Running on a promise of “Hope and Change” and promising that politics in his administration would be different, Barack Obama was voted into office.   Yesterday, following his first trip to the White House, Obama and his team, showed just how much was going to change and how different it would be.

Following what was their first fact to face conversation, between a very gracious current President and the holder of the “Office of the President Elect,” a conversation that purposely invited no staff of either man’s, the content of the conversation was leaked.   It wasn’t leaked by the White House or people affiliated with the gracious host.   The information was leaked by “anonymous aides” of the individual who is not yet President but has been the Presumptuous President for over a year.

Why is it that when I think of Obama and his staff moving into the White House I get a mental picture of college freshman  arriving at  the college campus and charging towards the frat house awaiting the first of their many anticipated parties.   Like the college freshman, I hope Obama and his staff figure out that there’s more to being in the White House than  leaks, special favors and other attempts  to make themselves look good.   Eventually, like college freshman, they’ll learn that there is a lot of  day in, day out work that needs to be done.   Work,  without which, they’ll fail.

Somebody better get this news flash to the various Republican organizations and their leaders!

So Karl Rove has finally figured out that you can’t play defense and take body blows for 10 rounds and expect to win!   For as smart as Rove was at orchestrating two elections, this was one topic that he sure flunked!

You can bet Obama won’t be making the same mistakes!

There’s an old saying that says “If you don’t learn history, you’re destined to repeat it.” That saying perfectly states my final thoughts on the 2008 Presidential election.

First, I want to clearly state that while I am an Evangelical Christian, I am not like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell where I believe you can discern God’s will or see God’s hand in every event that occurs.

Ok, going Old Testament.

After the Israelites escaped from Egypt, the were lead by Moses and then Joshua. After Joshua, a series of “Judges” ruled/lead the nation, or parts of Israel.

During the time of the Judges we find that Israel’s relationship with God had become distant. As generations passed, the new generations didn’t have the benefit of first hand knowledge of God’s works in their lives as the generation of the Exodus had had.   As a result, many of the Israelite tribes took to worshiping Baal during this period.

It’s clear throughout the book of Judges that God no longer paved the way for the Israelites as a result of their distance. “If it feels good, do it,” was the guiding principle for the Israelites during this time. In fact, the last line in Judges is:

Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

As things continued to deteriorate for Israel and a civil war took place, the people of Israel desired change from what they were experiencing.   Rather than looking back to see what had worked previously, they looked around themselves to other nations and said “we should be more like them!”   The result was a request to God via Samuel, to request a king to lead them.

God understood that the reason the Israelites were having challenges had nothing to do with the type of leadership they had.   He knew that the issue was one of self importance, arrogance and disobeying of God’s word.  

In  1 Samuel 8, God attempted to warn the Israelites that there would be consequences of their  desire:      

¹⁷He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. ¹⁸And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves,^(M) but the LORD will not answer you in that day.”The LORD Grants Israel’s Request

Unfortunately, the Israelites didn’t heed God’s advice and demanded a king:

      ¹⁹But the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel. And they said, “No! But there shall be a king over us, ^20(N) that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.” ²¹And when Samuel had heard all the words of the people, he repeated them in the ears of the LORD. ²²And the LORD said to Samuel,^(O) “Obey their voice and make them a king.”

So, God gave them a king in 1 Samuel 9, Saul, and he turned out to be as bad as God had warned and worse.

It didn’t take long for the Israelites to realize they had made a mistake.   Only a couple of chapters in the Bible, 1 Samuel 19,  and according to some scholars, probably a couple of years in real life, the Israelites were asking for forgiveness for their demand of God for change:

¹⁹And all the people said to Samuel,^(AM) “Pray for your servants to the LORD your God, that we may not die, for we have added to all our sins this evil, to ask for ourselves a king.”

So why the history lesson?

Even without tying in issues of faith, the parallels between the Israelites and the US are stark.   Like the Israelites, the US has moved from a period of steady prosperity into a time of trouble and uncertainty.   Also like the Israelites, rather than looking back and taking responsibility for the actions that have gotten us here, we’ve assumed that the right answer for our troubles is “change” and “to look more like other nations.”   Finally, like the Israelites, we have concluded, even though every sign tells us otherwise, that wholesale change of our method of governance is the answer.

