We have entered the most dangerous period of time America has ever known, and our adversaries are taking note.

Men who believed somebody was there in the White House when they called for help died in what Mr. Obama declared this week to be a Republican party, “side show.”

Like a juvenile might do in seeking to deflect criticism after crashing his father’s car, he added, “there’s no there there.”

The sleeping-on-the job and fundraising trips while fighting men were expecting traditional American military backup cannot be lightly blamed upon others in view of the facts now present and actual testimony from then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

The daily White House press narration of blame-it-on-anyone but the President alerts an increasingly confident terrorist network that indeed “there’s no they’re there” when it comes to leadership.

And with no one home, potential enemies see the gates to American global interests wide open to attack as they did in Benghazi on 9-11-12. No Trojan horse necessary. They have seen the Obama Administration provide the video-made-them-do-it excuse to simply enter and destroy.

From overseas we find a British view of Mr. Obama in this headline based upon Thursday’s brief press conference:

“During Rose Garden Press conference Obama refuses to apologize for secretly seizing AP phone records, shifts blame to Congress for security lapses, and dodges question about White House IRS knowledge.”

In the body of the article we find these words from the President, “I certainly did not know anything about the IG report before the IG report was leaked to the press,” referring to the growing scandal regarding IRS targeting practices directed toward perceived Obama political opponents.

All of this mounting show of either incompetence or corruption at the highest level begs serious questioning that hopefully an alert media will ask of themselves such as:

If the President is ignorant about everything that goes wrong in his administration, what does he know?

If the President indeed only finds out about scandal or crisis via the press after the fact, who is in charge during the birth of scandal and crisis?

Glaring evidence found in 100 damning emails released earlier from the White House this week – out of over 25,000 according to US Congressman Jason Chaffetz – coupled with last week’s courageous congressional testimony of three high ranking State Department whistleblower eyewitness accounts belie  Mr. Obama’s statement  this week of, “Nobody understood exactly what was taking place during the course of those first few days.”

What the third US President, John Adams, reminded the arrogant and proud applies here, “Facts are stubborn things.”

The real side show is the duplicitous dance of DC dilatants who revel in their clever political reportage, but can only do the salsa around their version of facts by repeating, “we are still uncovering facts,” as if that should satisfy the press and public at large.

Daring the IRS to now attack those who, with boldness, quote the founding fathers and cite the constitution in defense of political points of view, we hear an echo from Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a friend:

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so that the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”

As we are finding in three brewing Obama administration scandals, there is a lot of “they’re there.”

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author, editor of Jerusalem Reports.com, and contributing Op Ed columnist to a number of news organizations. More about his authored works at www.jmpratt.com

The juxtaposed view of the value of life couldn’t be more glaringly transparent than when we compare Ronald Reagan’s value for all life against the constant complaint of the left… That some life is more important than others.

If it wasn’t bad enough that the constant attitude about the value of life in the Obama Administration continually echoed the Hillary Clinton line,  ”What difference does it make!” and what we had with Press Secretary Jay Carney’s pronouncement that “Benghazi happened a long time ago…”

…along with his casual excuse for killing an innocent American boy in a drone airstrike in Yemen with, “He should have picked a better father–”

Now we have…

“Death is part of life,” ranking Democrat Cummings said for today’s congressional record in the Oversight Committee hearings on Benghazi.

What is it about death that these people seem so enamored with?

From womb to tomb they pretend to be the champion of so many rights, yet death and the cavalier attitude toward it surrounds them.

Just sayin…

FOR MORE, see today’s post:  NOT LEFT or RIGHT: “BENGHAZI HAPPENED,” Mr. Carney!

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author of 9 titles. His Right and Wrong, Not Left or Right – America’s 3^rd Option, is scheduled for eBook release in this fall, 2013.

Americans can smell a donkey and see an elephant from a mile away.  They don’t need the politics of left or right to clarify the facts speaking for right or wrong.

“Benghazi happened a long time ago,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney cynically supplied to the White House press gathering on April 30th. An excuse right out of the righteous indignation playbook of Hillary Clinton’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings, he offered the media a chance to adopt her Benghazi attitude of, “What difference, at this point, does it make!”

Why it matters, and what the stakes are for the US led by a dismissive Obama administration, requires a visit in time to the day after Benghazi happened.

On the morning of September 12, 2012 two Presidential candidates chose different paths to project resolve and strength out to a world and country awakening to the tragic news of the murder of an ambassador and three citizens, Sean Smith and former SEALS Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

Presidential contender Mitt Romney rose to the dais at an early press conference and declared an unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist act offering sympathy for the victims and their families. He appeared a man with focused resolve, ready to immediately find the facts and act; someone a country could look to in times of trouble.

Barack Obama appeared later that morning at the presidential podium set in the White House Rose Garden, accompanied by a dour appearing Secretary of State, and gave a short Presidential statement of regret offering, “And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.”

He made sure to seed the press corps with the soon-to-follow four week pre-election pretext that an obscure anti-Islam You Tube video inspired the “spontaneous” violence in Benghazi by adding, “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious belief of others.”

What we didn’t know on September 12, 2012, but soon found out, was that the President of the United States was alerted to the attack in real time the evening of September 11, 2012. Further, American rescue forces were in “stand-by” mode for a “go” command from the Commander-in-Chief, and that instead of issuing such orders he chose to retire and ready himself for a Las Vegas, Nevada fundraiser trip set for the following day.

The bottom line becomes one of right or wrong.

While men died and a consulate burned, Barack Hussein Obama did or did not leave his post, subordinated his duty or did not to people unauthorized to issue final orders for the military rescue of Americans under attack and the securing of evidence and American property from attacking terrorists.

Hillary Clinton now appears prophetic as we look back to her 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary attack ad against the former community organizer reminding Americans of Barack Obama’s lack of experience: “It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep…but there’s a phone in the White House, and it’s ringing.”

