What's It All About?

I sense a lawsuit in the works as a result of the Rush Limbaugh flap.  No, I don't expect the aggrieved Ms. Fluke to sue him.  I expect someone to go to court to settle just what differentiates a "church" from it's ancillary businesses.

This is where Ms. Fluke has added to the problem by inviting criticism upon herself.  Forget that the 'facts' she presented in her testimony before Nancy Pelosi and her minions were exaggerated at best and outright misrepresented at worst.  Like it costing her poor fellow students $1000 a year for contraceptive devices. If true I'd question their ability to get through law school!  There's an intelligence deficit there. We all know the lack of 'truthiness' in that whopper hence the real question has gotten lost in the sensationalism. Without knowing if church and church run business is considered one and the same or not, it won't be solved.

If it's considered not all encompassing, then it seems reasonable the business, in this case a school, should provide the same benefits for it's employees and students as the non-Catholic university down the street.  If it's deemed one and the same it's a whole different ball game.

What Ms. Fluke is doing is trying to convince us they are not one and the same and therefore should provide the contraceptive benefit.  She didn't need to add the ludicrous examples of fellow students suffering financial hardship because it wasn't there.

Enter Limbaugh.  He chose to ignore nearly everything Ms. Fluke said and made it a personal issue with her supposed unquenchable quest for sex.  He couldn't have been more wrong.  You could almost see him getting high on the words he was spewing.  It was like he couldn't stop, getting more and more pumped - and insulting.  Like when you get a fit of laughter and can't control it.  Though this was no laughing matter.

He deserves everything coming his way from the advertisers withdrawing to the stations dropping him.  Don't give me the whine that the liberals get away with it.  They don't.  And to the liberals, don't give me the whine that the Republicans are waging war against women.  They aren't. What's happening is an example of government over reach and the consequences thereof

I do wish the candidates had been more vocal in condemning Limbaugh.  "I wouldn't have used those words," as Romney said, was inexcusably lame.  Newt was outraged that Limbaugh was getting so much attention in lieu of everything of importance - like himself I'd wager.  I haven't seen a response from wither Santorum or Paul.

Today begins a new news cycle.  Super Tuesday will be dominating the news.  Limbaugh will be forced into contriteness for awhile.  Ms. Fluke will go back to her activism and law studies.  I'm sure the book deal she'll negotiate will be adequate to pay for her health benefits should she prefer a private provider.

I guess I agree with Mr. Gingrich to the point there are much more important happenings calling for attention.  I'm going now, to see what they are.

For One Brief Shining Moment

Saturday night I watched as three of the Republican presidential candidates faced questions from their peers and their public.  It was the third forum hosted by Mike Huckabee, this time being held in a cavernous, abandoned warehouse once owned by DHL.

The venue wasn't exactly cozy yet their was an intimacy rarely seen in campaign politics as everyone sat on stools in close proximity.  They were so close to one another they could not help but make eye contact and perhaps that is the secret of successful campaigning.

The questions were by no means softballs, the subject for the most part jobs and what the candidates proposed to do to bring them back. Each answer was forthright and earnest in tenor.  It was interesting to me how similar these three men really are when it comes to their solutions.

The heart and soul of the evening belonged to the everyman and woman that were representing us, the voters.  Their frustrations and worries were palpable.  Their fears and anxieties.

In listening to the questions they put forward and the answers given I saw a side of each candidate I had not seen before.  The crispness of an idea, reasons why the idea would work, why it was needed to be done said without condescension in understandable terms. Understanding. Compassion.  None of it feeling the least bit insincere.  No soaring soliloquies, no religious ideologies, no repetitious chanting of resumes.  Just straight answers. A far cry from the theater of the so called debates.

I was disheartened as I read the headlines this morning as super Tuesday approaches as to how quickly that moment passed.  If he'd quit I'd be ahead.  If I had his money I'd be ahead.  Back to the same old mean spirited rhetoric poorly masked by insincere smiles.  Politics as usual.  Winning at all costs.

For a brief moment these men showed what lies beneath all the ego and ambition that drives them.  I wonder if they recognized it within themselves or if they are so used to their alter persona's they didn't even notice.

I hope they do before it's all said and done.  What we've been seeing of them on the stump isn't encouraging.  What I saw Saturday was.  I'm sorry Ron Paul wasn't there, I'd have liked to see him in the same circumstance.

I don't know if another Forum is scheduled or not.  It would be on FOX.  If you can watch one and your mind has not yet been set in stone, it might help you decide.  Or not, which might even be better when you realize the good might just outweigh the bad. At least it would probably clear up some misconceptions.

Have I made up my mind?  Kind of, well, maybe - I'm not sure, really. Not to worry.  Like most of the people on the panels, I have until tomorrow night to decide.

When All Else Fails - Cheat!

Rick Santorum shouldn't crow too loudly about how narrow Romney's margin of victory was in Michigan. Why?  Because he had to cheat to get there.

It was the robocalls to Democrats and Independents encouraging them to get out and vote against Romney.  Oh, yes, it was an open primary.  Anyone could vote, but for a candidate to encourage those of other parties to vote against one of his own reeks of dirty politics.

