The Job Warrior: My Experience Losing a Job and Getting Another During a Hiring Freeze

I walked into my job a few weeks ago and was informed that I was unemployed. Pretty much that was it. Merry Christmas and good luck paying rent and buying groceries. Without getting into particulars, I went from being the top salesman to being a former employee. Not an easy thing to walk home and tell my wife when just about the entire country is on a hiring freeze. The first thing I did... in fact, the same day, I went to see my previous employer, a man who had not wanted me to leave in the first place. In fact, the only reason I left was because I was working both jobs at the same time, and the assistant manager making the schedule couldn't or wouldn't reconcile the two schedules. But what I did was leave on good terms with plenty of notice, and I kept in touch and on friendly terms with the previous employer. Granted, it was easy, because the previous job was in a supermarket. But my wife and I talked to the manager, a great guy named Matthew, like a friend. Sometimes it was no more than a greeting, a 'How are things, Matthew?', but my wife and I both kept him in our orbit. Part of the family. We genuinely like Matthew, and he has always been a friend regardless of the job. At the same time, I knew that my first responsibility when faced with unemployment was to get another job. And the obvious first move was to go back to the man who said that he'd love to have me back. So I put on some smart clothes (as my wife really taught me well, put your best foot forward. Dress for what you want to be) and went to see Matthew. I didn't try to BS Matthew. I didn't beat around the bushes. I told him I needed a job. He said that the company had a district-wide hiring freeze, but that he would see what he could do. He said I should come back in a few days and talk to him. At that point I have to admit I was let down. I'd walked in figuring I'd walk out with a job. Then I had to assumed that the hiring freeze would be non-negotiable. So I went home (I even stopped on the way home to try to pick up an application. No dice. This place that had a help wanted sign wouldn't even let me apply because they weren't hiring) and got onto Monster.com. I updated my resume and started searching for jobs that I am qualified. 'Retail' and 'customer service' were my keywords. That's because for the last 18 years I've been in the retail/customer service trenches. I have extensive experience in that arena, and most of those 18 years in fastfood, which is, to my experience, the most challenging customer service arena. My wife and I even considered leaving town while we had some savings to work with, but we were also concerned that we wouldn't find the job situation any better where we went. We settled on giving our town a week or two before we gave up on it and left. With that in mind, I opened up my job search parameters for some places we considered moving to. With all of that in mind, I set about applying for jobs via Monster.com. I should note that before I started job hunting, I got up early, had a good breakfast, showered, shaved, and dressed as if I was going to work. I thought it was important to approach the job search as a job itself. It might be tempting to sleep in and give up shaving and sit around in sweat pants and a ratty old shirt, but that is too much vacation mode for the serious work of job hunting. I also set a minimum of four applications filled out each day before I stopped. Discipline was vitally important for my motivation and mindset, and was necessary to get another job quickly. And I knew that I had to get another job quickly. And something else. I was told by many friends that I should apply for unemployment. Maybe I should have, but to be honest, I didn't want to ask for any kind of financial assistance unless I absolutely needed it, and at that moment I didn't think we did. I was paid for vacation time that I had coming (almost a week), plus a paycheck, plus a bit of savings. If we hadn't had that, or if it had taken too long to get another job, it would have been different. But I thought that to apply for unemployment would also have been bad in a motivational sense. And, to be honest, pride got in the way. It wouldn't have remained in the way for long, but it was there at that point. I didn't want to see myself on the news as part of the huge number of jobless claims making headlines.So, on to the job search. Monster.com showed (what was for me) a surprising lack of opportunity for retail/customer service specialists. What I had failed to take into account was that one of the hardest hit sectors of our economy is retail. People are simply less and less encouraged to go out and spend money if they don't have to. And of course, especially close to the end of the year, companies don't tend to hire full-time, permanent people. I did get a quick response from a local advertising firm, and dressed up nicely and took 3 buses to get to their office for an interview. It turned out that they were hiring people to sell things from booths (I won't get any more specific, as I don't want to identitfy the firm in question) on a strictly commission basis. That is okay for some, and they said that people could make quite a bit of money doing it, but I have regular bills and a family that depends on me. I need a regular paycheck that I can depend on. But the point is, I tried. I put my best foot forward. I went to a bit of effort.At this point, the few days that Matthew had said to wait had gone by. I called the supermarket to make sure he was in, and dressed nicely again and went to see him. Then the really bad news. Matthew said that the hiring freeze was still on. He couldn't hire me. I was pretty disappointed at that point, but I thanked him for trying and tried to not show my disappointment. That was really the worst moment of the job search, because I'd put a lot of hope in getting that job back. Ah, but then two days later, I found out that Matthew hadn't given up. He went to bat for me with human resources and managed to arrange to bring me back as a rehire rather than a new hire. To start, I would actually have to take an almost 4 dollar an hour pay cut, but after the first of the year there should be a departmental manager position opening that needed to be an in-house promotion. It was just important that I get my foot in the door. I took the offer without hesitation, and my job search that really had me scared only lasted one week. I was very lucky. I know that people have spent six months or more looking for work and not found any. I know that there are lessons to be learned from my situation. First and foremost, don't burn your bridges. Give plenty of notice, treat employers with respect, and don't be afraid to go back to them. Treat your job search like a job, not a vacation. Listen to your spouse. They are intelligent and resourceful, and can help you. I know mine helps me. I wouldn't take this world on without her. Don't dismiss jobs that you think are below you. There is no such thing as a bad job if it is honest and supports your family. For example, I was prepared to go back to fastfood if I had to. I wasn't enthusiastic about the possibility, but I was prepared to do it anyway. Pride is important, but you can't support a family on pride. In fact, Matthew was concerned that I might not want to take the pay cut and come back as a courtesy clerk (among other things, we bag groceries and retrieve shopping carts). My wife and I both said that I'd take anything. I'm happy to have it. And one other thing. If you have the opportunity to go to college, take it. Get yourself a degree in a subject that interests you but that is also marketable. I was in the military, but failed to sign up for the G.I. Bill, and I have regretted it ever since. I'm not saying that my professional life would be better if I had a degree (because there are plenty of unemployed college graduates), but I certainly would have had more opportunities.

Rewarding Poor Performance

With a frighteningly bad economy, Congress has voted itself a raise. Rather like the CEO of a nearly bankrupt corporation begging for money one day, then granting himself a bonus the next. Yes, unbelievable as it is, with our economy in the tank, a seven trillion dollar rescue package that just didn't work (and, yes, it really is $7 trillion. Even the mainstream media is starting to admit that), a debt spiralling faster than hurricane Katrina, Federal lawmakers have given themselves a raise that will give each of them $4700 more next year, with a price tag of $2.5 million.

I'm not going to talk about their unforgivable audacity, because it has become so commonplace, it would be like complaining about the sun coming up. Really, what can be said that hasn't been said a thousand times before? We know how bad they really are, and how little they obviously care about the people they're supposed to represent, or the state of the country as a whole.

Granted, $4700 a year equals out to just $90.38 a week, but the point is that they don't need it and they certainly don't deserve it. Taking the math a little further, that price tag of $2.5 million dollars divided by the $4700 a week (and this all comes from Fox News, which I trust more than the networks or CNN), comes to 531.9. I won't speculate as to who the '.9' is, :) but really, what they're doing to reward themselves for running the country into the ground is taking the equivalent of $90 a week out of the household budgets of 531 families. So come on, Brian Williams, tell the people about it. Mister President-elect, where is your outrage? Mister Reid, Ms Pelosi, where are the hearings? Why isn't Wolf Blitzer talking about it?

I'd really like to see a public, national referendum approve every raise that our so-called representatives give themselves. If it is so important that the snakes can spend $2.5 million when we're in debt up to our eyeballs, then certainly it's worth the trouble of asking the people who are forced to pay for it.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas

Folks, there is a project I've been associated with for a few months now, called "The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas". Rather than trying to explain it myself, I am going to paste a release of sorts that the organizer Kirok of House L'Stok wrote.

 

The Twelve Trek Days of Christmas has started for a second year, when we celebrate the traditional Season of Goodwill by giving away twelve "presents" from the Star Trek fan production community. In a way it's Christmas all year round for them since fan productions are only allowed by the copyright owners if they are provided to the public for free. Accept them as our tribute to the original actors, writers and production crews, to maintain interest in the originals, build support for future professional productions and extend on the Star Trek universe with our own creative visions.

On the first day of Christmas, Star Trek gave to me ... a Fan-Made Audio Book! <http://www.twerponline.net/12days2008/day01.html>

The present for The First Trek Day of Christmas is "Fatherhood", the second episode from the audio book series, "Tales of Death and Honour". Designed as a trilogy, the series started off earlier this year with "Motherhood", an original tale of love and loss on the Klingon homeworld, and this episode extends on that life and death struggle with a rescue from an unexpected source! It is produced by Silvertongue Productions, the audio productions group of The House of L'Stok, an experimental multimedia production house for the creation of fan and smallscale Indie productions. For more information about this and other productions of the House of L'Stok, checkout the website at http://lstok.blogspot.com

Unfortunately, in the best tradition of fan productions it's late! But by way of an apology for keeping you waiting, and to wet your whistle
for the new episode, we offer you the new series trailer for Tales of Death and Honour which is available on the TrekUnited Audio Centre
at ... <http://www.scifitube.com/trekunited/audio/DAH-Teaser1.1b.mp3>

 

I have two submissions..... One (On Day Ten) is a Fan-Made game called Fantasy Trek that you can preview at http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/

The other (On Day Eleven) is an ebook of three "Enterprise Virtual Season" episodes... and they can be previewed at http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/

 

 

 

KBF-Kapact

IKS tIQghoB
"Surrender or be des-"
{sound of explosion}

Klingon Black Fleet
"...laughing, undefeated..."

