Your View - Politics Archives

While listening to a talk radio show the other day I noticed some characteristics that I have seen in a few of my less promising students. The fundamentals of a good debate allow each debater to make a point. Then the other side has a chance to make a point and the debaters alternate back and forth in trying to rebut each point. It goes back and forth until the debate is over.

The topic of a debated issue does not matter, however the individual that can support his side of an issue with "facts" has a substantial advantage over his opponent.

In each debate, there is a judge. The judge can be an individual, such as me in my classes, a group of judges, or the voters as in a political debate. Points are supposedly given and taken away based on what the individual says. When a debater makes a statement and proceeds to support it with facts, he is said to have made his point. However, if the opposition is successful in refuting the debater's initial statement the point is awarded to the other side. This is exactly what happens in a courtroom when lawyers are arguing a case.

When in a debate, an individual wanders off topic the debate moderator (judge in a courtroom) is suppose to stop the wayward speaker and require him to return to the topic. Likewise when politicians debate one another, hopefully the isteners will tend to value less the speakers if he or she strays for their main point without making any connection.

While listening to a radio debate recently, I noticed a few characteristics that I find in a few of my less than promising students (those that eventually flunk out). These individuals, when presented with very logical points for which they have no rebuttal, tend to start shouting and bringing in extraneous babble and try to change the subject.

In a broadcast political debate, the moderator trying to exercise common courtesy allows far too much latitude to each speaker. If a judge allowed this type of digression, the trials would never end. The moderator (media personality) is hoping that the listeners will do the adding and subtracting of points, based on what the individual says.

Likewise, logical individuals will tend to withhold their votes from the speaker that tries to obscure the issue with idle ramblings. There are some points that George Bush has already made that are irrefutable with fact. The Democrat speakers are just trying to shift the focus of a debate to some other topic that he or she feels are more suitable to their liking.

The Democrats should not waste their time trying to debate George Bush about the benefits of his tax cuts, the benefits to the United States of his military action, and his sincerity of his intent to safe guard the nation. By standing upon a stage and making bellicose pontifications about what George Bush has done wrong, while NEVER being specific about what they will do in the future they are only are losing voters to the Bush camp.

Originally posted from 11-07-04 to 11-14-04
Suggestions For The True Believers
by Dr. M. Sidney Wallace

Like Al Gore, John Kerry’s name will be written on the wall of the socialist hall of fame when the bathrooms are completed. By offering himself on the sacrificial alter of American politics; John F. Kerry has performed the ultimate sacrifice for the Queen Mother. She knew the time was not right to challenge the Bush dynasty and wanted to wait until the 2008 election when she will be asked to save the nation after eight years of Bush free enterprise economics.

The Queen Mother knows that after eight years of a Bush administration, all Democrats, and especially the southern Democrats that deserted the party in 2004, will come back to the socialist philosophy of Roosevelt, Johnson, Marx, and Lenin. There will be such a public outcry for help that there may not even be a need for an election.

She knows the American public has not suffered enough yet to make the final break with the system that has caused so much pain and suffering for so many years. For the next four years our foot solders must be ready for any opportunity to focus attention on the hardships imposed on their brother worker by a free enterprise economy that expects everyone to work for what he receives. Just like the decedents of Southern confederate solders that are still fighting the Civil War after 125 years, true socialist democrats must fight on until they are victorious. Think about this the next time you whistle "Dixie."

Social Democrat men - Join the United States Army or Marine Corp and demand your right to go to Iraq. There is no better place to spread our socialist philosophy than in a new country that is just getting a taste of freedom. Off duty, make friends with the local Muslims terrorist and continue to tell them that George Bush only wants their oil and doesn’t care what happens to them after he gets it. While in basic training, if your drill instructor tries to preach “free enterprise” philosophy, just stand your ground and tell him he is not suppose to be politically influencing new recruits and I am sure that he will stop immediately.

Committed Democrat women - Join a convent or evangelical commune and encourage more promiscuous actives. Show them that having sex with many men is forward thinking. Prove that right wing Christians do not know what they are sermonizing about. Remember the motto from our Queen in the sixties, “If it feels good, do it.” When other nations see how happy our workers are they will want to change to our socialized form of government.

Homosexual brothers and sisters - Try remodeling that old closet to make it more comfortable for those long hours that you will need to hibernate until Barney Frank has a chance to convince the nation of your status as victims.

For those that think the nation’s workers need to pay more taxes - Lead by example and do not file a tax return requesting a refund.

For those unemployed - Stop looking for work and watch how President Bush squirms as he tries to figure out how to pay “your” bills.

Students in college - Demand your school offer more classes in critical subjects like “Creative Family Welfare Planning, Social Readjustment Of Our Youth Without Parental Involvement, and Leisure Activities For The Unemployed.” If you are having problems with grades in other classes like math, sciences, and history, talk with your education union representative about becoming a public school teacher.

George Bush has already laid out his free enterprise agenda, which calls for radical changes in the Social Security System and Tax Reform. Join with other loyal supporters and protest any proposals. Don’t be tricked into looking at the facts, just protest any, and all suggestions. If you all stay the course your will have our Queen Mother Hillary to lead us in the very near future.

Originally posted from 10-24-04 to 10-31-04
Why Are Good People Liberals?
by H. Scott Van Dyke

If you are a conservative, think about it for a minute: What would compel someone who, for all intense and purposes is just like you, to have such a convoluted view of politics? I mean, after all they are your neighbors, coworkers, and friends. We spend time socializing with them .We get together in our homes and spend time with them in and out of work. We raise our children together, taking them to sports and school functions. Our close friends even become confidants and people who we share our lives with. They seem to be just like us, and yet when you get right down to it, their politics run totally against all that we believe in. As a matter of fact they are the enemy!

The politicians they vote for are, without question, anti-American. All you have to do is look at their voting records and it is clear. The people they put into office vote against our country, and the judges that they appoint are hostile to the very Constitution that they are bound to protect.

Now, it is very hard to understand because they don’t look like Socialists. They don’t march around like Communists, waving red flags with hammers and sickles on them. Yet they vote for politicians who are. What could possibly be the explanation? They live in the same country with the same freedoms as we do, and have just as much to lose if we lose those freedoms. So how can they follow and support tyrants like John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and Tom Daschle, and scoundrels like Bill and Hillary Clinton?

Are these people we know really in support of killing hundreds of thousand babies a year? Do they really believe that the thousands of years of the traditional family should be replaced by not only allowing homosexuals to marry but to also remove the father? Do they really believe that our Constitution should be replaced by activist judges who are accountable to no one to guide our country? Do they really believe all of the distortions, lies and deceit coming from their candidates? Or could there be something else that makes them ignore all of these things, kind of like the old "see no evil, hear no evil?"

