It's The People's Business, Right?

For many years, I have heard people say that government should be about the "people's business". This has two meanings: that the chosen form of government in America should be for the people and about what the people want and that the people chosen (elected) to lead should spend their time taking care of the business of the people of the nation as a whole. Lately, I think this has been forgotten in Washington. In the past nine months, rarely has Congress been "about the people's business".

It all started with a stimulus package that most Americans were against and viewed as having very little chance of actually stimulating the economy, but Congress rammed it through in record time and Obama signed it. With one pen stroke, he saddled our children and grandchildren with an almost insurmountable debt. Then, came the bailout of the auto industry or more specifically, GM and Chrysler. Of course, the jobs of the auto workers in Michigan were important, but their importance did not justify the United States government entering into the auto manufacturing business or the forced resignation of GM's CEO, Rick Wagoner. Since when did it become the federal government's right to tell the CEO of a private industry that he must resign? Next, Obama and certain members of Congress began pushing the "Cap and Trade" bill in an effort to "protect the environment". Of course, this plan does little to protect the environment and much to destroy private industry and increase utility taxes on every taxpayer. Fortunately, this bill still has a few hurdles to make before becoming law since it was sidelined to focus on the next offender - health care, or if you prefer, Obama-care.

The Congress has spent countless hours on the creation of a health care plan to provide insurance for all 307+ million Americans. Although the health insurance industry needs some revision, most Americans are happy with the insurance plan they currently have. In spite of record turnouts at Town Hall meetings nationwide throughout the August recess and national polls from multiple, unbiased sources, the Democrats are still determined to pass a health care bill that insures everyone and includes a public option, and most likely, allows illegals to participate in the system. The Democratic members of both the House and the Senate are willing to force the passage of this bill without any bi-partisan support merely because Reid and Pelosi are twisting their arms to do so. Even the so called "Blue Dog Democrats" are being manhandled into submission by their party leaders and urged to fall into lockstep with the rest of the party on this issue.

Perhaps it is because they are aware that the prediction of Sen Jim DeMint could become true if this fails. In July, he said "If we're (Republicans) able to stop Obama on this (health care), it will be his Waterloo." Obama has attempted to paint the insurance industry with the same brush that he paints all his political enemies with - that of ignorance, lack of compassion, unimaginable profit margins and general disgust and has trotted out his party faithful to back up his claims. Earlier this year, Democrats have made claims that the insurance industry's profit margins are "obscene" and "immoral" and Obama has said that this plan "would keep insurance companies honest", which of course, implies that they are not. Several organizations have done some fact checking and have shown for 2008, the health insurance industry profits rank 35th in the nation, below railroads, Yahoo, Coors and even Tupperware, which had a 7.5% profit margin. The average profit for insurance - just 2.2%. Does this sound like an industry with "obscene" and "immoral" profits? Not to me, it doesn't.

Reform needs to take place within the health care system, but a complete overhaul with government funded health care is not the answer. This system will inevitably lead to poorer health care and inadequate services. It is a simple matter of mathematics: if you take 200,000 doctors who are currently seeing 200 million patients and add an additional 50 million people to the system with no additional physicians, there simply won't be enough physicians to handle the number of patients. The answer then becomes long lines and rationed care. Right now, we have the finest medical care in the world. People travel from distant lands to visit our physicians and have surgeries performed in our hospitals by the finest surgeons. Rationed health care will most certainly damage this quality of care and Americans will suffer from limited access to necessary medical services. This is not what Americans want and this is not the people's business they should be focusing on.

While Congress and President Obama deliberate on health care, unemployment continues to rise, factories are still being shut down, workers being laid off and in many cases, their jobs outsourced to foreign countries, banks are still closing, homes are still being foreclosed on and our troops are still languishing in the field awaiting reinforcements. Surely, these issues have a greater impact on "the people" than passing a health care bill that won't even go into effect until 2013. Surely, our members of Congress could spend less time demonizing Humana and Blue Cross and more time demonizing the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Surely Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi could twist the arms of their party members to prevail upon business owners in their districts to keep their businesses open and the workers employed. This IS the business of the people and this is the reason they were elected.

There is no provision for health care in the Constitution, but it does mention their obligation to their duties as a member of Congress. This duty is to represent the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, not the will of the Majority Leader or Speaker of the House or even the President. The oath states: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely' without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." This is an oath they are sworn to uphold and as citizens and voters, we are duty bound to ensure that they do so. The true test of this duty will come in November 2010. I sure hope we pass with flying colors.

