The news is reporting that the AARP is selling out Senior Citizens today. They are supposed to endorse one of the Obamacare bills that are floating around Washington. Since all of the Obamacare bills contain provisions to restrict care to Americans that are past 60 years of age and have an illness that will cost a lot of money. Each bill is slightly different in its treatment of these Americans, but the net result will be a similar removal of care for these patients. The AARP is supposed to represent Senior Citizens over the age of 55. They obviously are not concerned about the effects of these Obamacare bills on the Senior Citizens that make up the membership of the AARP.

There is a reason why the AARP is endorsing Obamacare. That is because the Obamacare bills are reducing Medicare. Medicare has a program called Medicare Advantage that is very popular with Senior Citizens. It covers them when Medicare does not. The Obamacare bills will effectively eliminate this program. It does not actually eliminate it, but guts it so much that it might as well put it out of its misery. AARP sells a competing Medicare gap coverage that is not as popular with Senior Citizens. With the Medicare Advantage program effectively eliminated, the AARP insurance program will be the only one selling Medicare gap insurance. That would be a windfall for AARP. That is why they are endorsing Obamacare. They are selling out Senior Citizens for the almighty dollar. The leadership of AARP is also composed of far leftist types. That also comes into play on the issue.

Another event is happening today that is far more important than AARP selling out Senior Citizens. That is the Tea Party rally at the Capitol Building at noon eastern time. This idea is the brainchild of Michelle Bachman, Republican from Minnesota. She has invited Mark Levin and Jon Voigt to come and give speeches. After the talks, the crowd is supposed to enter the office buildings and find members of Congress to talk to. The idea is that thousands of people coming to Washington and showing up to talk to Senators and Representatives in person will bring a powerful message. Nancy Pelosi is waiting with baited breath for this to occur, in her secret meeting.

If they get enough people to the event, it can be impressive. Members of Congress are already soaking up the idea that Obama does not have coat tails to rescue them if they vote against the wishes of the public. With large numbers of people on their doorstep, that reinforces the idea that the public is interested in this issue and they better watch what they do. Those that have Democrat Kool-aid in their veins will not be moved. Those that are the least part insecure will be moved by the demonstration. This is a great opportunity for Republicans to make the Tea Party protests part of the Republican platform. They just have to remember not to fumble the ball when it is served up on a silver platter.

As I got home last night, Michael Savage had a guest on who was talking about the impact of the votes in Virginia and New Jersey on Democrats. I did not get to hear everything he had to say, but I did understand that he felt that Democrats were shaken by the magnitude of the defeat in Virginia and that they lost in New Jersey at all. Barack Obama won both Virginia and New Jersey by hefty margins in 2008, just one year ago. To lose by 18% in Virginia after only one year, must cause Democrats to wonder what is going on. Also losing New Jersey had to shake them to their core. New Jersey is one of the very bluest of the blue states, so that it elected a conservative Republican must be troubling. Electing a moderate (liberal) Republican like Christie Todd Whitman was not so much of a stretch. Doug Christie is a conservative Republican. He has very few moderate or liberal tendencies at all. Christie must have been outspent by about 10-1. There is no way that Jon Corzine should have lost. Christie won because of the Obama factor. People are afraid of the way Obama is steering the country. This is a way they could voice their opinion and get Democrats to listen.

This next year will be very interesting. Will Obama, Reid and Pelosi remain tone deaf and try to lead us off of a cliff? Will the Republicans plug into the energy of the Tea Party movement and become the true conservative party that it should be? All this and more will play out over the next 12 months. Election Day 2010 should be every bit as interesting as Election Day 2009 has turned out to be. That would then set the table for 2012 and who will replace Barack Obama. I can hardly wait!

Will Munsil wrote an article for the ASU newspaper. In the article, he laments that some of the conservative voices are not giving the conservative movement a good name. He has a lot of good things to say about Rush Limbaugh. But, he dismisses Glenn Beck, Orly Taitz, Michael Savage and the “birthers” as giving the movement a bad name.

What Mr. Munsil does not realize is that each “voice” in the movement has its place. Orly Taitz and the birthers have their place. While it is not necessarily the face that establishment conservatives would like to put before the world, they are a viable force. Establishment type conservatives generally tend to be a little more liberal than the people that support Orly Taitz and the birthers. To people more conservative than Mr. Munsil, Orly Taitz and the birthers are pursuing something they feel passionately about. Whether it will ever bear any fruit is another matter and not even the point. The birthers build a pretty convincing case based on evidence that is available to the public that there is something to their story. Let them pursue this goal and stay out of their way. If they are right, the evidence will build up and say so. If they are wrong, the evidence will eventually lead everyone to that conclusion.

