved the house to Street Dempo, Matraman, Jakarta

Dozens of years did not meet, friends of Barry's PRIMARY SCHOOL in Jakarta then yearned for him.
Initially, they did not know Barack Obama.
However after they saw his photograph, they then just understood that the loop hair had black skin that was Barry.
"Oh... the black that."
He previously his name of Barry.
Intensively he, now he is the great person.
In America again.
When yes he to Indonesia again, said Irma Dewi Sukanti, one of the former friends of the senator who currently is talked about as the US presidential candidate 2008. competed with Hillary Rodham Clinton, the wife former US President Bill Clinton.

 dtc/dws

Tranlated at http://www.toggletext.com/kataku_trial.php#

Sunday, 09 July 2006 02:31

SENATOR AS RASA INDONESIA (2-HABIS) Bocah Negro Gemuk Itu Rajin Ke Mushala Barack Obama kecil masih diingat oleh teman-teman sepermainannya di Jakarta. Barry, panggilan Barack saat kecil, supel dan pandai bergaul. Selain sering bermain kelereng dan sepakbola, dia aktif ke mushala. AKRAB - Senator Obama bersama dua pendukung. Barry dulu memang beragama Islam. Ayah kandungnya, Barack Husein Obama adalah seorang muslim ahli ekonomi asal Kenya. Sebelum menikah dengan Ann Dunham, Husein Obama telah menikah dengan orang Kenya dan mendapat keturunan tujuh anak. Semua saudara sebapak Barry ini beragama Islam. "Kita dulu sering mengajak dia ke mushala dekat rumah. Kalau pakai sarung, lucu deh," kata Rony Amir, teman sepermainan Barry saat tinggal di Jalan H Ramli, kawasan Menteng Dalam, Jakarta. Sebenarnya, tanpa memakai sarung, Berry juga tampak lucu. Ini karena badannya gemuk, tinggi, serta berambut ikal. Ronny saat mengingat kenangan bersama Barry selalu tertawa. "Lucu pokoknya," ujarnya sambil terkekeh. Tapi, saat ini Barry sudah berpindah agama Kristen. Dia hidup bahagia bersama istrinya, Michelle, dengan dua putri. Sejak terpilih sebagai senator AS dari Illinois, nama Barry semakin terkenal. Tentang sepak terjang Barry di AS, Rony turut merasa bangga. Menurut dia, sejak kecil, Barry memang suka bergaul. Barangkali inilah yang menjadi modal bagi Barry, sehingga menjadi politisi yang cukup disegani di AS. Cukup terkejut juga Rony saat mendengar Barry menjadi orang top di AS. Padahal, semenjak kecil, Barry tidak beda dengan anak-anak Menteng Dalam yang senang main kelereng dan sepakbola. "Yang membedakan dengan kita hanyalah, saat itu badannya tinggi besar dan hitam," ujar Rony. Di awal-awal hidup di Jakarta, Barry sekolah di SD Fransiskus Asisi. Di sini dia terdaftar dengan nama Barry Soetoro. Dia masuk ke SD ini dengan nomor urut 203. Dalam rapornya, Barry tertulis lahir di Honolulu, 4 Agustus 1961. Dalam dokumen sekolah, Barry tertulis sebagai warga negara Indonesia. Barry masuk ke SD Fransiskus Asisi pada 1 Januari 1968 dan duduk di kelas 1B. Agama Barry yang tertulis dalam dokumen itu adalah Islam. Sementara ayahnya bernama L Soetoro MA yang bekerja sebagai pegawai Dinas Geografi Ditjen Topografi TNI Angkatan Darat. Barry hanya bersekolah tiga tahun di SD Asisi. Dia hanya belajar sampai kelas 3. Pada 1970, Barry pindah ke SD Percobaan 04 Besuki, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat. Saat pindah ke SD Besuki, Barry juga pindah rumah ke Jalan Dempo, Matraman, Jakarta. Puluhan tahun tidak bertemu, teman-teman SD Barry di Jakarta pun merindukannya. Awalnya, mereka tidak mengenal Barack Obama. Namun setelah mereka melihat fotonya, mereka pun baru paham bahwa si rambut ikal berkulit hitam itu adalah Barry. "Oh...si negro itu. Dia dulu namanya Barry. Hebat dia, sekarang dia jadi orang top. Di Amerika lagi. Kapan ya dia ke Indonesia lagi," ujar Irma Dewi Sukanti, salah satu mantan teman senator yang kini disebut-sebut sebagai calon Presiden AS 2008. bersaing dengan Hillary Rodham Clinton, istri mantan Presiden AS Bill Clinton. dtc/dws

