The Seperation of Church and State


There seems to be another movement arising concerning the separation of church and state.
We have a high level government official visiting Sarasota in the next
few weeks to enlighten us. I remember this movement surfacing 8 years
ago. We had just moved to Sarasota
and it was about a week after the 2000 elections. My wife and I decided
to go, thinking it would be a good way to meet people in our
neighborhood and get politically involved in a nonpartisan issue at the
same time.

As the meeting got under way, a crowd of about 50 people had gathered.
I thought the speaker did a great job of presenting the case for
separation of church and state. Our founding fathers
certainly didn’t want a state church,and obviously most people today
don’t want it for all the same reasons the founders wrote about during
the founding of our country.

As I stated earlier, this was right after the 2000 election and the”open minded” hate Bush crowd
was just gaining momentum. It became real obvious from the start that
this meeting was more about hating Bush than about the separation of
church and state. To them it was not a bipartisan issue. It was clear
from the start , that as a conservative,I couldn’t possibly agree with
them, I didn’t really have a right to an opinion, and I sure didn’t
have a right to express it. I agreed with them on most issues, but to
this day they will never know that because of their hatred.

Anyway that is in the past. It is what it is. The more important issue
is what the separation of church and state means. Basically it means
that we will have no state sponsored church, such as the Church of
England, or that our government won’t be run by a religious fanatic as
happens in some countries. This is all well and good, and is what it
should be.

We, in America have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. We
are free to practice whatever spiritual beliefs we may have. As we grow
and change our beliefs may change and we are free to pursue those
beliefs and discover how they fit into what we already believe. It is
every one’s right to practice their spiritual beliefs or lack of them,
as long as they don’t infringe on some one else beliefs. I was taught
that if some one’s beliefs are different than mine, to sit quietly and
respect their beliefs,thereby giving them the same respect and courtesy
I would expect.

Because of political correctness
many of our common sense principles have gone out the window. It is now
OK to shout four letter obscenities in school but our children aren’t
allowed to utter the word GOD. Prayer isn’t allowed in school , but it
is OK for teachers in Washington State to have sex with their students
provided the student is over 18, if the student is a minor they have to
bring a note from their parents.(just kidding.) It is permissible and
acceptable for a minister to shout G-D America from the pulpit.

The list goes on and on, I agree there should be a separation of church
and state, however that doesn’t mean that a generic prayer can’t be
given in a public setting, that doesn’t mean that a government official
can’t express a belief in God. Our founding fathers all had a belief in
a higher power and God help us if our elected officials ever become
non-believers. They need all the help they can get to solve the
problems of the day.

In today’s world, we have enough separation of church and state, what we really need is to abolish separation of God and state.

Written by Gary Wonning

Take your mind off the troubles of today, think of a vacation

Need Luggage or a new Carryon? Up to 60% Off on Luggage, Handbags, Backpacks & More. Free Shipping at eBags.com

Advertisements

Obama’s Bill Hands ACORN $5.2 Billion


A rising chorus of GOP leaders are protesting that the
blockbuster Democratic stimulus package would provide up to a whopping
$5.2 billion for ACORN, the left-leaning nonprofit group under federal
investigation for massive voter fraud.

Most of the money is secreted away under an item in the now $836 billion package titled “Neighborhood Stabilization Programs.”

Ordinarily, neighborhood stabilization funds are distributed to
local governments. But revised language in the stimulus bill would make
the funds available directly to non-profit entities such as ACORN, the
low-income housing organization whose pro-Democrat voter-registration
activities have been blasted by Republicans. ACORN is cited by some for
tipping the scales in the Democrats’ favor in November.

According to Fox news, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., could appear
to be a “payoff” for community groups’ partisan political activities in
the last election cycle.

“It is of great concern to me,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.,
tells Newsmax. “I think our government has stayed strong because we’ve
had a two-party system, we have had robust debate, people have felt
that it was one man-one vote. They are privileged and grateful that
they have that ability to cast that vote. And when something is done to
belittle or diminish that, it is of great concern to me.”

Regarding ACORN, Blackburn added, “Additional funds going to
these organizations that have tried to skew that system, it causes me
great concern and I believe that it causes many of my colleagues great
concern.”

The three-term congressman stopped short of suggesting the
“neighborhood stabilization” money is a power grab by Democrats seeking
partisan political advantage. But radio talk giant Rush Limbaugh did
not.

