Adonai li v’Lo Ira. God is with me, I fear not. That was the main thrust of Glenn Beck’s message yesterday. During the speech, Glenn hit all the right notes to hit it out of the park. The highlight of the speech was his intention to start bringing the message to a global community. Thursday he will be in South Africa. Saturday, he will be in South America. Sunday, he will be in Texas to give a speech. He did not give the locality of any of the spots in South Africa, South America or Texas. Since I know he moved to the Dallas area, he most likely will be giving his speech in the Dallas, Texas area.

Outside of the meeting area yesterday, there were protesters and supporters. The protesters showed their ignorance of the events by the way they heckled the supporters. When the supporters were confronted by the hecklers, they defended themselves and made the hecklers look bad. In other words, they knew why they were there and had facts to back it up. The hecklers did not really know why they were there, except they opposed Glenn Beck. So, when things got down to the nitty-gritty, they sounded like spoiled brats.

Like any new company, the technical quality of the video was spotty. There were technical errors where they cut to the wrong camera and stuff like that. Those were minor glitches in an otherwise great performance. When it came time to get it right, they did. As GBTV gets more experience, the technical glitches I noticed will diminish. They can never completely go away, because the equipment is manned by humans and humans by definition make mistakes. Overall the quality was excellent. The glitches were minor and did not detract from the overall impact of the event.

The three awards given out yesterday were well deserved. All three were exemplary individuals or groups. They were all fantastic examples of how to overcome the great divide between Jews and Arabs. If more people acted like these honorees, the strife in the Middle East would diminish overnight. It might not end the strife, but life there would be a lot more enjoyable. One honoree was a restaurant that is jointly owned by an Arab and a Jew. It was bombed in 2003 and they did not let that stop them from continuing their relationship. In fact, from the bombing the relationship has become stronger. Another was a store owner who goes out of his way to make sure that the poor people in the area have the things they need for the different holy days of Muslims and Jews. As a result, the stores are frequented by both Jews and Muslims. Hamas and other terrorist groups do not like it, but the people do. So, Hamas and their ilk have to stand down. The third honoree was the young girl who found her family murdered a month or so ago. She has been a pillar of strength for the other two remaining younger children and the community. Instead of curling up inside and crying about how bad her life is she has dedicated her life to the welfare of the younger children in the family. That is the mark of a true hero.

The Restoring Courage events are over in Israel. The purpose was not to teach the Israeli’s courage. They have enough courage to serve them well. The object was to show the world the courage of the Israeli people. Not all Israeli’s are strong. The left in Israel is just as weak as the left is here in America. But the ordinary citizen of Israel has more than enough courage to overcome that weakness. That courage was on display for the world to see during these events. Let us hope that the world learned from this event. I have a feeling that the only people that benefitted from the event were the people that were predisposed to listen. The left in Israel and throughout the world was not listening and so missed the message. That would be par for the course.

I watched the Glenn Beck Journey to Restoring Courage movie last night. It was a moving experience because of the pictures of the people from WW II. I was particularly struck by the comments by the Rabbi from Poland about the number of Polish people who helped save people from the Nazi’s. Glenn Beck had made comments that there were so few. He has repeated that statement many times. There were only just over 6,000 out of a population of 35 million people. That is a small number by any measure, except one. That one was described by the Rabbi.

The Rabbi said that he was surprised the number was so high. The Nazi government went out of their way to make sure there were few who would help. They said that anyone who helped a Jew in any way would be killed. They really meant that rule, because they killed a lot of people who helped Jews and were discovered. The Nazi’s also said that if you helped the Jews, they would also kill all of your family. They also did a lot of that during their time ruling in Poland. With those rules and penalties, it is a wonder that there were so many people who helped the Jews escape or hide. It took incredible courage to help a Jew under Nazi occupation. That is why those 6000+ are memorialized in Israel today.

After I watched the video from Glenn Beck, I saw an article on Yahoo News that asked the question, why is Glenn Beck holding the Restoring Courage rally in Israel? I figured it was probably a hit piece, but it did get my curiosity up, so I read it. As I expected, it was a hit piece on Glenn Beck and those closest to the Restoring Courage Rally in Israel. The premise of the article was that if you had criticized a Jew for any reason, you must be an anti-Semite. If you were an anti-Semite, how could you support Israel? They used George Soros and Edward Bernays as examples of Jews that Glenn Beck had criticized. They deserved to be criticized. They are part of the reason we are where we are today. If they had been true to their Jewish roots, instead of trying to implement a New World Order we would all be better off. To argue that if you criticize one Jew that you are an anti-Semite is pretty lame. No group is without their black sheep. The bad ones in any group need to be called on it in order to validate the individuality of each person in the group. The arguments against Glenn Beck and David Barton were laughable at best. We also have to remember that Glenn Beck and David Barton are humans themselves. They have the same ability we all have to make mistakes. If we have to throw everyone overboard who has made a mistake, the boat would be empty.

