Simple ideas? Sure.

Implementable? Virtually impossible considering the current sentiment of America’s citizens and politicians. But when has that stopped me from inching my way out on the thorny limbs of unpopular political ideas?

First, presidential elections shouldn’t be decided by – to put it as politely as I can – “uninformed” voters. Here’s who’s voting for our presidents... and mind you, these are our vaunted college students:

Since we can’t really mandate political and news awareness among all stripes of voter, the simplest way to achieve at least some awareness is to raise the eligible voting age to somewhere between 30 to 35 years old. Exceptions would be granted to those who are serving in the military and veterans under that age. These folks are generally somewhat more aware of political and world events. In fact, they should be first in line because they (most of them anyway) serve the nation. Not that our adults are all swifties, but by 35 you've been let down by enough politicians that you become a bit more willing to wonder if your favorite candidate or party is shining you on (duh). Of course, voters must be U.S. citizens and show proof of age or something.

I am more than twice that age. My children and grandchild probably find it difficult to believe but once upon a time, I was actually young. As a 21-year-old political know-nothing, I know I and all my young friends were pretty much clueless and would have made the folks in that video look like a bunch of Karl Roves. My first opportunity to vote was JFK versus Goldwater.

Typically, youthful votes are based on emotion rather than reason and experience. If candidates or their campaigns promise to pay off young folks’ education debts, or take care of their rent or car payments, or free phones and the like, that candidate’s star will rise over the world of the young. The candidate’s actual record or ability to deliver the promise will not enter into the young voter’s decision.

The U.S. Constitution states in Clause 5, Qualifications for Office of President:

        Section 1, Article Two: ...no person shall be
eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five years...

Why? Experience, track record and maturity. Don’t we think voters should have at least some of those same qualifications to vote for the candidate who will best lead the nation?

Now, if that first suggestion is virtually impossible to pass, this next one will be met with shock and horror in Washington, DC, because it removes from at least one major Party their very reason for being.

If you are the recipient of any kind of social welfare, your eligibility to vote is suspended until such time as you can show you are no longer receiving these government benefits. Why? Check this out:

I’m not making any judgments about who is or isn’t qualified to receive social welfare, that’s a completely different issue for you to ponder.

But citizens simply cannot be allowed to vote themselves increased benefits (which, incidentally, is what Congress usually does for itself). Unchecked, the masses (and Congress) will always vote to fatten their own pocketbooks. This is a most cinical corrupting factor in how candidates run for the office. It destroys all sense of personal responsibility, ambition and patriotism in the masses. Isn’t that where we are now?

Is this the America our Founders envisioned? Or is it as Franklin warned when asked what kind of political system the Founders had formed... “A Republic, madam... if you can keep it.”
It appears we are having trouble keeping it. Isn’t it time we come to the aid of our great nation? I am telling you that we cannot help our beloved America by pretending what is true is not.



In 1742, Scottish philosopher David Hume described the importance of a free press; “The spirit of the people must frequently be roused, in order to curb the ambition of the court; and the dread of rousing the spirit must be employed to prevent that ambition. Nothing so effectual to this purpose as the liberty of the press by which all the learning, wit, and genius of the nation, may be employed on the side of freedom, and every one be animated to its defense.”

“The ambition of the court” today is beyond unacceptable – it is venal. Hume was not referring to a “court” of law, but the royal court... in our parlance, the U.S. Government. Its ugly tentacles have invaded virtually every facet of our lives, playing with trillions of tax dollars which disappear, without much objective scrutiny from the press, into a dark abyss. Ambition? If increasing our national debt to unprecedented levels... if deliberately, cynically, creating new generations of dependents just for votes... if “fundamentally changing” our nation and the way it works isn’t the kind of ambition Hume would say needs to be curbed, I don’t know what is.

“...The dread of rousing the spirit must be employed to prevent that ambition...” Obviously, there is little if any sense of dread in Washington, DC. If there is, it’s only the dread of not being invited to the next posh political party, or that lobbyists have lost your phone number. Our royals no longer fear the mainstream media will turn the people against them. If anything, they know the main stream media operates in full support of DC’s unbridled ambition. When mistakes are made, the MSM invents excuses. When plots are uncovered, the MSM buries them. Ever since it became ideologically dominated by the Left, America’s MSM has become a tool for that ideology, soul mates of Stalin’s “useful idiots,” working toward the day when one of their own would capture the White House. That day came with the election of our current Commander-in-Chief whose only dread seems to be using the military he supposedly commands.

A 2014 study by Indiana University School of Journalism found that just 7% of all journalists identified themselves as Republican, or conservative. That’s about one conservative among every 15 journalists! If it were not for the internet and one cable channel, we would have a virtual one-sided view of the machinations of Washington, DC. A situation even Joe Stalin might envy.

