First let me say that General Petraeus has been an outstanding military man. His achievements are well documented and publicized. His more than thirty seven years in the army deserve high commendation. And, yet, all of that becomes detritus in light of the most recent reports. The man who was thought to be a perfect example of discipline and order has been proven to be a mere mortal; succumbing to the same temptations as men have since the creation of Adam and Eve. It is unfortunate that his legacy will include this event.

Paula Dean Broadwell met General Petraeus at the end of 2006. Since both were members of the army (she had served and was in the Army Reserve) they must have found common ground in many of their conversations. Though the general claims to have been involved with her for less than a year, it seems that is questionable, at least in my mind.

When I heard the announcement that the president made about General Petraeus leaving the military to become head of the CIA, something felt amiss. It seemed an incongruous move.  I am not a pundit but my instincts were telling me that something was wrong. Why was this successful military man, who must have loved serving in that capacity, switching gears now? His relationship with Mrs. Broadwell sheds some light on the subject; but I have more questions. At what point did their relationship become an affair? They had known one another for more than five years. If human nature is any indication, it would seem that their intimacy went on for more than just the year it has been claimed. More importantly, was the white house aware of the affair? I say, “more importantly” because, if there was knowledge before the CIA position was offered, that would imply a set of circumstances whereby one party would be beholding to the other party. Where one might expect favors or information to be distributed according to the blackmailer’s point of view. Yes, I said “blackmailer”. This goes back to Benghazi. The ambassador was killed in a facility that was considered under the control of the CIA. The white house did nothing to help the four Americans who were murdered there. Did the white house think that General Petraeus would do as he was told because of what they knew about him? Did he disagree with the white house talking points? His loyalty to the military would mean standing up for those who died in service to their country. That may have been the reason he was “outed”. There is so much more to be discovered about Benghazi and this white house agenda but I fear we will never know. They have skillfully created distraction after distraction in an attempt to keep the truth from surfacing. It is my prayer that congress will pursue discovery of the answers and accountability for the failure in Benghazi. Perhaps that will finally give peace to the families of those brave American souls.

Few people have the ability to impassion a crowd. The president is one of them. He has an hypnotic effect on those who do not see through his facade. They seem to lose all sense of reason when they hear his voice. The most recent example is his explosive yet patronizing defense of Susan Rice. His response to various questions during his press conference was toned in equal measures; however, when he defended her name, the timbre of his voice was raised noticeably. I believe that these gestures are a subtle way of signaling his most liberal followers into action. He did it when he accused the Baltimore policeman of racism because the policeman was doing his job. Remember the beer summit afterwards? He did it when he said, “If I had a son he would look like Trayvon”. This one brought the black coalition down to Florida. Did you not have anything more important to do as President of the United States? Or were you looking for another opportunity to divide the people you are supposed to be uniting? Each state has its own laws which, at times, can be difficult to enforce. They do not need you to run interference; unless they request it. What you did was to make a bad situation worse. Another example is the “occupy” movement which you encouraged; somehow you always choose to be on the side of whatever will cause the most trouble. You must be so proud of yourself. Never let a crisis go to waste.

Now, back to Susan Rice. How dare the president try to defend her when he is the one who put her in harm’s way. Is Secretary of State an appointment for her blind loyalty? I do not know if she is qualified for that position but I do know that her rubber stamping the misleading talking points creates a doubt in my mind, to say the least. And, when members of congress  expressed similar doubts, surprise, another angry crowd. This one claiming the lack of confidence in that appointment was based on race and/or gender. Puhhleez!!! Is that their defense for everything? Oh, yes it is because there is no defense against incompetence. If this group of women of color thinks they have done Ms. Rice a favor, they have not. Again a division widens the gap between individuals who can think and those who follow the “Pied Piper of Washington”. A hundred and fifty years ago, you would have had a legitimate complaint but not today. Not after The Emancipation Proclamation, not after “Affirmative Action” and certainly not after all that Martin Luther King Jr. accomplished. So stop whining and start using your head for something other than a hatrack. And, Mr. President, your words claim that you are a unifier; your actions are proof that you are not.

Yesterday the president held his first news conference in eight months. It was so exciting that I fell asleep half way though the response to his first question. Why in the H-E -double hockey sticks does he have to filibuster with his responses which are not really answering the questions anyway? God forbid one of the press corps (that’s pronounced ‘core’, Mr. President) should ask a direct question requiring a direct answer. The response is even longer and still does not answer the question. For example: What did you do to save the lives of four brave Americans who died in Benghazi? The president dances around this by answering a question with a prosecutorial attack. The Armed Forces code… the Department of State code….the Intelligence Bureau code… and on and on. Meanwhile, back at the ranch you still do not know what HE did. And the rest of the press corps are aghast at the directness of the question. I’m sure Ed Henry and his associates felt like chum in a shark tank.