If I were Mr. Carney I would certainly want to deflect stinging rebukes and make Benghazi appear old and inconsequential, especially on the heels of a scathing report issued on Tuesday April 30^th by five House Republican committee chairmen charging intentional deception by the Obama administration.

The world had a chance to view two styles of leadership on September 12, 2012. Was it a defining moment of right or left for the President, or did it reveal itself as a right or wrong handling of lethal issues?

In a world filled with evil intent, strong leadership matters. Despite Press Secretary Carney’s attempt to deflect damning facts, Benghazi happened, and because it did the test of American morality and strength in the world continues in question.

“Facts are stubborn things,” US President John Adams declared.

It will be interesting to see if American journalists become stubborn and question facts as they “are” surrounding a possible Presidential cover-up, or if they will follow the rationalization Mrs. Clinton’s husband famously defined in the Lewinsky perjury testimonies telling investigators, “That depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

FOR MORE: “DEATH IS PART OF LIFE” Cavalier Congressman Cummings Says of Benghazi  

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author of 9 titles. His Right and Wrong, Not Left or Right – America’s 3^rd Option, is scheduled for eBook release in this fall, 2013.

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet and sweet for evil.”

–Isaiah 5:20

Words used to have universal meanings. For example, “Woe,” is a biblical term meaning, “uh oh” and “big problems are coming.”

I think everyone “gets it” even though I just went “Bible Thumper” on the reader.

As far as religious words go, marriage is one. And… it always had a meaning exclusive to the contractual union of a male and female. Why?

The post could end here, it is so obvious. Males and females procreate, build families, enlarge communities via successive generational growth, and thus nations.

Besides, God performed the first marriage–as far as Christians, Jews, and Muslims are concerned–and so he created the genesis of the human family.

Today we are in a great debate over what should constitute marriage in the United States of America. Is meaning really that important? Should it matter?

Like it or hate it, it is fact that our first North Americans were largely escaping religious persecution abroad and saw our continent as a place of promise, a New Jerusalem, a garden of good and evil, where their choices—and not an aristocracy or King’s choice for them—would result in whatever fruits they planted by the seeds sown, each after their kind.

They knew what “woe” was all about and clearly fought to keep it away with faith-based codes of conduct, though sometimes strict and even punishing.

My first ancestor to North America, British Lt. William Pratt, married a daughter of Mayflower pilgrims in the early 1600’s. He, his sons, and grandsons fought in the frontier wars with native tribes, against the French, and as patriots in the Revolutionary War. Sons, grandsons, and great-great grandsons had instilled in them faith in easy-to-understand right and wrong laws of nature from the teachings of their founding fathers and mothers.

These men and women have defended their country with zeal ever since.

And the driving force was always about the liberty to build a family through marriage and be blessed by accompanying hard work. Never in these four hundred years did any definition of marriage need a “re” added to it. That’s because words always carried meanings that no one had to guess at.

For example, it was simply understood by them that marriage bound a man to a woman with the intent of creating family; the natural outcome being rearing boys and girls into productive men and women and thus building and perpetuating the nation. (In our country’s latter-day efforts for foreign “nation building” we would do well to examine the original meaning of the words.)

Now we are engaged in a firestorm of social-cultural reform built upon the foundation of political correctness, considering legitimizing into federal law what has never been legitimized in all human history by any government until this past decade—homosexual, same sex, “gay” unions.

The Supreme Court is being asked to consider the Defense of Marriage Act which specifies marriage to mean between one man and one women and also California’s Proposition 8 in which residents overwhelmingly cast their vote opposed legalizing “same sex marriage.”

Arguments ask us as a society at large to consider this strange new feature as a “civil right” in a way that re-defines the very easy to understand word “marriage.”

We are told that if we do not recognize it as a society we are intolerant, bigots, hateful, and it will become a “civil wrong” to be further fought.

The “good guys” are those who support ending the six millennia long meaning to marriage and family. The bad guys are those opposing men marrying men, and women marrying women, even though they oppose discrimination in any other way.

But in being asked to be “discriminating” in the marriage of same gender people to one another as a “civil right” we must ask, “When did marriage become a civil right?”

Marriage roots are deeply embedded as a religious sacrament, marriage has always been a choice, and a contract between a man and a woman, else how did any of us get to this point of writing this blog post or reading it?

Marriage does not mean civil unions may not exist, nor that government can not toy with meanings. It just “is” what it “is.”

In short the meaning of “marriage” for all times recorded to date has been reserved for the union, contract, and religious sacrament between a man and a woman.

Marriage never indulged any other kind of union, hence a simple definition backed by a history and experience; one social scientists are 100% in agreement with–the most well adjusted children adapting to productive adult lives come from a married man and wife offering fatherly and motherly love, care, and continuity of family life. And…

Nations spring from the family unit.

Now we are asked to give marriage a new definition to mean anything we want it to mean. 

This post simply points out that when we loosely disregard the meaning behind words, we may also create looseness with safety of society and its continuity—tied to the moorings of what has been sanctified by actual history—the building of nations from male-female created family units pre-dating any government authorization.

Perhaps the idea to reform meanings hit a peak in our society when an impeached and former US President, who accused of sexual misconduct, signed into law the Defense of Marriage Act and then uttered these infamous words to side-step a clear and precise response to the independent counsel headed by Kenneth Starr investigating perjury:

“It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

In a 2001 Chicago public radio station interview a little known constitutional law professor Barack Obama, recited his beliefs on redistribution and social justice as he referred to the US Constitution as a, “charter of negative liberties.”

We now have a five year transparent history of what he and other social re-engineering liberal Democrats meant when the man, then inexperienced in any executive role and without business leadership history whatsoever, also uttered the words in an October 5, 2008 speech: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

Is it any wonder that the framers of the constitution restricted federal reach when they understood that the “thou shalt not” injunctions had both given liberty to good conduct but restricted society-destroying bad conduct?

Imagine a constitution with no restraints, where the whims of elected officials could change laws into their own image?

