Shocking. That’s the only word to describe the response of the media and some samples observed with “undecided” voters. Most of the night tonight Barack Obama tonight seemed completely flustered and totally out of his element. He smiled sarcastically, he interrupted, he offered incoherent answers to Jim Lehrer’s questions. Put simply, he looked like he didn’t belong on the same stage with John McCain. Even though, the typical analysis I’ve heard in the MSM tonight goes something like this: “It was two debates. Obama won the first part, McCain the second. Obama came out ahead on the economy, McCain was clearly superior on foreign policy.” That seems consistent with the pre-debate narrative. The country seems to assume Obama is superior when it comes to the economy, in spite of the fact that his spending objectives, especially in the current climate, would bankrupt us.

Two debates? Really?

John McCain came out swinging on the economy, identifying the problem in Washington right now – Spending. This is a stark difference with the Bush administration. We have to cut spending. The concept is pretty simple. Barack Obama’s retorts were impossible to comprehend. They had little specific substance. He did not even respond adequately to the challenge concerning the massive spending his policy promises. Worse, he continues to pound on this absurd notion that John McCain is in league with George W. Bush on most policy. This is utter nonsense. John McCain and George W. Bush have been at odds since W. arrived on the national scene. McCain very adequately ticked off example after example of how he differs from Bush, yet Obama and the press simply ignore those facts and forge on under Obama’s falsehoods and campaign rhetoric.

McCain was direct and clear, and his positions make sense. Barack Obama was deceptive, could not even describe one change in his proposed policies that would result from the massive bailout Congress is arguing over right now, and acted like a child. He actually thinks it is good policy to trample on the sovereignty of Pakistan in pursuit of Osama Bin Laden. Never has his inexperience and inadequacy been more evident. He clearly is not a seasoned enough leader to even begin to qualify for the Presidency. His candidacy is a farce and the fact that he is neck and neck with McCain has this writer completely flummoxed. That the press continues to actively promote the myth that is Barack Obama is a travesty of historical proportions.

Barack Obama acted like a man-child tonight. He does not even belong on the same stage with John McCain. John McCain was the clear, unequivocal, hands down winner. Liberal fantasies may vary, but they do not make for truth.

Barack Obama likes to go about saying he’s only raising taxes on the top 5% of wage earners. No wonder he has to keep saying this over and over again like nobody believes him. We don’t. And now we’ve heard the next part of this story. On 60 Minutes tonight,, during a discussion of the size of the deficit and how he plans to pay for his spending, Obama quietly let the words “rollback the Bush Tax Cuts” escape.

So ah, now the other shoe starts to drop. So while he may be only slightly fudging the facts when it comes to payroll taxes and not mentioning taxes on your homes, your investments, and your inheritances, he also intends to let Bush’s tax cuts expire.

How is that not a tax increase on 95% of us?

Jill Greenberg is the photographer who several years back taunted babies until they started crying,, then photographed them, and then played some photoshop tricks to enhance the textures of the babies skin and tears, then created an art show out of them. As an advocate of free speech, one can hardly begrudge her right to say what she will about whatever political mood strikes her. Greenberg is an avowed Democrat, she does not like Republicans or Evangelical Christians or George W. Bush, and she chose to make a statement as such. Fine. On it’s face, she made art. Not all art should be pleasing to everyone. What art should do is elicit some emotional response, among other things. For that much, she deserves credit.

But that’s all she deserves credit for. This writer has a hard time respecting anyone who would make a baby cry for a cynical artistic purpose, and most of my liberal friends agree on this point. Now she has struck again, , this time as a contractor for Atlantic Monthly. Greenberg turns out politically to be no more than a simple partisan hack. She apparently is not familiar with John McCain or his record on war. John McCain is anything but bloodthirsty. Yet she chose to trick McCain into unflattering photographs for an upcoming cover, then turned around and used the rejects to make a political statement. The good news is that Greenberg has sufficiently honked off The Atlantic Monthly’s editorial staff,, and one would imagine she probably won’t work for them again.

More evidence of her instability: “Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”

Greenberg dances on a thin line between irresponsibility and free speech. When a celebrated periodical with liberal leanings can be disgusted by the actions of a photographer, that is no small accomplishment. Photography is an honorable pursuit. It has great potential to convince, persuade, or in this case, mislead by creating a false reality. People trust photographs, but the truth is, ironically, every photograph is a lie. Even the portrait of McCain The Atlantic chose was intentionally created to be as unflattering as possible.

