200 YEARS

 August 10, 1821. On that day the United States made it's greatest expansion move since 1776 and still stands as the nation's greatest acquisition.  On that day, 200 years ago, the United States of America granted statehood for the 24th time.  The great State Of Missouri entered into the Union.

Missouri did not enter statehood smoothly though.  It took many debates in Congress what the circumstances of Missouri statehood would entail.  The result was the Missouri Compromise.  Under this compromise Missouri would be the last state to enter the union with the right to make slavery legal if they so desired.  Missouri walked the fine line between slavery and emancipation.  Missouri has vast cotton fields in the southern half of the state, particularly in the bootheel portion of the state.  However, when the Confederacy was created Missouri did not join the rebels.  It remained a Union state much to the chagrin of about half of the population.  Because of this, Kansas came in as a free state and the Civil War brought some of the fiercest fighting along the Kansas and Missouri border.  In many ways the rift between Kansas and Missouri continues to this day.  It is hard to explain the dynamic of it, but you can feel it.

Besides the Missouri Compromise, Missouri has a rich history.  It was where the Lewis and Clark expedition kicked off as they made their way up the Missouri River in search of the Northwest Passageway.  William Howard Clark, yup same name as the one I carry, would become the first Governor of the state.  Both the Oregon Trail and the Santa Fe trail had their jumping off points on the western edge of Missouri.  The Pony Express, which carried mail to western destinations in the wilds was based in St. Joseph.

It is the setting for the last eastern city in the country (St. Louis) and the first western city (Kansas City).  The Great Arch along the Mississippi River in St. Louis is the Gateway to the West.  

This state brought us Jesse and Frank James and the Younger brothers.  Modern day Robinhoods.  St Joseph was also the place here Jesse died.  To those in Missouri he was murdered as a southern folk hero.

This is the state that gave Harry Truman to the nation.  You're welcome.

The state is where the two largest rivers in North America come together with the Missouri River and Mississippi River joining together.  This convergence of the two mighty rivers made Missouri one of the biggest inland ports in the nation.  The Missouri River is also the anchor that created Kansas City from a little trading post called Westport to a thriving metropolis that it is today.

Geography wise the state is beautiful in all parts of it.  From the cotton fields of the southeast to the scenic bluffs over looking the river in the northeast.  The Ozark "Mountains" (even if they do seem more like very high rolling hills) in south central are a wonder in and of themselves.  In mid-October these hills turn into a canvas and a wonder of God's handiwork.  Yes, I have been in New England in the fall and have seen it's beauty, but the Missouri Ozarks can stand toe to toe with it.

Kansas City is known as the City of Fountains having fountains everywhere you look.  It is home to the second largest public park with Swope Park sitting second to Central Park in New York City ... I should recheck that but I am pretty sure it is.  At any rate one of the largest public parks in the nation.

It is a major center of culture and the arts.  Kansas City and St Louis are major centers but the culture runs in all parts of the state.  Questions that?  Visit the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art in Kansas City.  It is world known as one of the great galleries in the world.

Missouri straight out middle America.  It holds that title proudly.  It is a diverse state that celebrates many cultures, races, and philosophies.  It has swung back and forth like a slow moving pendulum between conservative and liberal.  Currently the pendulum seems to be starting it's swing to the left but in about 50 years or so it will swing back to the right.  always has and always will.

One last thing.  The Missouri State Flag is, in my mind, the prettiest, most classy state flag of all the other fifty.

I could write more and I did plan on writing more but distractions with a higher priority came along, so I will stop here giving you a small but good idea of what the state is like.  It is wonderful.  

The sad thing is though, there doesn't seem to be a lot of celebrations planned as far as I can tell.  Of course, I don't follow the news as much as I use to and I am pretty well off Facebook except to check on friends and family to see how they are doing, so there could be a lot going on but I am ignorant of them.

Bottom line is this.  I LOVE THIS STATE.  I am proud to be born here and to have resided here my entire life.  I am proud of this state.  Yes we do have problems just as other states do but to me this is a special place.  I truly love Missouri.  I have been flying my Missouri State Flag since mid July in my own way celebrating this historic day. It is home.  I am proud to call it home.