If you think we have men and women who love the mirror now, who almost act omnipotent with their gavels and pens, wait until we see them unrestrained, giving them absolute control and power to decide what is “right” and what is “wrong” or what is “good” or “evil.”

The pioneering families in America knew that a civilized society which willingly obeys such statues as the “thou shalt not’s” as simple as the famous 10 found in Exodus, were more likely to find peace and prosperity than those which ran without a moral compass saying “yes” to whatever next new thing crossed their path.

They understood also that natural law forbade unnatural things—that which could never produce something after its own kind—and that God was the giver of laws and human rights, not man.

Ever since the 1450 AD Gutenberg Bible, the first book to come off a printing press, people learned to read, understand, and explore concepts of conduct creating from it the greatest bestseller of all time.[1]

The very first chapters of Genesis offered the concept of creation—that every seed and every animal procreated after its kind.

A man and woman were created for companionship but also to “multiply and replenish” in the earth.

Yet there was also a tree planted called the “tree of knowledge of good and evil,” which, if the first man and woman chose to eat from, would result in having the kind of knowledge God had; “knowing good and evil.”

As the story goes, a snake came along using half-truths in what he knew would be his best shot at control over them.

Thus the earliest concept of right and wrong was established in a time which we are told…

• God created man and woman.
• Snakes spoke lies against natural law.
• Man obeyed God or followed the snake.
• Good or evil resulted each and every time.

Call me a Bible thumper. I really don’t care. Historically there has never been an argument against such simple logic—until now.

Yet logic or not, I will be classed a bigot, a hater, and intolerant for applying the meaning of marriage to long cherished traditions and natural laws.

In man’s arrogance to make what has never been “right” into a right, he also dismisses and diminishes the meaning of simple words like marriage.

He may calculate that good fruit once sprang and grew from good seeds in recognition of natural laws, but now finds company in a disbarred and morally bankrupt ex-President along with the sympathy of millions of Americans in the garden of good and evil who claim fruits of a seed may become, “whatever the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

–George Orwell

Perception can be as dangerous as lies.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters  (D LA/CA  - Feb 28th) stated with a sober face as she was backed by colleagues,  that the US would lose 170 million jobs due to sequestration!

Oops… Only 154 million in 2009 census of the civilian workforce and we’ve lost more than 10%  of those since then…

Was she lying, did she misspeak, or is she just plain stupid? Sometimes it doesn’t matter. What matters is who believes and how much.

In Post #2 of this series the question of moral governance was considered along with the consequences of trying to make something right that in all recorded history has proven to be wrong.

I hope you will find this abridged chapter, Post #3, from the coming eBook, RIGHT and WRONG, Not Left and Right – America’s Third Option, useful in defense of traditional American values.

The Goat, the Cow, and Problem of Perception

Right and wrong, good and evil, truth and lies, have been with mankind from the beginning of recorded history. These elements occupy much of the storyteller’s time and create the triumph necessary for good literature to succeed with the reader.

We know good and bad when we see it, and we can sense and feel it from childhood. Our history is wrapped around it, our fables and stories require it. We live by it in moral codes of conduct and by rule of law in every city, county, and state in our union.

Our faith requires understanding good and evil as we even see the opposites of virtue and vice, corruption and incorruption in terms of heaven and hell.

God is with us or he is not. The devil rules us or he does not.

Right and wrong have consequences as sure as night follows day.

And yet a man or woman can believe anything they want.

In the movie Second Hand Lions Robert Duvall’s gruff and aged character tells Haley Joel Osment’s character he can believe anything he wants, but then shows his life experience and wisdom through what he values as true and worth believing:

“If you want to believe something, then believe in it. Just because something isn’t true, that’s no reason you can’t believe it. Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things that a man needs to believe in the most.

“That people are basically good; that honor, courage and virtue mean everything; that power and money, money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil—and I want you to remember this—that love, true love, never dies. You remember that boy.

“You see a man should believe in those things because those things are the things worth believing in. Got that?” –Second Hand Lions

THE GOAT AND THE COW:

I was driving with my son, who then was in his early teens but totally connected to the world of instant gratification in terms of knowledge, accepting the quickest answer to things via the internet and was generally otherwise distracted by noises of the world. This is a “normal” for a teen now days.

I had, however, thought I had done a good job of parenting to this point, though forgetting what it was like to not be mature in judgment and knowledge, or in other words an average teenager.

I was sipping a soft drink as we drove up a canyon. He didn’t have any other distractions before him, just the scenery as it passed us by. I too was in deep reflection, most likely upon a chapter I was then engaged in editing for one of my novels.

Excitedly he said, “Look Dad. That sure is a funny looking cow!”

I looked everywhere for a cow. Finally I said, “Where?”

“Over there!” he pointed with the tone that implied my age created fewer brain cells each passing year.

I spewed the soft drink out and over the car’s console, my lap, and pulled over choking.

I looked over at him and asked sincerely—now believing my failures as a parent were complete—“Are you serious?”

“Yeah. Why?”

“That’s not a cow.”

“But it has black and white spots,” he replied with exasperation.

“Son, pigs have black and white spots. Just because it has black and white spots, does not mean it is a cow,” I answered.

“Then what is it?” he asked.

Tears were almost stinging my eyes as I looked out the car window, up into the sky and pled, “God, what have I done wrong?”

I sucked it up and kindly replied, “It’s a goat, Mike. Goats also have black and white spots.”

The remainder of the drive was fun for him as he learned a new truth. Just because the spots are apparently the same as worn by another animal does make the object true. A cow is a cow, and now he knew what a goat looked like.

Cha ching! Another day done and another success in good parenting!

The matter of the goat and cow as applied to the question at hand is not if I am left or right, but if I am right or wrong.

Being wrong and proclaiming it right does not make it so any more than calling a goat a cow makes the goat… a cow.

You can believe anything you want, but believing something doesn’t make it so.

 POLITICAL TRUTH:

Truth is unyielding as it produces a cause and effect which can be examined under the light of careful scrutiny.

Truth produces the fruit of its seed. It is consistent, does not vary, and yields results which any double-blind scientific test may validate over and over again.