I have wondered about this for many years and have been at a loss to explain it until recently. I had some suspicions and ideas, but was unable to put it together. After all, when you try to have an honest discussion about issues with these seemingly normal people, they fly off the handle every time. As soon as you try to pin them down on an issue, they start spewing all manner of personal insults towards you and your political beliefs, and then move into the conspiracy theory realm. You’ve heard them: How Vice President Bush cut a deal with the Iranians to hold the hostages until Ronald Reagan stole the election. How "W" used the Supreme Court to steal the last election from Al Gore. How the CIA used AIDS to infect blacks. How Newt Gingrich planed to starve our children by ending the school lunch program, and our Senior Citizens by letting Social Security die on the vine, and on and on and on.

It then occurred to me that they have no intentions of discussing issues at all. Why is their response so inappropriate and hostile? What are they afraid of and why? As I thought about it, the answer came to me. They are not interested in the facts or the truth. There is something which is more important to them than the truth. Now the question is: What could be so important to these people that they are willing to give up their very freedoms to obtain it?

Well, I have noticed something in talking to liberals. Call it a trend or a similarity if you will. If you listen to a Liberal long enough, sooner or later you will catch it. You have to be looking for it or you will miss it hidden in all of the hype and sophistry, but it is there: the reason, the justification, the overriding excuse for their irrational behavior. I call it the "what’s in it for me" syndrome. It's hidden in there; you will hear them say it. "But when Republicans are in office I lose…" whatever it is. "They will steal my Social Security, the base will close and I’ll lose my benefits, I’ll lose the contract, they will do away with my program, I won’t qualify for assistance, I won’t get the scholarship, I’ll lose some of my union benefits, I’ll lose my health care benefits..." and on and on and on. That’s right. When Democrats are in power, the money flows! The social programs flourish and the giveaways abound.

The bottom line is that these people are all lined up at the great teat of the Socialist Party in this country in one way or another, and even though they would never admit it, they will overlook anything in order to receive their security. Damn the nation and its people who have to slave to pay the taxes for their security. Damn those who gave their very lives to make this a free and great nation. Damn those rugged individuals who, through great personal cost, set this nation on the road to freedom. They have become as slaves to their master to receive whatever their poison no matter what the cost, even if that cost is lost Liberty. They are willing to turn the other way and let this country fall into the hands of Communists in order to get their thirty pieces of silver.

Now you may disagree, but the next time you are talking with a Liberal listen closely. You just may hear it tucked deep in their conversation. Listen...

Originally posted from 10-17-04 to 10-24-04
Kerry - A Man With Vision
by Dr. M. Sidney Wallace

I watched all three debates between President George Bush and Senator John Kerry. I will admit that at the beginning I was inclined to vote for the best of the two candidates, but I was willing to keep an open mind until after the debates. I personally like the incumbent President’s “no nonsense” way of speaking. However, after watching the debates very closely, I would like to share a few points in Kerry’s favor.

Senator Kerry is a very erudite and well-spoken man. In a debate he shines like a bright twinkling star in the night sky when compared to a West Texas ranch hand. He almost certainly would do well while conversing in French in almost any court in Europe. He surely would have very little difficulty convincing the French and Germans that their ideas were best for America. George Bush, on the other hand, narrow-mindedly will only consider what is best for the United States.

During the final debate, George Bush stated that improving the quality of an individual’s education was the answer to helping that individual to finding new and better jobs. This approach on the surface seems reasonable, after all someone flipping burgers or digging a ditch might do a good job if they knew how to construct a simple sentence or balance a checkbook. At this, Senator Kerry retorted that all the unemployed workers needed was a steady stream of government money until their old jobs returned from overseas. He feels that certain individuals need to learn their place in our society, and that the government and unions can best determine that.

John Kerry accused President Bush of not having any ideas for America. This criticism doesn’t seem to hold water when one tests George Bush’s record against what he said he was going to do in his inaugural address in 2000. However, when John Kerry compares these accomplishments to his great litany of complaints about the things wrong with America, one has to wonder where the Senator has been for the past four years.

At the close of the second debate, John Kerry said: "I ask each of you just to look into your hearts, look into your guts. Gut-check time.”

When I close my eyes, I see John Kerry’s picture on the “wall of honor” in Hanoi for his grand defense of America in his youth.

George Bush may not be as sophisticated and polished as “Frenchy,” but he puts the United States first, and is one hell of a lot better leader.

Originally posted from 10-10-04 to 10-17-04
NEA Pro-Dem But One Bush Photo Stirs the Partisan Pot
by Nancy Salvato

It’s probably common knowledge by now that a 33-year old mom and middle school English teacher, Shiba Pillai-Diaz of Crossroads South Elementary School in Monmouth Junction Middle School, walked out on her job after she was told by her Asst. Principal, Mark Daniels, to remove a picture of President Bush from her classroom. She was told that if she cared about her employment, she would accommodate the request.

The White House-issued photo of the Bushes was pinned to a bulletin board that held portraits of George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and a copy of the Constitution. The request to take it down was in response to some parents who, after objecting to the picture hanging in their children’s classroom during a back to school parent teacher conference, gave her an ultimatum to either hang a picture of John Kerry beside it or to take it down.

The Principal, Jim Warfel, took a position that she was making a political statement by having a picture of the current Republican president in her classroom. He accused her of “inflammatory politics” and causing disruption and hatred” before telling her to hand over her keys and “get out” of the building. It gets worse. The Superintendent, Gary McCartney, warned her against telling the story to the press. He alluded to the idea that she would be choosing between her job and her principles.

There is a remote possibility that Ms. Pillai-Diaz was perhaps subconsciously promoting President Bush’s run for reelection by exhibiting his photo on her wall, a better likelihood is that his photo was displayed because he is the sitting President of the United States and therefore should be hanging in every classroom. However, the whole incident serves to bring to the forefront a much more serious problem involving the National Education Association (NEA).

The fact is that the NEA has been practicing partisan politics for 25 years. They have been using union members’ dues (without their acquiescence) to pay for the presidential candidacies of Democrats as well as promote liberal leaning policy, without any serious challenge from the teacher members, school administrators, or the public. Is the public school system a place where political beliefs can be treated equitably? Should the schools be written off as traditionally liberal without a fight?

Last Spring I received boatloads of literature in my school e-mail promoting the election of Gery Chico, a Democrat running for the IL Senate. When I inquired about whether a school system should allow a partisan campaign via e-mail, I was told it was perfectly acceptable for the teachers to be barraged by cyber propaganda telling them to endorse a candidate for office.

A double standard, you say? You bet. Most on-line bloggers commented that if Bill Clinton’s picture had been displayed on a wall, not a remark would have been said about the divisive nature of the teacher who hung his photo on the wall. But an endorsement of George W. Bush in the confines of the education community is sure to elicit disapproval.