What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com/
http://houseabukoff.blogspot.com
http://kapactsrant.blogspot.com/
http://startrekenterprisevirtualseasons.blogspot.com/

It's Still Country First

Talking about the Auto Bailout, I'd like to say that I don't like bailouts.
I think they're anti-capitalism and essentially therefore unAmerican. I
don't think they'll solve the problem, and I think that as always, our
supposed representatives don't in fact care about the Big Three, the jobs to
be saved or lost, or just incidentally, the billions of tax dollars from WE
THE PEOPLE that these vampires in suits push around like pawns on a
chessboard. I find it quite funny in fact that most of these tin-plated
dictators helped to cause the problem that they're using to humiliate CEO's
and dupe WE THE PEOPLE into thinking that they serve a purpose and deserve
to be anywhere but in prison. Given all that, we need to stop the Big Three
from going into bankruptcy because if they go out of business then not only
do their workers go on unemployment, but the companies who supply parts to
them go out of business too. And then all of those workers go on umployment
too. Quite honestly, we can't afford that. And really, Senate Republicans
showed us again why they were so humiliated in the elections. They have been
so blinded by ideology that common sense plays no part in their
decision-making process. I know that a huge part of the problem facing the
Big Three is the strangle-hold that labor unions have on the automakers. And
in fact, all the money in the world won't solve the Big Three's problems
until people can actually start buying their cars. But we still need to keep
all of those people from being put out of work. That is something we simply
can't afford.

Now... what can I say about Rod Blagojevich? He typifies the arrogance and
crookedness that is really at the heart of the Chicago machine that has now
bought and engineered two presidential elections. And the Obama aide who
lied about whether or not the President-elect consulted with the governor on
November 5th. He also typifies the arrogance and crookedness that is so much
at the heart of most politicians. What did the president-elect know, and
when did he know it? The snake of a governor simply isn't worth more time or
energy.

All of this really comes down to the idea of Country First, because the
validity of that concept didn't change on November 5th. When you look at all
these senators and representatives hanging billions of dollars of taxpayer's
money in front of panhandling CEO's, and the network cameras, showing us how
important they are, and how much we need them to solve our problems,
(despite the really rotten job they've done so far), do you really think
that they're thinking Country First? When you hear a corrupt liberal
governor talk about how much he's going to sell a senate seat for, do the
words Country First come into it anywhere? We've got a president looking the
other way while American citizens living on the southern border are
kidnapped by invading Mexican druglords, or refusing to pardon two border
patrol guards who were arrested for shooting a Mexican druglord in the rear,
and I just don't see Country First coming into the decision-making process.
There are only two professions where you can be consistently wrong and still
call yourself an expert. One is being a weather person (and I never believe
them anyway). The other is being a politician.

The American Inquisition or: I Wonder If They'd Approve Waterboarding In This Case

I've been watching as much as I can stand of the CEO's of the Big Three
automakers groveling before Congress with expensive hats in hand, begging
for scraps (and not actually from the people who will end up paying). The
first time they came begging, Congress, the media, and the blinded public
didn't question why they needed the money or exactly what they planned to do
with it, or in fact why we should believe it would actually make a
difference. No, all that anyone noticed was that these three rich
panhandlers flew to the inquisition in private jets. Forget that Al "It's
easy being green" Gore does the same as he lectures us about not pumping
filth into the atmosphere. Yes, it was stupid and insensitive, and they
shouldn't have. But we've suddenly forgotten that the smug, sactimonious
tin-plated dictators doing the interrogating are in fact responsible for the
mess that we're in. Mister Dodd. Mister Frank, et al. So what happens? They
send them away and take a vacation.

When they came back, driving all the way in what we're told are energy
efficient cars... and I put it that way because we're not always told the
truth. Like we were told that ethanol was going to solve our problems,
rather than put another hole in the economy. They forgot to take a train.
They neglected to car pool. They didn't hitch a ride with Al Gore. But since
they acknowledged the importance of symbolism over substance, the
inquisitors suddenly saw the urgency of the situation (and coincidentally,
failed to consider the stranglehold that their masters the labor unions have
over the auto industry) and are pushing for a quick passage. Michael Moore
says that capitalism is dead, and he's celebrating that (hence the worldwide
shortage of greasy french fries and peanut brittle this past week). Well,
the alternative is already up and operating. Ever hear of that economic
powerhouse called Cuba? How about North Korea? Yeah. Amazing. Well,
capitalism succeeds when badly run businesses go out of business and make
room for well run businesses. Pumping more money into the Big Three, so that
they can continue to pay ransom to the unions is like pumping more donuts
into Michael Moore in the vain hope that he'll start to lose weight. Odds
are, when they've used up everything you've given them, they'll still run
just as well as they do now.

I know that the Big Three are basketcases, and I know that it was really
stupid for them to fly private jets to beg for hand-outs. But you in
Congress really make yourselves look like petty schoolyard bullies
humiliating the weaker kid when you make people jump through hoops for
scraps. Scraps that come from the hard-earned money of WE THE PEOPLE.

I wonder if they'd approve waterboarding in this case.

Thanksgiving

A little late here, but I wanted to talk just briefly about Thanksgiving Day. I am glad that our Canadian friends celebrate Thanksgiving, even if it's on a different date. While the circumstances behind the holiday are myth-prone and clouded, and we're now told how horrible an effect that Europeans had on the new world. I'm not going to try to defend what happened, but at the same time, the natives (and even they truly were no more native than I am. Their ancestors migrated from China, across the land bridge that used to connect North America to Russia) were not entirely peaceful and prosperous. They warred with each other, suffered from disease, and were, by some reports, in decline as a civilization. But forget all that. What I'm really talking about is the idea of setting a day aside to reflect on all that we really have to be thankful for. We live with more freedom and prosperity than many other countries, even in these days of crisis. We have an issue of too many people wanting in, as opposed to the throngs of refugees in many countries. We have just elected someone from an middle class family of mixed race in a peaceful if passionate election. We can rest assured that once in office, Mister Obama will not seek to change the law to lengthen his term of office.

While many families are in the midst of crisis unseen in this country in years, somehow people still find a way to give what they can for those in more desperate need, and the spirit of optimism and dignity is as evident across the land as ever. We have problems, we know, but we also have great blessings, and we know that. The day after Thanksgiving, I spoke with a couple in the laundromat who lived in a two-room tent, but were washing work-clothes and enjoying each other's company. I'm not trying to say we don't have problems. Not by a long shot. But this country has never failed to rise to challenges, and we always end up better off in the long run. And the fact is that we still have lots to be thankful for. And I might just add that I hate hearing people call Thanksgiving "Turkey Day". That turns the holiday into nothing more than just another excuse to take a long weekend, eat too much, drink too much, and fall asleep in front of the television. That's like changing Christmas to "Present Day".


What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Not That We Don't Love You, But....

I've only met about five Canadians I didn't like. Considering that I don't make it through a week without meeting five Americans that annoy me, five annoying Canadians in a lifetime isn't bad. But here's a serious beef. I met a traveling Canadian who not only told me that their entire country was celebrating obama's election (I didn't ask if that included the conservative pm), but that literally tens of thousands of canadians had come down to the states to volunteer to help obama get elected. Smiling politely, I just said 'Yeah! People from all over the world helped him get elected.'

What I was thinking was get out of my country and get out of my election. I realize that other countries have more of a stake in our election than we do in theirs (primarily I think, because much as the rest of the world likes to spit on us and look down their noses at us, they still depend on us more than they like to admit), and I realize that they think that every American capable of stringing together two syllables must be a liberal (that's what stephen king teaches us, remember.... the same guy who thinks that our soldiers are all illiterate), and I also realize that conservatives don't have feelings (for example, in New Zealand, where they also just elected a conservative pm, I was told that all Americans would have had to have had a lobotomy... because George W Bush was elected). But here's a newsflash from the illiterate unfeeling conservative American Patriot. I would never presume to interfere in your election, and much as I generally like you and your country, I'd like to ask that from now on you stop interfering in our elections. If those tens of thousands of volunteers would maybe try instead to patch up your sieve of a border, we'd have fewer problems. And when you come back (and really, you are welcome. I forgive your ill manners and thoughtless mouth), please don't assume that I agree with your radical and/or ignorant politics. When in doubt, keep your unwanted opinions to yourself.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Our Duty as Americans

I was almost surprised to find Glenn Beck almost supporting Barack Obama the other day, in response to a caller who refused to admit or accept that Obama was going to be our next president. Now, I am not (as you may have guessed), a fan of Obama, and I am in fact convinced that the election was bought and paid for illegally, and it was determined early on that Obama was to be our next president. The facts may never come out, and most likely we are stuck with him for at least four years. But we are indeed stuck with him, and like it or not, it is our duty as Americans to support him as our president (Something most of the fringier liberals never really figured out with George W Bush). Having said that, it is also our duty as Americans to keep an eagle eye on our new employee-in-chief. Obama has skated along for his entire career by keeping just far enough away from the filthy crooks and general scumbags who are behind his power to avoid being seriously linked with them. It requires quite an imagination to not link him to these people (Ayers, Wright, Fannie, Freddie to name a few), but obviously enough first-time (and probably last-time) voters have just that. Well, Mr Obama, you may find that sometime over the next four years, you might just have to commit yourself to something. Granted, most decisions you'll be called upon to make are probably above your paygrade, but you may just find that people like Putin and Ahmedinejad are not as impressed by that as Bart Simpson, Daffy Duck, and "Will, Good" of Austin, Texas were.