Political fantasy, however, offered from the utopian mind or the social do-gooder is built upon sands called hope and a verbal vapor called change and disappears from view as rapidly as reality based upon ageless truths wash over them.

Political fantasies are pretty lies, rhetoric without substance, ends justifying the means, evidence to the contrary be damned, and all to gain power.

The problem?

Wrong dressed up as benevolence often prevails in politics, regardless of the fantasy introduced in slick marketing to present it as right.

And when wrong prevails it produces a fiscal, cultural, social, and security train wreck for the voters who trusted the lies in the first place.

Lesson?

You can lap information up from one party or another but the spots don’t make the animal.

Truth of nature makes the animal. It matters that you get that right.

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling novelist and non-fiction author, screenwriter, owner and founder of www.powerthinklibrary.com — one of the world’s largest 1 stop shops for original source documents and books, editor at www.jerusalemreports.com and Op Ed contributor. More about his work may be found at www.jmpratt.com, Facebook and Twitter.

-Abraham Lincoln

A Moral Nation and a Crossroad

In Post #1 , the “Introduction” to RIGHT and WRONG, Not Left and Right, America’s Third Option – a manuscript — opens with these words from Alexis de Tocqueville’s 1831 Democracy in America:

“America is great because she is good. When America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

America is at the critical crossroads of continued greatness or in descent to average at best, where not “left or right” decisions must be determined, but those which are either right or wrong.

Such is the matter proposed in this series and such is the nature of the conversation among conservatives today.

Our Present Leadership Crisis

Much attention in film and books has been recently given “Honest Abe” who — though loved and hated by a country divided during his one term as President — today is revered with Washington as America’s preeminent protector and moral leader of all forty-four American presidents.

Politicians have always loved to wrap themselves in a Lincoln disguise, for they know if enough Lincoln veneer of honesty can rub off, then they may popularize their positions as if Abe himself sanctions them. This is no more true than with our current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Both those who believe in Lincoln, and the wolves who betray him, believe his words:

“The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty. Plainly, the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of liberty.”

I explore more on our call to greatness through moral governance in this Post #2, RIGHT AND WRONG, Not Left and Right, America’s Third Option.

CHAPTER 1

Sunset in the Garden of Good and Evil

“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night we make no comparisons of right and wrong stars.”

-Alan Watts, British Author

Choice and Responsibility

Choices are followed by consequences and choice is the parent to decision, whether choosing between good or evil, or truth or lies.

I don’t know about you, but I am not easily herded into some corral where I can be labeled right or left by those who use and abuse words to mean whatever they want them to mean.

As for me, having left all party affiliation and preferring conscience over party loyalty, I also prefer articulating to candidates my position, rather than being beat up by their bumper-sticker slogans, and the all too-often meaningless and vacuous promises epitomized by the 2008 Obama campaign promises of, “Hope and Change.”

Any such grandiose promise should be a red flag to a reasonable person endowed with a thimble of common sense, since the promise means whatever the promoter wants it to mean and can open a Pandora’s Box of unintended (or intended) consequences.

It is agreed by all in America today; pundit, candidate, voter,  “Washington is broke…” even as both political party’s leadership recommend that their solution is the only way to “fix it.”

But what if their onerous party policies and practices not only perpetuate the problems which left and right have built for over a century, but also exacerbate them?

Your Representatives at Work?

It is with some chagrin that we may encourage a President to get out and play more golf, or for a congressman to stay on vacation rather than try to actually “fix” anything in Washington D.C.

Each time they do get busy we seem to have an increased national debt and economic strangulation by more legislation or unconstitutional regulation.

The federal debt, under a 2008 electioneer promise of “line by line” budget oversight, and the “greatest transparency Washington has ever known,” has experienced a doubling in a mere four years by an administration that not only does not do accounting “line by line” but does not even produce the line—having yet to produce a constitutionally required budget in four years of governance.

Pretty lies continue to beguile both a compliant press and a willing citizenry. After all, truth seems so boring, so bland and unexciting. For the truth in fiscal responsibility requires proclaiming the lunacy of spending forty-five cents on interest to borrow $1 from the Chinese.

In 2012 the party flat-lining on truth-telling were re-elected to “finish the job,” just as Barack Obama promised.

What is apparently “wise and prudent,” words commonly used at will by a Presidential administration in constant campaign mode, must only apply to the voters in their own financial housekeeping, for the facts of the past four years belie any serious consideration to an honest attempt on a federal level for wise and prudent fiscal management.

Eternal Blame Games

As we witness a national debt and spending crisis  exacerbated by a “left wing” redistribution scheme sans accounting responsibility, we are reminded by the managers of the spending spree that the prior Republican President caused it.

As blame continues unabated in the fifth year of a childish executive branch seeking to make what is wrong legal, we are equally reminded that in October of 2008 the Republican Party leader said he regretted abandoning, “…free market principles to save the free-market system.”[1]

With muddy water for a crystal ball we gaze into the truth of politicians controlling an economy. Clarity via wizards from Washington and clarity in local governance are at polar opposites.

We cannot overspend and create money on printing presses outside of OZ.  Where the rubber meets the fiscal road in Red State America the bottom line must show it in the black to survive.

So what if “left and right” – supposed poles in the political spectrum – are mere labels and really don’t matter anymore?

Right and Wrong

Ronald Reagan offered this Jeffersonian warning in his famous “A Time for Choosing Speech” — 1964:

“I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this. It’s time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, “We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.”

“This idea — that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power — is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man. This is the issue of this election:

“Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

“You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream–the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism…”

Power of the People

So what are the people to do?

They cannot relinquish their power found in the ballot box. Yet even there the federal government is rigorous in battling states who seek to enact the simplest voter ID laws, even as we learn in the 2012 case of a Hamilton County, Ohio poll worker (under investigation) that voting six times may be a crime, but it still works.

All must exercise that individual plenary power or lose the voice within us of both; protest against that which we cannot believe in, and support for that which we must believe in.