With Glenn and Tanya at Auschwitz was a member of the Israeli Knesset. He brought with him a list of his wife’s family who were killed there. That made the visit particularly emotional for him. He was having a hard time with the fact that he was seeing what his wife’s family saw during their last days. That really hit him hard emotionally. When they got to the gas chambers, he went in and out in less time that it took me to write this sentence. He said it was too much for him to take seeing the actual gas chamber.

You could see that the experience at Auschwitz touched Glenn and Tanya emotionally. The pictures of them just after visiting Auschwitz showed how much impact it had. They appeared emotionally drained after that experience. I am sure that is the same kind of experience that all of us would feel if we were in that same situation.

Glenn Beck held the second of his three face-to-face meetings in four nights last night. This one was Restoring Courage – Remembering. The main thrust of the event was remembering the Holocaust.

There was a movie that showed an 85 year old man returning to his birthplace in Germany. He left Germany at 15 and moved to Israel. He lived the next 70 years in Israel raising a family and making a living. The film was about his trip to visit some old friends and participate in an event remembering the Holocaust. I am not sure if he had been back to Germany before this trip. The movie hinted that this was the case, but sometimes referred to visits he had with the friends he was going to visit. So, I am not entirely sure that this was his first trip back, but he had not been back very many times if this was not his first trip back. He was the highlight of the Holocaust event because he had not been to previous events. They showed him around the town and where his home had been.

One interesting point is that his father visited him in Israel shortly after he moved there. His father could have stayed in Israel and saved himself from the Holocaust, but did not do so because it would have been illegal. His father had been a WWI hero and won the Iron Cross for valor in that war. He was a true German patriot. His father died in the Concentration Camps as did the rest of his family.

One highlight of the event last night was a candle lighting ceremony where members of Rudy’s family, his son, granddaughter, great granddaughter and great-great grandson lit candles. That was touching because Rudy had fled Germany and lived to produce all these generations. Had he stayed these people would not have been here.

One point was made last night that was an echo from the first night. That was that the world is good at honoring dead Jews. But the world is bad at honoring live Jews. The event last night was one of those events that honored dead Jews and those that risked their lives to save many others. There have been many memorials to honor dead Jews. We need to get around to honoring the live Jews that live among us every day.

One thing I fail to understand is how the Jews in the United States can consistently vote for liberal Democrats for office. The liberal Democrats constantly do things that are against the laws written in the Torah. They denigrate Jews in general. The Democrats running the United States today despise Israel. When are the Jews in America going to wake up and understand that liberal Democrats are not their friend? What is it going to take to start the sea change that needs to take place in the Jewish vote? Maybe something like this event in Israel will wake some Jews up to the fact that those of us on the right and the Christians are pro-Israel and pro-Jewish. That would be a wonderful outcome for this event in Israel. Anyone that has viewed even a small portion of the events will understand that Glenn Beck and those that support him are serious when they say they support Israel. This is not exclusive to Glenn Beck. Almost any other Conservative talk show host would say and do similar things. But Glenn Beck took the initiative and actually made it happen. That says a lot about the integrity of Glenn Beck.

Yesterday, Glenn Beck held the first of four events in his Restoring Courage program in Israel. The theme last night was Restoring Courage – Love. There were speakers from two large Evangelical congregations in the US and Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, a Jewish Rabbi from Israel who were the main speakers. David Barton spoke on the history of the location and Israel in general. Don Evans spoke on his story and the story of Cory Tenbloom.

Overall the program was excellent. For me, the best speaker of the night was Rabbi Shlomo Riskin from Israel. He spoke with conviction about how the Jewish people have been accused of being alone in the world, but they were not because they had God. Now, with the Christian community embracing the Jewish people, the hopes and dreams of people for thousands of years has come to pass. His definition of courage was to love someone who is not like you. This melding of Jews and Christians is a true example of courage because it puts two groups together that are very different, yet much alike.

One other thing that stood out at the event yesterday was the challenge to stand up for what you believe. I believe it was Glenn Beck that challenged everyone to stand up and state who we are and what we believe. He challenged people to start a journal. I already have this blog, so this will be my forum for my positions. I support Israel because the Jewish people are God’s chosen people. There are many prophecies that tell us what will happen before our Savior returns. Many of those events have to happen in and around Jerusalem. Those that are on the side of the Jews and Israel will be blessed. Those that are fighting against the Jews and Israel will find themselves losing. I want to be on the winning side because that is the side of right.

