It has been a well-known understanding that pro-life constituents with a strong religious bent give little, if no, option to their children when it comes to sex; abstinence only is their favored mantra. 

No doubt others and I have no issue with how you choose to raise your children and even to the extent that you choose to destroy their minds through supernatural fantasies, misinformation and limiting information by which they need to make solid decisions in life, which affect their life - sometimes for the rest of their life.

Abortion is the taking of life no matter how you look at it. 

However, at this juncture in our societal development we still face the difficulties of managing this issue of unplanned pregnancy.

Palin and her family are free to make their decisions as they see fit. It should bring to question though the aspect of just what values did Palin and her husband transfer to their daughter who made a choice to have sex. 

Not sex out of wedlock, but sex without contraception.

I care nothing about the baby and that potential; every individual has the freedom to make those decisions for themselves. Each woman should personally decide about her progeny.

Does anyone care about the other myriad of diseases transmitted sexually, most life altering that of HIV?

Everyone is so busy trying to excuse Palin’s decisions, her handling of her daughter’s situation and doing "damage" control, yet no one is questioning the apparent lack of options she gave her daughter whereby her daughter didn’t think it necessary or feared asking for options to "abstinence only" forms of contraception. 

Whenever you are not giving choices to others you are controlling and manipulating their behavior for your own self-interest.

This is exactly what the Republicans are constantly ranting about the Democrats engaging in repeatedly. Yet, in the face of life’s choices, Republicans constantly want to hinder the choices of other Americans through legislation, court order and fear. Heal thyself.

The very behavior Republicans disdain about Democrats, they regularly engage in aud nauseum.

I will vote for McCain/Palin, not because of their disenfranchising political stances when it comes to invoking religion which is the foundation of these ridiculous situations of unplanned pregnancies, but because of the pluralistic issues which face this country, those of National Security, Fiscal Responsibility, Freedom and Liberty.

Republicans will continue to draw ire and judgment from others because they continue, like Democrats, to attempt to control/manipulate behavior rooted in personal subjective philosophy (religion) instead of speaking to ALL AMERICANS.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

How each person defines creator is personal and subjective. To impose your definition of creator is inherently ANTI-AMERICAN as it seeks to, not only take ownership of this nation, but to control and manipulate others perspectives and experiences of life. 

The Formula For Living

 

Too often the political rhetoric that gets bantered about regarding change, help to those who need it, the system is broken is nothing more than just that: rhetoric.

 

If we believe in our nation’s fundamental foundations in which freedom and liberty are above all else, then the Formula For Living needs to start with the individual.

 

Let’s define a few concepts, which relate to all human beings:

 

Reality – your life is what it is; reality is the choices before you from which you have to make a selection

 

Accountability – making a selection from these choices belongs to the individual from which no other person can absolve you

 

Responsibility – able to respond to the choices the individual has made

 

Freedom – the ability to live life as one desires

 

Choice – an empowerment that cannot be limited by another

 

At No Cost To Others – individual choice at no cost to others. Freedom to make your individual selections. When your individual choice is at a cost to others you are infringing on their personal freedoms.

 

What does all this mean? It means that each individual is born equal in concept. You are free to make any choice to pursuit of your own happiness.  Our world is replete with the “rags to riches” stories that abound regarding success. Our world is replete with stories of self-destruction. Both scenarios are a matter of personal choice.

Don't confuse a difficult choice with no choice at all. 

Don't confuse undesired choices with no choice at all. 
 

Limiting choice of the individual is an attempt to manipulate and control for self-interest. 

There are no interests that are not self-interests.

We limit choice with young children because we have concern for their safety for which we have been gifted with until they are able to make such decisions for themselves.

 

Beyond this scope everything else is simply imposing your own personal philosophy of life by which you penalize others who don’t support your view of the world. 

 

I challenge you to apply this formula to any situation now being spouted off about in our elections.

 

I challenge you to personally apply this concept to your own personal life.

 

I challenge you to challenge me regarding this concept.