Happy Birthday Missouri!!!!  Here's to the next 200 years.  I love you.

 

THE ART OF DEBATE

Full disclosure to begin things.  I have never been a member of a debate team.  I have never participated in a formal debate.  I have never read a book on debate techniques.  My whole debate experience has been with friends, friends of friends, and family members.

Okay, so there are my credentials on this subject.  Absolute zero.  So with that in mind, here's my thoughts on what I have learned over the years.

There basically just two rules to be able to debate at least to a point where you can pull a good debate off.

First you have to know what you, yourself, believe.  You have to know what your philosophy is and how to talk about it.  This may sound easy but it isn't.  If you are human, your philosophy continues to change as you progress in life and it is important to revisit your thoughts every once in a great while so you don't get yourself confused.  Most time when I revisit my philosophy, it takes at least a week to feel comfortable with where I am at and make adjustments in my thinking.

Secondly, you have to know what your opponent believes and what the basics of their philosophy is.  This isn't easy either.  If someone were to look at my library, they would think I am nuts.  I have read the "Communist Manifesto".  I bought my own copy of Mao Tse Tung's little red book when I was young.  I have read the Ku Klux Klan writings of Ben Klassey as well as Mein Kampf.  I have read books on different religions and different philosophies.  I have watched debates, mostly debates of William F. Buckley debating whoever wanted to take him on.  I have read or watched the speeches of Adlai Stevenson, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Harry Truman, John Kennedy and Barack Obama.  I have listened to Martin Luther King, Jr, Malcolm X, Ayn Rand as well as the classic philosophers. I have read writings and histories from our founding fathers including the Federalist papers.  Every American should be required to read the Federalist papers I think, along with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.

I learned this lesson one afternoon from my grandfather.  I know I have written about this particular afternoon before because it was really a light bulb in my head going off.  I grew up with a conservative bent on my think.  I am not sure how that happened, but I did.  The whole extended family was very liberal except for myself and my cousin Jerry.  My grandfather was a Roosevelt liberal, an union organizer and president.  He was liberal from domestic policy on through foreign policy.  He use to enjoy talking politics if there wasn't anything else to talk about, i.e. football or baseball.  Grandpa was sharp.  He knew his own thinking and was able to express it very well.

He also knew what to expect me to say and he was always ready with any argument I might come up with and on this particular day, It dawned on me.  I use to visit grandma and grandpa a few times a week.  On a daily basis, grandpa would study the news paper and watch Walter Cronkite.  He knew what the Republicans were saying and he definitely knew what the Democrats were saying.  While he was reading the paper, if an article or editorial caught his imagination, he would clip it and put it in the pocket of his chair.  He would use these clips to remind him of something that he wanted to talk about.  On THE day, I showed up and sat on the couch next to his chair.  He whipped out a newspaper clipping and, I will never forget this, the sound of his voice, he said "Here, read what your buddy Pat Buchanan wrote." and then he sat there and watched me as aI read it.  When I was done I handed it back to him and he asked "Well?, What do you think?"  And as I thought about how to answer him, I looked at him.  He had a sparkle in his eye.  He had me and he knew it and that was when the light bulb came on.  The old man KNOWS what I am going to say!  Why bother?  I had been beat before I even started.

That was the day I figured out the key to debate.  Know what you think, and know how your opponent is going to respond.  It was shortly after that when I began reading about things I didn't really understand.  Most of my reading in my teens up until today is about history and what other points of views that there are out there and I noticed that even if the old man and my uncles were still whipping up on me, at least I could carry on a debate for more than a second or two.

The third part of making a good debate is the toughest one to accomplish.  To make a debate worthwhile instead of just a yelling match, There has to be some listening going on while the other side is making their case.  In entering a debate you have to keep yourself firm in your own thinking while at the same time be willing to listen with an open mind and be able to accept a different idea from your opponent.  This makes your philosophy more complete, makes your thinking clearer.  You must be prepared to make subtle or even large changes in your philosophy.  It is important to realize that you can always learn something new from somebody else.