Limbaugh warned his listeners Tuesday: “I’ll tell you what’s
going on here: We, ladies & gentlemen, we’re funding Obama and the
Democrats’ army on the street. We are funding the forces of the
Democrat party’s re-election.”

Blackburn echoed the concerns of Republican leaders who object
that the bloated package lacks the short-term stimulus a cut in payroll
or sales taxes would provide.

According to Matthew Vadum of the Capitol Research Center, the stimulus package now under consideration includes:

  • $1 billion stashed away in Community Development Block Grant money that ACORN often vies for successfully.
  • $10 million to develop or refurbish low-income housing, a specialty of ACORN’s.
  • $4.19 billion to stave off foreclosures via the
    Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Vadum states the current version of
    the bill would allow nonprofits to compete with cities and states for
    $3.44 billion of the money. Some $750 million, however, would be
    exclusively reserved for nonprofits such as ACORN, which is actually an
    umbrella organization for over 100 progressive organizations.

    Regarding the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Vadum
    writes in American Spectator: “Although ACORN operatives usually get
    their hands on such funds only after they have first passed through the
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or state and local
    governments, the new spending bill largely eliminates these dawdling
    middle men, making it easier to get Uncle Sam’s largess directly into
    the hands of the same people who run ACORN’s various vote fraud and
    extortion rackets. And the legislative package provides these funds
    without the usual prohibition on using government money for lobbying or
    political activities.”

    The charges of partisan political payback appear to be
    resonating in part due to Obama’s longstanding association with
    partisan get-out-the-vote operations. He was endorsed by ACORN, and
    during the campaign paid an ACORN affiliate $832,600 to
    get-out-the-vote assistance. Early in his career, he led a voter drive
    for an ACORN-affiliated group called Project Vote.

    It’s not the first time ACORN has been entangled in a bailout
    controversy. In September, House Republicans objected that the original
    $700 billion bailout package included $100 million for ACORN – a tiny
    fraction of the sums for ACORN now being considered in the stimulus
    package.

  • Redistribution of Wealth



    T-Shirts, Bumper Stickers, hats,etc!

    I think we should all do this, at least 50% of the people would learn a good lesson.

    Yesterday on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that
    read “Vote Obama, I need the money.” I laughed.Once in the restaurant
    my server had on a “Obama 08” tie, again I laughed as he had given away
    his political preference — just imagine the coincidence. When the bill
    came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was
    exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in
    disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to
    someone who I deemed more in need–the homeless guy outside. The server
    angrily stormed from my sight. I went outside, gave the homeless guy
    $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I’ve decided he could
    use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful. At the end of my
    rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless
    guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was
    pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the
    actual recipient deserved money more. I guess redistribution of wealth
    is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.

    Gary has been a writer/ photographer for over 20 years, specializing in nature,landscapes and studying native cultures.Besides visiting most of the United States, he has traveled to such places as Egypt,the Canary Islands,much of the Caribbean. He has studied  the Mayan Cultures in Central America, and the Australian Aboriginal way of life.Photography has given him the opportunity to observe life in many different parts of the world!

    He has published several books about the various cultures he has observed.

    For more information and a link to his hard cover and Ebooks,and contact information: please check his website.www.commonsensejourneys.com

    Your comments appreciated

    Take a Break from politics!

    Stay Green with Rechargeable Batteries from Batteriesplus.com!

    George Koritzer

    Another Great Obama Appointment!



    Political bumper stickers, t-shirts,etc.

    I saw this article in The Jewish World Review this morning, I thought I would pass it on. Obama’s appointments make no sense whatever to me. It looks like he is paying off political debts rather than picking the best people for the job.

    Obamunist Nominee Gave U.S. Port To Communists

    By Traditional Values Coalition Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

    January 15, 2009Barack Obama’s choice of Leon
    Panetta to head up the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the
    greatest gift Obama could give to Islamic terrorists around the globe.

    Panetta is a lockstep liberal and former
    chief of staff for Bill Clinton who apparently couldn’t even figure out
    that Clinton was engaging in lewd sexual conduct with Monica Lewinsky
    in the Oval Office. Or, if he did know, why didn’t he tell anyone?
    After all, Lewinsky was an intern in Panetta’s office. Didn’t he keep track of her frequent visits to the Oval Office?

    Does his loyalty to Clinton qualify him to oversee operation of the most important spy agency in the world?