During one of his tirades against anyone who has an honest question, he diverted to the senators who wanted to know who gave the information about Benghazi to Susan Rice. After all, she appeared on four Sunday morning news programs insisting it was an obscure video that generated the attack.  The president accused them of “besmirching” the reputation of Susan Rice, not related to Condaleeza Rice who knows how to think. Excuse me, but didn’t  YOU besmirch her reputation when your administration asked her to be point on an issue completely unrelated to her job? WOW! You really are a piece of work. Looks like you used her. And then you suggested that if they wanted to come after someone, they should come after you. Well, you made that kind of difficult by hiding behind her skirt instead of appearing on those programs yourself. I wondered why. The only thing that occurred to me is that you love to appear on the entertainment programs where your lies can not be prosecuted. After all, it is freedom of expression. But if you appear on a news program as President of the United States and lie, it becomes an impeachable offense.

In conclusion, we all acknowledge the president’s speaking abilities, especially when reading from a teleprompter. But, somehow, he stumbled when trying to say “besmirched”. And, I have noticed that without a teleprompter his speech comes out in short bursts punctuated by “uughh”. It’s as if he is on a five second delay which begs the question, “Who is feeding him the politically correct answers”? Is the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain? In the end the curtain will come down and the truth will be told.

I abhor the term “targeted demographic”! It gives the impression that you are being stalked by a sniper. Oh, wait, they are sniping about getting you into their camp; as if you should  to be herded. People are more than demographics and honestly they generally fall into more than one demographic (ugh, hate using that word). For instance, a single female  mother of two children or a widowed female senior citizen of any ethnicity are reduced to a number instead of being seen as the sum of their experiences. There is no empathy for the persona, only a drive to “get” their vote. Nobody wants to feel like that.

Now, here is the sad truth. Like it or not, we are all targets. But the DNC just goes quietly to the schools and poor neighborhoods and tells them how important they are, gives them a voter registration ballot and lets them know they can thank BHO for caring about them. Does he really care? Only about their vote in that particular election.

The RNC is all about numbers. They are brilliant when it comes to crunching numbers (except for this election) and they can readily provide statistics for whatever you ask. However, people are more than just numbers. They are a composite of their life’s history. They are mothers, fathers, teachers, students, employers, workers, and, thanks to America they worship at the altar of many different religions. They want to do the right thing but are just independent enough that they won’t be herded into a place where they are not appreciated. Learn to think of them as individuals, not just numbers. Reach out for their opinions on hard fought questions. Most people won’t hesitate to let you know how they feel.

There is this thing called the internet; a great place to express yourself. And when you ask them a question, it isn’t fair to just give them the option of two or three of your desired responses. Sometimes the answer is not what you want to hear; but, if you are smart, you will listen to it anyway. You may learn something about the way that America thinks.

First let me say that it is time to abolish the two party system. I believe that there are so many Independents because they do not agree with some of the policies or candidates in either party. The two party system does not give them the freedom to choose their candidate in the primary elections. In most (if not all) states, you must be registered either democrat or republican in order to vote. I know this because I used to be registered as an Independent. Wanting to voice my opinion on a referendum question that was being proposed during a primary, I stood in a long line and when I reached the sign in table and answered the question about my party affiliation, I was told that I could not vote. That opportunity was lost but I changed my party affiliation so that would not happen again. Having to do that did not generate a sense of loyalty to the party; just a sense of “I’m doing what I have to do in order to exercise my rights”. Ergo, my registration does not diminish my independent attitude. Back to the subject at hand.

Alphabetically first, this being a blog and therefore my opinion, the DNC is composed of two distinct types: those who sit in positions of authority whom I refer to as “demoncrats” (not a typo) and then there are those who believe the palaver of the demoncrats who IMHO are unable to use critical thinking ability or logic. The democratic party leaders are primarily lawyers. They probably prefer the term ‘attorney’ because ‘lawyer’ sounds too much like ‘liar’. I think it was Shakespeare who suggested “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”. And then there is “How can you tell when a lawyer is lying? His lips are moving”. Lawyers know how to parse their words so that you think they are saying what you want them to say, but they are not. Most people hear what they want to hear anyway so this is a moot point.  The DNC is smart enough to know that young people are idealistic and inexperienced. They believe in utopia because they have not yet been exposed to the real world. They are fodder for that party.

Now the RNC is composed of stodgy men who generate the platform of the party, (why do they call it a party when it is anything but?) and loyal conservatives who know you cannot dig your way out of a hole by digging a bigger hole. Most people are conservative because they have had life experiences which prove that point of view. But loyalty only goes so far. Dogs will remain loyal even if you treat them badly. Most conservative people, on the other hand, have a mind of their own. There are limits to how far they can be expected to comply. Early on in this latest campaign, the polls showed a lack of enthusiasm for the RNC’s choice of a candidate. No matter, we will convince them thought the honchos. Not so said the constituency. The choice was painful; the devil we know vs the devil we don’t know. In the end, enough people decided to make no choice which resulted in four more years of gridlock and pain for the American people. The system needs to changed.