The Israelites went through some tough times after they got Saul as their king.   While Saul had an early successes, he quickly turned from God and lost His favor.   God then instructed Samuel to anoint David as king but it would be years before David finally took the throne.

While I expect us to go through some difficult times as a result of our recent political decisions, I remain hopeful.   Like the Israelites, I expect the citizens of the US to eventually see the errors of their selections.   Also, unlike Israel, we won’t have to wait an unknown time frame until the death of a king to make a change.   We’ll be able to make a change in two or four years.

Saul’s pride and jealousy created a schism within Israel at the end of his reign.   Rather than a peaceful transition to David, the king who God anointed, there was fighting between the families and followers of David and Saul.   Eventually, David won but not until there was great bloodshed within Israel.

Like Saul, it’s apparent that Barack Obama has enormous pride.   I’m not going to suggest that should  Obama or the Dems lose an election, that we would not have a peaceful transition.   I am going to suggest that the pride and ego I see in Obama, Reid and Pelosi leaves me concerned that they will attempt to impact how future elections occur.   Oh, I don’t mean not having elections.   Re instituting the “Fairness Act” and implementing the union card check program are two ways to tilt future elections in the Dem’s favor.

I certainly don’t have a crystal ball to see the future.   I do however, believe we are seeing a similar human behavior pattern (and just maybe a pattern of God) that is similar to the Israelites of old.   I guess the way to handle this for the near term is the same way that Samuel dealt with the situation with Saul.   When the Israelites recognized that Saul was a mistake, they confessed their sin to Samuel and asked him to pray for them.   In 1 Samuel 12, Samuel replied:

²³Moreover, as for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the LORD by ceasing^(AT) to pray for you.

I’ll pray for this country’s citizens and its leadership.

I’d have to check the archives but the only position, and I’m not even sure that it was that, that I disagree with him on was his commercials for global warming.

Newt has a solid finger on the pulse of the American public and the conservative core. While there may be others, Newt is the only person I know for certain who can take conservative principles and explain their benefit and purpose to the general public.

So it’s done, or mostly so.   There are still a couple of Senate races yet to be officially determined (yes, one of them includes Al Franken and yes I live in MN…sigh) but in general, we’re done.   Now that I’ve had about 22 hours to decompress it’s probably a good time, before I completely lose the “sense of the moment” to look at what we learned in this election cycle.   Most of this is gleaned from the exit polling done by CNN:

1. Contrary to Obama’s protests, the election was  decided on  race – While he did swing about 2.5M votes of caucasians, Obama’s win came from non caucasian voters.   We knew about the African American vote.   Only 4% of African Americans voted for McCain.   Traditionally, 10% to 12% voted Republican.   However, Latinos also moved 14 points towards Obama versus what Kerry was able to garner in ’04
2. The PUMAs were a work of fiction – Oh I’m sure there were some and I’m sure they voted for McCain.   However, Bush got 11% of the Democrat vote in ’04 and McCain got just 10%.   Those numbers tell me that the PUMAs looked no different than your normal Dem voter.   I suppose it’s possible that McCain may have had an even smaller Dem vote without their support.   However, I’ve seen other result data that tends to corroborate the lack of a PUMA influence.
3. Working from your base to the middle works better than working from the middle towards your base – Obama received support from 89% of self ascribed “liberals”, compared to Kerry getting 85% of the same group.   McCain only received 78% of the “conservative” vote while Bush received 84% of the same group.   Of course those who are moderates broke for Obama 60% to 39%.   It’s clear from this that while Obama held his base, McCain never fully recovered from his early pokes in the conservative eyes.
4. No “event” cost McCain the election – Regardless of when they decided who they were going to vote for, with the exception of the last week, McCain was never closer than a 5% deficit.    This is interesting in that the talk of how the economic issues impacted McCain doesn’t seem to hold water.   What this also shows is that the election results were  about broad ideology and candidate  confidence issues.   It also suggests that while polling better than the broad Republican brand, McCain was never able to completely shake  the negative perceptions.    
5. 67% of those polled favor expanded offshore drilling – I’m a bit surprised that this number is still as high with $2.40 gas as it was with $4.00 gas.   It will be interesting to see how Pelosi/Reid/Obama respond to this.
6. Expect more Socializing of Industry – while only 39% of all voters supported the $700 billion bailout, unless they were strongly opposed to it (only 29%), they voted for Obama.
7. Age more important than Race – While I don’t entirely believe this given what I saw in item 1, the exit polls showed that 39% said the age of the candidate was a factor in their vote, while only 19% said race was a factor.   The people who said age was a factor overwhelmingly supported Obama.