Precious Are They

When will it end? As I sit here writing this, a child will go missing in the United States. Before I am done, 30 children will have disappeared from the streets of America. These children may just be walking home from school, may be playing at the park with friends, may be angry at their parents and decide to walk up the street to cool off. Whatever the reason, most of them will never be seen or heard from again. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, a child goes missing in the United States every 40 seconds. That means that over 2,100 children become missing every single day! This is a sobering statistic. I share this with you to bring attention to a serious problem within our society. The problem is child sexual predators.

Last week, the news alerted us to the disappearance of two little girls, one 7 year old, Somer Thompson, in Florida and a 9 year old, Elizabeth Olten, in Missouri. Hundreds of law enforcement officials and volunteers turned out to search for these two precious little girls and thousands more prayed for their safe return all week. But, on Thursday and Friday the horrific tragedies came to a close as the bodies of both girls were found. One was found in a landfill 50 miles from her home and another in the woods near her home. This is tragic! Both of these little girls' lives were cut short by vicious murderers. A 15 year old boy has been charged with the murder of Elizabeth, but so far no suspects have been found in Somer's murder. Although the authorities have declined to say so, it is probably a safe assumption that both of these children suffered unimaginably and their murderers were sexually motivated. I do not write this to offend anyone, only to show the depravity of these murders. My point is simply this: how many more helpless, beautiful little girls are going to disappear from our streets before we say enough is enough?

Every single time one of these murders happens, the person charged and convicted is a convicted sexual offender out on parole. Clearly, the system is broken. These monsters cannot be rehabilitated, they cannot be reintroduced into society with the hope that they will not offend again. These people are sick, they are unable to assimilate into normal life and they CANNOT and MUST NOT be trusted. All one has to do to realize the scope of this problem is google "sexual offenders in your area" and use the Family Watchdog site. I am sad to report that I have 1161 offenders in my area. Any one of these people could easily decide to offend again and my children would be in jeopardy. The solution to this problem is quite simple: lock sexual offenders up for life. Build more prisons if you have to, but keep them away from the citizenry. I would be willing to pay higher taxes if I knew that my money was helping to pay to keep violent sexual predators of both children and women behind bars so that they could never harm an innocent person again. Wouldn't you?

I know that the U.S. Constitution says that you are innocent until proven guilty, but when DNA evidence proves that a crime was committed by a particular person and that crime was violent, sexual and murderous, I believe that our Founding Fathers would have allowed for execution of the criminal, not just imprisonment. We have far too many liberal judges that believe that everyone deserves a second chance and that anyone can be cured with some psychological assistance. This is simply not true. Listen to the last words of murderers on death row. Quite often they are neither repentant nor remorseful for their heinous acts. It is the same with sexual predators - they simply don't see what they are doing as wrong.

There must be a way to stop this madness and protect our children from these monsters. The most popular liberal mantra is always "...for the children." But, they are the very people responsible for releasing these people into the wild to kidnap, assault, murder children and toss them away like garbage again. Liberals are so fond of asking conservatives why we are not compassionate, how we can be against abortion or a "woman's right to choose", how we can be against gay marriage and pro-death penalty because they say these people are discriminated against and need protection? I can think of no other group of people more in need of our protection than innocent children. Children whose lives are filled with promise and hope and love and dreams. Children who just want to come home at the end of the day and sit in Mom or Dad's lap and tell them what they learned at school or what new friend they made that day or how much they liked the macaroni and cheese Mom made for dinner. These children need and deserve our protection - they deserve to know that they can walk from their next door neighbor's house and be safe - that they will arrive home and be tucked in bed for a peaceful night's sleep. If liberals want to do it "for the children", maybe they should focus less on providing women with a health care plan that will pay for abortions and more on legislation that will permanently imprison those people who are determined to harm the most innocent and precious amongst us - our children.

Put Up Your Dukes!!!!