But, we are told, the internet is full of conservative sites spinning like unscrewing right wing nuts. May be. Unfortunately they are only preaching to their choir. It’s the vaunted “independent” voter who needs to at least hear what the right side has to say. “Conservatism” may be a word which frightens many, but surely – before this nation becomes a one-party, one-philosophy nation – the Right deserves to be at least heard by the nation’s independent voters.

“...Nothing so effectual to this purpose as the liberty of the press by which all the learning, wit, and genius of the nation, may be employed on the side of freedom, and every one be animated to its defense.” 

The safety of the hive should not be the driving force behind the press... a search for truth, or at least facts, should be. The press is the medium by which the genius of our nation (now buried under mountains of regulations) is roused to the cause of freedom and progress. It is now working diligently to repress any such progress outside the rigid orthodoxy of the Left.

Edmund Burke said “There are Three Estates in Parliament; but in the reporters’ gallery yonder, there sits a Fourth Estate more important far than they all.” We do not need a political revolution in America so much as we need a revolutionary demand for an unbiased Fourth Estate. A boycott of bias! The press has been dominated by that 93% for so many decades now that the spirit of the American people has become inured, numbed, no longer willing or able to produce proper dread in Washington, DC.

America’s mainstream media, which too many voters still believe is telling them the truth, has become an out-and-out propaganda mill, a willing partner in the unbridled ambition of Washington, DC. Owned by a small number of wealthy elites, the corporate news has sold itself to the royal court for a ride on its gravy train, which Hume and all sensible people know is never free.



President Obama claims he is dedicated to avoiding the mistakes his predecessor George Bush made in the Middle East. Obama is looking at the mistakes, but he is looking at the wrong mistakes.

GW showed his gall by telling Israel to hurry up and get the job done in Lebanon. Lord! This is the same cowboy who early on wouldn’t pull his own trigger in Iraq because he was concerned about matters of conscience, or history, or how many people on both sides may have been killed. Yes, I’ll say what I have always thought – “Shock and Awe” was just a pr phrase. Few were shocked because it was announced beforehand. And I wasn’t awed like I was when I saw the fire-bombing of Dresden or the mushroom clouds on Bikini.

Maybe it was GW’s business school training... like the coarse where CEOs of large corporations order a subsidiary company to do their dirty work so the CEOs can look good at the next annual meeting of the stockholders. Yet all this hesitancy did was cause another protracted pretend-war, where we try to train the untrainable, where the number of casualties was likely to be the same had he gotten serious about winning. The difference is GW’s way spread the funerals out for all sides over years instead of weeks.

In the ways of war, this is indefensible. Slow, casualty-free victory is, in itself, a stupid strategy based only on polling politics. In the end, casualties mount on both sides; the war on the ground, and the war in the polls are both lost.

When Bush finally listened to his military leaders, the Iraq “surge” worked. But what was won, was then lost by the new “President elected to end wars, not start them.”

President Obama is playing a variation of this stupid, dangerous game. The Iraq action lasted longer than World War II when the US defeated the combined forces of the Nazis and the Japanese. And now a wider Middle Eastern conflict has flared up right under Obama’s upturned nose.

Granted, in WWII we had Churchill and Stalin’s help. Two very big guns. FDR and Harry Truman would certainly tell Obama there is no victory in a pretend war, and not to take his gun out of its holster unless he has the will to pull the trigger. Don’t be waving your pea-shooter around like Deputy Barney Fife, expecting your enemy to quake in fear. They won't. Don’t tell your enemy the gun isn’t fully loaded, and on exactly which date you will re-holster it. The enemy will snap at your ankles and bloody you up because they believe you won’t pull the trigger for fear of criticism from abroad and from within.

Hitler and Tojo’s generals may have believed America didn’t have the stomach for war. But FDR fooled them, and when it came to High Noon, Harry Truman, that old haberdasher from Missouri, didn’t give a damn what the world thought – he pulled the biggest damn trigger that had ever been pulled in the history of war, scaring the bejeezus out of them all. Voila! The war ended. And America emerged as the most powerful nation in the history of the world. A status which seems to so upset our current president.

Ever since WWII, many of America’s males have been so emasculated by their PC mommies, PC teachers, PC girlfriends and PC media, that they find it impossible to put their finger on the trigger, no less actually pull it. So our presidents send our military forces here and there but with their hands tied behind their backs. Our presidents seem to fear it is they, not our enemies, who will face “justice” in some World Kangaroo Court. President Truman and his Generals Eisenhower, MacArthur and Patton undoubtedly would think we have lost all sense of reason if they could see what we have done to the American military.