 

As science seeks to falsify itself for the greater good, I challenge you to scientifically, if you will, falsify this concept where you are able to prove that personal choice, unlimited, endorsed by personal accountability and personal responsibility does not shift the paradigm of our world, our future generations and give the ultimate freedom and liberty to all of mankind at no cost to others.

 

Bring it!

With the appearance of "A-mad-jihad" at Columbia, I wish to remind people who want to invoke our Free Speech here in the United States:

1) We offer Free Speech to OUR Citizens

2) You are NOT an American Patriot if you endorse the Free Speech of a dictator who violates all the precepts of our Independence and Constitution.

Am I questioning your Patriotism?

NO! I'm telling you outright, YOU'RE NOT AN AMERICAN PATRIOT!

No If's

And's

of But's!

 

Great Global Warming Swindle Religion and God are NOT Great!

So, here we sit 7 years into the millennia and some people can’t seem to get a grip on reality. On one side the religious believe that some dude 6000 years ago said, “voila” and everything is created in 7 days. On the other side there are the global warming alarmists who say that 30 years ago “voila” man made global warming and is destroying the earth. Do these ideas sound stupid? They should.

The regulation of behavior is on both sides of the spectrum.

Let’s start with the global warming swindle. We understand that CO² is only a minute piece of the puzzle yet somehow man, this tiny little species on the planet, is the root cause of it all.  BTW, funding as an argument for who's zoomin who is negated by the fact that both sides are funded by their invested entities, so get over it.

Religion. People who devote their lives to this are laughable and could probably use some psychiatric help. The evidence does not in any way suggest that a person, thing, entity known in the past as god, exists. Even if you HAD proof of A god, all your work is ahead of you to prove that YOUR god is THE god and that YOUR bible is THE unalterable word.

Listen, no one should believe the religious about the denouncing of global warming from people who believe in some supernatural being that apparently has created an entire universe with you in mind while you utilize your bible to discriminate and endorse bigotry of people who don’t think or live the way you do or the way you think they should.

Oh, but you global warming nuts aren’t any better. No one should believe someone who thinks that man is inherently evil and bent on destroying the earth by enjoying the fruits of modernity, while you utilize your dogma to discriminate and endorse bigotry of people who don't think like you or live the way you do.

I’m sick of the debates on both these subjects; as if ANY of you has the final word on either of these subjects – here’s a news flash – YOU DON’T!

Yes, we should conserve our resources; yes we should find alternative forms of energy that are cleaner; yes, we should recycle; yes we should think about our future and how to preserve it and on and on and on.

Yes, you should be able to have your freedom of religion; yes, you should be able to worship in your churches; yes, you should be able to put up your nativity scenes at Christmas at your homes and places of worship and on and on and on.

However, you do not have the right to tell others how to live their lives according to your dogma! You do not have the right to discriminate people legally just because they disagree with you. You do not have the right to infringe on the freedoms of others because of your specific dogma.

If your god doesn’t want you being homosexual, then don’t be homosexual – but stop telling other people they’re bad because of it or discriminating because your particular god doesn’t like it.

If your scientists say that global warming is happening and we should conserve, then fine, you conserve. Nevertheless, stop trying to impose your specific dogma on everyone else.

It’s an interesting observation of both sides that you each think you corner the market on morality and how everyone ought to be living their lives. What happen to freedom! What is it with your constant need to control everyone?

Religion and Global Warming:

Seek to regulate behavior

Has indoctrinated dogma

No amount of change can free you

You’re born into wickedness

Wants change based on majority/consensus

Create alarmist behavior

Spew Armageddon type prophecies

Refuses to hear anything other viewpoint

Heretic for not believing

Endorses itself as a “belief” rather than reason

Rooted in victimization

How does it feel to look at yourselves in the mirror and see the other side as fanatic as you are?

ENOUGH!

The moralizing of society by everyone from the Christians to the Islamics needs to end once and for all – message to the religious – you’re slowly killing society.

There is no one religion or bible that seems to agree – do you agree?

You people of religion, any religion, do not corner the market on morals. The absurdity and arrogance of thinking that morals are based on the bible is one of the most diseased ideas religion has come up with in its history. Man made god in his image for a myriad of reasons I couldn’t possibly put in this article because they are too numerous.