The NEA has run a very effective campaign to discredit our sitting president because he has challenged the “soft bigotry of low expectations” which occurred on “their watch.” The status quo they’ve created is their lifeline and they see it slowly drifting away. To that end, they have convinced those associated with the educational community (PTA, teachers, administrators) that all of the problems can be resolved by more money and smaller class sizes. But that is simply not true.

Injecting some competition into the education market through school choice is the logical solution to any system bogged down by bureaucracy and inefficiency. Allowing students to transfer to independently run educational institutions rather than attend public schools which aren’t meeting the high expectations we should have for our most precious resource, is probably the most beneficial bi- product of the NCLB legislation. But making inroads into the public school system is kind of like trying to get the message out in the mainstream media. It’s that hard!

Nancy Salvato is a Research Associate with Americans for Limited Government. She is an experienced educator and an independent contractor with Prism Educational Consulting. She serves as Educational Liaison for Illinois’ 23rd Senatorial District. She works nationally and locally furthering the cause of Civic Education. Her writing is widely published on the internet and occasionally in print venues such as the Washington Times. Her opinions have been heard on select radio programs across the nation. Additionally, her writing has been recognized by the US Secretary of Education.

Originally posted from 10-03-04 to 10-10-04
I Will Scrap My Begging Bowl, Will You?
by Sergei Borglum Hoff

This writing will provide support for the patriots who are determined to restore our fundamental rights. For the well-meaning Americans who are fearful and clearly misinformed, significant attention is also directed towards their patriotic struggles. As for the pseudo-patriots who express contentment with the social engineering of their lives by an oppressive nanny-state, they will not benefit from reading further. Because of an inability to accept responsibility for their lives, these nationally exalted paragons of docility have by now bleated their way into the flock, shepherded towards the precipice. Until their grazing meadows of sweet-grass wither, they will not stray

My next statement is one of sincere admiration for the politically enlightened men and women who are further trustworthy and liberty-committed. Contrary to the commonly held notion, acts of bravery are not limited to those Americans within the public safety professions. While their efforts are meritorious and command nationwide gratitude, other heroes live and work in our midst, with the noble purpose of restoring integrity to our Constitutional Republic. Such individuals are well aware of the message that I am about to deliver. These honorable people are confident and courageous enough to present the truth without prompting from anyone. Their voices will never be stilled or patriotic endeavors defeated.

Yet, their sincerity of purpose and words of wisdom are seldom remembered and at no time applauded. Unlike the submissive majority, these genuine patriots are representative of our founding intent, sovereign dignity, and national strength. For them, enslavement by our government will never be an acceptable condition of life. They will remain free, or perish. If we are truly concerned Americans with national pride and clear conscience, then how can we not appreciate the value of their courageous efforts, and further honor such commitments to freedom and human rights? Ashamedly, we do not!

Seldom are there more disturbing patriotic obligations than challenging acts of betrayal by our leaders and other public servants. This is particularly true when such perfidious and life threatening deeds draw unnatural responses of either praise or timidity from the injured citizenry. Given the sweeping abnormality of the people's behavior and magnitude of federal interference within our daily lives, concerned yet lesser persistent defenders of our founding principles will despairingly and wrongly conclude that it is time to surrender their freedoms. As for my response, I refuse to fearfully sit in this stinking puddle of national humiliation, and be browbeaten by bureaucratic hoodlums with titles that suggest honorable intent. As a sovereign American citizen my stance was foreordained; I shall not yield.

The very real dangers now facing our children demand that I put forth the following challenge:

Upon reading the next several lines, many individuals, not giving the personal and national ramifications of our constitutional crisis adequate thought, will label me un-American or unpatriotic for publicly expressing my unpopular views. A number of loyal, resolute, and knowledgeable Americans that speak in a similar vein are now under condemnation by the unenlightened masses, and two masterful weavers of disinformation—government propagandists and the mainstream news media. They have indeed spun a lengthy mythical yarn.

For the past forty years, I have witnessed a federal invasion of fifty sovereign states and the dismantling of our Bill of Rights by politicians and judges behaving in an unconstitutional and rebellious manner. Enough! I will scrap my begging bowl, and refuse to humbly ask that my unalienable rights be honored. Never again will I ignore my guiding principles or surrender my liberties, and be governed by officials with ambitions unworthy of defense, not one virtue to share with the people, and no shame for their betrayals. Their game of totalitarian chess has continued far too long, and it is time for the people of courage and independence to checkmate these elitist scoundrels.

Having rejected our intellectual capacity for reason and wisdom, we are insanely committing national suicide by following this out of control government, propelled by tyrannical public servants. Indeed, expressing blind faith in our politicians is certainly no indication of intellectual brilliance. Nor will such trust in federal agencies ever soar to the heights of commonsense.

Be always mindful that American politicians are excessively compensated public servants, not ennobled dandies from the Royal court. Scrap the begging bowl! Never kneel or stand in awe while instructing these servants on their duties. Our attitudes towards politicians must immediately change. Never request that the Constitution be obeyed. Demand! They are our servants! How much more illumination does this fact need before it can be readily grasped by the people? We are not subjects of a kingdom, and our attitude of subservience is repulsive to liberty-committed patriots.

As citizens and constitutional overseers of governmental powers, we must authoritatively voice our constitutionally supported warnings to these servants of the people. We should never tolerate their broken campaign promises or lack of constitutional compliance. We would not retain the services of any other incompetent, uncooperative, or arrogant employee. Therefore, it is absurd for us to accept saboteurs, oath-breakers, and betrayers of the public confidence.

Our Founding Fathers did not endure the abuses of a tyrannical government and learn nothing. Their constitutional creation is not a document of government sanctioned privileges, to be allotted out by contemporary miscreants in office. Ingeniously, they provided us with the Bill of Rights, which protects our Creator's gift of liberty.

The Constitution was conceived by the people and for the people, placing literal and enforceable limitations upon government. Additionally, our Constitution is not symbolic of reluctant submission to individual liberties. To the contrary, our Founding Fathers heartedly endorsed the attributes of self-responsibility and individualism. Nor was the Constitution ever intended to be—as Socialist activism so absurdly argues—"a living, breathing document" with the potential of transforming unalienable rights into privileges. Enforcement of constitutional principles is our defense against tyranny.

In accordance with my understanding of their intent and doctrines, the spirits of our founders are troubled as this formerly brave populace now lives in fear and under the yoke of an oppressive Socialist government, where our national and individual sovereignty flutters precariously in the wind. They behold our government as wasteful, incompetent, corrupt, and obscene.