Source Banjarmasin Post.
http://www.indomedia.com/bpost/072006/9/depan/utama4.htm

Employers use federal law to deny benefits

Employers use federal law to deny benefits
Saturday July 5, 11:31 pm ET
By Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer
Workers -- and some judges -- frustrated in legal fights over benefits with large employers


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Dying of cancer, Thomas Amschwand did everything he was told to make sure his wife would collect on the life insurance policy he had through his employer.

"He was obsessed with dotting every `i' and crossing every `t'," Melissa Amschwand-Bellinger recalled about her husband, who died in 2001 at age 30.

But Spherion Corp., the temporary staffing company where Amschwand worked, told Amschwand-Bellinger she would not receive any of the $426,000 in benefits she believed she was due. When she went to court, Spherion succeeded in getting her lawsuit thrown out. The Supreme Court on June 27 refused to review the case.

Amschwand-Bellinger received a refund of the few thousand dollars in insurance premiums she and her husband dutifully had paid. The total, she said, would not cover the costs of his funeral.

The story has played out often under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Designed to protect employee benefits, the law has been used by employers as a shield against suits.

Federal appeals courts, interpreting Supreme Court decisions dating to 1993, consistently have said companies that offer health, life and retirement benefits under ERISA cannot be sued for large amounts of money, or damages. Instead, they can be sued only for typically smaller sums such as Amschwand's insurance premiums.

Several federal judges have bemoaned the unfairness even as they have felt constrained to rule in favor of employers.

"The facts ... scream out for a remedy beyond the simple return of premiums," Judge Fortunato Benavides of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in the Amschwand case. "Regrettably, under existing law it is not available."

The Bush administration has argued that the appeals courts are misreading the precedents and has asked the high court at least twice to clarify the earlier rulings. So far it has refused.

Congress, which could amend ERISA to make clear such suits are allowed, also has taken no action.

The result, in the view of ERISA experts, the administration and some lawmakers, is perverse.

"The beneficiary under the policy didn't get the promised benefit," said Colleen Medill, an expert on ERISA at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. "To say we're just going to return your premiums, that's a total farce. That's not what they paid the premiums for. They paid them for the benefits."

Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said at a recent hearing that before ERISA became law, employees clearly could sue for benefits in state courts.

The court rulings, said Leahy, D-Vt., have left people "more vulnerable than they were before the law was passed."

Spherion's decision to deny benefits to Amschwand-Bellinger turned on an odd set of facts. Spherion, which employs about 300,000 people, switched insurers after Thomas Amschwand was diagnosed with a rare form of heart cancer. The new policy did not take effect until an employee worked one full day. Spherion never informed Amschwand of the requirement.

Amschwand asked repeatedly whether there was anything else he needed to do and was told no. He asked that the new policy be sent to him. Spherion never did so.

He died without returning to work. His widow said he easily could have worked a day if that was what it took to activate the new policy. Spherion could have waived the one-day-of-work provision, as it did for other employees but not for Amschwand.

Spherion spokesman Kip Havel issued a brief statement when contacted by The Associated Press after the high court declined to review the case. "We are pleased the court has made its decision and the matter has finally been resolved," Havel said.

The court also recently turned down an appeal from Louis Gerard "Gerry" Goeres, who sued Charles M. Schwab & Co. over hundreds of thousands of dollars in retirement plan benefits.