It is now official. The Obama White House has created an "Enemies List" and at the top of that list is the cable news giant, Fox News. I knew it wouldn't take long for Obama to reveal his true colors with regard to the media and negative reporting. Since the campaign of 2008, he has been systematically shutting out the reporters from Fox and welcoming reporters from those from friendly networks like NBC and MSNBC. Last year, he reluctantly agreed to an interview with Bill O'Reilly, but refused to even speak to Sean Hannity. This is not surprising on its face, but given that he personally attacked Hannity several times during the campaign while speaking with other media moguls, I found it rather disheartening that he would not give Sean Hannity the opportunity to question him about those disparaging remarks. Now, the President's advisers have ramped up the game and are openly and unashamedly launching attacks on Fox News. This is not the wisest decision that a President can make.

By allowing himself to be drawn into this verbal war, he has brought the office of the Presidency down to as Senator Lamar Alexander put it "street brawling". This is not what Americans expect from their President and it is wholly inappropriate for Obama to engage in this type of battle. This is Chicago politics emanating from the most powerful office in the world and we deserve better. Of course, since Obama has surrounded himself with fellow Chicagoans, like Axelrod, Dunn and Jarrett, why should we expect anything else but this type of political game? After all, that is the only way they know how to play. Down and dirty...just like the city they call home.

Last year, Sean Hannity declared that true journalism died in 2008 because no one wanted to cover the back stories of Obama and question his fitness for the presidency. I am in total agreement with him. Studies by the Pew Research Center have shown that the only network that truly was "fair and balanced" throughout the campaign was Fox News. Now, a tape of White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has surfaced in which she tells a foreign audience that the Obama campaign manipulated the American media to only share the stories that they wanted to be told.

What is this madness? Is this not a reason for outrage among the American media? The wool is slowly tumbling from the eyes of the American people and they are beginning to see Obama for what he truly is; an inexperienced, completely unprepared, appeasing man that was thrust into the White House as a reflexive vote against the Bush administration, not on his merits. Now is the time for the media to truly engage this administration on every issue that is important to the public. Now is the time for them to actually begin to question the motives of the Obama administration and Congress with regards to several issues. Health care, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the increasing rate of unemployment, the lack of economic stimulation from the "Stimulus Package"; these are just a few of the problems plaguing the American people. When are they going to ask him to offer real solutions, not just sound bites?

If I were a member of the mainstream media and I discovered that I had been manipulated by a Presidential candidate to help get him into the White House, I would be livid. I would be so anxious for my next interview with a member of his administration that I wouldn't be able to sleep at night; I would be too busy planning my strategy for proving that I will no longer be a puppet on a string. This war with Fox is a ridiculous strategy for any President to employ and I believe, as do so many of the political pundits, that it will backfire on him.

The other reason this is inappropriate is that it shows his chief political advisers are wasting time on this issue while failing to deal with more important matters. Obama has had time to declare that Fox News acts like a talk radio network, but has not been able to find the time to reach a decision on the needed troop surge in Afghanistan. General McChrystal's report has been sitting on his desk for 60 days and he has done absolutely nothing of value with it. He has been stalling on this decision for far too long and our men and women fighting in the field are becoming more endangered every day.

I asked in a previous blog when Obama was going to stop campaigning and start acting like a President? I pose this same question again. I did not vote for Obama, but he is my President and I know that I deserve better, and the rest of America deserves better. Obama has likened himself to Lincoln in the past and I believe he can take a lesson in Presidential leadership from our 16th President. When Virginia decided to secede from the Union, Lincoln acted swiftly and boldly to contain the secession in the South. He ordered all Secessionists in Maryland to be locked up and denied them ha beaus corpus in order to prevent Maryland from seceding as well. He knew that if Maryland seceded that Washington DC would fall to the Confederacy in the blink of an eye and he knew that must be prevented at all costs. I have disagreed with this decision because he violated the US Constitution, but his action prevented the fall of the Capital city to the Confederacy and may very well have saved our Republic from imminent disaster.

Perhaps Obama can exhibit some true leadership skills and make a much needed decision to send 40,000 more troops to aid those soldiers already fighting in Afghanistan. This decision is critical to our Republic as well. The longer we delay in winning this war, the stronger the Taliban and by extension, Al Qaeda become. This represents a very "clear and present danger" to the United States. It is time for Obama to focus on the important issues and leave the "street brawling" to the political pundits and bloggers. More is expected, more is required from the President of the United States.

Memory Lane

I was home from work that day and decided to turn on CNN for some background noise while working in my home office. I was watching a live report when the second plane hit the towers. I watched it as it flew directly into the building and my first thought was "Oh my God! We are under attack!" I immediately picked up the phone and began calling loved ones who were at work in their respective offices and unaware of the tragedy unfolding in New York City.