Glenn Beck does not have the same function in the conservative movement that Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Prager or Michael Savage have. Limbaugh, Prager and Savage discuss the fine points of conservative orthodoxy. Glenn Beck is not in that category. Glenn Beck’s job in the grand pantheon is to be the “Town Crier”. In early America, there were people that went around the towns that gave the headlines of the news. They were known as the Town Criers. Their job was to discover news and report it, not discuss points of doctrine. I am not saying that Glenn never discusses doctrine, just that his role is more of the Town Crier than intellectual. Glenn Beck has been warning America about things that are happening and are about to happen. He does that very well. If you think that he is trying to be Rush Limbaugh or Dennis Prager, you would say he is giving us a bad name. If you understand his role, you will embrace that role and wish we had others that did just that.

Michael Savage performs the same role as Rush Limbaugh and Dennis Prager. If you listen to all three, you would be struck by how similar their messages are. Their approaches are entirely different as are all three individuals. Dennis Prager holds an intellectual discussion with you on the radio. He appeals to your intellect. Rush Limbaugh is the showman. He entertains while teaching. Michael Savage just tells you like it is. You may not like what he says, but you have to realize that what he says is true. Michael Savage does have the problem that he sometimes comes across as too negative. When I listen to Michael Savage, sometimes I have to turn him off because he is too much for me to take. That never happens with Rush because Rush is funny and makes sure you have a good time.

Will Munsil is correct in that we have to wonder about the face that we put forward. But, before we criticize we have to realize the roles each commentator plays. Why? Because if you do not understand why the radio personality says what he/she says, you miss the entire point. The why is just as important as the what.

I do commend Will Munsil on his insight. Any time you write an article and take a stand you will start to take arrows from all those that have a problem with whatever it is that you say. Liberal Republicans want their candidates to be politically correct, so they do not offend Democrats. Just being physically present is enough to offend Democrats on some issues. In other words, if you spend your life trying not to offend Democrats you will end up being a nothing.

Last night on the way home, I heard part of the Michael Savage show. They were talking about a comment that Nancy Pelosi made regarding blood being spilt over remarks on the Obamacare bill. The tone of their conversation was that this was similar to the statements made by people leading up to the Reichstag fire that propelled Hitler to power. The inference being that if there were some kind of incident, the Democrats could declare martial law and eliminate the need for elections.

I must admit that when I first heard Nancy Pelosi’s remark, I was concerned. I do not trust her in my sight or out of my sight, so anything she says troubles me. This one puzzled me because I could not see any basis for her making the comment. She was talking about violence when the demonstrations have been remarkably civil was unusual.

Of course, I also am reminded that the news media has tried to portray the demonstrators as potentially violent. When a black man showed up with an automatic weapon strapped to his back, they took his picture and claimed it was a white man. The drive by media has an agenda and they will promote that agenda regardless of the facts. The people that showed up on Sept. 12 were the most peaceful demonstrators in the memory of the law enforcement authorities in Washington. These demonstrators are so filled with hate that they even cleaned up after themselves. The areas with demonstrations were cleaner after the demonstration than they were before the demonstration. From what I have picked up from those that were there, it was something you could take your children to.

When Janet Napolitano sent the memo around that made basically every conservative a potentially violent criminal, she was shouted down. The list was withdrawn from the public eyes. Now, we find that that the memo did not hit the wastebasket. It just went underground. It must be circulating freely among the left wing members of the administration. The ideas in Napolitano’s memo were repeated by the Speaker of the House. That means we can expect more comments from senior government officials in the coming weeks and months.

The question that Michael Savage and his callers were addressing was why? At this point nobody officially knows for sure. If there is some type of conspiracy like some were talking about last night, those people know. The rest of us are in the dark until the trap snaps shut. If there is no conspiracy, then things will just happen. We should be aware of the potential for a problem. We should make plans in case there is a problem, and hope that we are wrong. People with 20/20 hindsight always ask the question, “Why didn’t they see all the warning signs?” The warning signs are not obvious until something happens, then it is too late.

Glen Beck is still under attack from the left. In a way that is a good thing. It means that he is being effective in finding the skeletons in their closet. It is also a bad way because it shows how many companies are spineless lapdogs of the left.

Glen Beck has a terrible time slot to get high ratings, yet he is now frequently the top show on all of cable news. Bill O’Reilly has had the top slot for a long time. Glen is now getting ratings that challenge Bill for the top spot each day. Bill O’Reilly undoubtedly does not like that, but it is the nature of TV that shows wax and wane in the ratings. Right now, Glen Beck is hot and it shows. Both Bill O’Reilly and Glen Beck are on Fox News. Either one gets more people viewing their shows than view the total of the top shows for any other cable channel.