So yes, real Americans...  those patriots that you scoffed at, bitterly clinging to guns and religion, they'll support you, probably better than you'll support them. But they'll also be watching you very closely. Just like I will. You actually work for us, Mister Obama, and if you don't do the job right we'll fire you in four years.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Why This Is A Good Thing...

Without preamble, except to say that I am very happy that this historically expensive and ugly campaign is over. What an ugly time it's been. If only I believed that it couldn't get worse. I shudder to think what the next one will be like.

So why is this a good thing for conservatives and bad news for liberals? Well, it is simple. Liberals will run the White House and both houses of Congress. If they fix things, then anyone who truly believes in "Country First" will be happy. Me included. If they make things worse, which I am convinced they will, they'll have nobody else to blame. Congress has been largely liberal for two years and has accomplished nothing but allowing the mortgage and credit meltdown and attaining historically dismal ratings. Now it looks as though they'll have filibuster-proof control. Fine. You promised bipartisanship and delivered partisan hatred unseen in this country in years. Now you've promised change. You'll be held accountable. At the same time, the republican party had six years of control over three branches of government and failed miserably. They lost because they deserved to lose. I can only hope that the next lot that gets in thanks to the democrats' failure will do better.

So in a nutshell, this is why I am so happy with the way the election turned out. (And a big shout-out and thanks to Tony Romo and the gang for registering to vote in Las Vegas, and to Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, and all the other community organizers for buying those untracable prepaid credit cards, from wherever in the wide world they got them:) ! ).

The Republicans who failed so miserably to justify our votes and our support can go home and not come back.

The Democrats will have no one else to blame when their flawed policies fail. And maybe, just maybe, Pelosi and Reid and all the other liberal vipers will get the boot for good.

And mister obama... well, for one thing, you've just demonstrated that 'Affirmative Action' is no longer needed in this country. You've got your chance to 'change' things. If you do, you'll either fix or break this country. If you fix it, fine. I'll vote for your second term. If you break it, well, you'll get rewarded for that too. On the other hand, if you do as you've done before and break your promise, well, we have your promise on tape, and we'll play it endlessly at every opportunity. But think about what 'change' entails. You have two alternatives. You can continue the hand-outs to minorities, you know, the instutionalized slavery called welfare, and change nothing and continue to make the country safe and free for lazy gang-banging crack smoking pimps who probably shot themselves full of speed just so they could crawl to a voting booth and vote for you. That is where we're at now, and Joe the Plumber is working for a living so these particular breed of small business owners can sit on their aspens and fry their brains. So if you want to retain the crackhead vote, don't change too much. On the other hand, if you really do change the status quo, you are likely to lose the support of all of the cartoon characters, pro NFL players and gang-bangers who elected you.


What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Good News!

Just a quick note before work. Tomorrow I'll tell you why the election news is good news for conservatives and bad news for liberals.....



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Another NewsMax special.... "Obama Positions Run Against Grain of Voters"

I don't want you all to think I'm gettiing lazy, but here is another important gem from Newsmax. Ted, who commented last time, I have bad news. That lawsuit has been dismissed. Apparently a single person can stop a Christmas tree from being put up in a mall, but a single person cannot stop someone who is ineligable from running from president. As long as that person is a liberal. Have no fear. If mister barack hussein obama does manage to buy this election, I will declare this blogsite to represent the interests of the American government-in-exile, and maintain a close eye on the government of the Peoples Republic of America.



Obama Positions Run Against Grain of Voters

For the first time in modern political history, American voters appear to be on the verge of electing a president they profoundly disagree with on a stunning array of issues.

Indeed, on subject after subject - ranging from gun ownership, to partial-birth abortion, to English as a national language, to driver's licenses for illegals, and even to raising taxes - voters sharply disagree with Sen. Barack Obama, who some in the mainstream media portray as a virtual shoo-in to win the presidency.

Why would voters flirt with electing a president whose views contradict their own? Blame the economic meltdown on Wall Street, experts say.

"The dramatic downturn in the fortunes of the financial sector in the last month has driven all other issues into the basement," pollster John Zogby of Zogby International told Newsmax.

Almost 65 percent of Americans now say the economy is the No. 1 issue, Zogby said. By comparison, the No. 2 issue on voters' minds, the war on terror, is cited by just 9 percent of voters.

"We almost never get a response like that when we ask about the most important issue facing voters," Zogby said.

So voters are so frustrated over the economy, pollsters say, that they might put a candidate in the White House whose views drastically contradict their own. Consider:

   * On political philosophy, National Journal has identified Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. Year in and year out, a solid 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as "somewhat" or "very" conservative.


   * Obama openly advocates income "redistribution." A June 27 Gallup poll asked 1,625 U.S. adults what approach government should take to fix the economy. By an 84 percent to 13 percent gap, respondents disagree with Obama and oppose redistribution of wealth. (In fact, even 77 percent of Democrats opposed it.)


   * Obama has been an outspoken supporter of bilingual education. In fact, he got in trouble during the primaries by leaving the impression that he might favor mandatory bilingual education for American kids. Here's how U.S. voters feel: 85 percent of Americans believe that English should be designated the language of the United States, according to a June 2006 Rasmussen poll of 1,000 adults.


   * On the right to bear arms, Obama says he supports an individual's right to own guns. But in 1996, he stated on a questionnaire that he opposed the sale, manufacture, and possession or firearms. At a Milwaukee news conference this year, he said cities should be able to enact gun control "to deal with gang-bangers and random shootings." The NRA awarded Obama an "F" grade on protecting Second Amendment rights. On that issue, Obama would appear to be seriously at odds with the average voter. A June 4-5 CNN poll of 1,035 adults nationwide showed that 87 percent oppose "Preventing all Americans from owning guns." Similarly, a Feb. 8-10 Gallup survey of 1,016 adults found that 73 percent agree that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms.

   * During the Democratic primary, Obama repeatedly voiced support for granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, describing it as a public safety issue. Yet 77 percent of Americans oppose giving driver's licenses to illegals, compared with just 16 percent who favor it, according to a Nov. 6, 2007, Rasmussen Reports survey. Even 68 percent of Democrats thought driver's licenses for illegals is a bad idea.


   * Obama has pledged that 95 percent of Americans will actually get a tax cut under his proposals-quite a feat considering that more than a third of American adults currently pay no taxes at all. Promises aside, an August 26 Gallup poll of 1,023 adults shows 53 percent expect Obama to bring higher taxes. A September Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters gave voters a choice: Fewer government services and lower taxes; or more government services and higher taxes. By a 57 to 31 percent margin, voters preferred lower taxes -- even at the cost of fewer government services.


   * On partial-birth abortion, Obama said during an April 26, 2007, Democratic primary debate that he trusts women to decide for themselves if they want them. Obama stated that he strongly disagreed with a Supreme Court decision last year upholding a ban on partial-birth abortions, because it provided no exception provided for a pregnant woman's health. Given such an exception, Obama said he would consider limits on late-term abortion. In August, he said that the question of when a baby qualifies for human rights is "above my pay grade." NARAL, the pro-abortion rights advocacy organization, gives him a perfect 100 pro-choice rating. But 68 percent of voters disagree with Obama and favor a ban on partial-birth abortions, according to a November 2003 Gallup poll of 1,036 adults.


There's no secret to Obama's popularity in the polls despite his unpopular stance on many key issues.

"These are important issues that may drive individual voters away from Obama," Zogby said, "but they are not by a long shot the most important issues in this campaign."

Larry J. Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, isn't at all surprised at Obama's strength, as reflected in many surveys.

"When an incumbent president is at 25 percent in the polls, when 91 percent of Americans say the country is off on the wrong track, and when the economy is very rocky, it is virtually impossible for the White House party to get a third term," he told Newsmax. "I've been studying this subject for 38 years. It really is that simple."

All of which raises the possibility of a country at war electing the candidate widely viewed as less capable of protecting the country.

"McCain is seen far and away as a better commander in chief," Zogby said, "but nobody's thinking about that right now."

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.



What is Fantasy Trek?
Not Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

From "Newsmax": 'Smears' About Obama Largely True

I don't often do a copy and paste job, mainly because unlike Joe Biden and barack hussein obama, I have integrity. But this piece of fantastic work by Lowell Ponte at Newsmax is so important that it has to get out. The left wing liberal drive-by media doesn't want you to know what a danger obama is, but there are truths that have to get out. Truths that show what obama is, what he believes in, what he has done, and the shocking associations he has kept. Guilt by association? When the history is as long and consistent as obama's, you bet. Because at the very least, they show judgement that is frightening. At the most, they show someone who is too dangerous to take a chance on. Not in the world we face today. What Mister Ponte has done has exposed the lies, half-truths, and machiavellian extremes that obama will go to get elected. Just to be completely honest and upfront, the following is not my work. I had nothing to do with it. I am simply sharing it.


'Smears' About Obama Largely True

Monday, October 20, 2008 9:32 PM

By: Lowell Ponte  


The Obama campaign says its candidate is a victim of smears and has even created a Web site to fight such attacks.