Our fathers grieve as they further see this once noble nation of pioneering and patriotic citizens now betrayed by oath-breaking politicians, intrusive federal bureaucrats, and a warmongering president whose designedly false accusations are responsible for the maiming and slaughter of thousands. Not only does our Attorney General publicly advocate the use of detention camps for U. S. citizens suspected as having terrorist associations, but the humiliation and torture of helpless war prisoners is the expedient directive of the day. Tragically for our children and theirs, we the people have become blind to the corrupting leaders of our "Homeland."

The establishment of our Constitution demanded the display of courage and vigilance by a well-armed citizenry; its continued integrity will always necessitate the same. Look around you. Be observant! Question all actions of government and propaganda from the unethical news media. Fear, denials, and escapism will never reward us with liberty; every gain demands a sacrifice. The original patriotic spirit of revolutionary America must be revived both within our hearts and national consciousness.

If not already aware that the Declaration of Independence was directed towards King George the Third, I would be convinced that the signers were addressing our own suffocating government. Our government, in its oppression of the people that formed it, has far exceeded the tyranny of Britain. As a citizen of this misused nation, my duty requires that I ask if it is now time for "the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government?" Do we the people need a second Declaration of Independence?

Our nation—intended as a Constitutional Republic—is in distress. And, not surprisingly, two paramount questions persist, requiring wisdom followed by courage, resolve, and strength. As did King George the Third, have our elected and appointed servants become so arrogant, and moved beyond the realm of reason, thereby compelling the formation of a new government by the people? If a new government is not called for, can we optimistically anticipate that restoration will be achieved through principled congressional intervention?

Regarding either potential, a large segment of the population shares similar anxieties yet remains ostensibly tranquil. For these patient but also determined individualists, the demoralizing and debilitating influences of Socialism will soon become unbearable. For the security of our nation, politicians must no longer ridicule such concerns as being irrelevant, nor be permitted to place their self-serving interests above the rights of the people and the Constitution. For a servant to mock his master's anger is damn unwise.

Millions of honorable Americans fear and mistrust our government for numerous valid reasons. Such nationwide anxieties were never intended by our Founding Fathers. As a mass consciousness, this environment is preposterous, unhealthy, and intolerable. We the people have foolishly nurtured this parasitic bureaucracy; it is now our duty to starve it. If we fail to acquire the necessary courage and fall short of this defensive responsibility, it will surely suck life's freedoms from our children and theirs.

To say that I hate government would be inaccurate; it is a machine. For the efficient performance of any society government is necessary, but its power and interference with the owner/operator must be constrained. I have never authorized bureaucrats and politicians to exercise a power of attorney over my professional or personal affairs. Nor have I ever relinquished my unalienable rights to the same in order to ensure my safety or for any other reason. All self-governing patriotic Americans are duty-bound to resist, and publicly condemn unconstitutional intrusions. As a beginning, the deceptively labeled "USA Patriot Act" must be repealed. It is unconstitutional and an insult to genuine American patriots.

There is nothing moral in our government forcibly taking from the earners and builders of this nation and then doling out the booty to the undeserving. This practice is socialistic, but properly called extortion. The United States Constitution does not recognize a Socialist form of government. Liberty has no correspondence with Socialism! Any suggestions or attempts to make changes in the direction of Socialism quell the "American Dream." Such behavior is nothing other than treason.

This nation belongs to the sovereign people; not the government. And government becomes the oppressor when we the people, supported by constitutional law, judge it to be so. Given the Republican and Democrat stranglehold on our government, I now judge it to be a subverter of constitutional law, a despoiler of morality, and a menace to my children.

An authority to enact and enforce unconstitutional laws does not legitimately or morally exist. Congress lacks the authority to enact laws that run contrary to the principles of our Constitution (Supreme Law of the Land). Such laws are a product of outlaw legislation, yet sustained by a corrupted U.S. Supreme Court and enforced with federal guns.

I shall further refuse to conceal my contempt for subjugators of a sovereign people. When they are not enslaving us through taxation, they are busily forging our chains of enfeebling and imprisoning Socialist legislation. They have disgraced and sold us into a lifetime of servitude to Bully-Brother. Their fraudulent conduct has become the rule rather than the exception. It must stop!

Self-preservation demands that these unstable mentalities be removed from office. Today, most politicians and bureaucrats are either unscrupulous or incompetent and should step down from their gilded pedestals. If they refuse, we the people must strive to constitutionally expel them through impeachment or the ballot box.

Our liberty-committed Fathers were slanderously labeled and prosecuted by the British Empire as traitors and terrorists. Many lost their property or were put to death as a result. The Republicans and Democrats, spurred by the "New World Order" policies of the current and past two administrations, will do no less in order to halt resistance to their unconstitutional behavior, and destroy our present-day defenders of freedom.

Do not permit this government and media to divert your attention elsewhere. Shun these bureaucrats and their Socialist media conspirators when they identify your next friend or foe. Consult your conscience before condemning genuine American patriots who are prepared to sacrifice, fight, and possibly die for freedom and the preservation of our nation's founding principles. Indeed, they stand between us and total enslavement. Many have already forfeited their upright reputations, basic comforts, and property; some have lost their lives. We must honor and support these brave patriots; they are our fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters.

Government is the master of prevarication, and can easily deceive the unwitting. It is doing so now in regards to pre-knowledge of the September 11th terrorist attacks. Do not accept my words as fact, but I beseech all honorable Americans to seek and demand the truth regarding government deception. Use your own intelligence to discover these facts. You take responsibility! You investigate! You be the judge! If we are sincere in our efforts to restore constitutional government, then we must be scrupulously informed, consistent, and thorough in every action.

The Republican and Democrat loyalists are destroying our nation. The November elections will provide us with the opportunity to topple George Bush from his imperial throne, oust all cowardly Representatives, and hold one-third of the Senators accountable for their un-American deeds. By reelecting over and over again, politicians with unchanging impoverished values, we cannot logically entertain thoughts of justice, freedom, or the constitutional restoration of government. Such expectations are childish at best. At the worst, they are insane.

Not one campaign trail that we have followed thus far has led us to a constitutional destination. If we expect positive change then it is essential that only genuine patriots with constitutionalist principles be elected. Neither George Bush nor John Kerry will ever honor the Presidential Oath of Office or the founding principles that many thousands of loyal Americans have died for since the year 1776.

Government is ponderous, and our constitutional foundation is now crumbling. Unless we the people quickly downsize government, the rubble that it sits upon will be our children's future.

If I ignore my guiding principles, they are of no benefit to me, my children, or our nation. Yes! I will scrap my begging bowl, and support Libertarian Party candidates. Will you?

Originally posted from 09-26-04 to 10-03-04
Philosophy Of The Man
by Dr. M. Sidney Wallace

I watched John Kerry's acceptance speech a couple of weeks ago. I also had an opportunity to hear President George W. Bush speak in person a few days ago.