Of course some claim that had Gore or Kerry been president instead of Bush, we would not be in these wars. Why, they seem to believe, even Israel and her neighbors would all be at peace today. Because the Left gives the enemy everything it wants just to calm the savage beast. But we all know the ways of Middle Eastern radical politics. As soon as they cash your check, they buy better rockets and start in again until you give more. The same with North Korea. All enemies of liberal States have learned the drill. Countries like America, who can afford it, will try to pacify you with gifts. If history is any predictor, that’s what Gore or Kerry would have done. Funnel money and whatever else it took to Middle Eastern radicals and all the others around the world. Money, technology – recall the “secret” technology transferred to our adversaries in one way or another during the Clinton years – whatever they could have hidden under the table, while on top of the table the conflicts are debated endlessly at the UN whose only real expertise is raping our treasury.

So, while President Bush may have acted like a bumbling breakfast of cornpone – he at least recognized that you can’t buy peace from terrorists.

Don't get me wrong. Don't go to war except as a last resort! I would prefer to see us revise our laws and assassinate radical leaders and despots in their sleep than to see more of our boys die or be physically and mentally disfigured for life. But if you have to go to war, the best way to do it is fast. Get it done as quickly and as devastatingly as possible.

GW should have taken a clue from Harry Truman and his generals – even from his own father! And now President Obama needs to think about this. When you are in a real war, not a pretend war, you are going to lose men and you are unavoidably going to kill civilians. You can spread it out over time and maybe pr-wise it doesn’t look as bad as if you do it all at once. But doing it all at once has the uncanny effect of scaring your enemy into submission. When Harry Truman sent the Enola Gay over Hiroshima, he believed even the most war hardened Japanese would cave when that B29 unleashed the light in God's eye, and they felt the blistering shockwave which changed the world forever. Oh, some still argue that Little Boy and Fat Man weren't the determining factors that ended the war. Maybe it was augmented by the USSR’s declaration of war against Japan which by that time had been pounded mercilessly by convention bombs. Either way, faced with the certainty of an apocalypse, the proud Japanese decided enough death was enough. There can be no doubt dread of B29s overhead hastened the end of the war.

Our current president might take a lesson from Harry Truman. When faced with the choice between funerals on our side or the other side, he chose them. Harry had the guts to pull the trigger and get it over with. Our president might at least try to find his manhood, stop listening to the mommy-thinkers who surround him; he should pay attention to his generals, and to history.



Watching President Obama deliver his address to the nation, I couldn’t help looking past the serious facial expressions to the tentative look in his eyes. As if every fiber of his being hated going as far as he was forced to by political circumstances. Mr. President, your lips were saying yes, but your eyes didn't agree.

Perhaps it is my own Roman blood which makes me believe the contrast between how a warrior leader such as Caesar and President Obama would have speechified might illustrate the reasons we are in the mess we are in.

“My countrymen. I have today sent John Kerry to meet face to face with the leaders of our enemy.

“I have instructed Secretary Kerry to make a peace offering to these sub-humans. My offer is simple and firm. If they will abandon their goal to meet us in New York and to raise their flag over the White House; if they will return their stolen weapons and disband in the next ten days, we will, in exchange, not do the following.

“We will not rain fire and brimstone down on them wherever they are and wherever they flee. We won't light up the desert and fuse the very sand they run on.

“We will not use our earthquake generators to tumble the mountains down on them when they run to the caves of Pakistan.

“We will not capture in chains the few who manage to escape the holocaust, drag them to North Korea or any nation which still finds human bondage acceptable, where they will work in the mines, longing for death every minute of the rest of their miserable lives. We will not have to instruct the new slave holders to pair them up with goats and camels (only this time it will be the goats and camels who are on top).

[Loud cheers from the audience]

“We will not march their leaders naked through the streets of cities they have held in terror, allowing children and women to spit, spray pig’s blood and goat dung on them before crucifying these leaders, letting their bodies rot until vultures pick their bones clean.

“We won’t deliver their hollowed skulls to other terror enablers, whether local bullies or leaders of large nations, to serve as a warning to any future miscreants who begin thinking “caliphate” again.

“We won’t arm their women with orders to shoot dead and castrate any husband or father who attempts to mistreat or deny them the ordinary opportunities and courtesies women in the civilized world take for granted.

“We won’t track down every last jihadist soul lurking in the shadows of America, load them onto cargo planes, fly them across the Atlantic and dump them from 25 thousand feet into the Sargasso Sea where their bodies can be enjoyed by the fish.

“We won’t arrest their financial supporters and shove them feet-first into wood shredders nor use the resulting jelly to feed pigs and hogs.

“If their leaders do not accept Secretary Kerry’s offer, he will suggest to them that they had better begin praying for legions and legions of fresh virgins in their heaven because they are going to run out of them very quickly.

“However, knowing my history and my philosophy that new secret weapons, unused, do us no good, I have all confidence our enemies will embrace our terms. If not, the battle will be glorious. And brief.

“My strategy is simple: tis better to be feared than loved. The only flag which will ever fly over the White House is Old Glory.