When The Atlantic called Jill Greenberg,, a committed Democrat, to shoot a portrait of John McCain for its October cover, she rubbed her hands with glee.

She delivered the image the magazine asked for—a shot that makes the Republican presidential nominee look heroic. Greenberg is well known for her highly retouched images of bears and crying babies. But she didn’t bother to do much retouching on her McCain images. “I left his eyes red and his skin looking bad,” she says.

What was firing was a strobe positioned below him, which cast the horror movie shadows across his face and on the wall right behind him. “He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.

Even the Photography blogs are ripping her for this one, and rightfully so. This abuse of her artistic license is simply unethical, and she is rightly being castigated for it.

Jill Greenberg is the photographer who several years back taunted babies until they started crying,, then photographed them, and then played some photoshop tricks to enhance the textures of the babies skin and tears, then created an art show out of them. As an advocate of free speech, one can hardly begrudge her right to say what she will about whatever political mood strikes her. Greenberg is an avowed Democrat, she does not like the war in Iraq, and she chose to make a statement as such. On it’s face, she made art. Not all art should be pleasing. What art should do is elicit some emotional response, among other things. For that much, she deserves credit.

But that’s all she deserves credit for. This writer has a hard time respecting anyone who would make a baby cry for a cynical artistic purpose, and most of my liberal friends agree on this point. Now she has struck again, , this time as a contractor for Atlantic Monthly. Greenberg turns out politically to be no more than a simple partisan hack. She apparently is not familiar with John McCain or his record on war. John McCain is anything but bloodthirsty. Yet she chose to trick McCain into unflattering photographs for an upcoming cover, then turned around and used the rejects to make a political statement. The good news is that Greenberg has sufficiently honked off The Atlantic Monthly’s editorial staff,, and one would imagine she probably won’t work for them again.

More evidence of her instability: “Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”

Greenberg dances on a thin line between irresponsibility and free speech. When a celebrated periodical with liberal leanings can be disgusted by the actions of a photographer, that is no small accomplishment. Photography is an honorable pursuit. It has great potential to convince, persuade, or in this case, mislead by creating a false reality. People trust photographs, but the truth is, ironically, every photograph is a lie. Even the portrait of McCain The Atlantic chose was intentionally created to be as unflattering as possible.

When The Atlantic called Jill Greenberg,, a committed Democrat, to shoot a portrait of John McCain for its October cover, she rubbed her hands with glee.

She delivered the image the magazine asked for—a shot that makes the Republican presidential nominee look heroic. Greenberg is well known for her highly retouched images of bears and crying babies. But she didn’t bother to do much retouching on her McCain images. “I left his eyes red and his skin looking bad,” she says.

What was firing was a strobe positioned below him, which cast the horror movie shadows across his face and on the wall right behind him. “He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.

Even the Photography blogs are ripping her for this one, and rightfully so. This abuse of her artistic license is simply unethical, and she is rightly being castigated for it.

Jill Greenberg is the photographer who several years back taunted babies until they started crying,, then photographed them, and then played some photoshop tricks to enhance the textures of the babies skin and tears, then created an art show out of them. As an advocate of free speech, one can hardly begrudge her right to say what she will about whatever political mood strikes her. Greenberg is an avowed Democrat, she does not like the war in Iraq, and she chose to make a statement as such. On it’s face, she made art. Not all art should be pleasing. What art should do is elicit some emotional response, among other things. For that much, she deserves credit.

But that’s all she deserves credit for. This writer has a hard time respecting anyone who would make a baby cry for a cynical artistic purpose, and most of my liberal friends agree on this point. Now she has struck again, , this time as a contractor for Atlantic Monthly. Greenberg turns out politically to be no more than a simple partisan hack. She apparently is not familiar with John McCain or his record on war. John McCain is anything but bloodthirsty. Yet she chose to trick McCain into unflattering photographs for an upcoming cover, then turned around and used the rejects to make a political statement. The good news is that Greenberg has sufficiently honked off The Atlantic Monthly’s editorial staff,, and one would imagine she probably won’t work for them again.