I am sure that everyone of you reading this can recall exactly where you were and what you were doing when you first heard about the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. Of course you can, it was a day that forever changed America and by extension, the world. The memories of the images of September 11, 2001 are as clear to me today as if they occurred yesterday rather than eight years ago and the swelling of pride in our Nation and patriotism that followed those horrific events are easily recalled memories as well. However, it seems that many people in America have forgotten the terrible events of that day and the emotions that accompanied them.

The fear that we would be attacked again very soon, perhaps even the next day, was so strong, you could actually feel it in the air, the concern that was felt for those missing and feared dead in the attacks was overwhelming and the pride in being an American could be seen everywhere you turned. There were lines of willing donors outside every blood donation center, flags proudly displayed on every street corner and most cars, and for a few days in September there were no Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, blacks or whites, we were all just Americans and we were grieving together. Then psychologists told news networks that it was best not to broadcast those images of the attacks anymore and everything started to return to normal and we began retreating to our separate corners. And that is where we have remained for over eight years.

What is the reason behind this trip down memory lane? Because, sometimes it is necessary to take a step back and remember the path that we have traveled and survey the landscape that lies ahead of us as a nation in order to maintain a healthy perspective on the current situation. Currently, we are engaged in two wars in two countries, both of which are Muslim nations. This has led to increased diplomatic difficulties in the region between the United States and other Muslim nations such as Syria, Lebanon and Iran. In addition, it has been suggested that all three of these nations have been aiding the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan by supplying weapons and men to fight. President Bush spent seven years doing everything he could to ensure that our troops had the necessary tools for waging a successful war and that we were not attacked by terrorists again here at home. Although, he and his team made some mistakes in the wars, we have not been attacked again and the policies put in place by his administration and the tireless efforts and dedication of those charged with our security have been successful in their protection of the home front.

Now, Obama and his team want to dismantle so much of what the Bush administration put into place simply because it was President Bush's handiwork. Obama made many promises on the campaign trail about these issues, such as vowing to close Guantanamo Bay, ending "torture" of detainees and restoring America's positive image throughout the world. He began working on fulfilling these promises as soon as he took office, but soon found that it was much more difficult than he originally thought.

He has encountered great difficulty with keeping his promise to close Gitmo by January 2010 because he does not have anywhere to send these prisoners that are currently housed there. Other countries do not want them, they are suspected TERRORISTS! There is not room for them in American prisons, so he is not sure what to do with them. Now, the White House is saying he needs more time.

He did sign an executive order to end "torture" of detainees, but was not planning on former Vice President Dick Cheney to be so outspoken in his defense of the Bush administration's techniques of interrogation or the CIA memos that detail the success of water boarding Khalid Sheik Mohamed. This has led many Americans to question the intelligence of releasing details of our interrogation techniques and the benefit of ceasing to use them.

Obama has been criss-crossing the world on an "apology tour" since taking office in January and has done all in his power to improve the image of America overseas; but has he been successful? Although he has been welcomed with open arms by the people of other nations, he has not achieved any real results. Russia still refuses to join with us in using sanctions on Iran to compel them to end their nuclear pursuit, Great Britain is our greatest ally, and they are sending more troops to assist us in Afghanistan, but only 500 more. Germany and France are there as well, but will not permit their soldiers to fight, only to engage in support activities. The Olympic Committee did not award the 2016 Summer Olympics to Chicago even though President Obama and Michelle both appeared in front of the Committee in Copenhagen. In fact, Chicago was the first city eliminated from the voting. North Korea continues to defy the international community in spite of President Obama reaching out to them and sending President Clinton as an ambassador to free two imprisoned American journalists. Obama may be seen as a "rock star" worldwide, but his Presidential power has yet to yield any tangible fruit.

Perhaps, we need to remember as a nation the day after September 11th, the day we all wondered when it was going to happen again and where. The time when our nation's leaders were frantically brainstorming the necessary actions to take in order to ensure our security and retaliate against those who dared to attack Americans on American soil. Those people are still out there, scheming, planning, training in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan, the deserts of Iran and Syria and Lebanon and most likely, some secluded places in our own country. We must be ever watchful and remain vigilant in order to maintain our security. President Obama and the members of his administration's National Security team and members of Congress need to take a moment and reflect on where we were eight years ago and the path we have yet to travel before taking actions that will compromise our security and open the door once again to terrorists and their deadly attacks.