For 16 months, Schwab mistakenly refused to acknowledge Goeres as the beneficiary in the retirement plan of his domestic partner, Stephen Ward, a Schwab employee who died in 1999. By the time Schwab acknowledged its error, the value of the account had declined by more than $500,000. Goeres sued for the rest. Federal courts dismissed the suit. "Unfortunately, legal relief is not available," U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said in ruling against Goeres.

"You know the Schwab commercial, `Talk to Chuck?'" Goeres said. "I thought if Chuck knew this, he'd say, 'Oh my God, this is so wrong.' I live on naive dreams."

Schwab said in court papers that Goeres could have taken legal action soon after Ward's death, when he first was told he was not the beneficiary.

Amschwand-Bellinger said the cases show the need for either the court or Congress to provide "some sort of meaningful remedy for employees when employers have a breach of fiduciary duty."

A Texas native who lives in an unincorporated Houston suburb, she has since remarried and has an 18-month-old daughter. She is president and executive director of the Amschwand Sarcoma Cancer Foundation, which she founded with her first husband.

She recognizes that she is more fortunate than many others who have fought similarly futile battles for benefits under ERISA. "What if we had had children and I was a stay at home mom?" said Amschwand-Bellinger, who previously worked for a public hospital system. "What if I was 60 years old, with no skill sets, and I had to go back to work?"

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

Bill's Comment: If you are able to get your own health insurance, then go for it. The day will come when employers will say, "To heck with this." If Congress was to pass a bill in which the employee can use it as a tax write-off and not the employer, then that will, at least, get the ball rolling. The sooner we can get rid of the entitlement mentality, the better off we will be.

NBC Universal to buy The Weather Channel for $3.5B

NBC Universal to buy The Weather Channel for $3.5B
Sunday July 6, 5:45 pm ET
By Seth Sutel, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- NBC Universal and two partners said Sunday they have reached a deal to buy The Weather Channel from Landmark Communications Inc., ending a drawn-out process that had attracted interest from several major media companies.

Financial terms weren't disclosed, but a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity said the purchase price was $3.5 billion in cash. NBC was joined in the deal by the private equity firms The Blackstone Group LP and Bain Capital LLC.

In addition to The Weather Channel, which can be seen by 97 percent of U.S. cable subscribers, the deal also includes several related assets such as weather services for newspapers and radio stations and the widely used Web site Weather.com.

NBC Universal, a unit of General Electric Co., became the sole bidder for The Weather Channel last month after Time Warner Inc. dropped out. CBS Corp. and cable industry leader Comcast Corp. had also expressed interest earlier.

NBC already operates a digital weather and news service called NBC Weather Plus that was launched in 2004 and would make a logical fit with The Weather Channel. NBC Weather Plus is owned by NBC and its affiliated TV stations and can be seen on digital cable services and digital subchannels operated by NBC stations.

NBC and Landmark said in a statement that The Weather Channel would be operated as a separate entity out of its base in Atlanta. They said they expected the transaction to close by year-end, pending regulatory approvals.

Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., GE Commercial Finance, GSO Capital Partners and Sankaty Advisors LLC will provide debt financing for the transaction.

Landmark, a privately held media company based in Norfolk, Va., put The Weather Channel up for sale in January along with its other businesses, which include The Virginian-Pilot and eight other daily newspapers. No announcement has yet been made about the newspaper sales, which are continuing on a separate track.

The Weather Channel was launched in 1982. Its Web site has about 37 million monthly unique visitors, putting it in the top 15 Web sites, according to the company. The Weather Channel has 1,300 employees and estimated annual revenues of $550 million.

WHY CONSERVATIVES SHOULD SUPPORT MCCAIN by Len Munsil

Source: http://www.lenmunsil.com/2008/03/why_conservatives_should_suppo.php

March 30, 2008 01:26 PM

For nearly 25 years I have actively promoted conservative principles in public policy, as a journalist, lawyer, public policy expert and political candidate.

I have done so because I believe conservative principles of economics, national defense and social policy are in the best interests of our community, state and nation.

On the front page of today's Arizona Republic Viewpoints section is an article I wrote arguing that conservative interests will best be served by the election of Arizona Sen. John McCain to the presidency this fall.