The higher the viewership a show has the more advertisers generally want to advertise on that show. The reason is that you want to be seen. You also want to be seen on the “best” shows. The “best” shows are usually defined as those that bring in the highest viewers. A side note to this is that conservative show viewers tend to be more loyal than viewers for other shows. All of this would lead one to believe that advertisers are knocking down the door to get on the Glen Beck TV show. After Van Jones started the boycott, a number of advertisers have pulled their ads from Fox News and the Glen Beck show in particular. In my mind, those are advertisers to avoid. If they don’t want to advertise on Glen Beck, then I don’t want to buy their products. All I need now is a list of those advertisers and I can change my buying habits.

Why are advertisers boycotting Glen Beck? A couple of weeks ago, Glen Beck said that Barack Obama is a racist on his TV show. The next day on his radio show, he explained why he believed Barack Obama was a racist. Whether you agree with Glen Beck or not, he has a right to his opinion. Viewers have a right to watch his show after a comment like that. His viewership is through the roof. Obviously viewers are not put off by the comment about Barack Obama being a racist. Advertisers also did not have a problem with it until Van Jones started his boycott movement.

Just like I support Michael Savage in his effort to remove the stain of being “Banned in Britain”, I support Glen Beck in this effort. Whether or not talk show hosts will support one another is not important to me. I understand why other talk show hosts do not support Michael Savage’s efforts in regards to England. They believe if they put their support behind Michael Savage’s efforts then they will be lumped together with his views. I can’t really tell much difference between the views of Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. If you boil them down to their essentials, they agree on most issues. That is as it should be because they are all conservatives. But, they also all believe that they are the best talk show on the radio/TV. To put their support behind another host would acknowledge that the other host is important. Their egos will not allow another talk show to be nearly as important as their talk show. That is why they will not support one another, even though they should.

As a private person who has no ax to grind, I can support multiple hosts and have no problem with that support. I listen to all of them and more to gain as much information as possible. Dismissing one or more as unimportant would diminish my information base. When one of my sources of information is in trouble, all of my sources of information are in trouble.

Glen Beck has been exposing the circle of advisors to Barack Obama. Van Jones is one of the closest advisors to Barack Obama. After the revelations this past week, Van Jones cannot last much longer as the Green Jobs Czar. I look for him to disappear from the White House this weekend or early next week. That will diminish the standing of Van Jones, but will most likely cause him to work that much harder to stop Glen Beck from broadcasting. That will kick this battle up one notch. Van Jones has a problem in his fight with Glen Beck. The problem is that Glen Beck only uses highly researched information. Van Jones is using lies to support his position. Glen Beck is using facts to support his position. Eventually the advertisers will see the light and tell Van Jones where to stick it. Companies can lose only so much money over principle.

Here are some random thoughts to fill the day. My mind will not settle on one issue to discuss. Or even two issues like yesterday. So, I thought I would borrow a page out of Thomas Sowell’s playbook and do a random thoughts blog.

I read an article on Townhall.com that said Democrats should not call themselves progressive. She felt that they should call themselves regressives. The reason is that progressives connote forward thinking. Democrats do everything except think of how to improve the body politic. Democrats are always trying to take us back to something that failed in the past. They will argue that it failed because they were not there to make sure it worked well. There is no arguing with that, but it will still fail because the idea is faulty, not the implementation.

Glen Beck has been warning us about the President’s advisors and Czar’s for the past two weeks. While I knew that some were communists and radicals, I had no idea they were all that way. The big concern with this group of individuals is that they just might decide to seize power. If the military went along with their power grab, they could get away with it. Without the support of the military no coup could ever be successful in the United States. The signs point to a possible coup attempt by Obama and his camp some time prior to the 2010 elections, especially if they are poised to lose the House and Senate. I am not saying they will do anything. I am just saying that there are signs that point in one direction. With this group, signs that point in one direction could be completely wrong.

Democrats never want you to connect the dots on anything they do. The reason they do not want you to connect the dots is that they are always making things worse, not better. They always claim things are better or at least, not worse. When you look at what they do, it always turns out to be a problem. For examples, just look at the federal government. The Democrats always point to Social Security as one of their successes. If you give it an impartial look, you see a program that is broke and failing. It is impossible to fix it because the Democrats cry to the Senior Citizen groups, mostly from AARP. If you talk about reforming Social Security, you suddenly get deluged with calls from senior citizens worried about you taking away their Social Security. Of course the people are mis-informed about what is happening, but that never stopped them from contacting their representatives. Nothing will be done about Social Security until it starts to be a drain on the budget. Then, it will be possible to reform the system. Unfortunately, the time for action will have passed.