    While serving on Clinton’s staff, he oversaw the search for a new CIA
    head to replace James Woolsey who served from 1993-1995. The search
    ended with the pick of John Deutsch who ran the agency for 18 months
    before resigning. It was later discovered that Deutsch had classified
    documents on his home computer and was accessing Russian web sites and
    pornography.

    According to former CIA head James Woolsey, Clinton rarely held
    intelligence briefings with him. In fact, Woolsey says he never had a
    private meeting with Clinton and only twice was summoned for
    semi-private meetings.

    Woolsey clashed with Panetta in 1993 when Panetta was head of the
    Office of Management and Budget (OM. The OMB at the time was
    considering sizable cuts in intelligence spending – cuts that Woolsey
    opposed. According to a CIA-written history of the time,
    Woolsey was concerned about a shrinking intelligence budget when
    intelligence targets were multiplying around the globe! Woolsey wanted
    more money for unmanned aerial vehicles for reconnaissance. Woolsey
    eventually won the support of President Clinton over the objections of
    Panetta at the OMB. Panetta later warned Woolsey that he would “pay”
    for his budget victory. It is clear that Panetta wanted to hinder the
    work of the CIA. Woolsey resigned from the CIA in December, 1994.

    Overall, Clinton was clearly more interested in Monica Lewinsky’s
    activities under his desk in the Oval Office than he was in national
    security issues or Islamic terrorism.

    In fact, documents how Bill Clinton’s lax policies on Islamic terrorism led to the 9/11 attacks on our nation in 2001.

    Clinton ignored intelligence and offers of cooperation against bin
    Laden from several Muslim countries. In addition, Clinton and Sen.
    Dennis DeConcini (D-NV) stopped the CIA from hiring Arabic translators
    – while phone intercepts from bin Laden remained untranslated!
    (“Clinton’s Failed War On Terror,” Washington Times, 12/19/2004)

    Panetta’s leftwing credentials are well established. In 1985, for
    example, he and 13 other far left congressmen helped sponsor a 20th
    anniversary fund-raising event for the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), a Marxist-oriented group funded by Communist Party member Samuel Rubin, the Faberge perfume magnate.

    It was Leon Panetta who negotiated for Clinton to grant the Communist
    Chinese Overseas Shipping Company (COSCO) a 10-year lease on the former
    Long Beach Naval Shipyard in California! (A summary of this security
    threat is posted in the Congressional Record (May 20, 1997)

    Panetta Will Undermine Intelligence Efforts And Endanger Our Nation

    Leon Panetta has publicly opposed any intelligence-gathering
    technique that involves “torture,” but this term is so broadly defined
    as to mean making an Islamic terrorist feel uncomfortable!

    Without aggressive interrogation techniques, the CIA will be unable to
    obtain the kind of information it needs to keep this nation safe from
    another any future 9/11 attack.

    Panetta also opposes “rendition,” – the practice of removing terrorists
    to secret overseas locations for interrogation. Keeping terrorists
    offshore is a way of protecting our nation from prison breaks into our
    general population.

    Gary Berntsen, a former CIA operative was interviewed by Bill O’Reilly
    on Panetta. Berntsen was stunned that Panetta had been picked to run
    the agency. “You could have knocked me over with a feather. I – you
    know, after this decision to chose Gates to run, you know, the
    Department of Defense, I thought that Obama would choose a – someone
    who had a vision of this, a bit more aggressive vision of this and not
    someone so far to the left. Clearly, we need someone with a warrior
    ethos to lead the CIA.”

    According to Bernsten: “I think it’s clear that Democratic presidents
    historically have been afraid of the agency. Jimmy Carter went in there
    and gutted the place with Stansfield Turner. John Deutch did the same
    thing for Bill Clinton. Hopefully, Leon Panetta hasn’t been given
    walking instructions to.”

    Bernsten is concerned that Panetta will destroy the morale of the CIA agents if they’re prohibited from taking risks.

    Colonel David Hunt was on the same show with Berntsen. Here’s his take
    on Panetta: “Yes, I think it’s a – they think it’s a dumb decision. And
    this is like – what’s saying about Panetta, what’s being said is
    because he’s read intelligence as chief of staff in the Clinton White
    House, he can therefore be a CIA director. That’s like making a
    principal of a high school who read a history book, a four star general
    in charge of Afghanistan. This is – to the man and woman I talked to,
    retired and active military, retired and active intelligence officers
    just shaking their head.”