I work every day with extremely complex systems, and have found the age-old KISS principal always works best. For those to young to know what the KISS principal is let me explain. KISS means "Keep It Simple Stupid"

During John Kerry's acceptance speech, he repeatedly spoke of how his
administration would solve every individual's problems. His government will determine your needs and provide for all. His two main points:

During President Bush's campaign speech, he repeatedly spoke of how his administration is getting out of your way and letting you solve your own unique problems. His two main points:

The Election in November comes down to a very simple choice. Kerry wants his government to determine when and how much allowance you
need. He wants to treat you like children and never require you take responsibility for yourself. Bush wants his government to get out of your way and let you determine for yourself what you need. He wants to treat you like adults and require you to take responsibility for yourself.

I hear it said every hour of every day that Frenchy does not have a plan for your future. I can guarantee that he does have a plan for "YOUR" future. Just take a look at what Frenchy sent me and decide for yourself when presented with the facts. It is short and to the point, so please don't jump to a conclusion until you have read the fine print.

The incredible energy that you, our supporters, have shown over the past five days has changed the way I'll look at campaigning forever. The veterans made me exceptionally proud when they lined up and saluted me as the bus rode by. Incidentally, tell them that I learned in Viet Nam that a proper salute should be with the right hand and all fingers outstretched. I noticed that most just had their middle finger extended.

As I accepted the nomination on Thursday, our supporters made history once again by contributing an astounding $5.7 million in one day, thus proving once again that Democrats have more money than sense. We asked for volunteers and 400,000 signed up for additional welfare benefits.

Today, we are releasing a new book, "Our Plan for America: Stronger at Home, Respected in the World," that details these plans and talks about the values and experiences behind them.

You are the heart of our campaign. That's why I wanted to offer you the first look at "Our Plan for America." I have included the Table of Contents for you.

As you can see above I learned a long time ago in Viet Nam that it is imperative to hire the right person for the job, and we both know just the right man to do it.

I hope to see you frequently in the next few months, but if I don't I will keep the paper mills humming by sending you my non-stop propaganda that the voters so eagerly await. Just like everyday, we want you to be right along side us fighting to keep the right man in the White House.

Originally posted from 08-15-04 to 08-22-04
An Open Letter to George W. Bush:
Your Character vs. Ronald Reagan's
by Sergei Borglum Hoff

I received your personalized campaign solicitation along with a photo signed by you and Laura. I immediately knew what should be done with your personal appeal for contributions and my vote, but what do you suggest that I do with this handsome family photo? I have one other personal photograph that does indeed inspire me to the heights of patriotic fervor. Unlike yours, it sits in a place of honor. It is a remembrance of my presentation to President Ronald Reagan in 1987. The President and I enjoyed a conversation regarding my granduncle Gutzon Borglum, and his creation of the most recognized patriotic monument in American history, Mount Rushmore National Memorial. President Reagan demonstrated his profound respect for our National Shrine, as he did with every representation of America's founding principles.

With sadness and a feeling of betrayal, I recall your visit to Mount Rushmore last year. Absent of shame, you defiled the stately significance of our National Memorial - along with the Constitution - by extorting fear driven support for your preemptive war on Iraq. As intended, your compelling yet misleading argument was presented under the approving gaze of four esteemed presidents. With illusion as the predetermined effect from this dynamic performance, the enthralled onlookers were further entertained by your receipt of posthumous support from our sculpted august leaders. With patriotic and family concern for the preserved dignity of our revered Memorial, I condemn your carnival-barker gimmicks. For reasons that should be clear to genuine American patriots - those who conscientiously challenge your un-American stance - I refuse to bestow the same honor on you. Along with your campaign promise of "compassionate conservatism," I suspect that your photo will find its way into my bursting bin of political prattle.

Clearly, Mr. President, your character is not that of Ronald Reagan. President Reagan was a man of sincerity, integrity, and loyalty. He was a man who will be remembered as a true American patriot. Unlike you, he was a man who was incapable of subverting the Supreme Law of the Land (U.S. Constitution) and never conceived a plot to undermine the Bill of Rights. Nor was he a warmonger with New World Order intent who wasted the lives of thousands for fraudulent, un-American purposes. Ronald Reagan earned our trust and allegiance by actually defending the principles of a free people; you exact nationwide obedience through fear and deception. Do not insult our intelligence and the memory of this noble American by endeavoring to identify your wanting character and self-serving ambitions with his patriotic principles and fortitude. Such an attempt falls into the realm of absurdity.

If you decide to become a steadfast defender of constitutional law, I will enthusiastically support you all the way. Tragically for us all, such a transformation of character and conscientious reevaluation of your ill-fated policies appear less likely by the day. Despite the euphoria of the national audience, your amplified words of "protecting our freedoms, equal justice, rule of law, limited government, the individual right to bear arms, securing our borders," and "necessary security measures," typify political trumpery at best. At worst, they are the reassurances of an Iscariot.

In opposition to the emotionally animated and nationally fashionable praise for your spectacles, I shall moreover submit that you have done nothing to downsize and cleanse our polluted government. Under your watch, government continues to balloon, and justice aimed towards rogue federal agents and the perfidious Clinton administration is further denied the people. Of supreme importance, violations of human rights have intensified, with the torture and humiliation of helpless war prisoners being the expedient directive of the day.

Regardless of a few seemingly beneficial offerings - for the titillation of the masses - there is no evidence of a relationship between your spoken defense of the Constitution and actions. Contrary to your well-publicized reassurances of government creditability, your manifestations are the completing steps of cronyism, totalitarianism, imperialism, and degenerative socialism. Mr. President, your contempt for the doctrines of our Founding Fathers has been revealed to all reasoning patriotic Americans of a wise and healthy "doubting Thomas" nature.

It requires intellectual honesty and strength of character in order to be faithful to the people and Constitution. Our Constitution deserves to be defended and revitalized. Instead, you disloyally chose to erode the law of our land with a fountain of unconstitutional legislation, an outpouring of enfeebling socialist programs, a violent flood of meddling federal police agencies, a torrent of self-destructive foreign policies, and a flow of sovereignty subversive United Nations treaties. Politically thrilling it all may be for the egotist, but your frequent minuets with Socialist senators, endless warmongering orations, and farcically scripted cowboy-machismo are unreliable strategies for the defense of our nation, individual freedom, justice, and the U.S. Constitution.

Regarding your personal appeal for contributions and votes, if the U.S. Constitution will not justify your actions, then why should you be supported by those patriotic Americans who love their families and sovereign nation? There is no greater danger to the principles and security of a free nation than a president with the unrivaled power to unilaterally declare war and a willingness to disobey the laws of our land.Unjustified preemptive assaults on the people of Iraq and the destruction of the Bill of Rights cannot convincingly be equated with virtuous intent and national security. In the eyes of the world, your imperialist agenda has discredited our once resolute Constitutional Republic. Our allies now view us with contempt or suspicion.