I am not very good at this third part.  I think I use to be pretty good at it but as I have aged, I think that my thinking has become kind of set in concrete and not willing to change.  Instead of actually listening to an opposing point of view, my mind seems to jump on parts of sentences, take statements out of context and convince myself as to how little logic is being told me.  It is a problem and one that I try to work on, but really I don't succeed much in it.  Friends on social media will verify that about me.  Then again, there are times when I think they don't listen either and when you have two opposing viewpoints with neither side listening, it turns into an excersize as though you both are spinning your wheels on an icy patch of road with dry land just to either side of that ice.  Both sides get frustrated and to restart from before the debate and move on as if it never happened.  That seldom happens either.  Too often we hold on to what someone said and don't let them forget it and soon, what once was a friendship becomes a mind game that never ends.

Right now this country is a mess.  I don't think you can blame it on the current administration or the previous one.  It seems to be an over all society that has hardened the wills and the thinking of those that hold them.  Right now, I think, this country has forgotten how to listen to each other.  Without listening there can be no end to the debate that is raging.  Without each philosophy taking a little from the other and giving a little, things start to spinning terribly out of control and our society is hurt by it.  Our country is hurt by it and when the United States is in a war of words with ourselves, it effects the rest of the world.  This isn't the first time our country was deeply divided, but it seems like it is the deepest divide we have had since the American Civil War.  The art of debate has been lost and has turned into a huge power struggle.

This country needs to come together even if it is just a tiny bit.  We need to start listening to each other.  We need to strive to understand different ideas and thinking.  We need to bring this great social debate that we find ourselves in toward an understanding that can bring respect from each of us to each of us.  Everyone has their own thoughts, that is a truth as old as mankind has been discussing ideas.  That is a given.  You don't have to agree with a person to have respect for them.  Only with a mutual respect that a vibrant debate can bring out in people can this country continue to grow and to lead the world.

I don't know about you, but that is what I want for this country.  I want it to be strong.  I want our allies to follow our lead.  I want our enemies to respect us enough to be able to come to the table and work things out so everyone is safer in the world.

That is what The United States is supposed to be.

AS LONG AS WE ARE REWRITING HISTORY

As long as we are rewriting history and destroying monuments and statues that remind us of our past, in particular concerning the slave issue and the Civil War, I think we should take it all the way instead of just those monuments of Civil war participants and Confederate Generals and armed forces.

So my first proposal is to rename any national monuments around the country that honor any president who owned slaves and held slaves which would lead up to the Civil War.  First off lets look at the Presidents of the United States who did own slaves.

01. George Washington owned slaves
02. John Adams did NOT own slaves
03. Thomas Jefferson owned slaves
04. James Madison owned slaves
05. James Monroe owned slaves
06. John Quincy Adams did NOT own slaves
07. Andrew Jackson owned slaves
08. Martin Van Buren owned slaves
09. William Henry Harrison owned slaves
10. John Tyler owned slaves
11. James K. Polk owned slaves
12. Zachary Taylor owned slaves
13. Millard Fillmore did NOT own slaves
14. Franklin Pierce did NOT own slaves
15. James Buchanan did NOT own slaves
16. Abraham Lincoln did NOT own slaves
17. Andrew Johnson owned slaves
18. Ulysses S Grant owned slaves

 Grant was the last President to own a slave.

The obvious first step is to rename the Washington Monument to the Quincy Adams Monument followed by renaming of the Jefferson Memorial to the Adams Memorial.  Give these two early opponents of slavery their due finally.

Next, replace Washington with John Adams on the Dollar bill and the quarter.  Followed of course by Quincy Adams being placed on the nickel and the 20 dollar bill along with Harry Truman or John Kennedy on the 50 dollar bill.

The destruction or removal of all memorials, statues of slave owing Presidents across the entire nation is a must.  Any National Parks or federally owned lands named in "honor" of these Presidents should be renamed to those who did not own slaves with Adams and Quincy Adams getting first chance.  Consideration should also be given to great Americans who did not hold the office of the presidency.  Abolitionists like John Brown, Fredrick Douglas, Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks in particular.  That is not sarcasm, I feel these Americans have long been over due recognition, particular John Brown, as has President Adams and President Quincy Adams.