Every program promoted by or originating in the liberal wing of either party has either failed, is failing or will fail. Their batting average for success in this is awful. Why anyone still believes them is beyond me.

Michael Savage has been banned from entering England. Putting him on that list was incredibly stupid. Leaving him on the list tells me there is more to the story than just putting him on a list. He is getting vindication of sorts by receiving and accepting an invitation from the Cambridge Debating Society. They asked him to participate in their debate scheduled for later in September. They have hosted Theodore Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill and other great names. Michael will have to participate by satellite, but at least he will have a presence in England. I fail to see what danger a 67 year old man who talks for a living poses to the English people.

Why Michael Savage does not get more support here at home is another question that I do not understand. I know he says controversial things, but his message is conservative and very accurate. The only thing I can think of is jealousy. The big talk show hosts generally do not acknowledge any of the other talk show hosts. This is like they do not exist. It is silly and childish. This is an issue that transcends any jealousy they may have. If all the talk show hosts made this an issue, England would have to respond. That would help solve the problem.

Barack Obama has now served for 100 days as President of the United States. This has been some sort of a milestone after Franklin Roosevelt had a productive 100 days. Ever since then, Presidents mark the 100 day anniversary and measure their accomplishments/failures. Barack Obama is no exception.

If you are a kool-aid drinking Democrat, the first 100 days could not be better. The United States has changed its foreign policy from one of projecting strength to one of projecting weakness. Liberals believe that other countries will now love us more and peace will reign on the Earth. Barack Obama, as President, has bowed before a foreign ruler for the first time in American History. That was great for liberals as it shows we care about the feelings of other countries. But, bowing before someone indicates that you believe that the person you bow to has more power or authority than you do. Picking a Muslim ruler was a bad choice. Muslims ate it up.

On the domestic front, liberals are beside themselves because every dream they have had for the last 40 years is being realized in the first 100 days. They had been squawking about the deficit being too high under President Bush. But when the deficit swelled by a gazillion percent, they cheered as if their dreams were being realized. The recession, which usually lasts somewhere between 60-90 days, is now approaching 150 days with no end in sight. That is not a problem for the Democrats; it just means another opportunity to add another government program or three.

In summary, for liberals and other assorted Democrats: Barack Obama has been highly successful in his first hundred days. They would like to see this continued.

Now for a real assessment of what has happened. The part that preceded this analysis obviously had rose colored glasses on. The real assessment is that the first hundred days has been the worst in American history. Barack Obama has ignored the Constitution at every turn. He has also made the United States a laughing stock among other countries. There is little he could do to make things worse, except for actually nationalizing everything. He has done everything up to nationalizing our economy.

Let’s look at a couple of specifics to highlight my paragraph above. When Barack Obama took his trip to Europe, he spent the entire trip saying he was sorry. At no time did he stick up for our country and tell the Europeans to stick their plans in their ear. He said we would accept anything they came up with. That is not the mark of the leader of the free world.

When Barack Obama bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, it was an insult to the American people. American President’s do not bow before foreign rulers. We are independent and equal or superior to any other nation on the planet. We do not bow, nor has any President ever bowed before a foreign ruler until Barack Obama. Bill Clinton was scolded for almost bowing. Barack Obama actually bowed and nobody said boo, except for the conservatives.

Obama and the Democrats have undertaken a full court press against the Constitution. Their Porkulus bill that was supposed to be a stimulus bill was almost entirely unconstitutional. That is not even saying that we do not have the money to pay for that Porkulus bill.

In the first 100 days in office, Barack Obama has managed to lower the United States from the leader of the free world to a second class country. He has spent money from our children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great grandchildren to accomplish nothing. Our descendents will curse this President and Congress and the people that elected him for that outrage. They will be paying for his stupidity for generations to come, all to achieve Democrat Nirvana.

Barack Obama has managed to take this country from a center-right position to a leftist position in 100 days. That has to be the operation of a shrewd operator. Yet, you see that he gives gifts to foreign leaders that are insults, not gifts. He has so many gaffes that you could fill up a 3 hour movie and still have some left over. He seems to be smart at what he wants to do and completely ignorant of everything else. His staff is just a bunch of people to tell him how good he is. They are completely incompetent. Axelrod seems to be running the country, while Barack Obama seems to do all the photo ops. Barack and Michelle Obama are all over the print media in pictures and articles at how wonderful they are. We are also told how beautiful they are. It is nauseating.

Michael Savage seems to think that we are on the path towards fascism. If that is the case, we need to take the steps necessary to stop those steps. In other words, we need to stand up to the leftists and say, “NO!” That might be enough to put off the truck careening towards the disaster of fascism. We shall see what happens. I fear for my country, I really do. I love this country too much to see it turn into something that I do not recognize. It has already changed more than I would care to see.