But a Newsmax investigation finds many of the so-called smears are largely based in truth and the Obama campaign uses half-truths, clever language, and ad hominem attacks to spin the facts.

Obamas www.FightTheSmears.com focuses mainly on anti-Obama messages being repeated on the Internet and talk radio, the only media where Obama's ideological allies are not dominant.

These "smears" and the Obama rebuttals are often framed in lawyerly language that leaves much wiggle room in the candidate's answers.

FightTheSmears.com also makes no attempt at objectivity, describing Obama's critics as pushing misleading research and distorted claims because they are ideologues busy spreading a pack of lies about Barack.

In a section of the site titled, 'Who's Behind the Smears?' visitors can see a chart naming seven groups and six individuals with lines that suggest multiple, sinister connections between them.

The people and groups named are real and are members of Washington's small but conservative sphere of power and influence. The Obama conspiracy chart links all of these conservative individuals and groups back to the critics who dogged the Clinton 1992 Campaign.

This may come as something as a surprise to Hillary Clinton, as many of the smears against Obama first surfaced during her heated primary contest with him.

Newsmax reviewed 10 random claims and related rebuttals posted on Obama's ever-changing FightTheSmears.com to gauge their veracity. Here's what we found:

Claim No. 1: Obama's campaign is funded by the rich, big corporations and foreigners.

Barack Obama was the only major presidential candidate this year to completely reject contributions from The Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs that have dominated our politics for years, the Obama site says of the persistent online criticisms of its fundraising.

Instead, this campaign has been owned by the more than 3.1 million everyday Americans who have donated in small amounts.

Not so, according to campaign finance records. Nearly half of the $600 million raised by Obama to date has come from wealthy donors and special interests. Obama's allies months ago dropped their ad linking Republican rival Exxon John McCain to Big Oil after it came to light that Obama had taken far more money from Exxon-Mobil than McCain.

The Obama campaign has complied fully with federal election law, claims the Obama site, including donor eligibility and contribution disclosure requirements.

However, one giant loophole the politicians wrote into the law allows contributions in amounts of $200 or less with no donor identification. Obama claims that $300 million in campaign funds was given by these small donors, and he won't release their names and addresses.

McCain has released his whole donor database, including those who have contributed less than $200.

Critics argue that the other half of Obama's campaign haul the part not raised from big corporate donors and special interests came in a small flood of anonymous donations that might be foreign or corrupt, or both.

Claim No. 2: Obama has had a close, ongoing relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.

The Obama site acknowledges that its candidate and Ayers served on the board of an education-reform organization in the mid-1990s, but maintains most stories about the links between Obama and Ayers are phony or exaggerated.

It does not mention that Obama and Ayers worked together on the board distributing millions of dollars with the aim of radicalizing Chicago schoolchildren.

Nor does the site acknowledge that Obama kicked off his first political campaign in the living room of Ayers, the former Weather Underground leader. (Obama is currently saying it was not the first event. There is no dispute that one of Obama's first political events in his first run for public office was held in Ayers' home.)

There is also no dispute the Weather Underground bombed the Pentagon the Capitol, the home of a New York Supreme Court justice, and a police station, among other targets. FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, who infiltrated the group, has recounted Ayers teaching him how to make bombs and saying, 'In the revolution, some innocent people need to die.'

Smear groups and now a desperate McCain campaign are trying to connect Barack to William Ayers using age-old guilt by association techniques . . .� says the Obama Web site.

Actually, McCain and Obama critics are questioning why Obama would continue to associate with a man who, as recently as 2001, said he did not do enough and wished he had bombed more.

Conservatives also note that if Ayers had bombed abortion clinics, the liberal media would brand him a pariah forever. What does it tell us about the liberal media's and Obama's judgment and values that they see nothing wrong with embracing unrepentant terrorist Ayers today?

Claim No. 3: Obama takes advice from executives of troubled mortgage backer Fannie Mae.

John McCain started smearing Obama about non-existent ties to Fannie Mae in some of his deceptive attack ads, says FightTheSmears.com. The site downplays connections between Obama and two former heads of the giant mortgage-backing institution James A. Johnson and Franklin D. Raines whose corruption played a key role in the current financial crisis.

But an editorial in the Aug. 27, 2008, Washington Post described Johnson and Raines, as members of Mr. Obama's political circle.

Raines advised the Obama campaign on housing matters. Obama chose Johnson to select his vice presidential running mate. But because neither are advising Obama today, this Web site's present-tense claim that he 'doesn't [not didn't] take advice from Fannie Mae execs' is technically, if deceptively, true.

Johnson also reportedly helped raise as much as $500,000 for Obama's campaign.

And despite Obama's lack of seniority in the U.S. Senate, he pocketed more than $105,000 in political contributions, the third-highest amount given to any lawmaker, directly from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama's Web site leaves all this unmentioned.

Claim No. 4: Obama has close ties with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), a group suspected of massive voter registration fraud.

Obama's site says the candidate was never an ACORN employee and that ACORN 'was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive [Obama] ran in 1992.'

In defending Obama, the site resorts to smearing former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell calling him a 'discredited Republican voter-suppression guru' for daring to fight the vote fraud so often associated with operatives of ACORN, among the largest radical groups in the United States.

As Newsmax has documented in ["Clever Obama Tries To Bury ACORN Past,"] Obama's Web site is attempting to deceive when it says Obama was never 'hired' to work as a trainer for ACORN's leaders. In fact, he did the work for free from at least 1993 until 2003.

ACORN spokesman Lewis Goldberg acknowledges in the Oct. 11, 2008, New York Times that Obama trained ACORN leaders. And Obama worked as a lawyer for ACORN.

As to heading up Project Vote in Illinois, Obama said during a speech to ACORN leaders last November, "[When] I ran the Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack-dab in the middle of it."

Veteran journalist Karen Tumulty described Project Vote in the Oct. 18, 2004, issue of Time magazine as 'a nonpartisan arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now' after interviewing its national director.

The co-founder of ACORN, former Students for a Democratic Society official Wade Rathke, described Project Vote as one of ACORN's 'family of organizations.'

Over the years, ACORN and its front groups, like the one Obama ran in Illinois, have registered more than 4 million voters. When authorities in Virginia checked ACORN registrations, it found that 83 percent were fraudulent or had problems. This, in theory, could mean ACORN may have created the opportunity for stealing more than 3.3 million votes in this November's election, a margin far wider than that by which Obama is likely to win.

Claim No. 5: Obama has shown only wavering support for individual gun-ownership rights.

"During Barack's career in the Illinois and United States Senates, he proudly stood to defend the rights of hunters and sportsmen," says Obama's Web site, "while doing everything he could to protect children" including his own two daughters "from illegal gun violence."

But the National Rifle Association, it continues, "is distributing a dishonest and cowardly flyer that makes confrontational accusations and runs away from verifying them."

Actually, the NRA does a meticulous job of laying out documentation, as Newsmax reported in September ["NRA to Fight Obama Over Gun Rights Flip-Flops,"] to show that Obama has supported handgun confiscation; the handgun ban in Washington, D.C.; a virtual ban on high-powered rifle ammunition; and many other draconian restrictions on Second Amendment rights.

If elected, wrote the NRA, Obama 'would be the most anti-gun president in American history.'

Claim No. 6: A fervent supporter of abortion rights, Obama supports late-term and partial-birth abortions.

The Obama Web site dismisses such criticism as the work of 'radical anti-abortion ideologues running ads against Barack.'

But as an Illinois state senator, Obama voted repeatedly against legislation to protect infants who, during a late-term abortion, were 'born alive.' Such protection, he has argued, already exists in Illinois; it does, but is subject to the abortionist's decision whether such an infant has a good likelihood of survival.

Nurses have reported instances in which surviving aborted babies were left by abortionists to die without water, food, or warmth.

Obama's Web site notes that even the Republican author of one of these bills, former state Sen. Rick Winkel, has written that 'none of those who voted against [his bill] favored infanticide.'

True, but Obama's site does not quote the rest of Winkel's statement: '[T]heir zeal for pro-choice dogma was clearly the overriding force behind their negative votes rather than concern that my bill would protect babies who are born alive.'

Obama has a 100 percent pro-choice voting record according to NARAL Pro-Choice America; his rating from the National Right to Life Committee is zero.

How extreme is Obama on this issue? In the U.S. Senate, he has voted against bills that would prohibit minors from crossing state lines for abortion without parental notification.

"Look, I got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old," Obama has said. "I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."

Claim No. 7: Obama showed little interest or support for American combat troops during his overseas visits.

Doubts about Obama's true support for the military cropped up during a campaign trip to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Europe.

A widely circulated e-mail, penned by Army Capt. Jeffrey S. Porter, described Obama's visit to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan: "As the Soldiers lined up to shake his hand, he blew them off . . . He again shunned the opportunity to talk to soldiers to thank them for their service . . . I swear we got more thanks from the NBA basketball players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from [Obama]."

Porter later recanted, sending a follow-up e-mail that said, in part: "After checking my sources, information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong." He did not specify which information was wrong, leading Obama skeptics to suspect that this officer has been disciplined by his superiors.

Heading home, Obama touched down in Germany, where he was scheduled to visit the American hospitals at Ramstein and Landstuhl. But as The Washington Post reported, Obama canceled the trips after being told by Pentagon officials that he could only visit in his official capacity as a senator, not as a candidate and could not have his visits with hospitalized soldiers videotaped by the media.