His excuse?  Romney did the same thing in New Hampshire.  Do two wrongs make a right?  I guess Mr. Santorum thinks so.  This is the man who wears his religion, his piety on his sleeve. The man who is so sure of what's good and what's evil never misses a chance to let us know.

Can he have it both ways?  Can he inundate us with beliefs he holds true that many of us do not then turn around and encourage people of another party to vote with the sole intention of skewing the results to his benefit?

Whatever it takes.

Perhaps we should compare what Santorum has said about more religion being needed in public life against what John Kennedy had to say.

Santorum: The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.

Kennedy: I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist. We have separation of church and state in the United States of America.

One gets it.  One does not. Then there's me.  Kennedy 'cheated' on a personal level; a private matter between the parties involved.  Not the country.

As far as I know the 'church' frowns on cheating on all levels, but when it comes to swaying the outcome of an election, it is no personal matter.  It concerns the country.  Somehow I can't imagine any church condoning such behavior even considering Mr. Santorum's curious interpretations of doctrine.

The Thanks We Get

Every time I turn around it seems Americans are being blamed for all the ills facing the nations of the world ruled by radical Islamists.

It certainly gives one pause to listen to Ron Paul and just stay away!  Even if we get involved, say in Syria, it should be made clear it's for the sake of humanity; that no government has the right to slaughter it's own people.  Depose the government then get out.

We should be doing it now.  Other countries, like Turkey are willing to get involved but are waiting for some leadership from America.  Well, with this administration, forget that.

It brings us around to the current cycle of violence against us in Afghanistan.  Where days after the fact our soldiers are still being targeted for having burned some Korans. Desecrating the holy books is punishable  by death. To the infidels!  Us. They seem to forget that their own people are the ones who desecrated them, not our soldiers.  They had been written in and were being passed around to relay messages of jihad.  But it's so much more enjoyable to blame Americans and kill them while shouting God is great!

I was thinking about what symbol of ourselves we hold most dear.  Our flag.  How many times have we seen it burned by unruly mobs who hate us.  Yet we do not go out and slaughter them in return.

We have even seen it happen by our own citizens.  They are protected under the first amendment.  Freedom of speech, or if you will, expression.  It rankles our sensibilities to be sure, but somehow to our way of thinking it's a right that we have, no matter how distastefully it's being utilized.

I must agree with those who are encouraging more diplomacy in the handling of Iran, more people of the same ilk as the Afghanistans.  Should a war break out over Iran's nuclear ambitions it's lose lose for everyone involved. And we will bear the brunt of the blame whether or not we deserve it.  It's the nature of the beast and the depth of the hatred.

How many American lives is it worth losing for a mindset we cannot change?

To Run Or Not To Run

Have you ever wondered why some candidates run?  Like Mitt Romney.  He's been running since the last time he ran and doesn't seem to have learned anything from the experience.  Is it just for the title?  One more addition for the trophy case?

Both Dole and McCain had an 'it's my turn' demeanor about them.  Obama probably wanted to be the first president of color for the historical value; he certainly has had no interest in governing.  Newt acts as though he's entitled.  Paul is frustrated because no one takes him seriously, insisting he can't win yet he continues to try.  I have no idea where Santorum is coming from.  The field leaves the Republican party in dire straights against a president who is so weak I could blow him over with my breath.  Yet unless something miraculous happens, he will win.

Now Jeb Bush, who is one of the many thought able yet declined, is worried about his party and it's candidates.  He feels that they are running on people's fears and emotions.  He's right but not for the real reasons.  People's fears?  Right.  They fear one of these guys might actually win.  Well, one will, be he Democrat or Republican.  Emotions?  It's frustration and disappointment that this is the best the country can come up with.  It's frightening.

Bush is wrong too.  The ideology of fear, hatred and division he feels the Republicans have pushed too long is what is being resonated isn't, unless he's looking at the candidates attitudes toward each other.  The nastiness of the super PAC ads is certainly causing division among themselves.  They want us to hate their opponent yet all I detect really is self loathing just as a superiority complex often hides an inferiority complex. That they have had to stoop to such a low in tactics says little for their vision or leadership abilities.  Fear.  As I said before.  One of them will win.

Asked if he might run as a consensus candidate Bush said absolutely not.  So he'll leave it to those who at least had the guts to get into the race to bumble along alienating their base as well as the independents they so sorely need.

The whole problem goes way beyond party loyalty.  It goes to the understanding of the political animal.  Why they choose to run and why they don't.  No matter who wins the Republican nomination, look for an inconsequential vice presidential choice.  Everyone touts Marco Rubio, but why would he want to tie himself to a weak presidential candidate while the others are sitting on the sidelines waiting for 2016?

Or are they?  Are they just too afraid of the challenge of the job and the personal persecution from the press that comes with it? It's much easier to sit on that sideline and criticize.  Heaven knows enough us do it. But then we're not politicians nor leaders, merely citizens looking for leaders. If  those who were thought to be the better men for the job won't step up to the plate we're doomed as a country.  That's a stance that encourages grabs for power, imperial presidencies,  shunning the constitution and eventually dictatorships.

We couldn't possibly be on that road.  Could we?