    Hunt noted: “What they’ve [Obamunists] done putting Panetta in there is
    putting a stake in the heart of the agency and try to kill it. This is
    not a good situation at all.” (Source: The O’Reilly Factor, Jan. 6, 2009

    Take a break from politics!

    Write your Congressman, Often!


    A list of all U.S. Congressman, and women!
    They do listen to us, they want to keep their cushy jobs! We just have to send more emails than the other side!
    I email key politicians in other states also, not sure if they pay attention to out of state voters, but it doesn’t hurt anything. If nothing else, I’m sure it annoys them!

    U. S. Congressmen

    Political Wear

    Take Your Mind Off Politics!

    Obama, Return to Camelot?


    What will the Obama administration bring? Will it be a return to
    Camelot, that fictional fantasy land envisioned at the time of King
    Arthur, as many would like?

    His appointments lead us to believe that his administration will be anything but Camelot.


    US president-elect
    Barack Obama’s so-called “climate czar” Carol Browner has been exposed
    as being a member of Socialist International, a highly influential
    group that advocates the implementation of global government.

    Links of Browner to Socialist International have been
    removed from their site, but an earlier version shows her membership to
    the organization. Browner also ran the EPA during the Clinton
    administration from 1993-2001, the longest-serving Administrator in the
    agency’s history.

    Socialist International calls for the institution of “democratic forms of global governance
    as the foundation for building a peaceful and sustainable world society
    overall.” The group’s charter of principles also states that “A
    principal task of new global governance must be to ensure that the
    benefits of global economic growth and the opportunities for economic
    development are distributed fairly”.

    Eric Holder, his nominee for attorney General is the same
    Eric Holder that pardoned Marc Rich and the FARC terrorists under the
    Clinton administration. He also defended a corporation that supported
    terrorism in South America and doesn’t know the definition of
    terrorism. Do we need this?

    The Secretary of Treasury nominee forgot to pay taxes for
    several years, hired illegal immigrants and never paid taxes on them.

    From all indications during and after the campaign he intends to
    silence all critics, eliminate talk radio. They are for free speech
    only if one agrees with them. When a local TV station in Orlando asked
    smiling Joe Biden a question he thought inappropriate, the station was
    banned from further interviews.

    Our 2nd amendment rights
    would also be eliminated if he has his way, as with every liberal
    politician they feel we have no right to defend ourselves. I don’t know
    about you but I have no desire to live in a country where only
    criminals and crooked politicians have guns.

    The bailouts will continue, people are lining up in droves for free
    money. There is even a move to bail out the porn industry! How Absurd!!

    People don’t really realize
    how much of their income goes to pay taxes, instead of the taxes being
    withdrawn automatically every American should have to write a check
    every week to the government, then it would sink in how much is being
    paid.

    The government is even paying for converter boxes to switch to digital TV, why?

    Obama and the democrats have criticized and called Bush
    stupid  for his tax cuts, now Obama is suggesting tax cuts, he also
    says we can’t withdrawal from Iraq immediately, he is doing some of the
    same things Bush either did or wanted to do. In my view if you think
    someone is stupid and then turn around and do what they do,  that makes
    you double stupid.

    From all indications there
    is no change , just the same old worn out politicians we have put up
    with for 8 years of the Clinton and in some instances the Carter
    administration.

    Corruption and scandals are running rampant, and he isn’t even sworn in yet!

    If we survive this is could turn out to be quite amusing, kind of like a three ring circus, certainly not Camelot.

    Travel Articles and Photos!


    Protect your rights today! Click Here

    Whatever Happened to Bipartisianship and the free exchange of Ideals?


    Excerpts from The Rush Limbaugh Show!

    RUSH:
    Somebody sent me an e-mail picture supposedly of Ann Coulter on an
    airplane, but the picture is taken, like, from a flight attendant
    looking down at people seated in coach.  I don’t think it’s Ann Coulter
    because I don’t think she flies coach, but it might be. It looks like
    it could be.  She’s wearing a mask, a surgical mask to keep germs away
    and so forth.  That sounds like Ann Coulter. 