I personally will probably never see Israel in person. I am getting up there in years and my health is not the best. But that does not diminish my love for Israel and the Israeli people. Like it was said at the meeting yesterday, we have to accept the Jewish people as they are today. Every group of people has good people and bad people. What is sometimes hard to do is ignore the bad and embrace the good. That is what I try to do in the case of Israel and the Israeli people.

This week at work, I was listening to “For the Record” by Molotov Mitchell. Molotov Mitchell is an Evangelical and was talking about Christ and capitalism. One of the people working on our air conditioning system overheard Molotov Mitchell and assumed I was an Evangelical like him. So, he asked me if I was an Evangelical. I had to tell him no, but that I felt that truth is where you find it. If you find someone with the truth, you should listen to him/her and act accordingly. Just because someone is your religion does not mean they are the ultimate in truth. Just because someone is not your religion does not mean they do not have any truth at all. People make mistakes and get things wrong. It is my job to evaluate everything I see and hear and determine what is true. In this case, my listing to Molotov Mitchell proved to be an opportunity to talk to someone who would probably not have talked to me under normal circumstances. He was a great guy and had some really good ideas. I am glad that we had this opportunity to talk. That is the way to help your follow human in this world.

In an effort to get more Democrat voters, I mean make us safer, Janet Napolitano announced some new rules for handling cases involving illegal aliens. Instead of treating all illegal aliens as being here illegal, there will now be different grades of illegal aliens. Those that commit crimes will still be considered illegal aliens. Those that have to take care of other family members or have talked to a college recruiter or military recruiter get to stay without prosecution. How that is going to make us safer, I have no idea. But, it will increase the number of illegal aliens and since Democrats vehemently oppose any form of voter id, it will be easier to get them to vote.

If you wonder why I am accusing Democrats of voter fraud using illegal aliens, it has been proven in many different races all across the country. When Loretta Sanchez defeated Bob Dornan in California, there were a large number of votes that were determined to be illegal. Interestingly, she won the election by almost that number of votes. Some of the precincts in that election had over 100% of the voters voting. How you get that number is beyond me. I would think that a poll worker would catch the problem before it went much beyond 100%, but these poll workers did not do that. Also Mary Landrieu won the Senate in Louisiana with much the same tactics. You can cite case after case and the tactics are all the same. Large numbers of votes are cast in some precincts that push that precinct vote total over 100%.

Everyone knows that the only reason that Democrats want it easier for illegal aliens to be here is to allow them to vote in elections. The Democrats in some cities are even trying to make it legal for illegal aliens to vote in some elections. San Francisco is trying to make it legal for people who are not residents to vote in city elections. There is also a city on the east coast doing the same thing. For some reason, Democrats are unable to understand that it is the right of a CITIZEN to vote in elections. People who are not citizens are not allowed to vote in elections. That is the way it was set up and that is how it should remain. But non-citizens vote almost 100% for Democrats and that is why they need those votes. Citizens are starting to wake up to Democrats and it is getting harder to fool us.

There have been rumors that the Obama administration was going to try and do an administrative amnesty program for a long time. We are seeing the first stages of the amnesty program right now. They cannot put the program out in its final state all at once, because people would reject it. By bringing it out in stages, they hope to reduce the opposition to amnesty. Democrats rarely do anything in one step. They almost always start with a small step that might even seem reasonable. That gets the camel’s nose inside of the tent. Then, after a period of time, you wonder how the camel got inside of the tent. That will be the way with this administrative amnesty program. It will start small with this restructuring of how they handle illegal immigration cases. After the election in 2012, I expect the amnesty program to be installed completely. There will be three or four more stages to install before they get the final product out in public.

We need to be on our guard for the grand design from the Obama administration. They will deny that this is what they are doing. But, when it is all over this will be in place and you will have been duped. It has happened time and again with Democrats. They always deny that they are doing something, while doing it. Then, when everyone catches on to what they are doing, it is too late to stop them. One thing about Democrats that is constantly true. That is that they will never, ever tell the truth about what they are doing.

Having spent two years in England, I have an affinity for that country. I have been saddened by the riots that have engulfed their cities. It came as little surprise after knowing of the decline of their culture. But, the link between the poor whites in England and the blacks in this country are astounding. I got that link by reading the recent articles from Thomas Sowell.

The culture of poor whites in England and poor blacks in America are similar. Both are being destroyed by government “help”. Children are born outside of marriage at an astounding rate. There are generations of people in both groups that have never worked a day in their entire lives. The similarities go on and on.

What can be done about it? First, we have to get back to the culture that blacks had prior to the time when the government felt it had to “help” them. Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams have written a lot about the fact that children born out of wedlock prior to the great society was about 23% and is about 79% now. So we cannot attribute the children born outside of marriage problem to slavery because the number of children born outside of marriage was so much lower for almost a hundred years after slavery was ended. That takes an argument race hustlers love to use. Marriage has to be encouraged. That one thing will dramatically improve the lot of blacks and black youths in America.