Prominent liberal mainstream media reporters such as NBC's Andrea Mitchell rushed to defend Obama, saying that the press had never planned to cover his visits to military sickbeds. But Obama canceled both visits and used his free time instead to shoot hoops, with the media recording his best shots.

Claim No. 8: Barack Obama is a Muslim.

FightTheSmears.com states bluntly that Obama is a Christian, not a follower of Islam.

In fact, Barack Hussein Obama's Kenyan father was raised Muslim, though he reportedly was not religious.

His mother divorced and remarried another man, a Muslim from Indonesia. As a youngster in Indonesia, Barack Obama attended two schools and was registered at both as a Muslim. He received religious instruction in both schools as a Muslim, including studying the Quran. According to a childhood friend, Obama occasionally attended services at a local mosque.

Obama's Muslim upbringing has been detailed in a 2007 Los Angeles Times report (reprinted in The Baltimore Sun) headlined "Islam an Unknown Factor in Obama Bid." Middle East expert Daniel Pipes has studied the question of Obama's Muslim faith and says he is 'lying' when he says he was never a Muslim.

It's important to note that Obama's Web site does not say he was never a Muslim. But in the past, Obama's site and FightTheSmears.com did make the claim Obama was never a Muslim. Since that claim is obviously false, it is no longer used.

Obama says he became a Christian in his late 20s. He now describes himself as Christian. Until recently, he spent two decades as a member of a Chicago United Church of Christ congregation that embraces Black Liberation theology. Somewhat like the Roman Catholic liberation theology of Latin America, the Chicago UCC church preaches elements of neo-Marxist class warfare. It combines these radical socialist elements with black racialism.

Claim No. 9: As president, Obama would raise taxes dramatically for most Americans.

Millions of Americans recognize that Obama is likely to raise taxes. But like a good conjurer, who tricks you into watching his right hand while doing things with his left, the Obama Web site assures readers with a red herring.

The Illinois senator will not tax your water, as claimed in some fringe e-mails, FightTheSmears.com maintains.

What Obama will do, however, is tax businesses and capital gains more heavily, even though America already has the world's second-highest business taxes.

"Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases" said former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson at the 2008 Republican National Convention. "They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax businesses! So unless you buy something from a business, like groceries or clothes or gasoline . . . or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small business, don't worry. It's not going to affect you."

During his campaign, Obama has promised to raise various taxes that will fall on most economic classes, including the dividend tax, the FICA tax cap, the capital gains tax, the estate tax, and new taxes on gasoline.

He also called for the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which will automatically raise taxes on most Americans. By letting the Bush cuts expire, Obama would produce a $2 trillion tax increase that some economists predict will rumble through the already weakened economy like an earthquake.

Claim No. 10: Obama was born outside the United States and is ineligible for the presidency.

The Obama Web site dismisses the claim that the candidate was born anywhere but in the United States as 'completely false' and 'groundless.'

As proof, the Obama's campaign has produced a 'certificate of live birth' from Hawaii indicating that Barack Hussein Obama II was born Aug. 4, 1961. Critics, however say the document could have easily been forged and is not a substitute for a certified birth certificate.

No reporter has been allowed to see the original certificate of live birth or its certificate number, which is blacked out on copies of it on the Obama site.

Skeptics note that Obama's 'Father's Race' is identified on this document as 'African,' a geographic and modern politically correct term rather than a 1961 racial designation. The standard term used on American birth certificates until the U.S. Census changed it in 1980 would have been 'Negro.'

Former deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg, a Democrat with mixed credibility (he has supported conspiracy theories involving 9/11), has filed a lawsuit to force Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate. According to Berg, Obama's paternal grandmother has said she was present at his birth in Kenya, after which his mother promptly returned with her baby to the United States.

If that is true, Obama could be constitutionally ineligible to be president.

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.




What is Fantasy Trek?
More Than Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

From "The Patriot Post" Notes on Presidential Character

This is the complete text of an email I received from "The Patriot Post" on the subject of Presidential character. It is really a message for loyal Democrats whose party has been highjacked by radical elements like Barack Obama. Read on. And for my conservative friends, take heart. Obama's numbers are slipping, just as the truth is starting to stick.

Here is the message, courtesy of "The Patriot Post":

"The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men." —Samuel Adams

In his Inaugural Address on 20 January, 1961, President John F. Kennedy closed his remarks with these famous words: "And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."

With those words, JFK, considered by many to be the most exemplary leader of the Democrat Party in the 20th Century, asked Americans to put country first, a bedrock principle of the Party until the last few decades.

However today, the current slate of Democrats have turned Jack Kennedy's national challenge on end, essentially proclaiming, "ask what your country can do for you, not what you can do for your country."

In 1963, Martin Luther King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and said for all to hear, "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Has his dream been realized, or have Democrat leaders divided us up into constituency groups, where we are judged by all manner of ethnicity and special interests rather than the individual and national character King envisioned?

Kennedy and King had it right, but the Democrat Party has squandered their great legacy, and betrayed us, moreover enslaving many Americans as dependant wards of the state.

This is not the Democrat Party envisioned by Franklin Delano Roosevelt or Harry Truman, much less its founder, Thomas Jefferson, who would not recognize even the most vestigial elements of his once-noble Party. (This dramatic transition is evident in the Democrat Party Platforms from Kennedy to Obama.)

When asked why he left the Democrat Party, perhaps the most famous of former Democrats said, "I did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me." That was Ronald Reagan, who earned the respect and support of an enormous number of Democrats during his presidency. His observation, "the Party left me," has never been more true than today.

For several months, we have heard and observed two presidential candidates, centrist Republican John McCain and liberal Democrat Barack Obama. It should by now, be obvious to all of us who put our country first, which of these candidates possess the high qualities of a statesman, and the prerequisite moral and civic virtues for an American president.

Unfortunately, too many of my fellow Americans have difficulty distinguishing these qualities.

Every four years, at the peak of presidential election cycles, we're told by the talkingheads and the party hacks that "this election is the most important in our lifetimes." This time, however, they may be right. These are indeed perilous times.

Our nation is facing crises on several critical fronts, including an historic economic disaster, the resolution of which will require the steady hand of a statesman in possession of outstanding character — character that has been honed over his lifetime, character that is proven consistent with our nation's legacy of liberty and equality.

That reformed Democrat, Ronald Reagan, wrote, "The character that takes command in moments of crucial choices has already been determined by a thousand other choices made earlier in seemingly unimportant moments. It has been determined by all the 'little' choices of years past — by all those times when the voice of conscience was at war with the voice of temptation, [which was] whispering the lie that 'it really doesn't matter.' It has been determined by all the day-to-day decisions made when life seemed easy and crises seemed far away — the decision that, piece by piece, bit by bit, developed habits of discipline or of laziness; habits of self-sacrifice or self-indulgence; habits of duty and honor and integrity — or dishonor and shame."

For the first and final word on the necessary character traits the next president should possess, let's return to our foundation, our Founders, those who risked all to proclaim our individual rights and responsibilities as ordained by God, and outlined them in our Declaration of Independence and its subordinate exposition, our Republic's Constitution.

Our Founders wrote at length about character, both of those who seek high office (or, rather, those that high office seeks), and those who elect them. Here are but a few excerpts in their own words.

John Adams: "Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom. ... If we suffer [the minds of young people] to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives. ... We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. ... We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections."

Samuel Adams: "Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters. ... If men of wisdom and knowledge, of moderation and temperance, of patience, fortitude and perseverance, of sobriety and true republican simplicity of manners, of zeal for the honour of the Supreme Being and the welfare of the commonwealth; if men possessed of these other excellent qualities are chosen to fill the seats of government, we may expect that our affairs will rest on a solid and permanent foundation. ... [N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. ... No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders. ... Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual — or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country. ... Religion and good morals are the only solid foundation of public liberty and happiness."

Thomas Jefferson: "It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution. ... If a nation expects to be ignorant — and free — in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. ... The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest. Only aim to do your duty, and mankind will give you credit where you fail. ... An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens."

George Washington: "No compact among men ... can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable, and if I may so express myself, that no Wall of words, that no mound of parchment can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other. ...[A] good moral character is the first essential in a man, and that the habits contracted [early in life] are generally indelible, and your conduct here may stamp your character through life. It is therefore highly important that you should endeavor not only to be learned but virtuous. ... 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. ...[W]here is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths...? Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness — these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens."

At the end of the Revolution, when our Founders were endeavoring "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," Founding brothers Alexander Hamilton and John Jay and our Constitution's author, James Madison, wrote The Federalist Papers, its most authentic and comprehensive explication.

In Federalist No. 1, Hamilton warned, "Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants."

Sound familiar?

In No. 10, Madison cautions, "Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm," and insisted in No. 57, "The aim of every political Constitution is or ought to be first to obtain for rulers, men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous, whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

Madison's Supreme Court nominee, Justice Joseph Story, wrote, "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."

The Founders thus warned of the perils posed by the candidate who lacks political courage; the candidate who tells us everything we want to hear.

In November 1800, John Adams, in his fourth year as president, wrote to his wife Abigail, "I Pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessing on this house, and on ALL that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof!"

We should all pray likewise, now, today, this minute.

As Adams understood, "A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

Almost two centuries later, Ronald Reagan reiterated, "Freedom is ... never more than one generation away from extinction. Every generation has to learn how to protect and defend it, or it's gone and gone for a long, long time."

So, what of the current generation of voters, and the two presidential candidates?