Even while the vote is sacred, recent evidence proves that little seems to change after our vote until we take to the streets and town halls to add voice to the ballot decisions.

This, such as the evolving “Tea Party” movement begun in 2009, is the best thing the author has witnessed in forty years of citizen involvement in politics.

And yet, with all our combined energy—notwithstanding directly and overwhelmingly affecting changes during the first round of Tea Party influence in the November 2010 elections—the big government elephant in the room is crushing in size and the political jack ass brays for more of the present cliff hanging fiscal bankruptcy and moral insolvency they created in the first place.

After all, if there is no crisis there is no need for the party which brays blame, and squeals fairness, and popularizes lies.

Foundations for American Greatness

Early in the days of our American Republic a constitutional scholar close to the original intents of the Founding Fathers said of plotting politicos in his day:

“Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.”  –Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1779-1845

It would be well if all citizens understood the founding document upon which rests all political decision making at their feet. Sadly few have ever read the 4543 word US Constitution.[2] Of the federal government guided by the US Constitution, the second US President declared:

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion,” wrote John Adams. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

 George Washington knew that good private conduct was essential to America’s survival. He left Americans with this in his farewell address:

“The foundations of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality, and the preeminence of free government be exemplified by all the attributes which can win the affections of its citizens, and command the respect of the world.”

 If Adams and Washington are to still be believed then responsibility rests in the moral character of the people, who then choose their political leadership, right, left, center…it does not matter.

As we witness sunset in the American garden of good and evil, what matters, if we wish to see the dawning of a new day for our nation, is simply made up of–right or wrong.

POST # 3 HERE: http://www.redstate.com/jamesmpratt/2013/02/27/the-goat-and-the-cow-post-3-from-right-and-wrong-not-left-and-right-a-series/

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author, screenwriter, editor at www.jerusalemreports.com and Op Ed contributor. More about his work may be found at www.jmpratt.com, Facebook and Twitter.

-Abraham Lincoln

A WORLD AT WAR?

Hot wars are always preceded by soft wars where values become so polarizing that killing and conquering seems the only recourse.

While there will always be militaristic zealots for causes making national self-defense an answer to physical attacks,  the answer to all war is founded upon choice for moral conduct; what is best for others, a golden rule paradigm which clearly makes “right and wrong”  a third option to the left and right politics which by nature separate people.

Politically I am a conservative and independent defined by belief in tried, true, and traditional cultural values and politics, proven by measurable results to be “right” and not “wrong” as to outcome.

Tagged “right” by the media, I do not object until they color it as radical and throw around silly terms reserved for Hitler and Mussolini’s socialist thuggery — the polar opposite to conservative and traditional American ideals, and those rights endowed by God such as freedom of speech and religion.

The following series of “Right and Wrong, Not Left and Right — America’s Third Option” posts will argue for an alternative to the polarizing effect that left and right categorizing generates  among common sense thinking Americans.

MEDIA DRIVEN POLITICAL POLARIZATION HURDLE:

I believe like Adams that, “Facts are stubborn things…” And I know that facts must somehow be what hurdles the wall the mainstream media has built to protect a clearly progressive/liberal fantasy.

To side with fantasy over substance is to expect what its politics produce: dreams, fairy tales, and delusion but nothing of substance other than the outcome of every horror story.

That  the media is largely liberal and progressive is based upon the evidence in biased reporting presented before us 24/7; a topic I will be covering later at length.

That they have conveniently and intentionally polarized political thought over the last 100 years into left and right camps, makes the simplest argument for the need to turn the conversation to right and wrong  — something every average American can wrap their heads around.

WHAT IS RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS CONVENIENT:

The fact remains that decisions have consequences, but it is also true that a person steeped in liberal logic, but devoid of interest to do independent fact-finding, means they will most likely continue as lovers of the pretty political lies foisted upon them. This because fantasy favors immediate gratification and does not ask for hard work.

In all probability the conservative argument, billed as “right wing” by the press, will be largely ignored by Democrat Party and liberal thinking voters due to the paint used by the mainstream media to color it; black, scary and selfish.

As we know, nothing could be further from the truth, but then truth generally doesn’t make good liberal copy.

And there is this: Unless we can somehow offer plain and simple evidence that links consequences of liberal choices to actual disaster in such a way that the liberal thinker will have to ask themselves from a self-interested position, “Is this policy right or wrong for me?” we will largely lose the war of values in a head to head media battle.

Like the State Farm commercial: “It must be true, I found it on the internet,” she says to the insurance agent. “Oh here comes my date. He’s a French model.” State Farm agent asks, “Where did you meet him?” She replies, “On the internet.”

Granted, asking a liberal/progressive to think logically, using cause and effect as a barometer for political decision making, calls to Ronald Reagan’s statement when he uttered:

“It isn’t that liberals are ignorant, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

So how do we contest the liberal/progressive spin in a war of values?

There is, and always has been just one answer: Boldly offering indisputable evidence upon what is right and what is wrong.

Only inconvenient truth based principle can offer palatable evidence with satisfaction lasting far beyond the fantasy offered by political prophets dressed as a caring shepard; even as they lead the flock to the slaughter.

I offer this first post from the “Introduction” to a manuscript in production which shall be offered for free reading Part I in June 2013:

Right and Wrong, Not Left and Right — America’s Third Option”

Introduction

“America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”  – Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

I do not care if a leader is a Democrat or Republican. I only care if the elected leader does what is right, and by so doing generates a good outcome.

There are objective societal measurements for “right” just as there are objective weights for what is “wrong.”

Society can easily measure the effects of good or poor choices because of the ever present law of cause and effect which deals swiftly and fairly.

What Einstein is credited with saying in terms of results holds true:

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Children and innocent minds always get it right when two options are placed before them. If told one has never worked before and the other has, simple intuitive skill prevails.

Only in the world of power-seeking adults do we find fables and slogans turned into truth. In fantasy politics what is evil elsewhere can be spun into a virtue by citing “fairness” and “tolerance.” Never mind repeated results proving their power hungry point of view invalid.

