2011 Wrap up, 2012 Preview...

It’s been a long time since I’ve actually put out a complete blog. I have spent a lot of time resorting to Tweets and Facebook updates. However, as we wrap up 2011, I want to discuss the coming election year and the importance of conservatives uniting and standing on principles.

In 2011, the GOP establishment continued to miss the point of the 2010 elections and what the Tea Party and conservative mandate meant. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have both been incredible let-downs in leadership. I have felt betrayed and disappointed in the Republican Party in 2011. If we want a chance at real change in 2012, some attitudes will need to change, some spines will need to stiffen, and some leaders will need to stand up.

The debt ceiling debacle was a colossal failure. There is no way the government collapses if the ceiling is hit. Perhaps some services will need to be temporarily closed, but there is a monthly income of approximately $392 BILLION. The President of the United States and the US Treasury Department have sole discretion over how monies are spent should there be an uncovered portion of the budget and Congress has not given authorization for additional borrowing. Therefore, boys and girls, had the GOP stood strong and fought to the bitter end for real spending cuts, not gotten it, and the debt ceiling had been reached, Obama and his Treasury guru Timothy Geithner would have to decide how to spend the $392 BILLION. So, if they opted not to send Social Security checks or checks to the military, it would have been Obama’s responsibility and choice to do that. Yet, instead of getting that message, you know, the TRUTH out, the GOP buckled. For some reason, Boehner and the GOP establishment just don’t get it. They still think giving in to the left will somehow garner favor and fairness from the mainstream media and Obama himself. Not going to happen.

The GOP is still dying for a leader who will step up and lead and not buckle to pressure. The stakes are too high now for us to continue to be weak in the knees. ObamaCare will, in fact, destroy what’s left of our healthcare system. Health Care needs REAL reform, and not a bunch of bureaucracy that will put government between people who need care and the doctors they want to see. ObamaCare is making it harder for insurance companies to be viable. It is designed to force insurance companies out of business, thus forcing a need for a “public” system. Which is just an awesome idea. Look how well the government can deliver mail on time, or how profitable Amtrak has become, or how well the VA system meets the health needs of all veterans. The government cannot get FEMA trailers into New Orleans for weeks after a hurricane they knew about 6 days ahead of time. Yet we want them to take over health care and life and death decisions? Really?

Health Care needs reform. Lawyers have too much power and influence the cost of health care more than anything else. Yet, because most of the Democratic Party is run by lawyers, no one dared address lawsuit abuse in the health care bill. The GOP needs to fight and make the repeal of this travesty the number one priority on January 20, 2013. Second priority is the repeal of Dodd-Frank. Third priority is to open the way for the pipeline from Canada to the gulf. Getting those three priorities accomplished would do wonders for the economy. Here’s how…
Repealing ObamaCare will release billions of dollars in bureaucracy off the backs of businesses, big and small. Even if the company tries to save some money by dropping coverage and paying the fine, they would still be paying people to deal with the red tape and bureaucracy to pay those fines. Now, without that burden, they could afford to recruit and retain the best people for their company. With the best people performing and content with their jobs, their productivity improves, the company improves, and more jobs can be created. Not to mention the thousands of people who work for insurance companies whose jobs would really be saved (as opposed to the fictitious saved or created jobs we keep hearing about.).

Dodd-Frank is terrible law. It makes banking, seeking loans, and anything financial excruciatingly painful, especially if you are a small business. Dodd-Frank is killing jobs on a daily basis. Banks are laying people off in 2011 to get ready for policies within Dodd-Frank that take effect over the next two years. Dodd-Frank is bad law, not to mention it’s complete lack of reform to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (of course having nothing to do with those two failed institutions undying and exorbitant financial backing of Democrat candidates, particularly Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and Barack Obama). The repeal of Dodd-Frank will alleviate the immense pressure being brought to bear on the business community. If it’s easier to operate, it’s easier to produce, it’s easier to create profit, and then it’s easier to grow and hire.