More evidence of her instability: “Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”

Greenberg dances on a thin line between irresponsibility and free speech. When a celebrated periodical with liberal leanings can be disgusted by the actions of a photographer, that is no small accomplishment. Photography is an honorable pursuit. It has great potential to convince, persuade, or in this case, mislead by creating a false reality. People trust photographs, but the truth is, ironically, every photograph is a lie. Even the portrait of McCain The Atlantic chose was intentionally created to be as unflattering as possible.

When The Atlantic called Jill Greenberg,, a committed Democrat, to shoot a portrait of John McCain for its October cover, she rubbed her hands with glee.

She delivered the image the magazine asked for—a shot that makes the Republican presidential nominee look heroic. Greenberg is well known for her highly retouched images of bears and crying babies. But she didn’t bother to do much retouching on her McCain images. “I left his eyes red and his skin looking bad,” she says.

What was firing was a strobe positioned below him, which cast the horror movie shadows across his face and on the wall right behind him. “He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.

Even the Photography blogs are ripping her for this one, and rightfully so. This abuse of her artistic license is simply unethical, and she is rightly being castigated for it.

When it comes to faith, there are two types of people in the world. Those who put their faith in a higher power, and those who put their faith in man. Sarah Palin was heard to say that her congregation should pray we were on God’s side in the Iraq war. The leftists out there are leaving a critical component out of that statement when they report it. Palin’s exact, full quote was “Pray that our national leaders are sending our troops on a task that is from God.” Contrast that to the knee jerk left asserting that Palin said “Our national leaders are sending our troops on a task that is from God.” Or worse, some blogs I’ve read seem like people who are reading this quote can not comprehend English. Palin, echoing the same sentiments offered by Lincoln, FDR, and Kennedy, says essentially we should pray we’re doing the right thing. The left needs to distort this to something that it is not.

Saying the mere words “mission from God” antagonizes Atheists and Agnostics who are threatened by the very belief there is something bigger than them. Even though Palin was reflecting a humility rare among politicians, this statement is barely 6 hours old and it has been warped by the secular left.

Those who decry “there is no God” are lying, most of them. Atheists deny the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, but that does not mean they do not worship the same god that all of Secular Humanity worships. That would be man. It is that faith in man that leads to the folly and poison that is Socialism. The irony of American Politics is that most Democrats do not realize what socialism is. In a recent email exchange, a friend of mine cried foul when I used the ‘S’ word. “Why does everyone think Democrats are all socialists who want to give away the American economy?”

Socialism’s seductive power starts with the belief system that says man is essentially good, and when given his opportunity, will do good. The major flaw with Socialism is its humanistic foundation. Given the premise that resource ownership translates to power, when the resources of a given state are all funneled through a central distribution channel, the massive power that accrues has proven time and again to be impossible to resist.

Judeo-Christian belief is the diametric opposite of that world view. Judeo-Christian belief says man is essentially bad and can only be made whole through the redemption of forgiveness. The Judeo-Christian tradition recognizes the limitations of our evolution, and seeks to limit it with a belief system of benevolence and forgiveness. Conservatism naturally bases its tenets in this system. Conservatism requires power be balanced among ALL the people through liberty and justice for all.

Joe Biden says if Sarah Palin is elected Vice President, “it would be a backward step for women.”

Carol Fowler says Palin’s only qualification is that she “hasn’t had an abortion.”

Joan Cusack, posing under the pen name Cintra Wilson at Salon.com, thinks Sarah Palin is a religious nut who is after your freedom. She even goes so far as to suggest all women should be mad as hell and ready to not take it anymore, or words to that effect.

And then Barack Obama himself dared tread on the lipstick turf yesterday, then dropped his own crocodile tears in response to Republicans pointing out the foolishness of his not so clever attempts.

The fact is, most of you ladies out there seem to be identifying with Sarah Palin. She’s just like you in a lot of ways. She’s a mom, she’s thrifty, she’s practical, she’s well-spoken, and she’s conservative. The fact is, she represents true feminism better than any possible choice, and that has liberals up in arms.

Biden, Fowler, and Cusack along with countless others are thumbing their noses at you and your values. They want your votes or your entertainment dollar, but the fact is they think you’re a rube if you identify with Sarah Palin.