Ok, so what does this mean?   I’m not honestly sure.   I’ll get back to you after the weekend.  

One  other quick observation:

Who was the person least happy with the Obama victory?   Hillary Clinton.

If Obama does well as President, Hillary can’t run until 2012 and we have this nasty habit of changing parties after 8 years by the same person.   If Obama doesn’t do well, that would likely move that group of no conviction moderates to swing their emotions to the nonDemocrat.

Well, at least at Thing 1 and Thing 2’s elementary.   I’m told he won 396 to 157!   I suspect the spread in the adult vote of this area won’t be too far off of that.   Maybe we should have started a drive to get “Power of attorney” for the rest of the state!

Folks,

This is a long video, nearly an hour, but well worth the time invested to watch it. If you want to speed read, you can do so here.

After extensive literary analysis and similar conclusions from four different analysis, Jack Cashill claims that Barack Obama did not write his first book “Dreams From My Father.” Cashill goes on to claim that Bill Ayers was responsible for writing and editing significant portions of Obama’s book.

Bill Ayers? Yup, that Bill Ayers! The Bill Ayers who Obama describes as “Just a guy in the neighborhood.” Interesting thing here, if Bill Ayers did write portions of the book it would seem like he was more than just “A guy in the neighborhood.” Pretty hard to ghost write a person’s memoirs without spending a whole lot of time with them.

Update: The link to Breitbart.TV was hosed. I’ll relink once I see that it actually works

We all know that the Barack Obama we see on the campaign trail is not the real Barack Obama. We clearly see through his writings and associations someone who does not believe America, in it’s current state to be a great hope to the world. However, with this revelation it would seem that Barack Obama may not even know the Barack Obama he supposed to be just a few short years ago.

…maybe others can.

John McCain has said that he will not use Jeremiah Wright as an issue in this campaign.   He believes that it is a “religious issue” and outside the bounds of political discussion.   I’m not sure how someone who Obama himself said was a “mentor,” someone who believes that the US purposely distributed AIDs to African Americans and has openly supported Kadhafi, Louis Farrakhan and Hamas isn’t a political issue but…

If McCain won’t pick up Wright as an issue himself, he now has help.   the National Repulican Trust PAC has picked up advertising time in a number of states and will be running this ad:

If you’re interested in aiding the funding of the buy for this ad you can go here.

First, watch this:

I feel like the duck at the end of the commercial after he hears Yogi explain that “they give you cash which is just as good as money!”

Yes I feel like the duck after reading this article.

The article is an interview with Nancy Pelosi. In it, she explains why having an “All Democrat, all the time” Congress would be a good thing. It’s mostly typical drivel from Pelosi until she gets to this pearl of wisdom:

“Elect us, hold us accountable, and make a judgment and then go from there. But I do tell you that if the Democrats win, and have substantial majorities, Congress of the United States will be more bipartisan,” said Pelosi.

AAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCK?

Having Democrat majorities in both chambers will make Congress more “bipartisan?”   Pelosi proved this session, by shutting off debate and not accepting amendments, what she believes “bipartisan” to be.   The only way you could consider a lopsided Democrat control of Congress as “bipartisan” would be that there would be no effective means to argue with any of Pelosi’s halfwit ideas and petulant demands.

Bipartisan, my butt!   Dictatorship, despotism, authoritarianism, autocray, totalitarianism and tyranny, maybe!

On the first business day after the Anchorage Daily News endorsed “The One” for President, the McClatchy news bureau does a hit piece on Sarah Palin:

Just how big a drag is Palin on the McCain campaign?

Of course, McClatchy owns the Anchorage Daily News.

While the hit piece isn’t unsuspected, the conclusions they attempt to draw are humorous at best, most likely intended to slant or flat out lies at worse.

Of course, McClatchy relies on the same RINO assessments that we’ve been hearing since Palin was selected:

Prominent Republicans have echoed that idea. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of McCain’s closest friends, suggested that Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent Democrat from Connecticut, would have brought independents to the ticket. Last week, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge said that had McCain picked him, the Republican Party would have had a better shot at winning his state.