The article appears alongside two others -- written by a press spokesman and a high school student -- extolling the virtues of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I was not aware the Republic planned to present my column as part of a "point-counterpoint" series on the candidates. My intent was to make the case for why conservatives should support Sen. McCain.

A few lines were edited out of the printed version, including this important point:

For conservatives, supporting John McCain is not a compromise or a sell-out of our principles. He is a presidential candidate who will strengthen national security, appoint conservative judges, support the sanctity of life, keep taxes low and veto pork barrel spending. He will advance the conservative cause in significant ways.

I will be discussing the article on KFYI's Mike Broomhead show tonight at 8 p.m. (550 AM). Here is what I wrote in its entirety:

Although Sen. John McCain has locked up the Republican nomination for President, some conservative leaders continue to snipe at him. While I agree with elements of most conservative critiques of Sen. McCain, I could not possibly disagree more with their conclusions – especially if those conclusions cause conservatives to sit this election out.

Sen. McCain is not the lesser of two evils. In fact, he is worthy of the enthusiastic support of every thinking conservative.

I join many citizens in gratitude that a genuine American hero with core conservative beliefs – who has already given so much for our nation -- is willing to spend his eighth decade on earth serving a cause greater than himself.

If you are an across-the-board conservative like I am – a fiscal, social and foreign policy conservative – it is in your interest and the national interest to elect Sen. McCain.

It’s not just because either of the Democratic alternatives would jeopardize our security, our economy and our values – though they would. It is because the election of John McCain will substantially advance the conservative principles and values we’ve been fighting for.

In the interest of full disclosure, Sen. McCain endorsed me in the Republican primary for Governor in 2006, even making strong television ads on my behalf. I was honored to have his support in a contested primary that I eventually won. But he never asked me for anything in return, then or now.

I write today on my own, without the knowledge or approval of the McCain campaign. And I do so because I am concerned that some conservatives are heading down a path that will result in the destruction of every principle they claim to promote.

Foreign policy conservatives should have the least concern about McCain. He has the experience and determination to carry the battle to the enemy in what he describes as the “transcendent issue” of our time – the fight against radical Islamic extremists. He is committed to victory in Iraq, and was an early proponent of the surge that has turned the tide.

Both Democratic candidates have made promises of withdrawal that will embolden our enemies and put at risk not only our troops but also the free citizens of Iraq who have trusted us with their lives.

Social conservatives have worked for a generation to promote the unique humanity and value of every human life, and are finally winning the battle of public opinion. Sen. McCain not only has voted pro-life for more than two decades – receiving the endorsement of Arizona Right to Life in every election since 1982 – but has pledged to appoint judges who are committed to constitutional fidelity. He has fought for every conservative appointment to the high court, including Robert Bork.

When we are so close to restoring the promise of the Declaration of Independence – the “unalienable” right to life of every human child – why would any sincere pro-lifer sit this election out? Unfortunately, we know what either Democrat would do – the “litmus test” of commitment to the flawed Roe v. Wade decision is alive and well. Aging liberals on the Court will line up to let Clinton or Obama replace them with liberal justices 30 years younger – preserving Roe and other activist decisions for at least another generation.

Sen. McCain supports marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Like Fred Thompson, he opposes amending the U.S. Constitution to protect marriage unless it is absolutely necessary -- which it would be if federal courts overturn state definitions of marriage. For now, he supports state efforts to confirm marriage as the unique bond of male and female.

Economic conservatives should appreciate Sen. McCain’s lifelong quest to reduce the size and scope of government and to end pork barrel spending. He has never voted for a tax increase and is committed to making the Bush tax cuts permanent. He believes in free market solutions to health care, not the government take-over promoted by Democrats.

With a lifetime conservative voting record of 82.3 percent, Sen. McCain’s commitment to our principles stands in stark contrast to his Democratic opponents, both of whom vote conservative less than 10 percent of the time.

The suggestion by one pundit that Hillary Clinton is “more conservative” than McCain is hyperbole on steroids -- so factually wrong that it’s just plain silly.