[Loud cheering from all members of the Senate, House and the Media. After all, it’s Caesar, nobody wants to swim with the sharks]

“I bid you all a good night. Benedictus Deus, Civitates Foederatae Americae!”

It may seem to my gentle readers that Caesar’s way is as harsh as Obama’s is milquetoast. But in this situation, somewhere between is what Americans expect, and what myth demands.



President Obama made a calculated campaign promise; if elected, he would be a president who ended wars... unlike his predecessor who started them.

It appears, however, that the world’s belligerents are laughing at this naive promise, taunting the Peace Prize winner. As I wrote in an earlier post, major wars don’t begin spontaneously, water doesn’t boil over until the temperature rises beneath the surface. And, as Machiavelli warned, the longer one side waits to join the battle, the more advantage is given to the enemy. This is where we are now, and this is what our president cannot come to grips with. He has no strategic vision or plan to deal with the volcanic eruptions the world is experiencing. It simply doesn’t fit his narrative.

With some exceptions, American sentiment has generally been against war during the Obama years. So far. But with the ugly turn of events in the Middle East, with the rise of ISIS, even die-hard Obama supporters are beginning to get itchy. It’s simple; only an ostrich can continue to pretend there isn’t an organized army of terrorists at war in the Middle East, and who have plainly stated in gory videos that they plan to export terror to “a city near you.” Our military “experts” see a vicious enemy vastly better organized, funded and capable than before. Even Pope Francis has weighed in with finality: they must be stopped. What does our ridiculous president, after hearing this very real threat, do? Invites thousands of potential terrorists to a city near you!

Obama’s “JV team” of terrorists broadcasts a video threatening to behead the president. Does he think they won’t try?

I vividly remember what the Sisters of Charity warned us students at our Catholic grade school in the 1940’s: some day Communists would take over America, would ask each of us what religion we were, and if we said we were a Christian, we would be killed. It appears the Sisters were right about the targets... they just got the wrong anti-Christian fanatics.

Unless there is a precarious allying among America, the willing European nations, Israel and Russia, the terrorist rampage will go on for decades. If not here, then there, or wherever they find an opening.

And there-in lies the irony of Obama’s presidency. In the end, unless he can forestall the inevitable until his term is over (and the next president gets stuck with the problem), America will have to join the battle. But why does the President continue to play the part of the ostrich, pretending that if he keeps his head buried in some sand trap it will all blow over?

Many Americans believe the President is at least sympathetic to Islam. Some Americans believe he is muslim. Some even believe he is doing everything he can to allow radical Islam to grow. Why do they think this? Because his inaction seems inscrutable. He take stands on issues which in some way seem to contribute to the success of what most traditional Americans see as the “bringing down” of America. Obama and his people are very clever at shading these stands and actions so they can be spun either way, depending upon your politics.

Up till now, the mass media and most Obama supporters seem to buy into the “it’s okay” spin. But how can you possibly explain the curious drive to allow virtually anybody, including the aforementioned terrorists, who can make it across our southern border to not only stay in America, but to get lost among our population – with benefits which many traditional Americans don’t have? Cloward-Piven’s “overload the system to break it down?” Or maybe to insure more votes for his Party? Only if you are willing to believe the Democratic Party has given up on African-Americans. But that is another subject.

It certainly seems the Obama administration has crafted devious methods for allowing terrorists into the United States, for funneling arms and funds to our enemies, and skirted any need for consulting with Congress. It certainly seems like President Putin is laughing at Obama’s feckless warnings and sanctions. Obama has been reducing the size of our military in the face of increased threats from abroad. The President had delayed and obfuscated any meaningful action to stop the progress of terror. In his rhetoric, they are not enemies. They are not even threats. Has he done anything to affect the release of the Pakistani being imprisoned in that country for helping the U.S. get to Bin Laden? Is even that too difficult a decision for Obama to make?

American sentiment is rapidly turning. The Pope is right. Radicals, terrorists, whatever you want to call them, have to be stopped and we all know it. History demands pay her now, or pay her later. As we have seen over and over, later costs far more. And, ironically, it is the man who was raised in muslim Indonesia, who thought its call to prayer was the most beautiful sound he ever heard; it is President Barack Obama who will have to stop the terrorists. Unless, as previously stated, he can stall off the decision until the next president is sworn in. Then President Peace can blame Bush for getting us into the mess, and blame the next president for taking us to war again.

Granted, one doesn’t easily or quickly go against one’s own upbringing, background and belief system. Imagine if JFK had to go to war against Catholic Ireland. Or “W” was forced to go to war against Protestant England.

But history doesn’t give a whit for sentiment. Unpredictable, and usually unwelcome events are what make a president’s legacy. If terrible evil threatens the U.S., it must be stopped. When the threat comes, whoever is our Commander-in-Chief has a sworn and sacred duty to protect The United States of America.