Further, along with their descendants, you have dishonored those patriots who sacrificed their lives within the past 228 years in the cause of individual freedom. The Constitution, representing the judgment of our Founding Fathers, has already convicted you of high crimes and misdemeanors; it remains for Congress (the people) to pronounce sentence.

I cannot speak for everyone, but eight years of the Clinton duet quenched my thirst for diversions and showmanship. Sir, you are an accomplished illusionist but a failed champion for our children. Indeed, along with your predecessor you have corrupted the Oval Office. Those of us who have penetrated your facade fear for our safety, liberties, and nation.

[signed] Sergei Borglum Hoff
Former staunch Republican, now supporting third party candidates

Let me tell you what I heard from John Kerry on Thursday night. Because the “would be” future president is so concerned with the security and safety of the nation, he delivered an acceptance speech using a very secure code. Not knowing the special encryption code has caused great confusion within the Republican Party, the Democrats and a few very interested Muslims.

Here are some of the reasons why I was so impressed with what John Kerry said at the Democrat National Convention. After all the horn-blowing by individuals who were financially indebted to the party, the next presidential hopeful John Kerry addressed the convention and the nation on what he would do when elected. I have broken the topic into specific areas to help in the understanding of the information.

Social Security - I will appoint a select Senate Committee to study the entire problem and make sweeping recommendations to improve. This has never been attempted before and may take at least two terms in the White House.

National Medical Program - I will ask Senator Hlilary Clinton to personally supervise a complete overhaul of the nation's medical systems. Once the nation has a chance to see how much better they will be with "Hillary Care," there will be a vast social outcry to ensure that every citizen lives forever.

Court Reform - I will ask Vice President John Edwards to personally supervise a complete overhaul of the entire national court system. With his new tort laws, there will finally be reason for rejoicing at the ACLU. The profession of law will once again become an honorable one.

Race Relations - I will ask Senator Robert Byrd to supervise a series of national rallies to recruit more minorities into the Klan. Once the "good old boys" know how much fun they can have with an in-house brother to play with, every chapter will want some.

National Defense – because of my vast personal experience of close to four months in Viet Nam leading massive armies into battle, I will personally take charge of the nation's defense. My first order will be to immediately direct that every military uniform have a bright blue United Nation patch sewn on the left sleeve. With this one action, other nations will immediately respect the forces of the United States. Our troops will no longer need to carry heavy weapons because all other nations will know that we mean them no harm. I will also direct the United Nations Flag to be flown above the American Flag on all national property. This will show our immigrants that we really care about their native lands as well as we do about our own.

Education - I will ask Senator Kennedy to completely re-write the nation's education system. Major points he will be focusing on will be the elimination of student psychological problems because of perceived failures. Senator Kennedy will assemble the top educator union officials to write new rules and regulations for the school systems to follow. Because of the importance of this subject, we will spare no cost to the local school systems.

Minimum Wage - I will immediately ask Congress to establish a national wage for all workers. This national wage will become a cap for everyone. All will be paid equally, no matter what he does or how much he produces. At the same time, I will require the Congress to establish a board of review that must approve any increase in cost of goods and services throughout the nation. When the nation finally gets control of its economy, its social problems will immediately go away.

Unemployment - I will ask my friends in Congress to reduce the number of hours an individual can work in one week to 20 hours. In this way, the wealthy corporations will have to hire twice as many new employees to accomplish the same work. This has worked in France and Europe and will work in the United States as well.

So my friends, you can see that I take my responsibility to vote very, very seriously. These are just a few of the reason I have decided to seriously think about voting for John Kerry.

Now that I have completed my somber consideration of what "Frenchy" has to offer, I will sleep very comfortably voting for George W. Bush.

Originally posted from 07-25-04 to 08-01-04
Some Solutions for the “Wasted Vote” Problem
by Jan Kok (kok at surfbest dot net)

One of the main reasons why alternative parties and independent candidates have such difficulty making any headway against the establishment parties is the Plurality voting method that is used almost everywhere in the US. This voting method creates a strong incentive for people to vote for one of the two front-running candidates - usually the Democrat or the Republican. Thus, the Plurality voting system tends to create and perpetuate a two-party duopoly.

Suppose you would really like to vote for one of the alternative party candidates but feel that you "have to" vote for the Republican so that the Democrat won't win. Perhaps you know someone who would also like to vote for an alternative party candidate but feels like she "has to" vote for the Democrat so that the Republican won't win. The Vote Buddy solution is that you and the other person promise to each other that neither of you will vote for either establishment party candidate. Both of you are now free to vote for whichever alternative party candidate you prefer. If you would like to verify that the other person doesn't cheat and vote for the major party candidate, you can fill out and mail absentee ballots in each other's presence. See www.VoteBuddy.org.

In order for the Vote Buddy idea to work, it needs to be widely promoted to the general public. A member of the general public who doesn't know about this idea will probably just vote for one of the major party candidates. Or, he may not vote at all if he doesn't care which of the major party candidates wins, figuring that if he bothers to vote for a minor party candidate, the vote totals for that candidates will be so small that no one will notice. If the Vote Buddy idea becomes widely known, unaffiliated voters may get excited and interested in the alternatives to the establishment party candidates.

So, promote, promote, promote! Call in to political talk shows and describe this idea. Write letters to the editors of your local newspapers. Get your favorite alternative party candidate to promote the idea.

The Vote Buddy idea is the only solution to the wasted vote problem that can be used in this year’s elections. However, it is only a temporary solution that will work only as long as there are two parties that receive the lions’ share of the votes. If the alternative parties start to receive a substantial fraction of the vote, the problems of Plurality voting will plague the alternative parties as well. For example, libertarian-leaning voters might split their votes between a Constitution Party candidate and a Libertarian candidate, and leftist voters could be split between a Green candidate and Nader. Plurality voting creates unnecessary rifts among political allies, and forces people with widely dissimilar interests to try to coexist within one of the establishment parties.

The long-term solution is to replace our Plurality voting method with something better. Approval Voting, Condorcet Voting, and many other methods allow voters to express their support for more than one candidate, thus alleviating or eliminating such problems as “wasted votes”, “spoiler candidates”, and “voting for the lesser of two evils.” For more information about these better methods, see www.VoteBuddy.org/votemeth.htm or www.ElectionMethods.org.

If you want to be free to vote for your favorite candidate or candidates without risk of causing your least favorite candidate to win, you should work to replace Plurality voting with one of the better methods. But, as long as we are stuck with Plurality voting, promote the Vote Buddy idea!