Yet politicians so often seek to create their own set of “rights” to appeal to a self-interested constituency.

If by rights we mean to impose the special interests of certain groups or classes of people above other citizens, or if such “rights” are legislated against natural laws and the nature of time honored liberty, and thereby proven “wrong,” then we are on a fool’s errand seeking to make failure legal.

Make no mistake, we are at war as to values. As always we fight over elements found in opposing poles of thought which each position must determine as good or evil, right or wrong, moral or immoral.

The political war need not result in bloody tumult. And personal perspectives such as politically “conservative” and “liberal” have always been, and will always be, juxtaposed.

Yet there is “right” and there is “wrong” in the world. Some behaviors stand against historic results and basic human codes of decency and morality no matter how we may legally codify them.

Some political and economic theories when employed, repeatedly fail. Creating dependency upon government really does create reliance upon government bureaucracy and does not lift a citizen from poverty to independent prosperity. Subsistence is not abundance. Fairness is not taking from someone who worked hard to rise from subsistence to independence.

In the current political context right and wrong is filtered through the lens of “right” or “left,” and in the very act of doing so the moral quotient suffers from a distortions along party lines and definitions. Ronald Reagan clarified in his famous “A Time for Choosing” 1964 speech:

 “You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down.”

What if there is no such thing as the political left or right as Reagan suggests, only “up or down?”

Good decisions yield good results. It really isn’t any more complicated than that. And you don’t need to be “left or right” to know the difference. You simply must embrace America’s third option, right or wrong.

Right and wrong governance was the primary motivator behind the creation of the most unique, powerful, and formerly free and abundant nation ever conceived on earth by man.

It began with the Declaration of Independence prior to the organizing document we call the Constitution of the United States of America. And that meant real war must be waged after the war on differing values had already commenced.

The Declaration of Independence built the foundation arguments from which all constitutionally directed legislative, judicial and executive decisions for the “good” of the people would flow upon this premise:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  “That to secure those rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the people…”  (Declaration of Independence 1776)

Military struggles and life and death warfare always begin with the war on values.

We are now engaged — LIKE it or NOT — in a world war. How hot that will get will depend upon the embrace of good over evil, right over wrong.

RIGHT and WRONG, Not Left and Right – America’s Third Option, is meant to take the Founder’s meaning behind the creation of the US Constitution and appeal to the political establishment and constituency now called “left and right” so that the fundamental American ideals are clearly enshrined in the goodness Alexis de Tocqueville saw in 1831, that “…if America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”  

POST #2 HERE: http://www.redstate.com/jamesmpratt/2013/02/27/the-goat-and-the-cow-post-3-from-right-and-wrong-not-left-and-right-a-series/

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author of inspirational category fiction and non-fiction. More about his work may be found at www.jmpratt.com. He is also found on Facebook  and Twitter and is editor for the middle east news consolidator www.jerusalemreports.com.

“After we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity we shall harness the energies of love. Then for the 2nd time in the history of the world man will have discovered fire.”

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

My take on Roe vs Wade 40 years later:

I was born “dead.” My mother says the umbilical chord was wrapped around my neck. She also says she “prayed me alive.” Perhaps because I was deprived of oxygen upon entry to mortality I came out of the womb a conservative.

I just know I have always thought the way I do about life, love, America, freedom, and the value of others from my earliest memories.

Everyone knows I write love stories and my first one — The Last Valentine — was written as inspired by my mother’s story of waiting for my father after WWII at the LA Union Train Station.

I have strong feelings for the processes of the “heart.” It is hard for me to choose which love story — of the millions potentially being born — is worth ending.  Every time I put pen to paper to outline a new story I consider the many “what might have beens” of life. All life is precious.

As John Donne (1572-1631) famously declared:

“No man is an island. entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.”

Though I understand that many will not agree with me in this modern “progressive” era, I must state my case this day.

We live in a world of “choices.” I have a big problem with intentional death over the last 40 years; the approximate 55 million potential artists, school teachers, medical professionals, researchers, other professionals, laborers, mothers and fathers, lovers all, who never got to experience life outside the womb once their beating heart was charged and thumping; because a “choice” by the Supreme Court was made to honor the “choice” to eliminate them.

I am an adoptive parent by “choice.” My wife and I were not blessed to watch children grow inside her from our union. The two we were blessed with need us; we “choose” them and valiant birth mothers saw their little beating hearts as valuable to the world. And we love them, no matter their “choices.”

You cannot increase respect for life, and blather on about how we need to “protect our children” in society and then diminish respect for  life by eliminating real beating hearts — the first organ to develop in the fetus.

When we devalue some life, we develop an attitude which begins to “choose” which life is “necessary.” This in turn devalues all life.

From that tyranny of choice by rulers over the innocent, greater sin and harm against humanity may grow. This is historically valid. Look at any society that “controls” population and you will see a benevolent acting tyranny behind the mask.

The poet de Chardin predicted something to embrace; for mankind has harnessed all the energies of tides, wind, and waves, and even gravity now.

It is time to harness the energy of love and discover FIRE for the 2nd time! 

James Michael Pratt is the author of inspirational fiction and non-fiction found at www.jmpratt.com.

TODAY: The Mail Online offers:

Romney aides blast ‘hypocrites’ who asked for cabinet jobs just before election and are now trashing him

• Presidential candidate has come under fire from Republicans after loss
• But aides say figures like Bobby Jindal and Newt Gingrich were desperate for positions in his cabinet if he had won

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237651/Romney-aides-blast-hypocrites-asked-cabinet-jobs-just-election-trashing-him.html#ixzz2DBwPf6Se

A vindication of what I suspected in my Part I post earlier this week (a portion is posted below) with the link to the entire post offered here: Part I Link 

November 21st Erased 

Did I say something wrong? Maybe. I meant no harm, was simply musing upon courtesy, truth and honor.