President Obama is holding 20,000, jobs hostage until after the 2012 elections. The Keystone pipeline, by itself, would create a buzz in the American economy. This pipeline would run from Canada to Texas. It would create a minimum of 20,000 jobs. It would lead to a lessening of America’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil. American construction technology would make it one of the safest pipelines in the world. We have a so many pipelines in the harsh conditions of Alaska. Does anyone know the last time one of them burst? Wouldn’t building in the mid-west be far less risky? Yet, despite already recorded and reported environmental studies giving the pipeline the O.K., Obama is giving in to environmentalist wackos and holding these jobs and economic buzz hostage for political reasons.

So, when a Republican is sworn in on January 20, 2013, authorizing the pipeline would open the proverbial floodgates to some economic improvement in the nation. On Monday, July 28, 2008, George W. Bush announced the lifting of the executive moratorium on the harvesting of oil shale in the western US. That day…THAT DAY…gas prices dropped. Gas prices dropped all the way through the election. Gas was $1.85 when Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009. $1.85. Just think how fast prices would drop again with the announcement that we’re going to give ourselves access to more Canadian oil that’s cheaper.

Think…how much better would your holidays have been if you were paying under $2/gallon at the pump?

As I look at the field of GOP Candidates, I am slightly disappointed. Instead of running against Obama, they have taken to tearing each other down. I have not chosen a candidate out of the remaining field. My pick was Herman Cain. However, the hatred of a black conservative was too much for him to put his family through. And that is a shame. Lies and baseless accusations can prevent a black conservative from running for office. Had Cain been a liberal, the women making the accusations would have been vilified as racists and had their worst, darkest secrets exposed on the mainstream media.

However, out of the field remaining, I wish Rick Santorum would gain more traction. Romney and Gingrich leave me slightly uneasy. Their records suggest they are prone to some of the problems I have with Boehner and McConnell in the Congress. They seem vulnerable to giving in and getting weak-kneed when pressured by the media and liberals in Washington. Michelle Bachmann is great in the House, but she does not have the strength or delivery in presentation to defeat Obama. Ron Paul is a crazy, hapless hack. When he is lucid, he makes some sense on domestic economic issues. Foreign policy, however, is his weakness and, if elected to the White House, would spark the third world war, while we sit at home and wait for the evil of the world to come calling. As for Huntsman, his daughters are very pretty, but that’s the only thing he’s brought worthwhile to the campaign. That being said, I do not want this guy anywhere near the GOP Convention next fall. He is NOT conservative. He is barely Republican.

So, of the field, my endorsement at this time goes to Santorum. He is the real conservative leader in the pack, no matter how much Charles Krauthammer or the other pundits in conservative media want to bury him and pretend he’s not a candidate. However, because, for whatever reason, he is not getting the traction he needs, I think thanks in no small part to Fox News burying everyone BUT Romney and Gingrich, I will probably go with writing in Gingrich on my Virginia ballot.

Nonetheless, whoever gets the GOP nomination will need to step up and lead. He or she will need to absorb the slings and arrows from the left. He or she will have to stick to their principles. If they stand up, run against Obama and his failed policies, hammer home the idea that Obama had all three branches of government under his control until January 2011, when the GOP took the House (thus getting through everything he really wanted to), and showing how America is worse off than it was in 2008, we can win a Republican Supermajority and get rid of ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, and clear the way for the Keystone pipeline. Those three agenda items would set the foundation for a revived economy…if only the GOP has the intestinal fortitude to do it.

Why I don't give the benefit of the doubt to the left...

There are so many people who believe without question in the agenda of the left. They defend to their own demise the policies and programs developed by liberals. They ignore facts to the contrary of their beliefs. They are locked into their beliefs without doubt or ability to admit wrong.

So, maybe they could possibly be right? Maybe their ideals are best. Why can I not give the benefit of the doubt?

I look at how the current administration and the current Congress treat everyday Americans. I study how reactions from those in power relate to the reality of their opposition. Then, I came to a conclusion about whether or not the left could be right.