We improve the lot of blacks in this country by removing the roadblock that has been built up to keep them in perpetual slavery. That roadblock is the tremendous amount of federal programs that have made poor blacks dependent on the federal government for their livelihood. We cannot end all the programs overnight. That would cause tremendous hardship and other ancillary problems. The programs will need to be reduced gradually to wean the poor blacks from their dependence. We have to give poor blacks some incentive to get married and to stay married. We also have to make it to their advantage to get and keep a job, not live a life of crime. To do that would mean a complete restructuring of the federal programs holding blacks down right now. Then, the programs would need to be gradually reduced until they no longer hamper the poor black person’s ability to earn a living.

The problems in England that are causing the rioting are here in America. They are not as bad here as they are there. The main reason is because liberals have been working on destroying the fabric of English society for much longer than they have been working at destroying the fabric of American society. Also, the liberals have been much more successful over in England than they ever have been here. Even the great Conservative leader, Winston Churchill, started many socialist programs during his terms of leadership in England. Conservatives over here have not done that as much as they have over in England. As a result, the problems are here, but not as severe as in England. If we use the riots in England as a wake-up call, we can avoid the total societal meltdown that England has had.

The problem in England is the same as the problem here. That is too much government involvement in people’s lives. Thomas Jefferson was right when he said that the government was best when it governs least. The less involvement government has in our lives, the better our lives will be in America and around the world. Getting that program through Congress where power is the name of the game will be next to impossible. I am suggesting that Congress voluntarily give up power to allow the country to heal itself. That will only happen if we elect people to office who truly believe that government should have little involvement in the lives of ordinary citizens. Beware the politician that promises to solve all your problems. He/she will just cause more problems than they ever will solve with their government solutions.

When I was a federal employee, I was continually frustrated by the one size fits all approach that the federal government does business. Working in Arizona and North Dakota taught me that there are different environmental problems with different environmental solutions. The federal response to the situation is to impose the same solution on both environmental problems. That led to many frustrating hours trying to work around the rules to solve the real world problems I was trying to solve. That is the way federal programs work. That is why the federal approach to solving problems can never work. Problems are not the same everywhere.

Operation Fast and Furious is still under investigation. Four important people under investigation in Arizona for the ATF were recently promoted to Washington. Now, as a former federal employee I know that the policy is to promote people out of trouble. In other words, if someone gets in trouble, you promote them or transfer them to get them out of the trouble spot. The one proviso on that rule is that you wait until any legal investigation is over until you make the transfer. What I am talking about is someone gets a divorce or something and that cause’s problems in a small town. You promote the person away from the problem to solve the greater problem of public relations.

This series of promotions for these four individuals smacks of a cover-up. In cover-ups, one thing you do is give the person who knows important information a promotion to get him to shut up about whatever he/she knows. These promotions appear to be this kind of promotion. Moves cost the government thousands of dollars to complete. On the Mike Broomhead show yesterday he estimated that each move cost about $186,000 plus the cost of the per diem for a month for the family. That is easily another $30,000 per individual, probably more. The positions these individuals were moved to appear to be the type of positions where you put people you want on “ice”. They are artificial make-work positions that have never been there previously.

The four individuals that were moved were high ranking individuals in Arizona. They would have had knowledge of who authorized the program or at least from what department authorization came from. Now that they have been paid off, this information will be much more difficult to obtain. I say they were paid off because each one of them was in danger of being personally prosecuted for crimes. That means they could have spent time in jail for what they did with Operation Fast and Furious, unless they came clean on what they knew of higher level people involved. Now that will be difficult, if not impossible to obtain. The hook is not there any longer. These people are still in danger of prosecution, but the hook that would have obtained more information has been removed.

This appears to be part of a cover-up to protect high level employees of the Obama administration or even Obama himself from the fallout from Operation Fast and Furious. The path that would have led to the individuals responsible just became more difficult to follow. These individuals who were moved were undoubtedly told that their move was dependent on their remaining silent on any higher level involvement in Operation Fast and Furious. At least, that is how I would handle the moves if I was in the Obama administration. I would make them agree to be silent on high level involvement before moving them away from the problem. That way I could protect anyone in Washington who authorized the program.

We may still get to the bottom of the case. But these four people are now going to obstruct the investigation instead of being a help to the investigation. That is a shame, because people have died as a result of Operation Fast and Furious. Because of these deaths, the individuals responsible need to be brought to justice. They can still be identified and prosecuted because there have to be other sources of information. But it is always easier to get cooperation from key individuals instead of roadblocks. We need to cut off the head of this terrible program to show the criminals in the Obama administration that they will be discovered if they commit crimes. We cannot allow cover-ups to protect guilty people from prosecution.