Evidently my post from November 21st disappeared from the Diary box list here at RedState one day after posting it.

It could be just my imagination as “Part I” November 21st post simply wouldn’t pull up into the Diary box on any attempt after several updates.

Either way — I offer it again with this “Part II.”  I only do this because of the new, and validating information coming from the cited article at Mail Online.

AND — I cite an outstanding look and a robust debate for anyone wishing to investigate the position: Romney Was (Not) the Problem

Courtesy and Class for Conservatives 101

Look — Here’s the bottom line to me. We need courtesy.

Truth and honor are hallmarks of conservatism and most Americans instinctively know that.

The courtesy we sometimes lack moves up and down the spectrum from politicians to all of us commentators as we point fingers at each other — or as is the case with the recent election — forgetting the gracious offers of “thanks for the best you did give.”

This did not happen in public, instead we saw adults acting childish and self-important in their punditry, and as I put, “politically opportunistic.”

The GOP needs to be the party of  ”the class act,” but if their members can’t be then fellow conservatives must be.

Let the liberals be crass and ill-mannered. They are cut out for it.

Messenger Dodging Bullets

I’m all for creative messaging to gain adherents as I proposed in a post dated November 8th,  and of which so many critics of Mr. Romney and campaign have complained for two weeks.

Unaffiliated, by choice, I vote Republican, live in a conservative dominated city, county, state, and grew up in the home town of the Reagan Library, Simi Valley, CA when Reagan was my governor.   I’m Reagan through-and-through in ideals and maintain a Facebook Page in his honor.

Until the day comes that something more conservative is viable enough to compete with the GOP, I will seek to support conservatism within the GOP.

I will also seek to tell people, with whom I politically disagree, where to go so that they look forward to the trip, while seeking clarity, but no ill will.

We should be better than what was delivered to Mr. and Mrs. Romney and Mr. and Mrs. Ryan over the past two weeks; this from within our coterie of media appointed spokesmen at the highest levels;  who offered few, if any, “thank yous,” but much feigned outrage, vitriol, and indeed ill will for a supposed ally of weeks prior.

It doesn’t need to be so maniacal; the jumping upon the bandwagon of “what Romney did wrong” from the GOP gang members, hailed accurately by Rush Limbaugh and many others as “circular firing squads.”

The Post’s Message:

And that is where I got a little hot under the collar in “Part I.”

Outright distortions, lies, as was in the twisted words of George Will (Romney “despising the American people”) , and opportunistic grandstanding of two men I like in all other ways — Bobby Jindal and the very articulate and capable Newt Gingrich. (I recommend all his books, btw).

Unfortunately for them and us, they all came across as little as the liberal messengers, small minded, and petty, and it didn’t need to be. They are all talented and “big” in so many other ways.

So allow me to offer the RE-POST of what I will now call “Part II.”

Mail Online is quite a bit more forthright as to why Mr. Jindal’s and Gingrich’s nastiness was so outrageous and unworthy of them. As I said, I believed them to be bigger men that that.

PART I — PARTIAL POST FROM DIARY November 21st:

ROMNEY, TRUTH, HONOR or “When Jindal, Small Ideas, and Opportunity Politics Knock”

“Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.” ~ Thomas Paine

Truth and reason stand the test of time in a cause and effect relationship of applying principle for a reliable outcome.

Truth is made of stiff stuff because it is things as they really were, are, and always will be.

When truth is inconvenient the troubling temptation for political opportunists gains momentum, and they slither forth from unsuspected places, often clothed as friends.

It is disturbing, but expected when the opposition does it, but doubly harsh when erstwhile allies seek personal gain from it.

I have been disturbed for one week now at the nonsense of gainsaying members of the GOP who can’t have the decency to give Mr. Romney and his wife a well-deserved, “Thank You” but instead create empty messaged noise for the liberal media when there is “no there there.”

Ingratitude and lack of grace is an ugly thing — especially between friends…

Pretty Lies or Inconvenient Truths

“My honor and my life are one. Take honor from me and my life is done.” – Shakespeare

Honor in politics is rare. Romney and his wife Ann offered America a glimpse of it for a brief moment in 2012, and yet our hopes were dashed by small things and small men.

What we need is more Romney and Ryan Boy Scout oath takers no matter how silly it may seem or sound…

“On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and Country…”

…and not dishonorable opportunistic politics.

Self-destruction begins with embracing a lie, followed by endorsing it, ending with proclaiming it.

So it is with individuals and organizations, and for two weeks since the election so it has become with some in the GOP, at least in my mind.

To the point…

Two weeks ago the American people believed a list of pretty lies in enough numbers that just under 500,000 votes in four swing states bought the election outcome for Obama-Biden.

Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, and two other prominent conservatives, chose a path of high criticism of Mitt Romney for  his wording infractions cited last week by the press.

In short, Mr. Jindal sought political gain  by taking advantage of the political correctness game liberal progressives run.

He seemed to revel in the tearing down of a friend and ally of just two weeks prior — Mitt Romney — and in that there is no honor…

FOR ENTIRE “PART I” POST SEE: http://www.redstate.com/jamesmpratt/2012/11/21/romney-truth-honor-or-when-jindal-small-ideas-and-opportunity-politics-knock/

James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author editor and owner of Jerusalem Reports, and frequent contributor to Red State and other conservative sites. He is author of RIGHT and WRONG Not Left and Right – The Third Option, Book 1 for 2013 release. His personal website includes biographical and other information regarding his work. He can also be found on FACEBOOK and Twitter.

Thanksgiving celebrations have special significance to Americans. For one day in November family, food, faith, and football bring us together in a spirit of gratitude unlike anywhere else in the world.

My ancestry goes back to Mayflower pilgrims and earliest settlers of the Massachusetts and Connecticut where freedom to worship was as important to being American as any other freedom Americans have come to enjoy.

I share this image of a scaled model of the Mayflower to show how difficult the voyage must have been for 122 souls seeking hope for liberty in what they considered a journey to the promised land. 