The left is wrong. They are killing the country. Nearly everything Rush, Hannity, Levin, and even Beck are saying is en route to reality. How do I know? Look at the debate.

Conservative: I disagree with the plans for Health Care Reform. I fear the unintended consequences will result in rationing and even further difficulty for seniors to get and pay for needed care.
Liberal: RACIST! You are a bigot. You are a homophobe and a sexist. I am afraid of the violent rhetoric you are spewing.
Conservative: I am only voicing my opposition and utilizing my Constitutional rights. I think Health Care Reform and Cap and Tax will further destroy our country.
Liberal: Destroy our country? You are threatening our country with destruction?
Conservative: What? I want to peaceably assemble to petition my government for redress of my grievances.
Liberal: Racist! Seditionist! You Nazi with your guns rights and Constitution. You are dangerous! Someone needs to stop you before someone gets killed!
Enter SEIU members to attack nearest black person at Tea Party rally.

Conservatives express legitimate, fact-based concerns. Liberals call them racists and bigots and seditionists. It's like an adult arguing with a child. The adult uses logic, the child gets mad and screams and name-calls. Who is usually right when a child and adult disagree in this manner?

If the liberals could defend and demonstrate, with facts, that what they are pushing through is true, right, and accurate, why is their first, second, and only reaction name calling and marginalization of opponents?

The fact is, they can't. They know the opposition is right, so they have to legitimize them instead of de-legitimize their own agenda. Ask yourself, when you disagree with a friend or loved one, if they resort to name calling and attempting to devalue you as a human being, who is the person that is most likely right? Who is most likely on the correct side of an issue when one side cites facts, ideas, different solutions, and legitimate concerns, or the side who resorts to childish name-calling and baseless accusations?

Think about it.

Tea Party Day...No Violence?

For the last 10 months, or longer, we have heard from elected officials how potentially violent, scary, and bigoted the Tea Party movement was. We heard how members of Congress were frightened of the Tea Partiers and the potential for violence their movement created.

On April 15, 2010, 3 million people gathered in public squares throughout the land at over 1,000, different Tea Party locations, and not one arrest. Not one broken window. Not one injury. Just 3 million Americans of all races, genders, creeds, ages, and backgrounds coming together, singing patriotic songs, and letting their feelings be known.

I know that most people do not take it as a shock that the Tea Party movement held their 1,000, rallies throughout America without incident. However, if there was any question as to whether or not the Tea Party protesters were truly dangerous, all you needed to do was witness Nancy Pelosi and members of Congress parading, unnecessarily, through the protesters en route to passing the Health Care Reform fiasco.



Pelosi is one of the most notorious attackers of the Tea Party movement, accusing them of being "astroturf," meaning a fake grassroots, accusing them of being potentially violent Nazis, and other insulting, degrading, marginalizing comments. The entire Democrat party and the Mainstream Media has taken and ran with the idea of racism, bigotry, and potential violence by Tea Party members. Yet, they walked through, without reason other than to taught the protesters on that day. If it was so dangerous, why risk it?

Fact is, Tea Party members are good, proud Americans. They love the US and the Constitution that should be the guiding force behind the way the government operates. It is the Tea Party that remembers we have a Constitution. The pompous Congressmen and Congresswomen who strutted through the peaceably assembled masses of protesters use the Constitution as a floormat.

However, leaving a Republican party event in New Orleans called the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, an aid to Governor Bobby Jindall and her boyfriend were beaten and sent to the hospital with broken bones. Where is the outcry? Where is the wall-to-wall coverage? No where.



This picture, from Andrew Beitbart's website www.biggovernment.com, (LINK to photo/story) shows the aftermath.

Let us not forget, Obama's friends from the SEIU. I say friends because the SEIU has had more access to the President and his staff than General McChrystal. The SEIU has had representatives visit the White House, sign in the official guest registry than any other visitor or entity. The SEIU showed their true colors in St. Louis, without any mainstream media coverage...



Yet, TEA Party members are racist, bigoted, and violent? Really?