    But can you
    believe the gift NBC gave Ann Coulter by banning her from the Today
    Show today? The first news of this came that she was banned for life.
    Some stupid NBC exec let the cat out of the bag and said, “We just
    don’t want anybody who doesn’t like Obama. We don’t want a critic of
    Obama. This is not the time for it. This is not what the audience
    wants.”  Her book is not a critique of Obama! It is a critique of the
    liberal Drive-By Media and how liberalism has destroyed a bunch of our culture ! This appearance was booked, I don’t know how long ago, on the
    Today Show, and then they banned her from all cable outlets, PMSNBC,
    CNBC, banned her for life! What a gift. What an absolute gift! So CBS,
    Harry Smith booked her today, and it was no contest. Harry tried to
    stand up to her, but it was no contest.  She knows the material; he
    doesn’t.  He is part of what she is an expert on and doesn’t understand
    it.  It was hilarious. What? No, Mr. Snerdley, the media don’t see
    themselves be Stalinist.

    Anyway, we’re going to have her on the
    program to talk about it whenever she gets back.  I want her to come in
    and do it live, not on the phone.  She’s up in New York doing all these
    appearances.  I have my copy of the book.  It’s typical Ann Coulter. 
    It’s just amazing.

    RUSH:
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to rewrite House rules today to ensure
    that the Republican minority is unable to have any influence on
    legislation. Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian,” basically she’s
    going to get rid of all of the rules that the Gingrich House came up
    with.  “Pelosi’s rule changes — which may be voted on today — will
    reverse the fairness rules that were written around Newt Gingrich’s
    ‘Contract with America.'”  If she gets her way, Republicans will not be
    able to offer alternative bills. Republicans will not be able to offer
    amendments to Democrat bills.  They will not even be offered the guarantee of open debate accessible by motions to recommit for any
    piece of legislation during the entire 111th Congress.  Nancy Pelosi is
    effectively going to shut ’em out.  This is from Nancy Pelosi, by the
    way, who after the 2006 victories was talking about the new
    bipartisanship, the new transparency, the new openness and all this
    sort of stuff.  Now the Stalinist tactics are coming into play, and it
    will be interesting to see how the Republicans deal with this.  I know
    they wrote a letter and they signed it, they asked her not to do this
    and so forth, they protested it and so forth. 

    I was just
    watching a little bit of C-SPAN, the volume was down, I’m reading the
    closed-captioning — I probably shouldn’t mention this because I don’t
    know what Boehner was talking about.  Boehner was up there giving his
    speech as a Republican leader prior to Pelosi being sworn in and he
    said something, I don’t know who he was talking about, but what I did
    read in the closed-captioning was that he, “crossed the aisle and
    worked together for the American people,” and the whole place stood up
    and applauded.  Now, if Boehner said that and the Democrats stood up
    and applauded, something’s wrong.  I don’t know who he’s talking
    about.  I’m sorry, I didn’t catch all of it.  I don’t know who it was
    that was being applauded for standing up and reaching across the aisle.
    I don’t know if it was McCain, I have no idea.  If you want to get
    depressed, I will admit, there are reasons to get depressed and angry
    out there, there’s no question about it, but elections have
    consequences, and depression isn’t going to accomplish anything,
    folks.  Action is.  And the next set of elections is 2010. 


    Story #8: Obama Took Big Money from Richardson’s Rubin

    RUSH:
    From ABC News: “President-elect Barack Obama took big money from a man
    at the center of a federal probe that has forced one of Obama’s top
    Cabinet picks to withdraw.  Financial records show the Obama campaign
    got more than $30,000 from California financier David Rubin, the target
    of an investigation into donations and possible ‘pay-to-play’ deals
    involving New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Obama’s [former] pick for
    commerce secretary.  …  “David Rubin Attended Exclusive Hollywood
    Fundraiser for Obama [he] sat at Table 17 — one table away from
    Leonardo DiCaprio, ‘Survivor’ producer David Katzenberg and comedian
    Chris Rock.”  So, humph! “In early September — two weeks before Rubin
    attended Obama’s Beverly Hills fundraiser — a group of Alabamans sued
    Rubin’s firm,” and this we reported to you in December; that’s when it
    came to light, “and others over multi-billion dollar bond deals. The
    suit alleged [that Rubin’s company] CDR was part of a conspiracy which
    defrauded citizens and with bribery and corruption.”  So this guy was
    at Obama fundraisers and giving money to Bill Richardson.  I said
    earlier, “When I’m watching the Senate get sworn in, it’s like the bank
    opening the vaults to the thieves and welcoming them in.”