BUT… it doesn’t take ancestry to have heartfelt dreams of freedom, or to belong to the exceptional American experience as my family has benefited from for four centuries.

Consider the story of one tired American soldier, an Iraqi with a dream and one request, to have his heart buried in America.

Combat Medic Platoon Sergeant Grant L. Pratt III is now patrolling the Afghanistan border with Pakistan at a Forward Operating Base. When he first shared this true story he was with the 1^st Cavalry Division supervising 23 other medics in one of the most dangerous neighborhoods of Baghdad.

This letter home was sent September 11, 2007. I have Grant’s permission to share it with you.

  ”BURY MY HEART IN AMERICA”

Dear family…

I wanted to take this opportunity to let everyone know of an experience I had here that really affected me.

I have wondered over the last seven months of my deployment if this war can be won militarily, or if there is any hope that this country can embrace a democratic government. In my eyes the people seem more intent on themselves and their contempt for other each other than making things work here.

With the things I have seen, experiences, and watching friends die I kind of believe that our endeavor here is pointless. I did not believe that there was a single Iraqi in this country that really cared if the violence stopped or that there were any that did not want to kill every American they see. Then I had something happen that gave me some hope.

About a month ago an Iraqi came to my aid station; he is one of the Iraqis that works with us as an interpreter. His name is Sam and he is 20 years old. He came to my aid station with a severely broken and lacerated finger after it was shut in the 300-pound door of an armored vehicle. I spent about two hours cleaning his finger and suturing it, all the while making small talk. He continually told me how he wanted to come to America and join our Army so he could come back and do more for Iraq. He told me of how he loved Americans and that all he wants is to become one.

I listened and talked with him until I was finished with my procedure and wished him well, and in my mind dismissed most of what he said as just words and never thought much else of it.

On September 9th it came across the radio that an explosion had hit one of our vehicles and we had one soldier killed, two wounded, as well as the interpreter that was with them. I put my gear on and went with the squadron commander to the hospital to check on our injured men.

It was quite a gruesome sight. First I saw my medic, who had minor wounds, then went to the young man who had served as the gunner. He had received blast wounds to the leg, which had torn away a majority of his outer thigh. I then went to view the body of our fallen brother who died due to a head injury. We helped console the other members of the platoon, as this was the second soldier they had lost in five days. Overwhelmed by the experience, we walked in to see the interpreter, which turned out to be Sam.

Sam had suffered severe lacerations to the head, resulting in over 40 sutures and staples. He had a small skull fracture and a small brain hemorrhage. Despite his severe injuries he would only ask how the others were doing. He was covered in blood and in extreme pain and just wanted to be sure that the soldiers he had been with were okay.

Once satisfied they would be taken care of, he took my commanders hand and said:

“If I die please take my heart to America and bury it there.”

We assured him his injuries were not mortal and left him in the care of the doctors at the hospital and told him we would be back the next day to see him.

The next morning I received a call from the hospital telling me that Sam was going to be released to an Iraqi hospital, but that he did not want to go. He feared that because of his ethnic background that he would be denied treatment and sent away.

I told them I would call back in a few minutes and that we would come and get him and continue his care at my aid station. After 20 minutes of talking to the commander and making arrangements, I called the hospital and told them we would be there shortly to pick him up when they informed me that they had already released him, and had given him money to get to the Iraqi hospital. Needless to say, we were a little upset.

We began searching the area around the hospital and could not locate Sam. We were worried that he would fall into the wrong hands as any Iraqi that works with the Americans are often killed because they are aiding the enemy.

Three hours later we got a call from the gate to our base that Sam was there. He had walked from the hospital to our base, about seven miles in flip-flops and pajamas, despite fairly significant injuries.

My medics brought him to the aid station and as we laid him on the bed I looked at him and said, “You are a pretty tough guy.” He grabbed my hand and looked me in the eyes and said, “I knew if I got here you would take care of me, Sergeant.”

Tears filled the corner of my eyes and I replied, “You bet I will.”

He then said, “I had to get back here for two reasons. First the memorial service for Johnson (the soldier we had lost a few days prior) is tonight and I cannot miss that. We also have an important mission tomorrow and they need me.”

I informed him he would make it to the service, but would not be going on patrol anytime soon. He argued for a short time then agreed that it would be in his best interest to relax for a couple of weeks before going outside the wire, but still insisted his guys (the U.S. soldiers from his platoon) needed him.

Later that night I sat two rows behind Sam as we paid tribute to our fallen brother and watched as he mourned and cried with the rest of us. I realized he is as committed as the rest of us and is considered a brother to us.

I just got done rechecking his wounds and talking with him. He still insists on going back out with his guys because they need him. He talked about his dreams of living in California some day. I have to say I admire this guy. He displays courage like no other Iraqi I have seen and in some ways made me think again of my views.

Despite what you see and hear on the news, there are Iraqis like Sam that are dedicated to seeing their country succeed. There may not be many, but some sacrifice along side us with a simple dream of their country being better off, or like Sam of being an American citizen.

It gives me some hope that things will eventually work out here, and that someday Sam will be an American citizen, because he has earned that right.  — Grant

Gratitude and Thanksgiving

Gratitude is a noble quality requiring humility and a recognition for blessings one possesses.

Many citizens show it while others seek only the benefits from other countrymen — men and women who in private sacrifice and like soldiers possess it to the point of costing everything.

Sam carried it in his heart. All he longed for was just one shot at being part of something really big… America, freedom, the promised land.

For all those who want to be like Europeans, modeled after failed ideologies of socialism and their tyrants, or whose self-loathing causes them to detest their own country, consider Sam, a young man who’s greatest aspiration is to become an American, at what ever cost, even if it means only his heart may someday be part of its soil.

 James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author editor and owner of Jerusalem Reports, and frequent contributor to Red State and other conservative sites. He is author of RIGHT and WRONG Not Left and Right – The Third Option, Book 1 for 2013 release. His personal website includes biographical and other information regarding his work. He can also be found on FACEBOOK and Twitter.