Andrew Breitbart has been offering $100K of his own money for evidence of the "N" word being shouted outside the Capital during the Health Care protests. This offer has been posted online, on Breitbart's Twitter page, and during his television appearances since the day of the alleged racial slurs. Over a month later, not one shred of video evidence. Not one taker. Yet, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, and ABC ran with the racial slur accusations as if they were indisputable facts. (Kinda like the whole Global Warming thing, which has been virtually debunked thanks to the leaked emails last summer.)

The fact is, if you have the ability to think for yourself, you can see through the garbage. If the TEA Party WERE violent and dangerous, there would be visual evidence run 24/7, unlike the left-wing flag burners outside the White House who were ignored by the mainstreamers. If the TEA Party movement was wrong and the Democrats were actually doing the right thing, why do they have to resort to name calling and insults? Why can't they beat us with REAL facts and transparency?

In all reality, the Democrats and liberals in power are wrong. They know they are doing wrong. They know that the protesters and TEA Party members and Conservatives are right, which is why they refuse to fight with facts. Instead, they try to marginalize and insult and degrade their opponents. Like a couple children fighting, when one child has been bested, he resorts to name calling, yelling, and crying, rather than sticking up for himself and his beliefs.

The TEA Party movement is heading in the right direction. America needs to dust herself off and stand strong once again. That will begin in earnest the first week of November 2010, and will continue through November 2012.

Imagine...

Imagine...
Going to work and sitting at your desk, upset the boss just passed you up for a promotion. You're gonna have to stay late today and miss your daughter's dance recital. Suddenly, you are thrown five city blocks in the air. You never knew what hit you.

Imagine...
Sitting in your office and you are in complete disbelief. You cannot leave your building. The skyscraper you are in is on fire. The building is shaking. Word you are getting is that the stairs and elevators are all blocked with fired and debris. The heat is building. There is no escape. There will be no rescue. Do you wait to die? Or do you jump. You see others pass your window. You ask God's forgiveness as you take control of the one thing left in your power.

Imagine...
Storming to your cubicle. You had just had a major fight with your husband. You both said some mean, hurtful things. You sit in your ergonomic chair and silently, deep in your mind and soul, you take minor comfort knowing that you guys will be able to kiss and make up at 5:30 tonight at dinner. A flash of light and glass, your life is over.

Imagine...
Running the halls of the Pentagon to an important meeting. Something is developing in New York City that is going to have a drastic impact on National Security. You stumble on the loose corner of a rug, you curse the rug, look up as the wall to your right crushes your body. The last thing you smell is burning wood and scorched concrete.

Imagine...
Waking up, trying to regain your bearings. A second ago, you were at the watercooler talking about the new college football season. You think Florida State is going to make a run at it, but your buddy said his money was on USC. Now, the room is dark. Your buddy isn't anywhere in sight. You realize people are beating you with coats and pillows. You then realize the pain coming from your back and arms. You are covered in flaming jet fuel. You scream in pain before you fall into shock, then die.

Imagine...
Responding to the mass confusion of two planes flying into the World Trade Center. There are no elevators. No word on the conditions of the stairwells. All you want to do is get to the fires and help the people. You grab your 80 pounds of gear and climb the 80 flights of stairs...1 grueling flight per minute. You hear another series of explosions. Has another plane hit?! You never hear the answer as the floor above you lands on your skull.

Imagine...
Trying to organize batallions and companies of firefighters from the ground. These men are your responsibility. You send them up the towering inferno. The first tower collapses, you dive into a stairwell. When the dust starts to clear, a man who is a friend and the chaplain to the entire fire department lies next to you, dead.