Excuse Me, Mr. President...

Imagine my surprise on Sunday morning when I read the news that Obama had spoken at the Human Rights Campaign dinner on Saturday night to a crowd of more than 3,000 and promised that he "will end 'Don't ask, don't tell'. Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach." I am so glad that he wants to focus energy on changing military policy while in the middle of two wars rather than actually trying to fight and WIN those wars. This was excellent news in light of the fact that he still has not pledged to commit the necessary additional troops to Afghanistan as requested by his hand-picked General, Stanley McChrystal. As the wife of a career Navy sailor, it is very personal to me that he has not put our troops' needs first and that he has taken over two months to even begin meeting with his "War Council" to determine what his level of commitment is going to be to winning the war in Afghanistan. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines' lives are in grave danger and he wants to continue to talk about it rather than act like a President and send them the help they so desperately require.

While having a conversation with a friend yesterday whose brother-in-law is deploying to a war zone in Afghanistan with the Army this month, it occurred to me that the situation there is exactly the same as the situation was in Iraq just a couple of years ago. I asked her if he was going to Iraq or Afghanistan and when she responded "Afghanistan", my heart skipped a beat. This was the exact same response that I had when my nephew deployed with the Marines to Iraq two years ago. I thought how ironic that now the concern lies with those serving in Afghanistan more so than Iraq and all because the deteriorating situation is not being properly handled by our leaders, namely our President.

Even Senator Diane Feinstein, one of THE MOST liberal members of Congress, actually came out in support of General McChrystal on Sunday and said, "I don't know how you put somebody in who is as 'cracker-jack' as General McChrystal who gives the President very solid recommendations and not take those recommendations if you are not going to pull out". Perhaps, she knows more than the rest of us and that is exactly his plan - to pull out of Afghanistan and accept defeat, or more likely, she recognizes the caliber of McChrystal and the fighting prowess of our soldiers and believes that President Obama should follow the recommendations given by his General.

If Obama truly wants to help members of the military he should increase troop levels in Afghanistan so that the lives of their fellow brothers and sisters in arms will be better protected and put more money into defense spending so they are better equipped to fight and win against a cunning enemy. That is a policy every military member can appreciate, no matter their sexual orientation.

And the Winner Is....

for the Nobel Peace Prize - U.S. President Barack Obama! When I woke up this morning, wiped the sleep from my eyes and turned on the news, I was joyfully awakened with this marvelous news. How wonderful! Our President has joined the ranks of so many other amazing individuals who have gone before him and won the Nobel Prize for Peace. Only two other sitting U.S. Presidents have ever won, Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919. Of course, these two gentle men actually DESERVED to win. Theodore Roosevelt won for his efforts in bringing an end to the war between Japan and Russia. Woodrow Wilson won for his creation of the League of Nations, the precursor to the current United Nations, after the conclusion of World War I. Both of these men spent countless hours working towards and were tireless in their efforts to bring peace to an embattled world and actually brought this peace during their lifetimes. In contrast, Barack Obama has simply spoken about wanting peace and only at the cost of America's national security. He was awarded the prize for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" with "special attention attached to his vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons". Basically, the Nobel Committee gave him the award because he makes great speeches and dreams of a perfect world where everyone gets along and plays together nicely.

The Nobel Peace Prize is to be awarded annually to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses". (http://Nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/shortfacts.html) Although, Obama has talked repeatedly about brokering peace between nations such as Israel and "Palestine", and Iran, North Korea and the rest of the world, has begun a troop draw down in Iraq and wants to see the abolition of nuclear weapons from the world, he has not actually done any of these things except talk about them. Even more surprising, the nominations for this award were closed on February 1, 2009 - that was literally 12 days after he took office. Seriously, what peace did the man broker in 12 days that made him worthy of this honor? I submit that he is not worthy.