On 4 November, one of these candidates will receive a majority of electoral votes, and in January, be seated as our next president. But for sure, this election is much more than a referendum on the two candidates; it is a referendum on the ability of Americans to discern between one candidate who possesses the character and integrity of a statesman, which the office of president requires, and one who does not.

At this pivotal moment in our nation's history, let's hope that a majority of us have sufficient courage and character to make that distinction, and vote on what we know rather than how we feel.

Let's put country first.

For more information on the character of the presidential candidates, link to The McCain record and The Obama record.

Please forward these insights to your family, friends and associates.





What is Fantasy Trek?
More Than Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Lucky Me! I Just Found Out I'm a Racist!

I was waiting for the laundromat to open when two black guys walked up with a grocery cart (I'll just point out here and now that this was a stolen grocery cart. They don't sell them to customers, so if it says 'Albertson's' on it and it isn't in the Albertson's parking lot, it's stolen. Whether they stole it from the store or stole it second hand, it's still stolen) full of laundry. That's okay. But as soon as they arrive, they start launching into a diatribe about how wonderful mister barack hussein obama is, and how he's pure and holy, and how he graduated from Harvard which is the best school in the country, according to these learned young grocery cart thieves. It used to be elitest and white and evil until mister obama went there. What would we do without him? I suppose that these fine young upstanding grocery cart thieves finally have a reason to be proud of their country. Well that's good. Sadly for me, (according to these thieves), if I disagree with them, I'm either rich or racist. And since I'm not rich, I must be racist.

What is it that tells me that these two thieves are right? Because they didn't resort to any personal attacks. Nope, they stayed on issues. Issues like everyone is Alaska is drunk and stupid (and white trash, according the non-racist, sensitive, caring gentleman). He looked straight at me and my wife when he said that, just to make sure we understood. Gosh, lucky us. Issues like being held in a prisoner of war camp makes you crazy. Issues like black people finally getting what's coming to them. Issues like Bush is a criminal and finally obama is going to throw him in jail. And it was refreshingly lacking in such personal attacks like obama's voting record, or the racist pastors or terrorists he calls friends, or the fact that he has no problem with throwing unwanted babies in the garbage, or that he thinks that the middle class is bitter and clinging to guns and religion, I guess, because their lives are so empty. Nothing about the definition of life being above his pay grade.

I'm just glad that these two fine young thieves were kind enough to teach me that I'm a racist. Maybe next time I can be a thug and a punk who lives like a leech off of tax dollars provided by hard working non-thieves who actually own an alarm clock and a work ethic. Maybe I can be someone who can scoff at a hero who sat in a POW camp and had his arms broken every day. Maybe I can steal grocery carts and bellow and bluster with all of dignity of a two year old. Maybe I can be lucky enough to be such a pathetic excuse for a human being that I'll support any crook that promises to steal from hard-working people to enable my drug habit. But for now, really, I'm just excited that these two shining examples of humanity have taught me that I'm a racist. WooHoo!


What is Fantasy Trek?
More Than Just a Game. It's a Star Trek Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Just What Is a Barack Hussein Obama

Brian Williams has just finished telling me again why I should vote for mister obama. But fortunately, I have a brain, so I didn't fall for it. Mister Wlliams, I don't have any business ties to any Islamic republics. Can you say the same? No. You work for NBC. NBC is owned by GE. GE has business ties with Iran. One less reason to give you any credibilty.

Mister Obama has spent decades in the company of people like Louis Farrakhan, Reverend Wright, and William Ayers. He has marched in lockstep with avowed Marxists. Members of the American Socialist Party. His voting record (not counting all of those 'above my pay-grade' 'PRESENT' votes), is among the most liberal in the history of congress. He has voted 94 times to raise taxes. In Illinois he made no effort to stop the practice of throwing out and leaving in the trash failed abortions. That is as bad as it sounds. When an abortion failed, and a living (but unwanted) person was pulled out of a woman, it was thrown out. In the trash. And mister obama doesn't have a problem with this. The question of whether or not a person who is born ACCIDENTALLY, breathing air and aware of its surroundings is worthy of more than being dumped in the trash next to half-eaten burritos and empty coke bottles is above mister obama's paygrade. Good God man, just what is important enough to you to warrant taking a stand on? If you get elected, how many times can we expect you to vote 'present'? And if we have another 9/11, would the response be above your paygrade? You like to say we should concentrate on issues and not personal attacks. Well, the biggest issue I worry about is the very real prospect of having a president who makes Bill Clinton (hell, who makes Hillary Clinton) look like Ronald Reagan. Your solution is an all-powerful state that regulates every aspect of our lives and takes our money to redistribute according the state. I actually have faith in the love of country that most liberals profess. I think they're misguided and dangerous, but still patriotic. You are, in my opinion, not a patriot. You are a dangerous liberal marxist who is in a position to do damage to this country that would have made Stalin blush. Where do I get that? I get that from mister obama's friend Frank Marshall Davis and the rest of his communist friends in college. Not counting the year that spent 'pretty much in a daze'.

That is what a barack hussein obama is.






What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

The 700 Billion Dollar Cr@p Sandwich

John Boehner had it right when he called the bailout a cr@p sandwich, and Conan O'brien ('s writers) had even more right when he called it a cr@p sandwich with cheese. Let's look at this for a second, and without the liberal blinders on. This problem started in earnest in 1992 when Mister Clinton had the great idea to sell houses to low-income voters who couldn't afford them. The records are there. Here are a few links that show just what I'm talking about:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) "Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people..."

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial (http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09262008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/alarms__denial_130763.htm)

Bloomberg Financial News: "How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis" (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0)

YouTube: Democrats in their own words (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

YouTube: Burning Down the House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_597487)

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-_HlpZ8azA&feature=related)

I'm curious as to why Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson, and Katie Couric aren't talking about this, but I'm really angry that McCain isn't talking about it. I understand that sticking to his word (unlike Mister Obama) means he doesn't have unlimited funds for unlimited commercials, but unless he is waiting for an October surprise, he is sitting on something that could not only spread a little truth on the campaign (and make a few bitter, aged, liberal mouthpieces even more bitter), but keep a very bad man out of a position of power we can't afford to give to him. It was the clumsy hand of government that got us into this mess (not an opinion, a fact), and the clumsy hand of government is not going to get us out. The clumsy hand of government has never done us a favor. They turned victory into defeat in Vietnam. They convinced the Soviets to go into Afghanistan, resulting in the Taliban and a country-sized safe haven for Al Qaeda. They pulled troops back when we were on the verge of catching Bin Laden in the Tora Bora mountains. They failed to put adequate troops into Iraq when the military knew what was needed. Now they're going to put $700 billion of our money into a broken system and hope that it works. Of course, they say that taxpayers actually have a chance to make money on the deal. As if they're actually going to cut us a check if this scheme turns a profit. That was the best laugh I've had in a long time. But at the same time I'm really insulted by this piece of BS handed to us by the drive-by media, the minions of the liberal elite. The most feared words in the American lexicon are "We're from the government and we're here to help*, and that fact has never been more true. This cr@p sandwich with cheese is going to cost us more, I think, (in money, anyway), than the Iraq war, and the best anyone can say is "we hope it works". So if it doesn't, who will be grilled by a committee? Who gets to explain why to the American people? Who gets fired? The fact is, all of you place-holders on Capitol Hill, there is a limit to how much money we'll give you to further screw up our country. Unless you forgot, you are actually our employees, and at some point we're going to get sick of you bungling job after job after job. I know of no other profession (aside from maybe meteorologist) that allows you to be wrong so consistently and still call yourself an expert. There is no question that George W Bush has historically bad approval ratings, but he doesn't come close to the pathetic ratings that Congress has earned.




What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Top Ten Reasons I Don't Watch David Letterman Anymore

Number Ten:
He's nothing more than a liberal mouthpiece.

Number Nine:
Two words: Not funny.

Number Eight:
He was never funny. His writers were, a long time ago. He's just a bitter aging liberal with sagging ratings and a bad hair piece.

Number Seven:
There's no dignity in a bitter aging liberal trying to pick up on girls fifty years younger than himself.

Number Six:
Why stay up late to listen to liberal claptrap when I can get it on the evening news?

Number Five:
Dave doesn't understand that addressing a crisis is more important than being insulted by him. Going on the evening news is more important than being insulted by you, Dave. Heck, just about anything is more important than being insulted by you.

Number Four:
Dave's offensive liberal bias is as worthy of my time as Michael Moore.

Number Three:
Conan O'brien got the job you couldn't get last time, Dave. Maybe he's better than you.

Number Two:
Because Dave, you are a boob.

And the number one reason I don't watch David Letterman anymore is:
I grew up. Letterman didn't.



What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

The Company That He Keeps, The Content of His Character

Obama has been using the current financial disaster as fodder for his sagging campaign, saying that John McCain has been a part of the problem and will only allow the culture of corruption to continue. He's actually coming frighteningly close to telling us the truth. He's just gotten a few of the names wrong.

Barack Obama comes in second behind Chris Dodd in donations from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson was on Obama's committee to help select a vice president. He also admitted that he received preferential treatment from Countrywide mortgage. Who else got preferential treatment from Countrywide mortgage? Chris Dodd. Now look at another Fannie Mae CEO named Frank Raines. He commited fraud to the tune of $6.3 billion. Why isn't he in jail? Why weren't the hearings done? Good question. Mr Obama doesn't have an answer for that. He should, though. Raines is Obama's adviser on housing policy. And he, like Mister Johnson, walked away with tens of millions of dollars.