Ah, no!   Had McCain chosen Lieberman or Ridge for that matter, conservatives would have either stayed home on election day or just voted the down ticket races.  

Beyond Graham and Ridge, McClatchy trots out a host of other unknown, local RINOs who complain that Palin has been an embarrassment.   What’s McClatchy’s definition of “embarrassment?”

She also unabashedly identifies herself with the party’s conservative wing, alienating moderates.

“It reinforced the notion that John McCain cared little about people like me,” said former Maine state Rep. Sherry Huber, a Republican who backed McCain in the primary but now supports Obama. “She clearly does not share the values I and other moderate Republicans do.”

I’m trying to figure out which plank of the Republican platform that Palin violates which causes people like Ms. Huber to find her offensive?   Prolife?   Lower Taxes?   Smaller government?

The only part that McClatchy got right on Palin was their begrudging admission that she does invigorate the Conservative Base:

The Republican base loves Palin.

“So many people can relate to her. She really appeals to everyday housewives, people who go out and hunt, and people who have done great things in their life,” said Bob Dodge, a retired communications engineer in Sarasota, Fla.

Whether McCain wins or not it’s clear that Palin has cut a clear line between what RINOs and Conservatives look like.   The question will be whether the Conservatives will choose to fight for the party or allow it to further drift towards the Democrat Lite position.

If the Republican party goes down in flames this election there’s going to be a lot of focus on what went wrong.   You can bet there will be a lot of focus on whether the messaging was right, distinguished from the Dems.   Until then, RINOs of all shapes and sizes are working to make sure that Sarah Palin disappears like The Hollywood Argyles.   Coincidence?   I think not!

OK, everyone else will have this up on their site and I’m sure it will spin through chain emails.   While I would normally pass on this due to it being “everywhere,” this one just can’t go without comment.   In fact, I’m even going to use my new flashy light thingy to draw more attention!

In case you’ve just returned from several years on a deserted island, next Tuesday is election day.   We can go back and forth between the policy differences between the two candidates but that is wasted time at this point.   If you are at all ambivalent on who to vote for or if you have decided to vote for Barack Obama yet believes that the United States is a light to the world, consider that the next President will get to decide the makeup of the Supreme Court for at least a generation.

Our choice comes down to a candidate who believes the Constitution of the US is the supreme law of the US and should be followed.   Our other choice is a candidate who in the attached piece, states that he believes the Supreme Court should not be bound by the Constitution.   He intimates that it is only the Court’s lack of desire, not their Constitutional ability, to fundamentally  interpret the Constitution to reflect one of any of a number of European countries.

Listen to the piece.

John Hawkins at Rightwingnews.com has put up another poll of Right-of-Center bloggers.   You’ll find the poll here and my responses below:

1) Who do you think is going to win the election?

A) John McCain
B) Barack Obama

2) Do you think Sarah Palin has been a plus or a minus to the ticket?

A) Minus
B) Plus

3) How do you feel about Sarah Palin as a candidate?

A) I really like her!
B) She’s so-so.
C) I’m not a big fan!

4) The Republican Party did poorly in the 2006 election and even if McCain wins is on track to do poorly again in this years Congressional races. If you had to choose between these two options, do you think that’s because they were

A) Too conservative
B) Not conservative enough

5) Do you believe the mainstream media’s coverage has been…
A) Relatively fair and even handed.
B) Slightly biased in favor of Barack Obama.
C) Slightly biased in favor of John McCain.
D) Heavily biased in favor of Barack Obama.
E) Heavily biased in favor of John McCain.

6) Do you think Barack Obama is…

A) Honest (Yes or no?)
B) Patriotic (Yes or no?)
C) Qualified be President (Yes or no?)

Probably no real big surprises in the poll’s answers.   Yes, I want McCain to win and while I think it can still happen, if I had to put money down today I’d have to say he won’t.   That’s not defeatism, just an assessment.

I had problems answering the honesty question.   There have certainly been things I would consider dishonest answers from Obama.   However, I don’t know that they were in his mind and if I were honest I’m sure I could find equally equivocated answers from McCain that if I was partisan left, I would find dishonest.

I do like Sarah Palin.   She strikes me as genuine.   I don’t get the smarmy meter running to extremes when I hear her talk, unlike nearly every other politician I’ve ever met, left or right.