    Story #9: Richardson Wanted Bunch of Convention Freebies

    RUSH:
    Oh, I saw something else about Richardson last night on television. 
    One of the things he asked this outfit to do — maybe not be CDR, but
    some outfit. He asked for some company to pick up his personal expenses
    at the Democrat National Convention.  Now, when you ask that, as
    opposed to it being offered, you’re opening yourself up for quid pro
    quo. But the thing that hit me about that more than the possible
    political corruption — and this, it’s starting to irritate me more and
    more about
    people. 
    I know some people personally are this way.  Mr. Richardson, if you
    want to go to the Democrat convention, pay for it your damn self!  If
    you want to get a nice hotel, pay for it your damn self.  If your
    salary doesn’t give you the opportunity, go to the DNC to do it; or
    don’t go, or stay in a cheaper place or don’t throw a big party for
    everybody.  What is this notion that people in politics are entitled to
    everybody else’s money?  They’re entitled to yours and ours to spend;
    they’re entitled to lobbyists to party off of. 

    This is a big
    personal bugaboo of mine — and I know a lot of people whose active
    life philosophy is to get where you want with connections.  Scratch my
    back; I’ll scratch yours.  Don’t do it on the basis of achievement,
    don’t do it on the basis of deserving it, do it on the basis of
    connections.  Ask somebody to pay your way here, pay your way there. 
    Use somebody else’s money, even if you’re a big corporate type. How
    about this guy that gets a $750 billion golden parachute, gets an
    apartment, gets access to the company plane? If you’re given $750
    billion, don’t take the apartment and go get your own plane! Do you
    realize how many people in our culture — at the top, the people that
    we elect to run our affairs, do you realize how many of them — are
    frauds who think other people’s money is theirs?  How do you think
    these people that make 150 grand a year in the Senate or the House live
    the way they do? 

    You know, it’s not the system that’s
    corrupt.  It’s corrupt people who think of themselves as royalty who
    have these expectations.  Remember Dan “Rosty” Rostenkowski? We found
    out that he’s out to dinner every night with lobbyists and whoever, and
    they’re paying the freight. Sigh… See, this is why I could never go
    into politics and while I’ll never have a whole lot of friends in this
    world, is because I don’t accept stuff like this without an immediate
    payback or compensation because I don’t want to be obligated.  Now, if
    friends take me to dinner, it’s a different thing. Friends are friends.
    I once worked for the Kansas City Royals, and I was in charge of
    special events — you know, the little fireworks on the Fourth of July,
    the giveaway items and so forth — and I had a fireworks guy call me up
    and offer me season tickets to the Steelers on the sly if I would hire
    his fireworks firm. I went right to my boss, and told him about it, and
    the boss said, “What are you going to do?”  I said, “You have to ask? 
    There’s no way!” I’m amazed people think they can get away with this
    stuff, but the problem is the people we’re talking about get away with
    it.  Richardson could get away with having somebody else pay his
    freight at the convention.  That just so offends me.  Go on vacation
    and say, “I think somebody else ought to pay for it.” My gosh, and I
    call somebody to ask them to do it?  Talk about manners and class! This is off the charts, and this is who these people are.


    Story #10: NYT: Drive-Bys in Dark on Richardson Shenanigans

    RUSH:
    Look at this New York Times story on Bill Richardson: “In Santa Fe,
    Staying Can Also Be Such Sweet Sorrow.”  This is a story about how the
    media had no idea that all this was happening until Richardson quit. 
    And they didn’t have to work hard to dig up past Richardson shenanigans
    because it was all in the local Drive-By Media out there.


    Story #11: Panetta Has Much More Experience Than Obama

    RUSH:
    One other thing about Leon Panetta. We talked about him earlier and why
    he got the gig here but let me tell you something. I don’t want to hear
    about these objections based on Panetta’s “lack of experience” as a spy
    or as an intel guy to disqualify him.  There is not one Democrat
    looking at this logically who can object to Leon Panetta as head of the
    CIA.  If we can have a commander-in-chief with absolutely no
    experience, why can’t someone lead the CIA who doesn’t know a peephole
    from the ground?  We were told having no experience as a CEO, no
    experience as a governor, a mayor, that was somehow a plus. We could
    reject people like Sarah Palin, who is experienced. We can reject
    people like Roland Burris, who is experienced, but all of a sudden…?
    Compared to Barack Obama, Leon Panetta is a grizzled veteran here,
    folks.

    Take a break from the stresses of life!