In four years, Obama ranks second among donations from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae among all members of congress since 1989. In four years Obama has received more money from Fannie and Freddie than any other member of congress in the past two decades except for Chris Dodd, and Chris Dodd has been in federal office since 1975. Obama's only been in office since 2005. He's second among donations from Lehman Brothers among all members of congress since 1989. The top executives at Lehman Brothers, Ted Janulis and John Ray, are chief fundraisers for Obama. And by the way, one of them was a part of the head of Mortgage Capital at Lehman Brothers.

Mister Obama is pretty good at changing words and facts around to suit his purpose, but the company that he keeps... the people he worships with and studies under and benefit from and employ say a great deal about him. None of it is good.


What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Where America Lives

I saw something on the evening news that actually didn't make me want to throw an egg at Brian Williams' fake smile. People in Texas actually helping each other out. Not because they were running for office or fullfilling a community service sentence. They were helping each other out because they wanted to. Earlier in the week there were stories about people helping out neighbors who didn't have electricity by stretching extension cords across the street. That is when I'm reminded of what is actually right about this country. Patriotism has nothing to do with paying more taxes or expanding an already bloated and broken government. It has everything to do with actually building up the bedrock of America, which is the community. America doesn't live in the swamp that is Washington DC. It lives in Houston and Galveston and New Orleans and Scranton and San Diego and Juneau and the Bronx. It lives where people work for a living in a community and depend on each other and don't count their assets in voting blocks. America lives in the hearts of people of all races, creeds and colors who live here legally, pay their taxes and do their best to make a comfortable life. America lives in traffic jams and factories and grocery stores and malls and movie theaters. It lives in bus stops and schools and on beaches. America lives where we are. Where we are working and playing and living and struggling honestly. It lived, at one time, in the halls of government where patriots struggled, sometimes with each other, to unite a nation where before only enslaved colonies existed, but it doesn't live there now. It does live on blog sites and talk radio that keep a careful watch on the ivory towers of government that used to represent us. It lives in Wrigley Field, but not the Chicago Machine. It lives in sand-encrusted equipment that volunteer soldiers struggle to maintain in a desert country, just as it lives where people protest against the war. But it doesn't live in the hearts of politicians who think that losing the war would be good for their careers. It lives in classrooms where people argue about creationism versus evolution, but not in people who deny us the right to disagree. It even lives in liberal newscasts where sometimes, after all of the 'if it bleeds it leads' sensationalism and editorializing disguised as reporting, in the last moments of the newscast, almost as if by accident, we get to see a quick shot of real Americans helping each other.



What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

What Obama Knows

This is a topic that one post can't really do justice to, but let's just talk about it a bit.

Ever since the Founding Fathers threw off the shackles of King George, we've understood that government does best when it does the least. There is not a single instance in our history when the government has taken over a job from the public sector and improved on it or even maintained it at the same quality level. Our Founding Fathers understood just how dangerous a government is when it becomes perpetual and self-serving. They feared what we have now, which is a bloated, voracious, and all-powerful giant with no real understanding of or interest in the people from whom its power is supposed to flow. The Constitution is pretty specific with respect to the power that the federal government is entitled to when it talks about 'those powers not specifically granted to the federal government'. That is for a reason. A federal government that can grant itself more and more power as the days and weeks and years go on is a dictatorship in the making. Absolute power does in fact corrupt absolutely. And what does Mister Obama think of this? What is the answer to the ills of our country? He thinks the answer is a bigger, more powerful government. He thinks that public service should be managed by the government, just as he wants to take still more money from businesses that are already struggling (under the guise of 'taxing the rich'), not so that hard-working middle class people can create their own prosperity, but so that the government can have more money to reluctantly hand out to whatever group's votes are coveted on a particular day. It has been stated (by Democratic deity John F Kennedy) that no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity, but they keep trying to sell us the same empty idea. The Soviet Union tried to do that, and someone who knew better ran them into the ground. Thanks Ronnie. But Mister Obama, who has spent more than his share of time studying communism, just doesn't get it. Mister Reagan was a very kind, charitable man (the kind who simplistically clung to guns and religion when he wasn't winning the cold war), would probably very kindly say that it isn't that Mister Obama doesn't know anything, it's just that he knows so much that isn't so. Well, that's probably true. Mister Obama knows that simple people (who are only the backbone of this country when he's trying to get their vote) bitterly cling to guns and religion. He knows that big government has always been the answer to mankind's problems. He knows that we can tax our way to prosperity. And he also knows that the election's already won.


What is Fantasy Trek?
The Only 'Star Trek: The Experience' You Can Still Experience
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

Shooting From the Left

I've been pretty quiet lately, but I've been busy just the same. Aside from working on my fantasy trek project (see http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com for the only "Star Trek: The Experience" you can still Experience... and for free by the way). But I've also been watching all the shooting from the left that somehow just seems to be catching them in the foot. Not an easy thing when the left foot in question is so firmly entrenched in their own mouth.

Mister Obama says that he's going to change things, and that's why we should vote for him. First of all, Mister Obama seems to do much better when there's no voting at all. Either it's him not voting on any issue that might come back to haunt him (regardless of how important it is that someone charged wth representing the people actually take a stand based not on focus groups or snap polling but on conviction and principle), or it's votes not being allowed from Michigan or Florida (until he knows he'll win anyway), or it's votes not even being taken in the Democrat love-fest in Denver (rather than risking some delegates going against the commands of party bosses and 'super delegates'... and more on the subject of super delegates later), and declaring, not electing, the Chosen One's victory by Acclamation. Star Wars fans, remember that the last 'Chosen One' may have started out looking innocent but ended up being Darth Vader. The party that shouted out how much they wanted every vote to be counted suddenly seems to feel otherwise. And there is something else that needs to be considered here. Is it a pure coincidence that Darth Hussein Obama's :) victory speech so closely coincided with the anniversary of one of Martin Luther King Jr's most famous speeches? I don't think so. I think it was decided long ago who was going to be giving a victory speech on that night. I think 'super delegates' were put in place and the 'Acclamation' was planned long before a single primary vote was cast. I think that Hillary's campaign was doomed from the start. I think that the Kennedy's were all in on the act from the start. That's why they suddenly wanted nothing to do with the Clintons and were throwing their entire weight behind someone with so little experience and with twenty years of association with controversial America-hating, white-hating racist demogouges like Louis Farrakhan and Reverend Wright. They chose(n) him as the new JFK, and they weren't going to let a silly thing like democracy get in the way. And about those super delegates. I remember when a concept called 'one man, one vote' was an important idea in this country. Not any more. Now we have Super Delegate, who knows what's best for us, even in the voting booth. That's why they're given the voting ability of hundreds of us mere mortals. Who needs Batman?


What is Fantasy Trek?
http://fantasytrek.blogspot.com

No War on Terror?

Just a quick note here. I live in a tourist-dependant town, near an airport, in an apartment/residential area. Just two doors down, last Monday, an undercover sting operation caught someone who was getting ready to dump mercury into the water supply of a nearby airport. Tell me what that is if it isn't terrorism. And then explain how it isn't a war. I'm serious. If there is anyone out there who genuinely believes that it isn't terror and it isn't a war, I want to hear from you. And then folks, the question must be asked why local (and indeed national) had nothing to say about it.

William Delahunt (D-Mass) Identifies Vice Presidential Chief of Staff David Addington to Al Qaeda

Here's a little something, courtesy of Newt Gingrich that I don't recall Brian Williams or anyone on CNN or MSNBC mentioning;

Congressman Delahunt Should Apologize or Face Expulsion from Congress
By far and away the most sour note struck this Independence Day holiday was the outrageously irresponsible and un-American comments made by Congressman William Delahunt (D-Mass.) to vice presidential chief of staff David Addington in a hearing last week.

Rep. Delahunt repeatedly asked Mr. Addington about the use of waterboarding when interrogating enemy combatants. Mr. Addington replied that he could not discuss interrogation techniques because, as he said, "al Qaeda may watch C-SPAN."

"Right," Delahunt responded. "Well, I'm sure they are watching, and I'm glad they finally have the chance to see you, Mr. Addington." View this disgraceful exchange for yourself here.

For his unconscionable expression of pleasure at the prospect of murderous al Qaeda being able to identify an American public servant, Rep. Delahunt, in the very least, owes Mr. Addington an apology. If he refuses to apologize, his colleagues in Congress should move to expel him. There is no place in Congress for a pro-al Qaeda, anti-American public official.

I suppose Mr Delahunt figures that most people don't watch CSPAN and know only what the liberal-controlled media tells them. Unfortunately, our enemies (and we really do have them) are watching everything they can, and are taking every bit of information they can get. But just how hard will they have to hit us to unite us in this country for more than a few months? Apparently 9/11 wasn't hard enough.

I Apologize if My Remarks Were Misinterpreted

Just kidding. I apologize for nothing I say here. What I'm talking about is when people in the political arena say horrible things, and when they get caught out, they don't actually apologize... They apologize for people misinterpreting or somehow taking offense at some innocent thing they said. You know, if you say something against someone you hate (oh wait. Liberals don't hate, do they? Just conservatives hate), don't apologize. If you mean it, you mean it. I mean, we all know that politicians always mean what they say, right? :) And if you're going to backpedal and apologize, strap on a set and apologize for what you said.