We have a new candidate running for President and one old candidate dropped out over the weekend. Rick Perry, Governor of Texas, announced he is running for President. Tim Pawlenty announced that he is dropping out of the Presidential race due to his poor showing in the Iowa Straw Poll.

Tim Pawlenty had been a favorite of the media to win the nomination. But, he never seemed to catch fire with the public. His speeches lacked any direction and he just seemed in over his head. He might have made a great President, but he was not a good candidate. In today’s Presidential politics, you have to be a good campaigner in order to get a chance to be President. Gone are the days where your name is put up for President and your campaign consists of sitting on your porch and talking to people. Today, you have to get out and campaign hard and with fire to win the nomination. Tim Pawlenty just seemed to be missing that fire.

Rick Perry announced for President on Saturday in South Carolina. He is currently the Governor of Texas. He has been Governor of Texas for the past 10 years. During that time, Texas has produced about 40% of all the new jobs in the country, despite being only 5% of the population. With that kind of record Rick Perry has to be considered a front runner for the White House.

Rick Perry also inherited a budget that was severely in the red and turned it around. Texas now runs a surplus each year. People attribute this to oil, but when you look at the overall Texas budget oil makes up only a small percentage of the Texas budget. The surplus came because the Texas economy raised all boats, not just the oil industry.

There are questions about Rick Perry. The biggest one is that he was a Democrat until just before he became Governor of Texas. He was even the Texas campaign manager for Al Gore when he ran for President. Now, that is a huge negative. Al Gore is off his rocker and has been since long before he ever ran for President. Since Rick Perry supported Al Gore for President, he has some explaining to do before being accepted by the rank and file Republicans. Right now, few people really know things like him supporting Al Gore. But, I am sure that opponents have done their opposition research and will find that out in short order. It is sure to come up on the campaign trail a time or two before we get to the nominee.

Right now, the Republican field is quite large. But, there are only three that really have the eye of a large number of voters. They are: Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann. Each of the three has negatives that could disqualify him/her from the nomination. Each of the three has great strengths that will enhance their resume. Whoever wins will be the one that can explain his/her problems and not lose support with the Republicans who will be voting in the primary elections. We could have a surprise from one of the others in the Republican field, but that is highly unlikely. I have not settled on a candidate to date. As the primary season rolls along, I will evaluate the candidates and make up my mind. Until then, I will have to learn more about each candidate and the issues before making such an important decision.

Today, I want to talk about something that has bothered me for some time. Every time Mitt Romney is discussed or any other candidate who happens to be LDS, someone or a group of someone’s writes about how Mormons are not Christians and so on. I know that I wrote about this during the 2008 campaign, but it does need to be addressed again. This time I thought I would use the logic of the Evangelicals that claim that LDS members are not Christians in reverse and see how they come out.

First, let us look at their claim that “Mormons” are not Christians. The name of the “Mormon” Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If the church was not Christian, it would not have the name of Jesus Christ in its title. Most Evangelicals belong to the Baptist church or other similar church. The name of the Baptist church is not The Church of Jesus Christ, so are they Christians? Their church does not say that they are so maybe they do not believe in Jesus Christ, they might worship some other being and just talk about Jesus to fool us.

Another argument that Evangelicals use is that the Jesus that they worship is not the same Jesus that Mormons worship. Now The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints uses the King James Version of the Bible and the New Testament as the central source for our information on Jesus Christ. If we worship a different Jesus, then maybe the Baptists or other so called Christian church uses some other text to tell them about Jesus. Or if they use the Bible, they have changed the Bible from the King James Version of the Bible so that their Jesus has changed to fit into their changing view of the world.

As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we accept anyone as Christian who claims to worship Christ. That does not seem to be the case for other so-called Christian groups. We are not afraid of other Christian groups who claim to worship Jesus and what they believe. If their Jesus is not exactly the same as ours, the main thing is that they recognize Jesus as their Savior. Errors can be corrected through discussion.

Many outside of the LDS church believe that we worship Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith was the man who prayed which church was right and saw Our Father in Heaven and Jesus Christ appear to him. They told him to join to church then on the earth. Through further instruction, he organized the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We revere him as a prophet, just like we revere Moses or Abraham as prophets, no more, no less. If you came to an LDS church on a Sunday, you might hear reference to Joseph Smith in a class or two, but overall would have a hard time hearing anything about him most weeks. On the other hand, you would hear a lot of talk about Jesus in every meeting and class. But the people who make the claim we are not Christian, have never set foot inside a chapel.