One glance at the list of recent winners proves my point, with the minor exception of Al Gore in 2007 for Climate Change. I am not really sure how that correlates to brokering peace or reduction of armies, but I am not on the committee, obviously. In 2005 El Baradei won, not a bad choice given the fact that he is responsible for the regulation of nuclear power worldwide. In 2001, Kofi Annan won, also not a bad choice given the work he did with the United Nations as Secretary General, ignoring the embezzlement scandal of course. 1n 1994, Shimon Peres, Yasser Arafat, and Yitzhak Rabin and in 1993, Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk; all of these men can point to great accomplishments in the name of peace and in my humble opinion, were very deserving of this honor. However, not to demean Barack Obama, but he just hasn't been in office long enough to have achieved any great peace accomplishments and certainly not in the 12 days before the nominations closed.

Maybe, this was a knee-jerk reaction prompted by the election of an African American to the office of President of the United States which stunned the international community, maybe it was a consolation prize for not being awarded the Olympics in 2016, maybe it was an example of the awe and fascination the rest of the world seems to have with Barack Obama, or maybe it was a combination of all these factors and more. Whatever the impetus for this decision, in my opinion it was a poor choice. Maybe next year, the Committee will choose wisely.

It's Just a Race Thing

I have had it! I am so tired of being labeled a racist by the liberal left wing of the Democratic party. I am a proud participant in the Tea Parties that have happened nationwide and have done so because I disagree with the direction the government is taking the country in. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a racist. Of course, the fact that there are people of all creeds, party affiliations, and ethnicities participating in these tea parties seems to constantly escape the notice of those who seek to degrade our protest. If you have any doubt of this, all you need to do is listen to Janeane Garofalo on the Bill Maher show this weekend. [I have attached the video to this page for you to view it for yourself. Click on the top video in the video bar.] In her so illustrious way, she calls us "teabaggers" a white supremacist group. She says that we are clearly a "white identity" group or a "white power" group. The only problem that we have with President Obama, according to her, is that he is black. To put it as politely as possible, I could care less whether Barack Obama were black, white, green, purple or polka dot, I DO NOT agree with his socialist agenda! How dare she and other liberals insult me and my family and friends (many of you reading this) by calling us racists? It is not enough that she calls us racists and white supremacists, but she continues on with her train of thought and says that we are all pretending that racism is not the reason that we are protesting and speaking out against Obama. She says that we are "no different than any other white identity group throughout our nation's history". This implies the Klan and Nazis to me, but you can draw your own analogies. And, then says that we are tacitly nudging the country and each other towards violence by showing up to these rallies armed with our legal weapons. Last time I checked, it was legal in this country to own firearms so long as you are not a felon and prohibited by the law from doing so. Also, it is our right to assemble peacefully that we are exercising as granted to us by that document which binds our Nation together, the United States Constitution. Perhaps, she should try reading it sometime, maybe she would learn about our inherent freedoms in this country as guaranteed by the Constitution.

Freedom of speech is not extended only to those who are in power, but to ALL Americans. It is our right in this country to protest and speak out against government policies that we do not agree with. It is our right to carry signs asking our leaders, our ELECTED officials to be more responsible with our money, to listen to the concerns of their constituents, to create a health care plan that benefits everyone, not just the people who are currently uninsured.

I have watched the coverage of these "tea parties" very closely and I have not seen one single incident where the protesters became violent and the police were forced to get involved. As far as I can tell, they have all been peaceful gatherings to voice our opposition to a myriad of issues from the stimulus package to the health care proposals, to the advocating of a fair tax system and the rejection of socialist policies. I have seen signs asking our government's leaders not to burden our children and grandchildren with insurmountable national debt. Signs that ask Obama to revise the tax code in favor of the "fair tax"and others asking for the "flat tax" system. Signs against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and signs in support of our troops fighting in those wars. The Americans that participate in the tea parties are people who truly believe that they have a voice and that it should be heard. For so many years, Americans have been so apathetic about politics and have been involved as little as possible in the decisions that our leaders make; this has changed this year. It has absolutely nothing to do with the color of the President's skin and has everything to do with the direction of his political agenda. Every policy that he has advocated since taking office has been more and more socialistic than the one before it.

Many people are beginning to see through the lofty speeches and the glossy magazine photos and see the man for what he is - a Socialist in Capitalist clothing. If African Americans had protested the policies of George Bush as vehemently as people are protesting those of Obama, no one would have said a word about racism. But, with the shoe on the right foot, politically speaking, the door has now swung wide open and the insults are being freely hurled at those who would dare to stand up for their rights as Americans. It is such a comforting thought to know that since I am a white person, I have given up my right to advocate for policies that are anathema to Obama's simply because he is a black man. What a great commentary on our times!