The removal from the Register of National Historic Places of the homes, lands, or anything to do with the lives of these Presidents who upheld Slavery should take place.  First stop would be to bulldoze Mount Vernon and turn those lands into a National Park or reserve.  Bulldoze Monticello and all of Jefferson's holdings, again returning these lands to the American people in the way of a National Park or reserve.  Neither of these should be named for their former owners, Washington and Jefferson.  The third in this process would be to destroy the Hermitage in Tennessee and again, reclaim the lands and holdings for the American people.

After these three national ceremonies are completed, a very quick and systematic destruction of all homes and holdings of the remaining slave owning Presidents, including Grant's Tomb, should be destroyed and removed from memory.

History books used in our schools should pull any mention or teaching of these Presidents that were slave owners, replacing that space with Native American history.  John Adams should be taught as being the Father of the Country and the first legitimate President of the United States.

A commission should be established on the feasibility of re-carving Mount Rushmore to replace the likenesses of Washington and Jefferson with a carving of John Adams and  Woodrow Wilson.  If the commission decides that a re-carving could not be done safely, then the faces of Washington and Jefferson should be carved off to a flat surface.  The second part of the duties of this commission would be to oversee the total destruction of Stone Mountain in Georgia.

All Civil War Battlefields in which the Confederacy won should dutifully be removed from the Register of Historic Sights.  Any depictions or statues of a Confederate soldier ought to be destroyed on these sacred grounds where Union soldiers gave their lives.

All museums in the country which have any confederate memorabilia, especially a Confederate Flag of any kind, should destroy these artifacts of insurrection.

And you know, I kind of think that Grant's signature on the terms of surrender should be redacted.  Just a black box where Grant's signature use to be.  Once you destroy history, it cannot come back.

Now of course, all of these suggestions are ludicrous and would never happen or so I hope they don't.  This writing was intended to be sarcastic and satirical.  I am not so sure anymore.  History is important people, even if you don't like it or if it offends you.  It is still history and it is history that we should learn from.  It is OUR history, the citizens of the United States and even though it has lots of blemishes, lots of scars, it is still the best in the world.

We have had good Presidents and bad Presidents, even great Presidents as well as absolutely horrible Presidents.  I take great pride though in the fact that through all of our disagreements, both politically and philosophically, this nation has always stood as one when it came down to the bare bones.  I can, and have, disagree with cousins and neighbors and my grandfather on issues that are very important and come away from it still respecting each other and continue to talk and carry on the relationship we have forged.

There is a lot of hate going on in this country and it pains me to see it.  It isn't just Charlottesville or Evergreen State and it isn't coming from just one group of people.  There are pockets of hate in every part of the populace.  It is these small pockets of hate from all around that give rise to a crack in the American citizenry.

Freedom of Speech is at stake I feel.  I also feel Freedom of the Press is in peril.  The whole First Amendment seems to be collapsing.  The fourth and fourteenth amendments are coming close to being in danger.

Communication is the key.  Respectful communication where there is someone who's turn it is to speak and others listen carefully, closely, respectfully so that if they do not agree with speaker, they can have their turn to talk and be listened to closely and respectfully.   I don't mean only in words but in our actions as well.

We need our great leaders, our great minds of all races, creeds, cultures, philosophies and political leanings, great Americans to emerge from the shadows to lead, to think and to communicate.  Don't let this nation, this United States of America, be ripped apart anymore than it has in the whole of its history.

Our country needs this for now, for the future and for the future generations to come.

DUMBING DOWN OF POLITICS AND TECHNOLOGY.