Why is that?

Well first, Sarah Palin redefines feminism in ways traditional feminists abhor. Feminism in the tradition of Gloria Steinem was a failure, and feminists who still embrace that school of thought see Palin’s traditional home and values as an invalidation of the notion of women being just like men. The fact has always been that women are not just like men, and Palin shows us that they’re that much the better for it.

Second, Sarah Palin is religious, and that scares the fire out of secular liberals. They’ve managed to gain such a choke-hold on domestic affairs, they assume only those from their secularist faith should be allowed to enter political discussion. The paranoia stinks like much of the discussion concerning John F. Kennedy’s Catholicism. When Kennedy ran, it was not unusual to hear talk of answering to the Pope. Now, according to Cusack’s “There are those who will find comfort in the fact that they will know exactly what can be expected from Palin: Free will subordinated to obedience of an airtight, evangelical interpretation of the demands of God, country and Republican men.” The ignorance is stunning, but it is born of the same virus as Kennedy’s problems.

The fact is, Sarah Palin’s record shows she governs according to the law, not her religion.

Such paranoid histrionics are driving the venom that liberals throw at Palin, and by proxy you, your mom, your sisters, your cousins, and your friends. Any of us who are or who honor the women of this country who have provided our moral backbone for 230 years should be deeply offended at the Liberal Community over their behavior. The mere suggestion that they own the feminist turf based on their arcane secular world-view is patently false. What they fear is the invalidation of their political foundations.

The Obama Campaign still has not figured out what hit them and continues to dig itself a deeper and deeper hole. It is apparent to this writer that the problems they face based on their secular and narcissistic values will take longer than they have to overcome. Obama can not win without you, the hockey/soccer/Wal-Mart moms out there. Why they continue insulting the very demographic they need to win this November defies logical explanation. And ultimately, that’s the answer this writer is seeking. This is not a rational discussion.

Joe Biden says if Sarah Palin is elected Vice President, “it would be a backward step for women.”

Carol Fowler says Palin’s only qualification is that she “hasn’t had an abortion.”

Joan Cusack, posing as someone named Cintra Wilson, thinks Sarah Palin is a religious nut who is after your freedom.](http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/10/palin_feminism/). She even goes so far as to suggest all women should be mad as hell and ready to not take it anymore, or words to that effect.

And then Barack Obama himself dared tread on the lipstick turf yesterday, then dropped his own crocodile tears in response to Republicans pointing out the foolishness of his not so clever attempts.

The fact is, most of you ladies out there seem to be identifying with Sarah Palin. She’s just like you in a lot of ways. She’s a mom, she’s thrifty, she’s practical, she’s well-spoken, and she’s conservative. The fact is, she represents true feminism better than any possible choice, and that has liberals up in arms.

Biden, Fowler, and Cusack along with countless others are thumbing their noses at you and your values. They want your votes or your entertainment dollar, but the fact is they think you’re a rube if you identify with Sarah Palin.

Why is that?

Well first, Sarah Palin redefines feminism. Feminism in the tradition of Gloria Steinem was a failure, and feminists who still embrace that school of thought see Palin’s traditional home and values as an invalidation of the notion of women being just like men. The fact has always been that women are not just like men, and Palin shows us that they’re that much the better for it.

Second, Sarah Palin is religious, and that scares the fire out of secular liberals. They’ve managed to gain such a choke-hold on domestic affairs, they assume only those from their secularist faith should be allowed to enter political discussion. The paranoia stinks like much of the discussion concerning John F. Kennedy’s Catholicism. When Kennedy ran, it was not unusual to hear talk of answering to the Pope. Now, according to Cusack’s “There are those who will find comfort in the fact that they will know exactly what can be expected from Palin: Free will subordinated to obedience of an airtight, evangelical interpretation of the demands of God, country and Republican men.” The ignorance is stunning, but it is born of the same virus as Kennedy’s problems.

The fact is, Sarah Palin’s record shows she governs according to the law, not her religion.

Such paranoid histrionics are driving the venom liberals are thrown at Palin, and by proxy you, your mom, your sisters, your cousins, and your friends. Any of us who are or who honor the women of this country who have provided our moral backbone for 230 years should be deeply offended at the Liberal Community over their behavior. The mere suggestion that they own the feminist turf based on their arcane secular world-view is patently false. What they fear is the invalidation of Palin’s rise.