Imagine...
Sitting on a flight to the west coast. Suddenly, men have taken over the plane. They have killed one person with a boxcutter. They have taken the cockpit and are now flying the plane to a new destination, or, more appropriately, target. You and others get in contact with people on the ground. This plane, appearantly, is the fourth in a targeted attack on America and innocent civilians. You don't know of the horrors of people burning alive in the Twin Towers...You only know what the inevitable has now become, and what you must do about it. You follow the lead of four men, one of whom yells, "Let's Roll." A short fight occurs in the cockpit. The plane loses control, turns over, and crashes into the ground. You knew going into the cockpit, these murderous scum had already determined that you and everyone else was going to die. So, you and the others aboard determined the how and when and took back some control.

Imagine...
That you had been in the Twin Towers or the Pentagon or Flight 93. That your life was taken by murderous, evil scum of the Earth that took part in killing 3000+ innocent civilians. Imagine that you were taken in an instant, without chance to say sorry for your wrongs, to make up for the mistakes you made with loved ones, or to just meet your life's potential. Imagine, even worse, you suffered and died in the fires and smoke in the aftermath of the plane crashes. You felt your flesh melt under the heat of the jet fuel. Imagine the pain and shock of knowing you were going to die and there was nothing you could do. Imagine the horrors of 9/11/01, and you were destined to become one of the many faces on the memorial walls dedicated to the victims of the attacks.

Imagine...

Now, Imagine...
A large, loud-mouth portion of the country takes your death and uses it for political gain. They accuse the President of knowing and covering up the fact that the US Government knew, and quite possibly took part in, the acts that killed you.

Imagine...
An entire political party wants to give the same people that helped planned the attacks access to US Courts and the US Constitution. From the new President through both houses of Congress, there are those that want to offer full rights and privileges to the same group of people who trained to kill you. That the new President wants to move the terrorist scum from an off-shore military base to on-shore, US federal prisons, with full access to legal representation, full Miranda Rights, and full Constitutional protection.

Imagine...
The new President and his party attacking and distracting the efforts of intelligence agencies on a daily basis. That party uses the newspapers to discredit and attack these intelligence agencies for scaring or causing discomfort to people that have information that could be used to save more people from your fate.

Imagine...
A President and his party requiring US Soldiers to hesitate everytime they arrest or even engage with an enemy. Instead of trying to protect themselves from dying on the battlefield, they have to worry about what a Democratic senator will say about them if they kill an enemy. They have to worry about some politician calling for a full trial if you kill someone who poses a threat. They have to offer Miranda Rights to terrorists they capture on the battlefield.

Imagine...
The new President refusing to call the groups that are responsible for your death "terrorists." And he doesn't call it a "war on terror," but some sort of contingency plan. The new President apologizes to unfriendly nations for how America defended itself.

Imagine...
Eight years after your death, your death is memorialized by the new President as a call to community service. Instead of calling for a restrengthening of our pursuit of Bin Laden and al Qeada and preventing more terrorist attacks on US soil, the President says America should go out and pick up litter on the highway or other such community service. He in effect dismisses your sacrifice and your murder by saying 9-11 is a day of service.

Imagine...
You are looking down on the current administration and the party in power. Are you feeling forgotten? Are you feeling disgraced? Do you think you and the 3000 other men, women, and children who died on 9-11-01 are being memorialized appropriately and with respect?

Ah, I Get it Now...The REAL 1st Amendment

Amendment I:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

See, it is there, plain as day. The First Amendment, the first clause of the Bill of Rights. The language of those days was unclear. We, on the conservative side, take the words as they appear on the document. How foolish! We need to take off the blinders and see what the Constitution REALLY says.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
We conservatives have believed that freedom of religion at face value. Now, though, I have seen the light! What it REALLY says, is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, but the courts at the behest of special interests may rule against the free exercise thereof, especially if the religion in question preaches love, morals, forgiveness, and redemption. People are free to practice archaic religions like Christianity and Judaism, as long as no one is around to see it. Islam, Scientology, Voodoo, Buddism, and atheism are all protected and must be respected in all areas, public and private. It would be racist and prejudice to restrict these religions from being practiced in public forums." All this time, I never knew that the freedom of religion was so specific! My eyes are finally open. Those darn Christians with their oppressive messages and indoctrinations by offering a simple blessing of food! I am so glad the Constitution clearly lays out the restriction of such practices so we can put these ruthless people in jail!