NATURE in and of itself cares nothing about skin color, gender, sexual orientation, eye color, hair color, if you even have hair, politics, right, wrong, good, bad, moral, immoral, it only cares about survival – is something able to survive? No? Then be gone with it. Yes, propagate that species, whatever it may be.

You may not understand why the mosquito survived or why gay people exist, so don’t concern yourself. Pay attention to yourself and your own life. Be a good person. Science is figuring it all out anyway and continues to educate us as we evolve.

People lead responsible lives everyday, doing the right thing because it’s the right thing to do; having accountability in their lives; nothing more needs to be said. No bible tells them to do it or not do it. Everything else is none of your business or mine.

If you live by these two precepts in life you need no others:

1) Be Responsible for/to yourself

2) Be Accountable for your actions

You’re not responsible for other’s choices in life, only your own. You’re not accountable for other’s as they are accountable for their choices in life. Does this mean that I’m supposed to abandon my kids? Did I say that? No. You have…. what’s the answer – focus like a laser beam…. a RESPONSIBILITY to your children to take care of them and ensure they have all their needs met until they are able to care for themselves. Teach them responsibility and accountability and the process goes on.

This isn’t rocket science people. The contradictions in religion are infinite. In a Democracy you’re entitled to your opinion, you’re not entitled to your own facts.

What is a fact - a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the available evidence.

If you want to suspend all logic, reason and science and still believe in a supernatural god that presents absolutely not one shred of irrefutable evidence, fine. Knock yourself out. But no one endowed you with the Responsibility to indoctrinate, witness, or thwart our government and it’s citizens or children, or impose your religion on this nation or any other nation. When you do you are no better than the Islamic nutcases who are strapping on bombs and killing other people. That death just happens to be instantaneous.

There is NO argument you can make toward the 2 precepts I’ve listed. Everything falls under these two ideas; they will enforce all laws; defend our nation; support our Constitution; allow Democracy and freedom; people are civil at all levels as a result.

Make Responsible decisions as a civil society about what is Socially Acceptable with regard to behavior and have our political leaders make laws based on those behaviors. Not based on religion. Not based on bibles. Not based on your dislike for spinach instead of broccoli, it’s so because the bible says so. We base laws on that which would be destructive to others and ourselves – killing, stealing, child abuse, rape, etc.

 

The indoctrination of muslim children into believing that if they perform a suicide bombing they will get their reward with Allah is pure abuse, through and through. Don't you agree? If you do, then keep reading.

Since there have been accusations thrown my way of not being “relaxed” enough or “chillin’ out” when it comes to the subject of religion, perhaps it’s the potential of intellectual dishonesty about the “fire and brimstone” so propagated by the religious of this world that gets my dander up and about, most especially when religion deems to kill me lest I subjugate to such nonsense.

Recently on the Dennis Prager show a man was concerned that his grandchild was not being indoctrinated into religion. Apparently both his daughter and son-in-law are keeping their young child away from religion and church, as it should be.

You would find it abhorrent to speak about sex with children but think nothing of talking about god, especially when neither subject is appropriate for a child who has not reached the age of reason by which they can discern between the imaginary and the realistic world in which they live.

But, au contraire monfraire. In Dennis’ opinion, and I’m sure others of you zealots, “get them while they’re young” to quote the lyric of Tim Rice from the musical Evita.

We invoke the idea of Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy to our children as fantasy, in collusion with society, to enjoy childhood and aspects of our culture. Not a bad premise. I even played Santa one year at Macy*s 34^th St. and enjoyed it. However, the idea of bringing up the subject of a god from which you make no possible choice for a child to, not only discern if it wants to believe, but to deem their behavior inappropriate should they make the decision to not participate, is abuse at it’s zenith as it sets up a child for believing other fairy tales which have no basis in reality yet find themselves expressing said gibberish on my therapeutic couch, as it were.