The Obama Campaign still has not figured out what hit them and continues to dig itself a deeper and deeper hole. It is apparent to this writer that the problems they face based on their secular and narcissistic values will take longer than they have to overcome. Obama can not win without you, the hockey/soccer/Wal-Mart moms out there. Why they continue insulting the very demographic they need to win this November defies logical explanation. And ultimately, that’s the answer this writer is seeking. This is not a rational discussion.

Joe Biden says if Sarah Palin is elected Vice President, “it would be a backward step for women.”

Carol Fowler says Palin’s only qualification is that she “hasn’t had an abortion.”

Joan Cusack, posing as someone named Cintra Wilson, thinks Sarah Palin is a religious nut who is after your freedom.](http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/10/palin_feminism/). She even goes so far as to suggest all women should be mad as hell and ready to not take it anymore, or words to that effect.

And then Barack Obama himself dared tread on the lipstick turf yesterday, then dropped his own crocodile tears in response to Republicans pointing out the foolishness of his not so clever attempts.

The fact is, most of you ladies out there seem to be identifying with Sarah Palin. She’s just like you in a lot of ways. She’s a mom, she’s thrifty, she’s practical, she’s well-spoken, and she’s conservative. The fact is, she represents true feminism better than any possible choice, and that has liberals up in arms.

Biden, Fowler, and Cusack along with countless others are thumbing their noses at you and your values. They want your votes or your entertainment dollar, but the fact is they think you’re a rube if you identify with Sarah Palin.

Why is that?

Well first, Sarah Palin redefines feminism. Feminism in the tradition of Gloria Steinem was a failure, and feminists who still embrace that school of thought see Palin’s traditional home and values as an invalidation of the notion of women being just like men. The fact has always been that women are not just like men, and Palin shows us that they’re that much the better for it.

Second, Sarah Palin is religious, and that scares the fire out of secular liberals. They’ve managed to gain such a choke-hold on domestic affairs, they assume only those from their secularist faith should be allowed to enter political discussion. The paranoia stinks like much of the discussion concerning John F. Kennedy’s Catholicism. When Kennedy ran, it was not unusual to hear talk of answering to the Pope. Now, according to Cusack’s “There are those who will find comfort in the fact that they will know exactly what can be expected from Palin: Free will subordinated to obedience of an airtight, evangelical interpretation of the demands of God, country and Republican men.” The ignorance is stunning, but it is born of the same virus as Kennedy’s problems.

The fact is, Sarah Palin’s record shows she governs according to the law, not her religion.

Such paranoid histrionics are driving the venom liberals are thrown at Palin, and by proxy you, your mom, your sisters, your cousins, and your friends. Any of us who are or who honor the women of this country who have provided our moral backbone for 230 years should be deeply offended at the Liberal Community over their behavior. The mere suggestion that they own the feminist turf based on their arcane secular world-view is patently false. What they fear is the invalidation of Palin’s rise.

The Obama Campaign still has not figured out what hit them and continues to dig itself a deeper and deeper hole. It is apparent to this writer that the problems they face based on their secular and narcissistic values will take longer than they have to overcome. Obama can not win without you, the hockey/soccer/Wal-Mart moms out there. Why they continue insulting the very demographic they need to win this November defies logical explanation. And ultimately, that’s the answer this writer is seeking. This is not a rational discussion.

For the last few days I’ve been watching the evening news shows and I hear precious little about John McCain. As a political strategy, the timing and selection of Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin could be the most astute,