Originally posted from 07-18-04 to 07-25-04
A Dozen Reasons Why I'm a Conservative
by Edward Daley

Let me begin this article by stating that I am not a Republican. I am, however, a conservative. I embrace conservatism because that particular philosophy is distinguished, in part, by the following precepts.

1. Governmental control over our lives should be limited to those few trammels which are absolutely necessary to the survival of an otherwise free nation. In the words of Thomas Paine, "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."

2. Taxation should only occur when necessary to provide for the common defense, civilian police agencies, firefighting organizations, roadways, railways and other essential aspects of our nation's infrastructure. If we are to have income taxes, everyone but the destitute should pay a proportional amount of those taxes (the same percentage of taxes regardless of their income), and those who pay no income taxes should be thankful to those who do.

3. Our nation was founded upon the principle of God-given rights, regardless of the conflicting opinion of a small minority of American citizens who do not believe in the concept of a higher power. After all, not every American believes in the viability of the capitalist system either, but our system is still based upon capitalism no matter what some people choose to believe.

4. The preservation of innocent human lives is of paramount importance to all moral people, and those who wish to gratuitously destroy a fetus in the womb have an obligation to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that an unborn child is not a human life, worthy of the same legal protections that all other individuals enjoy, before committing abortion.

5. Free market principles should be applied to public education, health care and a host of other systems, which have of late been thrust into the socialistic downward spiral of governmental intervention and over-regulation.

6. We, the people, have an expectation of public accountability and private responsibility. With every individual right claimed, there is an equally important responsibility attached to it, and for every ounce of power claimed by some people over everyone else, there should be a pound of accountability awaiting those claimants at the end of the day.

7. People who wish to immigrate to our country need to do so legally. They should be willing to learn our language, respect our culture and obey our laws once they're here. Those who refuse to do so should be deported immediately.

8. Our federal government should have autonomy in determining what is in the best interest of our country internationally, as opposed to relying on organizations such as the United Nations to make our decisions for us.

9. You can't bargain with bullies, tyrants or terrorists, and to even try is not only naive but potentially suicidal. Sometimes violence is the only means by which one can defend one's liberties. Those who refuse to resort to violent acts under any circumstances are destined for slavery.

10. Affirmative action is racism, no different than those forms of racism practiced by the Nazis of W.W.II Germany or former President Charles Taylor's regime in modern-day Liberia.

11. People are not basically good, nor are they basically bad. They're both, that's why a moral code is necessary to the sustainability of a free society.

12. All human beings crave liberty and felicity, and to deny even one person who chooses to live a virtuous life the opportunity to pursue happiness and experience individual freedom, is a crime against humanity.

I'm sure there are some conservatives who would disagree with one or two of the above outlined principles, or at least the wording I have chosen to use regarding them, but it is my contention that these statements essentially speak for the vast majority of American conservatives.

I was going to write one of those "why the Kerry/Edwards ticket is wrong for America" articles this week like so many of my conservative peers surely will in the not too distant future, but it occurred to me that doing so would probably not accomplish my goal of persuading many ill-informed potential voters out there to see things my way. After all, how often do op-eds - no matter how insightful, well written or informative they are - change people's minds about political candidates? Not often I would wager, and that is precisely why I have concluded that I should try my hand at something a little different this time around.

Question 1: Do you think we should concentrate exclusively on developing alternative fuel sources, at the expense of building more conventional power plants and taking advantage of our own untapped energy resources?

Question 2: Do you believe that relinquishing control over our entire healthcare system to a government agency will result in inexpensive, high quality medical treatment for you and your family?

Question 3:Do you believe that increasing the taxes of people who make more than $100,000 a year will improve the U.S. economy?

Question 4: Do you embrace the hypothesis that George W. Bush took America to war in Iraq because he is an imperialist who wants to rule other countries and steal their oil?

Question 5: Do you believe that human beings are the primary cause of global warming, and that the government should impose punitive regulations on companies to stop them from creating greenhouse gasses, even if doing so harms our economy?

Question 6: Do you think a woman has an absolute right to abort her unborn child under any and all circumstances?

Question 7: Are Democrat politicians more like you than Republican politicians?

Question 8: Do you believe that the United Nations is more qualified than our own elected leaders to determine how the United States should conduct the war on terror?

Question 9: Do you accept the premise that the U.S. Constitution prohibits any reference to God on/in public buildings, in our common pledge of allegiance, on any U.S. currency, in our various oaths of public office, in any court's oath (to tell the truth under penalty of perjury), or on/in any other place or thing which can be considered public?

Question 10: Are you more concerned about what the rest of the world thinks about the United States of America than you are about defeating terrorists?

Question 11: Do you believe that restricting private gun ownership will result in lower crime rates?

Question 12: Should poor, private citizens be given no options concerning their children's enrollment in government controlled, public schools?

Question 14: Is the color of a person's skin more important, when it comes to determining his/her qualifications for employment and/or college placement, than his/her experience, knowledge and character?

If you chose 'Yes' more times than 'No' on the above exam, you are a true liberal. Go ahead and vote for John Kerry in November. On the other hand, if your choices where more often 'No' than 'Yes', do us all a favor and vote for the leaders of our current administration even though some of the things they do may annoy you.

Beyond that, if by chance you are one of the unfortunate few who have picked an equal number of 'Yes' and 'No' answers, all I can say to you is GIVE UP! I can think of nothing more profoundly pathetic than someone who bounces back and forth between the left and the right like some sort of political pinball. Either pick a side or get the hell out of everyone else's way.

Originally posted from 06-30-04 to 07-04-04
Bill Clinton's 957 Pages of My Life
Delivers His Last Big Lewinsky
by Kerry L. Marsala

It is often believed, that when a male feels somewhat, how do you say, inadequate of portion, that they must fill their hormonal insecurities by making other things around them, well larger than life. So, goes Bill Clinton's book, all 957 pages of pen to paper or perhaps in Clinton's case, oral to recorder. That all depends on what writing is, …is.

The pre-sale recordings have been proclaimed with many trumpets and hullabaloo. The far-left elitist talk shows have lined themselves up to slobber and pant over the golden boy. And the lemmings of Slick Willie's fan club, stood in long lines to perhaps purchase a first edition copy of our former President, known mostly for his sexual liaisons.

Isn't this something every former president wants to be remembered for, multiple sexual encounters while married, and performing most of them while in public institutions? 'Tis, sad but true, our former president has completed his task at making America look at her own reflection, of what she is quickly becoming, the people of self gratification-just because they can. The baby boomer generation, is a generation filled with many self-serving, self-centered, gratify me now, brats. Clinton was the antithesis of this.