If you really believed in not abusing your child you wouldn’t thrust this dogma upon them without their consent, just as you wouldn’t thrust upon them the subject of sex. If ever there were a “stranger – danger” anthem, it is one that should be shouted from the rooftops regarding the idea of god.

It’s intellectual dishonesty to indulge your own fantasies upon your child. No reason for this will ever justify the inappropriateness of this form of child abuse. A child can learn the value of anything in it’s own life by simply being taught the skill of observance – “when you do this, then this will happen, it’s still your choice, but you must consider the consequences of your actions, words and deeds. We also have laws in our world that say; while someone may think it’s okay to steal (as an example) there would be consequences for doing such a behavior such as jail or a fine in addition to how it makes it difficult to do a variety of things in our society when you have a police record or conviction. Additionally, your feelings will help you understand these choices. At some point you will rely on logic to make your decisions and not so much your feelings, at which point we’ll talk about the other options in our society that are available to everyone in which to help guide them in their lives.”

Could anything be more respectful and admiring of a child’s upbringing of teaching appropriate behavior? What could be more honorable in giving a child the OPTION of choosing a god, regardless of your influence, upon which the child would give itself over to such a being?

Perhaps the reasons behind this indoctrination are many, too many in fact to list here. But let’s start with several that stick in my mind: you, the parent think you own the child – it’s every thought, feeling, belief…you, the parent think that it’s your duty to instill a religious doctrine into your child because it was done to you (same justification for parents abusing their kids verbally, mentally, emotionally and physically – by the way) you, the parent want things your way, therefore strict adherence to such indoctrination will be enforced…you the parent, believe that it is for the child’s own good. I need only remind you of Alice Miller’s amazing books, one of which, Drama of the Gifted Child, among others.

Giving any person a choice is freeing you from manipulation and control.

Think about that statement again.

Giving someone a choice is freeing him or her from manipulation and control.

Think of the many times in your life that through your bigotry, discrimination, distorted view of the world, religion, dogma, and your own upbringing, this freedom of choice has been denied to you in your life and the lives of others.

While your particular religion may not agree with my actions, you have no right to impose such a religious belief or doctrine upon me. We create laws that tell us what we as a civil society want to consider socially acceptable, thereby creating consequences for said indiscretions. We don’t create laws based on religion, any religion. The answer to this should be obvious.

I don’t care if you, the adult, of sound logic, reason and mind, wish to participate in such behavior as worshiping a god. While my opinion is that such behavior borders on the schizophrenic, it is still your choice so long as it does not infringe on the rights of others to live their own lives with the same rights to freedom as you enjoy.

I dare say your very anger and outrage over my writings is cause enough for you to ponder my points. Typically those that have anger toward such writing usually are the ones committing the most egregious acts of abuse and are indignant when confronted with the wall of their own denial and delusion.

If our nation was founded on the ideas of Freedom and Democracy, the right to live your life as you choose as long as you don’t hurt others by killing them, stealing from them, rape them or other socially unacceptable behavior outlined by our laws, then wouldn’t that freedom and democracy include people who don’t endorse religion? People who don’t care about your bible and it’s view of homosexuals? People who don’t agree or care about your view of a woman’s right to choose what happens to her own body? People who don’t believe their tax money, extorted for the supposed enhancement of all, is not utilized for endorsing any religious beliefs, etc. on public property?

Sam Harris said it best recently when he stated that all Christians, for example, understand atheism since they do not believe in any god other than their own. They are atheistic towards all other gods that are worshiped in this world.

    Nothing like having a one-sided view of life instead of the 360 degrees that it really is all about. 

This recent ad on the Drudge Report was clicked on with anticipation of the good news that one of the most well-written shows on television is going to be renewed; that quite possibly the intelligence that is lacking from so many shows was going to get a chance to survive.  

http://www.townhall.com/ref/sorkin2    See for yourself. 

The sad part about it all, is the vitriol coming from whoever posted this ad on Townhall.  As if the show is really about anti-christians. In the words of Nell Carter and John Stossel, gimme a break. 