The problems for Obama are complex. His arrogance and that of his supporters is epic. His indulgence of the Seventh Deadly Sin is working wonders against his campaign because they have not the capacity to deal with the grass roots appeal of their opponents. For 18 months they have labored under the assumption that “(they) are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” Now here comes the wildly popular Vice Presidential candidate, and they can’t take their eyes off her her long enough to say anything more than the tired and wholly inaccurate mantra that John McCain is “more of the same.” Palin is wildly popular with women, many of whom made up that assumed majority Obama’s been going to bed every night assuming were in his pocket. Even some Hillary supporters and feminists otherwise are re-evaluating their assumptions about Republicans because of Conservatives’ unqualified acceptance and devotion to her. Sarah Palin and John McCain both are real reformers. Obama arguably is not. Obama is running on a platform that requires people believe John McCain is the same as George W. Bush. That is patently false. Let us not forget that John McCain voted against the most basic of George Bush’s acts as President, the tax cuts that were wildly popular amongst we Conservatives. In fact, not long ago, I spent several nights banging out emails urging my Conservative friends to disdain the radio talking points about McCain over that vote. I said then and it rings so much more true now, John McCain didn’t support those cuts because the bill did not include the requisite spending cuts to go with them. John McCain votes his conscience, and guess what? That means 90% of the time in the last administration he has supported the Republican President. But the very fact that he is here to cut spending terminates any argument that McCain is Bush III.

All Barack Obama has left at this point are jokes about lipstick and stinky fish.

Our Congress and President suffer now from unthinkably low approval ratings because Americans are fed up with the sniping, and Republicans are fed up with their own party’s largesse. John McCain’s Convention speech reflected that very sentiment. Republicans have been in the doldrums most of this year. They had lost faith in the Republican party’s commitment to true conservatism, whose foundations are the twin pillars of reduced spending small government. George W. Bush has given us neither. The primary campaign left us cold in terms of what most Conservatives felt about McCain. That perception aggravated by talk show pundits who decried McCain’s Maverick voting record as more evidence of the death of true Conservatism. I thought those arguments were ridiculous. John McCain has always voted his conscience, even if it went against the party lines. Given the state of the Conservative mind on the morning of August 29, it should not be a surprise to anyone what happened around the lunch hour that day. The Great Conservative Awakening was on, and the Obama Campaign as been reeling ever since.

Impeccably timed less than 14 hours from the end of the DNC’s Obamopolis speech, McCain may have dropped the biggest bombshell in US Political History. What Democrats and Liberals still have not grasped is why Sarah Palin has galvanized the sleeping silent majority and turned the 2008 election on it’s ear. Where Obama and his supporters seemingly assumed they would sail smooth waters into the White House and secure a veto-proof majority, suddenly and swiftly McCain capsized their boat and they’ve been flailing wildly ever since. The attack took a week to complete, the explosion reverberated for another week in the form of the rampant attention and attacks on Sarah Palin, and now this week continues in the form of stupid gaffe after stupid gaffe. Next week, or at some point soon, I expect the next wave of contrition and credibility crippling backpedaling to start in.

Lipstick on a pig? No, he certainly didn’t mean to point that directly at Palin. What can not be argued however is the stupidity of choosing that old joke. Obama should not leave his intent open to question, yet, he did. This is not the stuff of a competent campaign.

Given McCain’s move and it’s brilliance, once has to wonder how it could have had the effect we’ve witnessed? This effect would not have been seen with any other Conservative candidate. The primary season was lukewarm at best because all the candidates were seen as not comparing favorably to the standard-bearer, Ronald Reagan. Where is our Reagan? We mused, while watching the sterling podium performances put on by Barack Obama. Then here comes Sarah. Sarah Palin. Sarah Barracuda to some, a nickname I am not all that comfortable with in the political context. She’s the true, well-spoken conservative Republicans have been waiting for. The most important aspect of McCain’s decisions to put the undeniably Reagan Conservative Palin on the ticket as his complement is the message to his party. Once he nominated Palin, there could be no further doubt of McCain’s dedication to Conservative values.

And the Democrats keep doing stupid things.

As Americans enter the voting booth come November 4th, they will take the measure of men and a woman and decide who they trust with the responsibility of the Presidency of the United States. This election, like all others, will come down to one single issue. Who do you trust?

Barack Obama and the Democrats certainly put on an impressive, majestic performance in Denver last week. It was big and overproduced, in a football stadium with 80,000 screaming fans and a gushing media to hyperbolize. Obama’s speech was loud and full of liberal platitude. It also spent and inordinate amount of time attacking John McCain, their self centered sense of destiny’s mortal threat.

John McCain’s speech tonight was not slick. In fact, it was downright awkward in places. While it wasn’t the smooth production Obama put on last week, it was genuine and real. It started with his narrative, it ended with a challenge.