"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech."
Of course, this protects people burning Bibles, the American flag, George W. Bush and other conservatives in effigy, and other peaceful and constructive manners of protest. It also protects perverts like Larry Flynt to promote the degradation of women and positive ideals of immorality and indecency. However, this freedom of speech does not give Americans the right to speak against a democrat administration. It does not give Americans the right to disagree with democrats in congress. It does not give Americans the right to speak against a health care plan that no one knows the full details about. Why, speaking against democrats is divisive and dangerous. Speaking against the health care bill is immoral and fear mongering. People who speak against people like Obama are racists and evil people who need to be stopped. Those type of people must be stopped and must be reported to flag@whitehouse.org! "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, but the courts and the media can attack, discredit, and scrounge your personal life for dirt and embarrassing fact, or even rumors, or even flat out lies, to destroy you should you question, oppose, or try to debate any liberal government official, member of Congress, or member of the democrat administration."

"Congress shall make no law...abridging...the freedom of the press."
Here again, when you have the dangerous voice of opposition, such as a more central leaning network like Fox News Network, that legitimately offers both sides of each story, they must be destroyed. Again, Congress does not have to do the dirty work. The President of the United States will attack the network and its anchors himself. Other parties in the world of media. Papers of record like the New York Times and legendary broadcast networks like NBC and their spin-off cable networks team up to attack any dissenting opinion or spin in the world of media. Congress, however, has listened to and seriously contemplated the "Fairness Doctrine," but only for the conservative wasteland of talk radio. The government, already known for its lack of bias and ability to be completely, blindly fair, will decide, under the fairness doctrine, whether a radio broadcast is giving equal time to all sides of an issue. The fairness doctrine will ignore the broadcast networks like NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, and Comedy Central, and rightfully so! "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the freedom of press, unless it congress sees a need to mute voices of dangerous opposition."

"Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people to peaceably assemble."
Exactly! Look at the peaceful, constructive, spontaneous assemblies of groups like ACORN, SEIU, Planned Parenthood, unions, and other liberal groups. If a conservative happens to get in the way and oppose their views, a courteous curb stomping is in order and perfectly leagal because guns were not involved, thus keeping it peaceable. Now, conservatives, on the other hand, are fear-mongers and wear Brooks Brothers clothing to violently assemble. Why, their hand-written signs scare 11-year-old girls on their way to see President Obama speak! Hand-written signs at a conservative demonstration are more dangerous than all the guns in the world! That poor 11-year-old girl with her pre-written question that was chosen at random, who just so happened to be the daughter of that state's leader of the Obama '08 campaign (What an amazing coincidence!), had to see people with mean signs. The HUMANITY! While Congress has made no law to restrict the dangerous conservative assemblies, but the peaceful, thoughtful liberals have taken things in their own hands. It's okay to peacefully jump a voice of opposition. It's within constitutional protections to throw a pie in the face of a conservative speaker. It's okay to peacefully threaten bank operators who do not want to play by liberal rules. It's okay for liberals like Bill Ayers to bomb US properties and be a part of a group that torched the home of an NYC police officer. They were all peaceful assemblies protecting liberal ideals, which, of course, are the only safe, peaceful ideals that America can survive with.

"Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people...to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The ACLU and other liberal interest groups, most all funded by George Soros, have proven this freedom is alive and well. However, because of the obstructionism of the conservative right, these poor groups cannot go through congress to make the changes they want happen. Instead, they petition the courts to enact legislative change. Whenever there is a grievance, liberals know that consrvatives will prevent the grievance from being addressed legislatively. So, they sue. Sue again. Sue again and again and again until they reach the liberal bastian of the US Supreme Court. Liberal also use the media to petition the government for a redress of their greivances when there is a Republican in the White House. The media petitions, through their journalistic ways, a Republican President, putting him on trial for everything that liberals deem wrong. However, this right is not granted conservatives. Again, conservatism is dangerous, divisive, insensitive, and just plain mean. Conservatives have no right to question their senators or president on such petty issues as why our nation is spending money that isn't printed yet, why we are entering the largest debt in the history of the planet, why bills are being pushed through so fast that the last pages are smeared because the ink isn't dry, and why the president is appointing czars left and right to positions of unchecked power. How dare conservatives question a man of such unflappable integrity! "Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right of the people...to petition the government for a redress of grievances, except when the liberal movement is in power, because they are all nice people who want to provide everything the government can to the people who they tell are too weak to get it on their own. This right is restricted from conservatives who will use it to divide the country and attack the people in power that we all should trust and take at their word, no matter what."