This show deals with one of the cast members who happens to be VERY Christian and the comedy that surrounds this issue. BUT, that's not what the entire show is all about! It has very dynamic characters, with various levels of humor, intelligence and fun. The writing is so good that I would do a role on the show for FREE just to be part of such a great ensemble.  But, is that what the link is all about? 

No. It's about more right-wing uptight attitude with anyone who happens to explore topics that are very much on the minds of many in our country.  The Right seems to forget that there is an entire nation out here who don't have this slant on life to the extent that it wants to rid our towns  of anything that isn't following the Right's version, interpretation and agenda driven bible. 

This show is smart, funny, filled with amazingly talented actors, foucuses on great issues that make valid points from which we should be in discussion about, not trying to silence.   I, for one, am glad this show is going on, I hate to think that the Far Right would have the power to shut down shut a smart show that has great potential.

 Ripping on Rippa!

Apparently the perception of one’s truth is more important than the actual truth.

Take for instance the recent hoopla surrounding Kelly Rippa and Rosie, one need not say her whole name because we know who she is at this point, kinda like Cher or Madonna.

Clay Gaiyken is guest hosting on Regis and Kelly Live, Clay places his hand over Kelly’s mouth to quiet her, she makes a comment to the effect, “I don’t know where that hand’s been”. Suddenly the floodgates of homophobia have been unleashed and Rosie to the Rescue. This should be her new show; it can be based on her working as a common woman super-hero stamping out homophobia throughout the land.

Despite Kelly calling into The View (apparently we’re only supposed to pay attention to Rosie’s View and no one else’s) and defending her comment by telling Rosie, the other girls and the girlie audience, that “it’s flu season, I have 3 small children and he just got finished shaking hands with 200 people in our audience”. If you ever lived or visited in New York, you understand her paranoia, I do.

This wasn’t enough to convince Rosie. Oh, no! Certainly Not! She is here to stamp out homophobia, it is the disease and she’s dubbed herself the cure.

She continued to rant, make stupid eye gestures on television toward the captive audience with whom she perceives is hanging on her every word, that Rippa, without saying it out loud, is a liar. Rippa is a homophobe who was indicating that perhaps Gaiyken was with a man just 3 minutes prior to placing his hand on Rippa’s mouth and had certainly given this man a hand with the job at task, so stars above, who knows what was on his hand.

Christ on a cracker Kathi Lee Gifford! When did it come to this? And why is Rosie outing Clay Gaiyken? Not that anyone in the universe didn’t already know, unless of course, you’re like the sweet grandmotherly types who spend their vacations in Vegas and still think that Liberace was straight and just devoted to his mother.

It needs to stop. Rosie needs to stop. Not only is she embarrassing the gay community, she’s an embarrassment. She plays into every stereotype out there by suggesting that Clay is thinking and doing nothing but having sex 24/7. Certainly if it weren’t true, Rosie can’t think of anything other than man-on-man sex and the need to publicize it!

Rosie, we get it, you’re gay! You’re here. You’re Q*eer! We’re use to it. Now shut up about it.

Oh, and apologize to Kelly, you twit, with 3 kids at home, he would have been lucky I didn’t grab his arm, twist it behind his back, until he squealed like pig.

What can you say about a man who hates America, so much so, that he wants to blackmail the American Congress and Senate into a bullying tactic of bringing forth the draft? Rangel is under the impression that there is a huge majority of people who DON'T want to serve this country. This is Rangel’s fateful mistake.

This shakedown by Rangel’s at worst anti-American and at best a political ploy that exploits Americans in one of the most egregious ways.

It is Rangel’s view that Americans would NOT be willing to vote in Congress or the Senate, in this country's best interest, to send their sons and daughters into war to uphold our country's belief in freedom and democracy. This borders on Treason.

Although it would be difficult for parents to see their sons/daughters be drafted, it is still a part of this country's foundations of freedom and opportunity, of which Mr. Rangel has partaken of continuously.

Rangel’s shakedown occurs by his attempts to thwart potential wars in the future which would be in this country's best interest in protecting it's people for a variety of reasons, by placing fear and blackmailing our officials about their off-spring being drafted. This is extortion in a manner of speaking.