Stupid Things I've Heard Today

You know, the cheap version of that stuff that men take so they can get aroused? The upstanding (second-rate) product that also happens to inhabit the subject header of 90% of spam messages in the world. Yeah. So in the little almost whispered list of potential debilitating side-effects (nausea, vomiting... hmmm, sexy), they say 'don't use if you're taking nitrates for chest pains'. Okay, chest pains in this case equals prone to heart attack. And just a suggestion. If you're prone to heart attacks, maybe you should move an erection down on your  priority list.

Here's another one. Nutra System shows these over-the-hill sports stars talking about how you can 'eat like a man and still lose weight'. Again, if you think that you have to eat what some blowhard on TV tells you to feel like a man, a diet is not going to help.

And I'm sure there's more

Obama the Racist (among other things)

The subject header may seem strange, but really, what other word sums up
this person? Nothing really does it justice. He lies to us regarding NAFTA
during the primary, and sends his henchman to Canada to say, don't worry if
Obama objects to NAFTA, he's just saying it to get elected. He spends 20
years worshipping in a church that is led by a preacher who hates white
people and the country. And he doesn't see a problem with that, for 20
years, until someone points it out to him on youtube. There is no outrage.
Hillary refuses to exploit the situation, so no doubt didn't deserve to win.
Obama says he will stick with limited, verifiable public funding until he
discovers how much more he can get privately. He says he doesn't accept
money from lobbyists and special interest, but he does. He takes money from
labor unions that spend dues paid by members, regardless of the wishes or
political beliefs of those members. He even admits that he's beholden to
those donors. All politicians do it. We all know it. But Obama cannot look
down his nose at others and claim that he won't do the same. If he simply
had a different idea of how to fix the country, I could deal with it. But
his dishonesty just makes him just such a horrible choice to lead anything.
He is smug and elitist, and what's more, he's a racist. By claiming that
"they will try to make you afraid of him because he's black", he is using
his race, and fear of racism to garner support. He is assuming that a white
person (and now that the primary is over, that would have to be a
conservative white person) who doesn't like him must feel that way because
he's black. He can't see past his own color. He is no better than the KKK
because all he sees in himself and others is black and white. Mr Obama, I'm
not afraid of you because you're black. I'm afraid of you because I think
you're the most damgerous candidate for president we've had since.... oh,
1776? Something like that. You have the audacity to look down on the real
muscle of this country, saying that they cling to guns and religion because
we're bitter. I'll tell you why we cling to guns and religion. Because they
are our God-given right. The government cannot grant us these rights any
more that they can give us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness. And it was guns and religion that gave us our freedom from
Britain.

Good and Bad Founding Fathers

I've been reading David McCullough's John Adams, and aside from a fantastic
history lesson, I'm getting a picture of our early Congress that is, as hard
as it is to believe, almost as bad as that nest of vipers we have now. I'm
also learning of some of the truly brave men and women who gave us this
opportunity that our representatives now seem to be squandering. Rather than
try to explain each excerpt, I'll just present the words of David McCullough
and John Adams.

...Outraged by Dickinson's insistence on petitions to the King as essential
to restoring peace, even after Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill, Adams
had strongly denounced any such step. Like many other delegates, he had been
infuriated by Congress's humble petition of July 8, 1775, the so-called
Olive Branch Petition, that had been Dickinson's major contribution. From
the day he saw with his own eyes what the British had done at Lexington and
Concord, Adams failed to understand how anyone could have any misconception
or naïve hope about what to expect from the British. "Powder and artillery
are the most efficacious, sure and infallible conciliatory measures we can
adopt," Adams wrote privately...

*****

...The greatest minds agreed, Adams continued, that all good government was
republican, and the "true idea" of a republic was "an empire of laws and not
of men," a phrase not original with Adams but that he had borrowed from the
writings of the seventeenth-century philosopher James Harrington. A
government with a single legislative body would never do. There should be a
representative assembly, "an exact portrait in miniature of the people at
large," but it must not have the whole legislative power, for the reason
that like an individual with unchecked power, it could be subject to "fits
of humor, transports of passion, partialities of prejudice." A single
assembly could "grow avaricious . . . exempt itself from burdens . . .
become ambitious and after some time vote itself perpetual."...

******

...But when later that evening a preliminary vote was taken, four colonies
unexpectedly held back, refusing to proclaim independence. The all-important
Pennsylvania delegation, despite popular opinion in Pennsylvania, stood with
John Dickinson and voted no. The New York delegates abstained, saying they
favored the motion but lacked specific instructions. South Carolina, too,
surprisingly, voted no, while Delaware, with only two delegates present, was
divided. The missing Delaware delegate was Caesar Rodney, one of the most
ardent of the independence faction. Where he was or when he might reappear
was unclear, but a rider had been sent racing off to find him. When Edward
Rutledge rescued the moment by moving that a final vote be postponed until
the next day, implying that for the sake of unanimity South Carolina might
change its mind, Adams and the others immediately agreed. For while the nine
colonies supporting independence made a clear majority, it was hardly the
show of solidarity that such a step ought to have.The atmosphere that night
at City Tavern and in the lodging houses of the delegates was extremely
tense. The crux of the matter was the Pennsylvania delegation, for in the
preliminary vote three of the seven Pennsylvania delegates had gone against
John Dickinson and declared in the affirmative, and it was of utmost
interest that one of the three, along with Franklin and John Morton, was
James Wilson, who, though a friend and ally of Dickinson, had switched sides
to vote for independence. The question now was how many of the rest who were
in league with Dickinson would on the morrow continue, in Adams's words, to
"vote point blank against the known and declared sense of their
constituents." To compound the tension that night, word reached Philadelphia
of the sighting off New York of a hundred British ships, the first arrivals
of a fleet that would number over four hundred. Though the record of all
that happened the following day,Tuesday, July 2, is regrettably sparse, it
appears that just as the doors to Congress were about to be closed at the
usual hour of nine o'clock, Caesar Rodney, mud-spattered, "booted and
spurred," made his dramatic entrance. The tall, thin Rodney - the
"oddest-looking man in the world,"Adams once described him - had been made
to appear stranger still, and more to be pitied, by a skin cancer on one
side of his face that he kept hidden behind a scarf of green silk. But, as
Adams had also recognized, Rodney was a man of spirit, of "fire." Almost
unimaginably, he had ridden eighty miles through the night, changing horses
several times, to be there in time to cast his vote...

*****

..."Unfaithfulness" was something he could not abide, and in his spells of
gloom he pondered whether the fault was in the times. Unfaithfulness in
public stations is deeply criminal [he wrote to Abigail]. But there is no
encouragement to be faithful. Neither profit, nor honor, nor applause is
acquired by faithfulness. . . . There is too much corruption, even in this
infant age of our Republic. Virtue is not in fashion. Vice is not
infamous...

*****

...Then, just as agreement seemed near, Henry Strachey proposed to amend the
line specifying the American "right" of fishing to read "liberty" of
fishing, to which young Fitzherbert declared the word "right" to be "an
obnoxious expression." The moment was one made for Adams. Rising from his
chair, smoldering with indignation, he addressed the British: Gentlemen, is
there or can there be a clearer right? In former treaties, that of Utrecht
and that of Paris, France and England have claimed the right and used the
word. When God Almighty made the Banks of Newfoundland at 300 leagues
distant from the people of America and at 600 leagues distance from those of
France and England, did he not give as food a right to the former as to the
latter. If Heaven in the Creation have a right, it is ours at least as much
as yours. If occupation, use, and possession have a right, we have it as
clearly as you. If war and blood and treasure give a right, ours is as good
as yours. We have been constantly fighting in Canada, Cape Breton, and Nova
Scotia for the defense of the fishery, and have expanded beyond all
proportion more than you. If then the right cannot be denied, why then
should it not be acknowledged? And put out of dispute? It was settled -
almost. Article III of the treaty would read, "It is agreed that the people
of the United States shall continue to enjoy unmolested the right to take
fish of every kind on the Grand Bank." However, on the matter of taking fish
along the coast of Newfoundland and "all other of his Britannic Majesty's
Dominions in America," the people of the United States were to have the
"liberty," which, insisted the British negotiators, amounted to the same
thing. "We did not think it necessary to contend for a word," wrote a more
mellow John Adams years afterward. By the end of the day there was agreement
on everything. Dining that evening at his hotel with Matthew Ridley,Adams
was in high spirits. Asked if he would have fish, he laughed and declined,
saying he had had "a pretty good meal of them" already that day. Adams
generously praised his fellow negotiators. Franklin, he told Ridley, had
performed "nobly." But to Jay belonged the greatest credit, Adams said. Jay
had played the leading part, Adams felt then and later, never failing to
give Jay credit. The following day, Saturday, November 30, 1782, all parties
made their way through still another damp Paris snowfall, again to Oswald's
quarters at the Grand Hôtel Muscovite for the signing of the preliminary
treaty. Oswald was first to fix his name, followed by the four Americans in
alphabetical order. In effect, the Americans had signed a separate peace
with the British. They had acted in direct violation of both the
French-American alliance and their specific instructions from Congress to
abide by the advice of the French foreign minister. To Adams there was no
conflict in what they had done. The decision to break with the orders from
Congress, and thus break faith with the French, had been clear-cut, the only
honorable course. Congress had left them no choice. Congress had
"prostituted" its own honor by surrendering its sovereignty to the French
Foreign Minister. "It is glory to have broken such infamous orders," Adams
wrote in his diary. "Infamous I say, for so they will be to all
posterity."...