The president has already used the term “mandate” when referring to the results of the election’s popular vote. I disagree with the premise of “a mandate of the people”. Yes, he received a majority of the popular votes which were cast insuring his re-election. But more than half of the population that is eligible to vote, did not exercise their right. When you look at the numbers, and we will use the 2010 census figures, 308,745,538 is the total population. These figures are conservative because the current population is 314,742,236 therefore my calculations allow room for error that would benefit my position. The total number of people who cast a ballot for either candidate is less than 120,000,000. More than half of eligible voters did not vote! In essence, the president was elected by a majority of those who voted, but NOT by a majority of the people who will be governed by his decisions. Why do people choose not to vote??  I think it comes down to two main reasons when you exclude all of the minor “I was sick” or “I was on vacation” or “I didn’t have a way to get there”. These can be overcome with an absentee ballot. However, if you don’t believe that your vote counts, why make an effort. It seems that people do not have faith in the integrity of our system. Maybe because someone they voted for in the past did not get elected or maybe because whoever does get elected seems to ignore what the people want and push an agenda that satisfies their own political ambitions. That would certainly discourage participation in a system that appears to ignore them or, worse, patronize them. We are smart enough to know the difference. The next possibility for not voting is that none of the candidates are acceptable to them. Sadly, that may be what happened in this election. The candidates approved by the DNC and RNC were not what the people wanted but the DNC was better at making people feel they were important to the process. Unfortunately, many of those people are cold, hungry, and homeless as a result of Hurricane Sandy. I wonder if they still feel important now that the election is over.

This election is proof positive that Americans have lost their ability to think as individuals. It has become a nation of gullible sheep who follow a leader who is in sheep’s clothing. From the first big lie where we were told that Obamacare would not cover illegals and it does; through a series of misrepresentations too numerous to mention; to the most recent outrage of Benghazi, where four innocent Americans were murdered on September 11th, 2012. In this latest incident most of the news outlets refused to tell the unvarnished truth of the attack in an effort to protect the election of a president who has done nothing to strengthen our country. Did the people look for the truth? NO! Nothing in our educational system teaches them how think for themselves. Instead, they blindly followed the story about an obscure video which the president blamed for the incident, when the truth is that the video had nothing to do with the attack. These brave Americans did not have to die. It was their misfortune to be in the service of a president who did not value their lives. Compounding the problem, news (?) outlets ran with the story about the video instead of looking for the truth. There was a time, in the past, when the news media tried to out scoop one another with a scandalous report. Now they hide the truth and peddle their political pandering to the public. In my humble opinion, they are complicit and should be considered ‘accessories after the fact’ for covering up this heinous crime against America.

The really sad part of all of this is the election was won by attack ads that displayed the most unsavory method of political tripe. And gullible Americans became a party to the dirty politics by not looking for the truth. Our founding fathers gave their fortunes and their lives in the battle for a free America and this year America gave up their freedoms without even thinking about it. God help us!

If the president really cared about his constituency, a portion of the money that was spent on all of those attack ads would have been given to the poor and needy. Instead, it was used to keep him in the most lavish lifestyle that any president before him has been the beneficiary of.  Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. Wake up America. If you think the last four years was hard, hold onto your seats. And if you don’t have a seat to hold on to, I’m sure this president will find a way to take somebody else’s seat and give it to you.

An editorial is an opinion. People with a strong opinion on a particular subject may write a letter to the editor of their newspaper expressing their opinion. If the editors deem it worthy, their opinion may be published. Lucky us! Luckier them! They get to editorialize the entire content of what they print and; therefore, what we are allowed to read. It is most unfortunate that truth has nothing to do with what is printed. Case in point: Benghazi and the unnecessary slaughter of four Americans. Why has the truth been denied to the American people? What purpose does the media have if not to tell us the truth. Perhaps they think it advantageous to pander to various individuals or organizations. You underestimate the intelligence of the American people. Your job is to print the truth and allow us to discern the information according to our own philosophies. In that, you have failed! By denying the truth, you become an accessory after the fact and, in my humble opinion, just as guilty as the perpetrators of that heinous crime. Perhaps that is why subscribers are diminishing. People are searching elsewhere for the truth. Truth cannot be bought; it will come out eventually and you may have missed an opportunity to be that shining example of all that is great about our country.

May God bless America.
Oh, and by the way, it’s freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

Welcome to WordPress. This is my first post. This being a blog, it is strictly about my opinions with which you may or may not agree. Feel free to comment either way and I will feel free to be me no matter what. This blog was created right after the election results and most likely will express my political views. If you would rather see a blog about bunnies or butterflies or baking, look elsewhere. But I hope you will find that what I have to say, at the very least, is thought provoking. Thank you.