If you throw stones, it is best not to live in a glass house. I hope that this discussion has given you an insight into the controversy. This discussion will not change any minds that are not already open to the truth. Minds that are closed to new ideas or different ideas will decide that my discussion is not worth their time and ridicule it. That is fine as it just shows their ignorance. If it causes even one person who believes that Mormons are not Christians to think twice, the article will have served its purpose. Thank you for this opportunity to discussion this important but controversial subject.

Since the Republicans held a debate last night, it is appropriate to comment on the results of that debate. The Fox News and Washington Examiner questions were hot and cold which limited the ability of the candidates to adequately respond to the questions. Their favoritism of Ron Paul during the foreign policy part of the debate was disconcerting. During foreign policy, Ron Paul was given the opportunity to comment on every point made during the debate. The other candidates were held to a much stricter time line during that portion of the debate. Also, Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty spent a lot of time sniping at one another. That detracted from both of their performances.

Was there a winner of the debate? The answer is probably not. But if you had to pick a winner it had to be Mitt Romney. He won primarily because Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty were busy bashing each other every chance they got. Since Mitt Romney is the front runner, he should have been defending his positions. With the fight between Bachmann and Pawlenty, the other candidates basically left him alone. That allowed him to answer the questions as he wanted to without opposition. As a result, he looked and sounded Presidential even if his answers were not necessarily top notch.

Michele Bachmann came in a clear second, even with her sparring with Tim Pawlenty. Had she not spent so much time bashing Pawlenty, she probably would have been the winner. In typical Bachmann fashion, she misquoted Pawlenty on one occasion. That did not detract from her performance as in a debate people make mistakes. But, it did cause people to remember that she does make unforced errors in quotes and facts.

Newt Gingrich probably came in third, primarily because he called the moderators to task for asking dumb questions. The first time, that tactic worked because the question was about his campaign, not what he would do as President. The second time it made Gingrich appear petty and defensive because the question was about Libya. Newt always comes across as thoughtful and polished and that was the case here. He just did not put distance between himself and the rest of the field like he usually does.

The rest of the field basically tied. Tim Pawlenty needed to make a good hit to make a difference in the Straw Poll on Saturday. He did not make the splash that he needed to make to impact Saturday or even the rest of the campaign. He is a good man and was a good Governor of Minnesota. He just is not that great as a campaigner and has been swamped by the better campaigners. He may last a while longer, but he will drop out fairly soon. The rest of the field will also hang around for a while. They also will drop out before too much more time has passed, especially with Rick Perry entering the race on Saturday.

With Rick Perry entering the race on Saturday, the race boils down to Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann. The rest of the field will drop out after one or two primary votes. Without people voting for them, they will not be able to maintain fundraising to compete. Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann will dominate the fundraising and ultimately the voting as we go forward. At least that is how I see it here in August 2011. Money talks, especially in politics. Generally the best funded candidates come out on top. An underfunded candidate can compete for a primary or two, but over the long haul cannot keep up with the better funded candidate. The same holds true for the general election.

My prediction is that Rick Perry will be the Republican nominee. Mitt Romney’s negatives are just too high for him to defeat a candidate that is as well funded as he is. Michele Bachmann is underfunded compared to Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. Unless she pulls out victories in the early primary states, she cannot pull off the final victory. My guess is that whoever wins the nomination will select Michele Bachmann as the Vice-Presidential candidate. She would be an excellent pick for that spot on the ticket.

The US troops that were killed in Afghanistan in the helicopter crash were brought to Dover, DE yesterday. As per government policy, because the family members objected to the publicity, the press was barred from the event. The Pentagon and the military did not send any photographers out of respect for the wishes of the families. The White House, in an attempt to make Barack Obama look good, brought a photographer and he/she took pictures that were released to the press yesterday evening.

This shows a complete lack of class and honor from Barack Obama that he would go along with this scheme. But, he always has had this country bumpkin in the White House look about him since he took office. What this picture does is show how desperate the White House is to make Barack Obama look good. They could have taken pictures before or after with no problem. But during the event was highly despicable. The press and military photographers were not present out of respect. The White House photographer should not have been present or, if present, not have his/her camera out of the bag.

The picture, as described by Sharp in the morning on KFYI, shows Barack Obama saluting the coffins. Now you cannot see the coffins in the picture because it was taken at an angle to show just Barack Obama. But, the picture is described as being taken at the ceremony honoring the dead Navy Seals and other military personnel killed in Afghanistan. So, under normal circumstances, the picture would have been a great picture. Because of the request of the families the picture becomes a slap in the face to the military servicemen who died and their loved ones who now have to endure this disrespect.