There was a time when this country was young.  People from different areas of the country sent men that they knew very well to go to the Capitol and represent them and their concerns.  These men shaped the country and it didn't matter what they looked like or sounded like.  What mattered was what they thought and how they relayed those thoughts through words and actions.  For the national campaigns, the men who represented the people of their districts would tell the people what they thought of those running for higher office and the word would spread.  Pamphlets would be written either against a candidate or for another and these writings would spread around the country.  The pole would vote for electors who would go to the Capitol and cast a vote for who they represented back home.  The president and the vice president were not necessarily of the same party.  Who ever got the second highest number of votes would be vice president.  It was a system that worked well for the time period.  There was not mass communication and the decisions made by the voters were based on philosophy, pure philosophy.  This system gave us Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Monroe and Madison.  All of these men are consistently ranked towards the top when listing the greatest presidents we have had.

Then came the age of the newspapers, the telegraph, and the railroads.  The newspapers would cover a candidate and editorialize on them.  The men running for high office would make speeches and the text of those speeches would be wired around the country.  Newspapers began putting sketches of the candidates so people could see somewhat what these men looked like but it was still the words that got the attention.  Newspapers also began to editorialize with cartoons, and the publisher was able to spread rumors about those running for office.  Sometimes it had an effect, often it did not.  It was the time where Lincoln and Douglass began to debate around Illinios in front of their constituents.  The text of these debates were wired around so that there was a definite knowledge of the difference between the philosophies as well as the intelligence  of the two office seekers.  News would spread fast over the wires and we still sent electors to Washington to cast votes for how the people of each district voted.

The age of the radio then came upon us and for the first time people could hear the words coming from the candidate in his own voice.  This, I believe was the first small step backwards in the politics of the United States.  There were men who used the radio well.  Coolidge and Hoover did not know how to use the radio but Franklin Roosevelt did and he used the radio to get elected four times to the presidency.  He was a master at inflection and pacing his words so that the people would be captured by hearing him and what he had to say.  During this time a man by the name of Thomas Dewey ran against President Truman and it was partly the use of radio that determined who won.  Truman sounded like an ordinary man.  He talked with ordinary words that people could understand while Dewey talked in a more somber voice that came off as too serious and not as human as Truman.

The movie theaters then began showing candidates making their peaches and it brought people face to face with how a candidate looked as he talked.  It showed them the man's movements that went along with his voice inflections.  Towards the end of the Eisenhower era, television made a small impact and people were able to see the great General talk as a country boy run against Stevenson who talked like a college  professor using words that many of the people had not heard before.  It cost him the election because people could understand Ike, and know that Ike knew what their concerns were.  They weren't sure what Stevenson was talking about.

Then came the election of 1960.  Television made it's first huge impact.  Once again the two candidates debated, but this time it was televised into homes across the nation.  Two powerful and intelligent men would face off and in the end, it would be how they were perceived on television that made a difference in one of the closest elections up to that time.  Kennedy came off as relaxed, smooth and a well spoken man as well as a handsome man.  For Nixon the television was a disaster that would follow him his whole career.  Nixon looked tired, he didn't talk as smoothly as Kennedy and he had a look about him that was almost mean looking.  It was a match that in Lincoln's time, made have had a different outcome, but in 1960, the new use of television gave Kennedy a clear advantage.  Kennedy played to the television better than anyone would until Ronald Reagan came on the scene.  Reagan mastered the airwaves and rode the television to two terms in office.

Television then expanded with the arrival of cable TV across the nation.  It was a new medium that no one particularly thought about except for one candidate.  Bill Clinton realized that he could use cable tv to pin point who is audience would be from night to night.  The next step down on the fall of politics came the night that Clinton was on MTV talking to an audience of young people who were just learning about politics as they came of age to vote.  The big question that night from the electorate?  A girl in the audience asked Clinton what kind of underwear he wore.  This was the sign of how things were now heading.  Clinton laughed a little and then unabashedly answered the question.  That should have been a red flag for what the future would bring in the Clinton administration but it didn't.  It was also a sign of the further deterioration of how the electorate was starting to think and the kind of questions that would become newsworthy in a campaign.  Clinton used cable TV masterfully to reach different parts of the country and those that would be voting.  He used it so well, he was elected twice and survived an impeachment hearing that included charges of perjury to a federal grand jury which is a felony.