You should all be disgusted by this particular so-called "representative" of our nation who was elected to his official position. Who cares what party he's affiliated with, but we know which one by his vitriol. It's truly unforgivable and un-American.

Mr. Rangel, there's a ship leaving New York Harbor for France, be on it.

I think the  GOP should push to have their party present/pass legislation that would define "socially acceptable behavior" - define it - decide it - pass it - enforce it.

Thereby we can stop this sham about marriage/gay marriage and really focus on what this argument is about - that it's acceptable in this country to act, without impunity, towards gays in ways that are discriminating and reveal bigotry.

Then enforce this by pushing gays back into the closet or better yet, out of this country. "You're no longer welcome here; we've had enough of you destroying this country; destroying marriage; destroying relationships; destroying our children; you're immoral; you're disgusting and we want no part of it".

Gone are our tax dollars. Gone are our capital dollars. Gone are the contributions we make to society in all fields of professional position, including the highest revenue contribution outside this country - entertainment. Gone are the charities we contribute towards. Gone are the sisters, brothers, sons and daughters of families we're part of. Gone are our votes. Gone are the brave gays who serve our military.

Do it GOP! Do it or shut up about it, because frankly we're sick and tired of being your "modern day black person" with whom you think it's okay to say hateful things about, discriminate towards, and deny us our civil rights. 

You're scam is a sham and we're on to your game!

When I awoke today and hit the Drudge "refresh" button I had no idea I would see this article listed:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/14/D8LCTCSG0.html

Before you read the entire article it would be interesting for you to read this statement and see if you understand the totality of the article before you see it:

"When we attained our democracy, we sought to distinguish ourselves from an unjust painful past, by declaring that never again shall it be that any South African will be discriminated against on the basis of color, creed culture and sex," Home Affairs Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa- Nqakula told the National Assembly." 

This statement is one of the most beautiful I've read regarding this subject and clearly shows the understanding of responsibility when it comes to democracy not for just a few but for all. Again, the beauty of it recognizes that not all agree so not all need to participate if doing so goes against your particular religious faith - it couldn't be more respectful while protecting civil rights for all.

I realize this is an issue for many but this was a great day for all of mankind when it recognizes the differences we all have but the desires we all share.  

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/110906/rumsfeld2.html

This story cracks me up! I was laughing out loud at the story and the premise right from the start. I had no idea that The Hill was so humorous and wrote good comedy.

The idea that the GOP lost the election because Bush didn't fire Rummy prior to the election, is absurd at best. As if Rummy or Foley or Haggard had the balance of the election riding on their shoulders. Get real! The reason the election was lost varies from person to person.

Personally, I think part of it is that the Far Right has hi-jacked this party and won't get off their soapbox of self-righteousness. They won't stop talking about religion, their faith, blah, blah, blah.  They're not realizing that society, while respectful of their right to practice their faith, doesn't want to hear about it.  Christopher Hitchens made a great point the other day on Hewitt's show and I agree, I'm not going to vote for someone who can't separate his/her faith from politics. 

Another factor is that politicians when faced with the debate quesiton on television/radio with regard to Iraq never pressed the question about what the Dems plan was, oh sure they asked or made their talking point, but the way you get the sound bite out is you hammer the question home, "sorry, Mr. Casey, but I've asked you now 5 times to list concretely and specifically the Democratic plan for Iraq and you've avoided the question each time, gave me your talking points, or your hate Bush policy, but you're dodging my question"

Too often these people get on television/radio and instead of getting some decent time to answer questions they get 3 minutes of yelling, arguing, cutting each other off with nothing accomplished. Is it really worth it? Not if you aren't getting your message out. If the program can't offer you enough time to seriously have the discussion then don't do it. Yeah, right.

You win elections by honesty. You win elections by connecting to people in a way that says, "I get it". You win elections by understanding the issues not by "hating" the other party. The Republicans had ample opportunity over the past years to step up, do what was right in the face of their fear about elections and get things done. They didn't. They paid the price.