See? Now that I have explained the REAL first amendment, doesn't it make sense? Don't you see that Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the liberal left are only using the US Constitution to help? Thank God for Obama and the left!

The Supreme Court: It is not SUPPOSED to be Empathetic

The Supreme Court is not supposed to be an agenda-forwarding body. The Supreme Court is not a political toy. It is not supposed to be a body that determines the future of the nation based on personal feelings, experiences, backgrounds, ethnicities, or any other personal fiat.

The job...the duty...the responsibility of a Supreme Court justice is to interpret the law as it applies to the Constitution. The Supreme Court is not a higher power than the Executive or Legislative branches of the federal government. No branch of government is supposed to answer to or beholden to the whims of nine people on the bench of the highest court in the land.

Supreme Court justices are supposed to be impartial to each case they hear. They are to take themselves out of the case and judge each case on its own merits, and apply applicable laws to the case. The laws from which they are to draw are supposed to be exclusively from the Constitution of the United States.

For the last century or so, the Supreme Court has veered far, far left of center and has led the way for activists to enact change in the United States, and, in the process, has usurped the powers of the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.

With the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Obama has opened a Pandora's Box of issues with this Judge's idea of her responsibilities. As I am sure you have heard, Sotomayor made some questionable remarks about ethnicity and ability to judge cases.

First, I agree with the arguement that had the roles been reversed, no matter what the context, and a white male had said his experiences allow for wiser decisions that a Latin-American woman, he would be vilified until he would have to step down from any bench he could concievably sit upon. That man would no longer be able to touch a gavel in a United States court. A white man saying he is better at anything than a woman, minority, or a minority woman would lose everything he has ever worked for because he would be labeled, attacked, and crucified in the media and by even his closest political allies. Sotomayor, like any minority, gets a pass because white males have no rights and no protections from racist or hate comments. Its true. White males are not protected. We have no protections, no right to get upset, no inclination to fight and complain when we are attacked and left out for no other reason than our gender and color.

I can get over that. It's the hip thing to down white guys nowadays. We are the political whipping boys anymore. Fine.

My real problem with the comments is that Sotomayor is telling us that she relies on her background to interpret the law. Not her studies. Not her familiarity with precedents and the verbage of the Constitution (you know, the document that is the basis upon which ALL Supreme Court decisions should be made). Instead, because she is a Latin American woman, she has the experiences to make judicial decisions.

So, getting back to the original points at the beginning of this rant. The job of a judge, regardless of level, whether it be the Tazewell County Courthouse in Virginia, or the 9th Circut Court in California, or the US Supreme Court, is to use the words and meanings of the Constitution of the United States.

Not the laws of England. Not the governing documents of France or Germany. Not the laws and precedents of courts in South America, Europe, or Asia.

The US Constitution, and then the individual states' Constitutions.

Nothing else.

Not empathy for individuals. Empathy is fine, but it should not determine justice. Lady justice is blindfolded for a reason. She does not have one eye exposed to look down mercifully upon a purposed victim. Lady Justice weighs the evidence and the rule of law. That's it.

It is all well and good to show pity, empathy, and compassion on an individual basis. In fact, I encourage it. I think that it is truly American to help those in need when possible. I do not think it is the job of a Supreme Court justice to show caring and concern with their binding decisions on the court.

And neither did the framers.