Since Barack Obama does not even like the military, much less respect them, can we expect any less from him. I know he says the right things when it comes time to say them. But, he cannot say the word “corpsman”. Anyone who has any respect for the military would have known how to say “corpsman”. Obama said it like, “corpse man” rather than the correct pronunciation of “core man”. He also gets the names of Medal of Honor winners wrong when talking to military groups. That just shows that he does not care much about or for the military or he would make sure that information was correct.

The picture is nothing more than a publicity stunt designed to help in his re-election. It shows how little he cares for the wishes of others or the military. It shows that rules that everyone else has to follow do not have to be followed by him. That the White House or its spokesmen see nothing wrong with what they have done just highlights the hypocrisy over the picture. I can see an overzealous photographer sneaking into the event and taking a picture. But in that case, the White House would be appalled that there was a picture at all and would have moved to suppress its release. When pressed on the issue, the White House would have apologized to the families of the servicemen and to the American people that the picture even existed. Since that is not the case, it is obvious that they intended for this picture to be released to make Barack Obama look good. Since anyone who cares about the military will see it as a slap in the face to the military, this picture is not what the White House wants it to be.

I am not sure if there is just one picture or if there are more. I only heard of one this morning. It is posted on KFYI on the Sharp in the morning page. I will not post the picture here because I do not want anyone to see it and think I am endorsing the disrespect for our military. If there are others, it just makes the situation that much worse. One picture is terrible. More than one picture would multiply that disrespect many times per picture. Let’s hope that there was only the one picture. One is bad enough.

There are a number of theories on why the Navy Seals were being used over the weekend, but there is one that seems to hold water more than the rest. That theory is that Barack Obama knew that the Stock Market was going to go into the tank in a big way on Monday. He needed a big victory like he got with Osama bin Laden to raise his stature in order to weather the storm. So, he sent in the Navy Seals to get the Taliban leaders who were holding a meeting in this obscure town. The operation was poorly planned and executed. It was also a set-up and a trap. As a result, 22 Navy Seals, 3 Air Force Special Ops and 5 Army Special Ops were killed when their Huey helicopter was shot down by an RPG.

There are a number of questions about this operation. First is, why send in the Navy Seals? If you have information that the Taliban leadership is meeting in a town, send in an unmanned Predator Drone to shoot them or send in a Cruise Missile. Those would not endanger American lives and would kill the Taliban leadership more effectively than the Navy Seals could have. I am not saying that the Navy Seals are not good. I am just saying that they were the wrong tool to use in this case. An unmanned unit was more appropriate than a unit of military personnel. An unmanned unit is faster and does not endanger American lives.

Second, why send in the Navy Seals with old technology? The Huey is a great helicopter, but it has been around since Vietnam. It does carry a lot of payload. But it is very slow and hard to maneuver. The Navy Seals are used to helicopters that are much faster and more maneuverable, which makes them less vulnerable to being shot down. Huey helicopters are easily shot down because of their slow speed. They are also very noisy which takes out the possibility of surprise.

The last thought on the Navy Seal debacle is that the Taliban sure knew when and how our men were coming. That means that the people giving us the information were plants from the Taliban. Why did we not check out the people giving us the intelligence before going in half cocked? How could the Taliban know of our plans without the plans being leaked by the informants? I know that getting the leadership of the Taliban is a great goal, but more care should have been put into this plan. The entire operation smacks of someone who is desperate for some splashy show of American might that he risked everything on poor information.

After the Navy Seals got shot down, Obama’s plan was doubly destroyed. Not only did Monday happen with all its destructive powers, but he did not have the win he so desperately needed. He had the loss of our most valuable troops to deal with as well as the Stock Market crash and the devaluation of our credit rating.

So, when Obama came out and gave his speech on Monday, the Stock Market dropped 250 points while he was talking. Since it only lost 600 points for the day, it lost almost half of that total during Obama’s speech. That does not speak well for Obama’s credibility. Now, yesterday the stock market gained back about 2/3 of what it lost on Monday. That is good, but things are not rosy.

S&P downgraded our credit rating because of the amount of debt we have. There are other issues as well, but that is their main reason. They also said that the budget deal does not really address the underlying problem, which is the debt. That is true. The budget deal only cuts about $1 trillion over 10 years. That is next to nothing. If it cut $1 trillion in the next two years, then we might have not lost our AAA credit rating. But, Congress would have had a cow over that amount of cuts that fast.

The brilliance that is our federal government never ceases to amaze me. I have talked about the incredibly stupid “Operation Fast and Furious” in previous posts. In that program, the government basically armed the Sinaloa drug cartel in an attempt to track those guns, without tracking them, to get the “big fish”. Now according to a newspaper in El Paso, the federal government has allowed the Sinaloa drug cartel to sell tons of cocaine and other product in the US in exchange for information on the other drug cartels.