Surely the children of the W.W.II parents, cannot really be left holding all the blame. Dads came back from a horrid war with Japan, and fought bloody battles against Nazism. Many of the stalwart parents who loved this country never wanted their children to grow up knowing hunger, destitution, or being without. They showered their children with all they could give them, at times working several jobs, so that their offspring could have a better life.

But when a generation is raised being given too much, and not learning the pleasure of self-sacrifice and self-reliance, you get someone like Bill Clinton and in turn he is a reflection of how many of us behave today. Clinton even admits in his book that he had sex with Monica Lewinsky, because he could. How much more self-centered can one be?

We have CEO's, Senators, Congressmen, Lawyers, Doctors, Hollywood Stars, Garbage Collectors, and the list goes on-having extra marital affairs, because they just can. Really Clinton is no different than the majority of Americans who have become self-seeking. Clinton just got caught with his pants down and cigar in hand. We know it wasn’t Clinton's first or last tryst. For many self absorbed people, their need for power, self-gratification and ego boosting doesn’t end with a book called, My Life or your life or anyone else's life.

All that writing your memoir's does is cleanse your own guilty conscience for awhile. It’s a psychological release for those who feel the heavy burden of guilt, to tell a partial truth and paint it the color of spin.

As well, for Clinton it brings with it hope, the hope that he will once again re-gain the sympathetic support from those who will again, fall prey to his lying lips.

Clinton, the bad little boy who got caught, says he's sorry, sorry he got caught perhaps, but sorry for the acts? The night he says he told Hillary of the oral office affair, Clinton states that Hillary kicked him out onto the 'couch for a month.' Somehow I believe Clinton had a permanent couch everywhere they've ever lived. The indentation marks of well-worn upholstery could be seen everywhere Clinton utilized his power to gratify his own self-seeking ego. And never for one moment did I ever believe that Hilary wasn’t satisfying her own self-gratification, just as much as her 'nympho' husband was.

Clinton and those who behave like him, will be remembered in history for having big heads, but very little brains and virtually no heart or soul to speak of. They live on as those who had to stretch truth, hide truth, and alter truth-because self seekers own truths, have become the lies that they, and some of us have chosen to believe.

When Clinton was quoted as saying, "I have no idea if this is a great book, but it's a pretty good story." That may have been the first time he was actually telling the truth. His life from, his view is a pretty good story and by definition, My Life, is a Grimm Brothers Fairy Tale, with a fractured spin. If you ever are inclined to waste a week of your life, read My Life, but wait till it comes out in paperback at least or it comes to your local library. The asking price alone is enough to choke any devoted Lewinsky.

America: Have we let her become the biggest Lewinsky of all? But, I guess it doesn’t really matter if we have, as long as I get mine, and who cares what damage it does along the way? I can always write a book, and sell my version of My Life, my way.

Originally posted from 06-13-04 to 06-20-04
Mourning In America
by Jonathan David Morris

The 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, has died at the age of 93 after a lengthy battle with Alzheimer's. In the days to come, you'll read many essays attempting to capture his innermost thoughts and agendas, which will be written by people who knew him about as well as I did -- which is to say they'll be written by people who didn't really know him at all. I won't claim to know enough about him to warrant my writing a eulogy. From what I understand, he was a good man, but a little hard to get to know.

My connection with Reagan is mostly nostalgic. I was born in 1978, and he entered the White House in 1981. For me -- and, I'd imagine, for many men and women born around that time -- Reagan represents more than a presidency, a Cold War, and an Iran-Contra scandal. For me, he represents an era -- a moment in time and a time in my life. When I learned the word "president," Reagan was president. And when I discovered America, he spoke for it. So for me, to some extent, he still does.

Maybe it's just my whacked-out way of thinking, but I can't think of Reagan without thinking about my youth. This isn't a recent thing. It isn't because of his passing. It has always been this way -- he has always been like a spokesman for my childhood, for as long as I've been old enough to say things like "my childhood." I'm 26 now. I'm closer to 30 than 20 for the first time in my life. I think about my childhood all the time. I guess it's because I'm nearing a time when I'll think about having kids of my own. I don't know. But the point is, with Reagan, a part of my childhood has died. And I agree with you if you think this sounds corny, but I'm not afraid to admit that it's true.

I now know, for example, that -- like the Saturday matinees enjoyed by my parents -- the era of Saturday morning cartoons is dead. Oh, sure, there are cartoons on Saturdays still. They exist. I've seen them while flipping through channels. But it's not like it was when I was a kid and Reagan was king. Back then, I didn't flip through channels on Saturday mornings. For one thing, I didn't have a remote. I switched stations with a box connected to the TV by a long, unruly wire. But second, and more importantly, I didn't flip through channels because I always had my Saturday mornings mapped out. I took a Hi-Liter to the TV Guide every Friday evening and kept to the next day's schedule faithfully. I had to. There were hours upon hours of cartoons on all major networks. It's like getting lost in a toy store -- yeah, there are toys, but you're still walking down the aisles, crying, just trying to find your mom.

Reagan represents an era of innocence for me, a time when it wouldn't've mattered if I knew Papa Smurf was a Marxist because I didn't really know what a Marxist was. Reagan represents a time when I had my first dog, and lived in my first house, and could still see my grandparents on weekends instead of in photos and dreams. He reminds me of the big house my mom's folks had up in Plainfield, with a breakfast nook I'd like to rebuild in a house of my own someday, and a den where we'd gather 'round to watch M*A*S*H. He reminds me of my dad's parents' furniture, which was covered in plastic and rather uncomfortable.

He reminds me of Max Headroom and the original, invincible Mike Tyson, and MTV before I understood it, and Nintendo before it passed me by.

He reminds me of old Coke being replaced with New Coke, and New Coke being replaced with old Coke because New Coke sucked.

When I think about Reagan, I don't think about his famous speech the night the space shuttle Challenger exploded. I don't think about its crew "touch[ing] the face of God." I think about the classroom I was in when they announced it over the speakers. I think about how I got yelled at for raising my hand during the moment of silence. And I think about a very special episode of Punky Brewster.

When I think about Reagan, I think about the Cold War before I knew what war was, before I knew which wall he wanted Mr. Gorbachev to "tear down." I think of the Cold War as a plot device -- an excuse to box Russians in movies. And I think about my all-time favorite film, Back to the Future, and the scene in 1955 where Marty tells Doc that Reagan becomes president.

"Ronald Reagan? The actor?" Doc asks in disbelief. "Who's vice president? Jerry Lewis?"

Doc didn't believe Marty had his facts straight. But he believed in the future. And he believed he could get there. Back then, I believed the same thing. I'm more cynical now, to the point where anything less than cynicism seems like a dangerous waste of time. Life does this to you. It molds you, and it kicks you between the legs. It knocks down your favorite buildings. It drags you, kicking and screaming, into wars between evil and good.