This isn't to say the Democrats did a better job either, or that they have what it takes, but now at least they have a chance to reveal themselves for who they are and the world is watching, but will they remember? Will they hold the Democrats to the same standard as the Republicans? And will the Republicans get their sh*t together over the next couple of years?

No one I know wants another 8 years of Clinton White House, at least no healthy minded, sane person I know.

I'm sure you've all been hearing and seeing all the hoopla related to the latest Democratic "Rockstar"(yes, I've heard reporters, liberal mind you, using this term) Barack Obama. It's what I call the "Swoon Factor", just like Clinton before him, a virtual nobody in politics, save for a couple of years in the senate? This site has a terrific breakdown of where he stands on the issues:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

But aside from all this politics, which is more important than any of the rest of it, Obama has "it". The factor that helped catapult Clinton to unbeleivable rockstar status, all the while engaging in behavior that was to be his downfall. 

What the Left never seem to get about Clinton and his Lewinsky behavior were 2 things:

1) You don't have sex in the workplace, people get fired for that behavior. You especially don't have sex in the workplace while speaking to another President of the United States and in the Oval Office. 

2) When you're caught, you don't lie under oath

I don't care if Clinton wants to have a 1000 affairs, that's his business. But if his workplace is an office for which I am one of the millions of "bosses" and it's in "my office" - in the words of Donald Trump - "You're Fired".  The Hellary fallout is all on him, I don't care. But then to make the matter worse he LIED about it under oath. If you can't understand either of these points there's nothing else that could be said to you to make you understand. 

Which brings me to BO - (does it stink yet? we're about to find out in '08). What excused Clinton's behavior WAS his rockstar status. In the face of his completely inappropriate behavior he still had a high approval rating from....the "bobbysoxers". Unbelievable. They excused his cheating on his wife. They excused his disrespect for the Presidency. They excused his disrespect for the Offic of the White House. They excused his disrespect for our courts and his profession by lying under oath. 

We should have learned from that experience that "Rockstars" are fun but at the end of the day we want someone who is serious in politics and not using their histrionics in the guise of sexuality to entice voters, sway opinioin and make the women AND men swoon.  I could swear that Dan Rather was trying to flirt with Clinton. But I digress.

Keep a watchful eye. You heard it hear that the BO Swoon Machine is in motion and will do their best to create puff pieces, shrewd appearances, and an aura of being untouchable. All of which are the leading indicators you DON'T want when it comes to the serious issues our nation faces and voting someone into that prestigious office.

"We have serious issues that need serious solutions and your 15 minutes are up"
 Michael Douglas, An American President

There's nothing I can add to this story that isn't so eloquently stated by Jim Geraghty from National Review On-Line, check it out for yourself. 

 http://tks.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTJjYzYzYmMwNjY3N2YwNWE5NDQ3ZTQzZDczZWU5N2Y=

Here's a preview:

"I'm sorry, did the New York Times just put on the front page that IRAQ HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND WAS PLOTTING TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB?

What? Wait a minute. The entire mantra of the war critics has been  "no WMDs, no WMDs, no threat, no threat", for the past three years solid. Now we're being told that the Bush administration erred by making public information that could help any nation build an atomic bomb.

Let's go back and clarify: IRAQ HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS PLANS SO ADVANCED AND DETAILED THAT ANY COUNTRY COULD HAVE USED THEM.

I think the Times editors are counting on this being spun as a "Boy, did Bush screw up" meme; the problem is, to do it, they have to knock down the "there was no threat in Iraq" meme, once and for all. Because obviously, Saddam could have sold this information to anybody, any other state, or any well-funded terrorist group that had publicly pledged to kill millions of Americans and had expressed interest in nuclear arms. You know, like, oh... al-Qaeda.

The New York Times just tore the heart out of the antiwar argument, and they are apparently completely oblivous to it.

The antiwar crowd is going to have to argue that the information somehow wasn't dangerous in the hands of Saddam Hussein, but was dangerous posted on the Internet. It doesn't work. It can't be both no threat to America and yet also somehow a threat to America once it's in the hands of Iran. Game, set, and match."

It's a thing of beauty!