I know that one drug cartel holds no loyalty to another drug cartel. That would be incentive enough for them to sell out their competition. Selling out the competition would enable you to get more of the action that is available. I am sure the Sinaloa drug cartel thought this program was great. They got to sell out their competition and get to sell tons of drugs unmolested. What could be better?

I am sure that this program was managed just as well as the program, Operation Fast and Furious. That is to say that if we got any information that was worth anything, it would be a miracle. We would have upheld our agreement to let them sell their drugs, so that transaction would have happened up front. The information would have come later and most likely have been outdated or bogus.

The people running our federal agencies right now do not seem to have any intelligence. Anyone with any kind of intelligence would have seen that Operation Fast and Furious would have been nearly impossible to implement successfully. To track that number of weapons is nearly impossible because people do not check the numbers on weapons very often. Operation Fast and Furious was doomed to failure from the start. That the people managing the program could not see it is astounding, unless that was their goal all along. There is a theory that the goal was to allow the guns to cross the border then claim that the problem is American gun laws. That was happening during Operation Fast and Furious, so that could have been the real goal, not the officially stated one that was doomed to failure from the start.

This operation with the Sinaloa drug cartel to allow them to sell drugs in the US in exchange for information is astounding. As a law enforcement agency, you do not allow more illegal activity in exchange for information. You may give them a break from prosecution, but never allow them to increase criminal activity. At least, that was understood in law enforcement when I was a Deputy Sheriff in the early 1970’s. Things could have changed, but I doubt that the policy of allowing illegal activity to increase because of an agreement was one of them.

This program originated during the Obama administration, just like Operation Fast and Furious. That means that the Obama administration is wholly responsible for the fallout from these two programs. Operation Fast and Furious seems to have been authorized at the highest levels of the Justice Department from testimony given to Congress. This drug program has just been revealed. We have no idea, at this time, who authorized the sale of drugs. My guess is that this would have been authorized at the highest levels of the Justice Department as well. You do not agree to let tons of drugs be sold on the streets by foreign drug cartels without approval from a very high level source. That would appear to be at least as high as Operation Fast and Furious. My guess is that it was authorized by at least Attorney General Eric Holder, just like I believe he was responsible for Operation Fast and Furious. But, Eric Holder does not act without authorization from above. That would appear to point the finger at Barack Obama. I believe the Eric Holder guess to be solid. The guess on Obama is tenuous at best and probably not provable.  

Say what you want about Mitt Romney, the candidate. Mitt Romney knows how to pick a great PR team. The ads by the Romney team have been spot on a devastating to Barack Obama for months. Whether Mitt Romney wins the nomination or not, one thing is clear and that is that this PR team needs to stay on as the PR team representing the Republican nominee. They are that good. Usually Republican PR teams are wishy-washy and try to do too much. Romney’s team lets the story tell itself and also lets Obama defeat himself. The effect is lightning in a bottle.

The biggest problem Republicans have is getting their message out to the public. The dominant media culture leans far to the left and thinks that conservatives are “evil”. That makes it difficult for them to be objective in covering the Republican nominee. They are continually bumping up against this evil thing that the Republican is identified with. In order to get through that “white noise” you have to have a great PR team that knows how to identify a message and get it before the public.

Republicans do have talk radio and the internet to get the message out, but that requires that the people be listening for them to hear. Almost everyone watches TV at some time or other so it is important to have a message that resonates on TV as well. Romney’s team has captured this idea and has played it up over the months.

The theme of most the messages is that Barack Obama is unfit to be President. The rest of the messages tout the qualifications of Mitt Romney to be President. I must admit that the ones attacking Barack Obama are much better than the ones that build up Mitt Romney. But, Obama has given them so much material to work with that the task seems easy.

The problem with tasks that seem easy is that they usually are not easy. When someone else tries to do the same thing, they fall flat on their face. Even though Obama has given the Romney team plenty of material to work with, and they tend to use just Obama and his words in those ads attacking Obama, it still took some genius to put it together. In the latest ad on Chicago, they use visuals from Chicago and Obama’s words to paint a picture of an incompetent. The words without the pictures would not have the impact of both together.

I must admit that the Romney ads are about the only ones I have seen to date. But each one seems to get better than the one before. If you follow the ad campaign, you have to be saying that this is the way to attack Obama every time you see one of the ads. That is the beauty of using Obama’s words against him. It is difficult to say that the ad is racist when they just use the words of Obama to hang him. So far, I have not heard Obama react to any of the Romney ads, but I know that Obama goes out of his way to try and damage Romney as a candidate. I have to believe that these ads are hitting home with the Obama team or they would not spend so much time on any Republican candidate. Obama must feel that he can’t spend too much time on any particular Republican candidate or that might give that person a boost in the polls.