Talk show pundits have bludgeoned us with the list of McCain’s sins against conservative orthodoxy, beginning with his immigration bill.

But consider this – even in dealing with illegal immigration, Sen. McCain’s concern for national security and his recognition of political reality will cause him to do much more to secure the borders than any Democrat. If that’s the only issue you care about, Sen. McCain is still your best hope for progress – the Democrats can’t even given a straight answer about whether they would give drivers’ licenses to illegal aliens.

I first met McCain in 1984, when he came to my office for an interview while I was the editor of ASU’s daily student newspaper. Later, in a debate at ASU, he criticized federal efforts to stop illegal immigration. Consistent with his position today, he expressed concern about rounding up and deporting people who have been here for years. But then he said, “We need to tighten up our border control.”

That’s right – all the way back in 1984, when many of us who are concerned now about illegal immigration were not even aware of the issue – John McCain was on record calling for more border security.

For conservatives, supporting John McCain is not a compromise or a sell-out of our principles. He is a presidential candidate who will strengthen national security, appoint conservative judges, support the sanctity of life, keep taxes low and veto pork barrel spending. He will advance the conservative cause in significant ways.

Every day that conservative leaders grumble and express reservations about McCain increases the likelihood that a liberal Democrat will take office next January.

Then there will be no checks on the liberal tendencies of Nancy Pelosi and a Democratic Congress. The Supreme Court will be gone for a generation. Our right to make medical decisions will be lost. Our economy will be stifled by taxes and regulation. Our border will remain wide open. And we can only pray that our pullback from the war effort does not lead to more attacks in the United States.

For conservatives, that’s an awfully high price to pay because you’re mad about campaign finance reform or a dead and buried immigration bill.

The American Patriot

The American Patriot to me is one who loves their Country and wish America no harm for any reason.

The American Patriot is male, female and children of every nationality, race, ethnic background and religion who wish America no harm for any reason.

The American Patriot are not a particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom who wish America no harm.

The American Patriot ia proud of their flag and the Statue of Liberty which "welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, tempest tossed" and wishes America no harm.

The American Patriot takes pride in the greatest Warriors in the history of man - the American Soldier and wish America no harm.

The American Patriot looks at their sons and daughters in uniform with tears in their hearts and pride on their faces as their children goes off to defend the greatest country ever on this planet and wish America no harm.

The spouse and children of the American Patriot with anxiety in their hearts and faces shining with pride watch as their American Warrior leaves to defend America.

The American Patriot lives in the most prosperous land in the history of the world.

The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God given right of each person to the pursuit of happiness and the right to self determination and wish America no harm.

The American Patriot does not want to weaken America in dangerous times for political reasons.

The American Patriot does not put ideology first and America second to harm it in hopes it will learn a 'lesson'.

God Bless America and its' Patriots!

The American Warrior

The American Warrior is someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness.

The American Warrior is someone who frightens many people because they live in denial of reality, the American Warrior reminds those people that violence exists in the world.

The American Warrior has the capacity for violence towards those who threaten America and the American way of life.

The American Warrior is a constant reminder that there are terrorists in the land and those that wish to destroy America are already here on American soil.

The American Warrior on September 11, 2001, rushed towards the danger instead of fleeing from it, intent on defending and helping those American citizens in danger. Many American Warriors gave their lives that day and many more were willing to give the ultimate sacrifice for America and its citizens.

Most Americans are glad that they were not on the planes that crashed into the WTC and the Pentagon - the American Warrior wished they had been on those planes because they might have made a difference.

American Warriors were on United Airlines Flight 93 and defended unto death America and its citizens with the cry "lets roll".

The American Warrior waits for the day that they have lived for and trained for their entire life - to defend until death, America and its citizens.

"There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edmund Burke

This 4th of July, I salute the American Warrior, both living and dead. Men and women who serve in the Armed Forces, Police Forces, Fire Departments and ordinary civilians who rush forward to our defense instead of running from danger.

The American Warrior who wishes no harm to America - God Bless You!