Sometimes genuine and real are not pretty. While Americans can be distracted by polish, they are only attracted to truth and integrity. Sometimes truth may seem mundane in the wake of dogs and ponies. But truth is what Americans know. And to truth Americans respond. Americans will know that Obama lacks the depth of life experience of McCain. They will also recognize he doesn’t even match Palin on that measure. Americans will recognize Obama for the self-centered, Me First, Country Second political hack that he is. Americans will see in John McCain the journey that started as an arrogant young fighter pilot, was shaped by horrific experiences, and continued on a new course of service and responsibility.

The American Presidency at its best since George Washington has been a position of Service and Responsibility. The Constitution guarantees us it is no more than a position of influence, and certainly not a position of Power and Prestige over the people it leads. Our Democratic friends proceed with a sense that they are the moral authority, and as such, they deserve the Presidency, and all positions of leadership while we’re at it. But see, it is the self-centeredness of moral relativism that leads them to that position. Their pessimism leads them down the path of anger. The United States of America as a whole is not an angry nation. In the end, Americans will know who is the right choice.

Further complicating matters is Sarah Palin. How unlikely, that. Sarah Palin is 44 years old. She graduated from high school when Ronald Reagan was President. She pursued a career in anything but politics. She was raised a frontier girl in a solid, Christian household. In her was cultivated in the harsh Alaska winters the standard American values on which our Country was founded. She didn’t set out to seek power, she was drafted into Political Service. She brought her integrity into office, and her People surely know. History will tell us whether she has the character to absorb this whirlwind, and keep true to herself. America will be so much the better for her efforts if she succeeds.

Republicans know the real deal when they see it, and that’s why she has united the base. It’s not because she shares the Faith most of them do. It’s not because she forces her morality on the people she serves. It is because she functions as an executive should function, true to the purpose of her position as a servant and guardian of the people of her state. She has assumed the mantle as leader of the Conservative movement simply because she has the clear-eyed vision to believe it is possible to do the right thing. This writer prays she continues to be up to the task. Republicans could only have prayed for such a thing to happen this week. But, surely enough, it has.

This is truly an Historic, epic election. We’ve been struck, almost dumb, by an enemy who wants us dead as a matter of their religion. We’ve fought amongst ourselves, and we’ve seen but not recognized the consequences of liberal policy in the meltdown of our real estate market. Our lack of diligence on energy has thrown us into an crisis as the supply of the critical resource of our economy has been restricted. We continue our fight against terrorism. We continue now a fight for our very soul. Do we choose the path of socialism as so many have in the past? Or we fight to keep the America we know?

John McCain knows what we should do. To the rowdy and raucous cheers of Republicans, he ended his speech:

“Fight for what’s right for our country.

Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.

Fight for our children’s future.

Fight for justice and opportunity for all.

Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.

Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America.

Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We’re Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history. Fight with me, Join with me…”

We have to fight. We have to resist the temptation to replace weak times with government control, for the more government gives us, the more it can take away. Our forbearers did not sacrifice for us to give the nation over to the tyrants they fought to replace.

In the end, John McCain has served his country for his entire life with honor. His next act of service, should Americans see what I see, will be to serve his country as President. After a successful Presidency of four or eight years, he will leave that post with one final act of service, having introduced us to Sarah Palin.

The founders talked of Divine Providence. While other candidates would seemingly have lacked the courage to deviate too far from the expected, Divine Providence gave us John McCain. Only John McCain would have the audacity to select a young, unafraid, woman with the very virtues and values we need as the future heir-apparent to continue the work he begins tonight. Is it possible that we could finally clean up the mess that is Washington? Can it be true? If so, it is a beautiful story we can only hope Americans are capable of recognizing.

So, on November 4th, Americans will choose between integrity and service, or government control sold to us through eloquence and celebrity. They’ll choose between the real, and the fake. Americans have a nose for what’s fake. Americans will choose John McCain.

Tonight Barack Obama served up a heaping glop of baby food. A purely rhetorical puddle of goo that sounds more like it leans toward traditional Socialism than traditional Democrats. What stood out on this night was his deeply personal, negative attacks on John McCain. He spent a long time bashing and challenging John McCain after a patronizing nod to his service to our Country. His attacks should make easy fodder for McCain and Republicans next week in Minneapolis.