In the Military you salute the uniform…not the wearer. BUT….I just can not justify wishing Barack Obama well; based on what I learned about him, his past and his associates. I fear for our country if it’s delivered into his hands.

What I can´t understand is how can the electorate be so gullible to vote for Obama. The fact that he doesn´t have any leadership experience nor his only piece of legislation in the Global Poverty Act which will commit the U.S to a significant gift of money for distribution around the world, is if we don´t already spend too much on foreign aid. During the primaries Obama sent representative to Canada to calm their fears about his wanting to renegotiate free trade agreements. They told the Canadians, ¨it was only campaign rhetoric.¨Obama really supports NAFTA and the trans international highway that begins in Mexico, passes through the U.S and ends in Canada. Also, his presentatives went to Colombia in August of 2007 to meet with Raul Reyes, the late leader of the marxist/terrorist group FARC. Reyes died in a gun battle with the Colombian Army and this information was in his laptop which was turned over to INTERPOL. I have wonder why the information wasn´t shared with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, or the FBI. Why FARC and not the legally constituted government of Colombia, our ally, President Alvaro Uribe. Never before has there been a candidate about which there such much that is obscure and has such a cast of questionable and sleezy associates, ACORN, Khalidi, Farakhan, Rezko, and Ayres. If a Republican candidate had such associations he´d be hounded to withdraw. It seems as though there is a different standad for Republicans. Senator Stevens is begin urged to resign, while Congressman Jefferson, who was found to have $90,000. in cold hard cash in his freezer, continues to serve his district. Tim Foley resigned and Michael Mahoney is running for reeelction while scandal about two adulterous affairs and may have paid blackmail. Then there is Congressman Kenjorski, in district near Pittsburgh, and his funnelling federal funds to family members in non existent businesses. It seems as though sleeze is acceptable to and for Democrats.

During the primaries Obama sent representatives to Canada to calm their fears of the U.S. ending free trade; that in it is only political rhetoric. They assured the Canadians that Obama really supports NAFTA and the trans international hight from Mexico through the U.S to Canada. What is more damning, but never exposed in the U.S, is that Obama sent Represntatives to Colombia, meet with the late Raul Reyes, then leader of the marxist/terrorists FARC, instead of the legally constituted government of Alvaro Uribe. The information was found in the laptop of the Reyes when he was killed in a gun battle with the Colombian Army. The laptop was turned over to INTERPO. Why this information was suppressed and as far as can be determined wasn´t given to the either the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, or FBI. It is another one of those dark things hidden from the public about Obama. As if ACORN, Rezko, Khalidi, Farakhan, and Ayres wasn´t enough. Any Republican candidate with such credentials would´ve been hounded out of his candidacy or there would be a landslide vote against him. Apparently character only counts for Repbulicans. Democrats can be sleezy. People are urging Senator Stevens to resign, but congresssman Jefferson still represents his district, even though $90,000. in cold hard cash was found in his freezer. Tim Foley quit but Micheal Mahoney , who campaigned on being a paragon of virtue, is fighting to save his seat after his two adulterous affairs and blackmail came to light. Despite all of this it galls me that Republicans endorse Obama when they wouldn´t tolerate character flaws in the Republican candidates and who can the public be so gullible. The change Obama offers is not forward it is backward; it is a fusion of the Great Society of LBJ and the failed foreign plicies of Jimmy Carter.

I don’t think that’s very likely.

A contradiction and yet in a sense not. If he succeeds according to the few but alarming promises he’s made, perhaps a backlash will be better for the country in the long run. Reagan’s success initially owed much to Carter. Nonetheless, hoping for a future liberty in response to current tyranny is a poor way to advance a nation.