After Clinton, the campaigns began to start to stick their toe slowly into the waters of the internet.  They became good at raising money using the internet and to get their message across somewhat but the master of the internet didn't arrive until 2008.

Barrack Obama is a master at using all of the tools available to him to run for president.  He uses the internet to raise money.  You can't hardly go to any internet page without seeing the President and his wife on it telling us what a wonderful person he is.  He uses Cable and Satellite Tv to make a connection with the voters.  He goes on the talk show circuit where the hosts throw softball questions.  The questions aren't as bad as what kind of underwear he wears, but they don't exactly get down to the important issues of the day either.  I honestly don't think that people expect him to answer questions about policy when he is on the talk shows.  These shows are, after all, for entertainment and he is the best entertainer in politics.  He is the first president that does not make amends for going on the campaign trail and to talk shows instead of meeting with foreign leaders as things heat up in the middle east.  What amazes me is that he is so very good at being a campaigner, that he gets a pass on this from the press for the most part.

We are a mere five weeks away from the election and I am amazed at the knowledge that I don't have about where each of the candidates stand on certain issues and I probably won't by the time election day roles around.

Campaigning has turned into half truths and lies being tossed back and forth.  I don't know what or who to believe anymore.  Running for president does not hold anyone accountable anymore and past records mean nothing.  For one thing, we don't really know what the past record of these men really are.  Things get exaggerated and filled with half truths on both sides of the aisle.

People use the internet now to repeat these lies and half truths to an audience that we haven't had before via social networks on the internet.  Citizens are probably more engaged in discussing the election then ever before, but how do we separate truth from lies or exaggerations?  The half truths are the toughest because there is a hint of truth to the facts that people can hang on to and make their decisions using.

A friend of mine said that she was cynical when it came to the election.  She has been cynical since 1972 more or less.  I can understand where she is coming from.  I am cynical as well.  Cynicism is probably running rampant through out the country when it comes to politics and who can blame us?  I know I feel very cynical about both candidates.  The sad thing is I will vote come election day.  The really sad thing is that most citizens probably vote against a candidate because we don't feel comfortable voting for a candidate.  It has truly become the lesser of two evils being elected to run this great country and serious discussions are few and far between.

THE EMPTY CHAIR

Okay, I know that in an earlier post I stated that I would not be getting involved in any political arguments this year.  My intentions are to sit this election out and try to feel good about the votes that I cast, if any.

The "empty chair" of course refers to Clint Eastwood's remarks at the Republican convention and although this entry will hopefully not be an argument between the ideals of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, but rather just an observation of what has turned into a week that I think reveals what the current President is about from my point of view.

What brings this up is seeing the news coming in from around the world that involves the Untied States and our allies and the turmoil that is being reported and the President's response to these reports.

I have always been of the philosophy that the closer a government organization is to you, the more effect it should have on your individual life.  For example, in my case, the Kansas City government and the Jackson county form of government should have more impact on my life and how I live then the Government of the State of Missouri in Jefferson City.  In turn, the people governing in Jefferson city should have more impact on my life than those in Washington, DC.

I am not saying that the Federal Government should not have ANY say in the laws that I live under, but the city should be closer to my life.  There are different roles that each level of government should be responsible for.  While yes, the President does have an obligation to some domestic policies, the office of the presidency should be mainly responsible for our country's foreign policy.

In the past, some of our greatest Presidents have been strong foreign policy Presidents.  Starting off with the first five presidents, Washington-Adams-Jefferson-Madison-Monroe,  on up to Teddy Roosevelt, to Wilson and FDR followed by Truman, JFK, Nixon, Reagan to President Bush and his son, President Bush have all been presidents who took foreign policy very seriously and built their administrations around their foreign policy.  It is the President's primary function to lead the country in the area of foreign policy.  I sincerely believe this and I sincerely believe that history has shown this to be the case.

The news coming out of the Middle East this week and today in particular, shows us a region that is in deeper turmoil that it has been in a long time.  One of the main reasons for this is that we are faced with a President that has a very weak foreign policy, if one at all.

On a day when two of our embassies, in Lybia and in Egypt, have been attacked.  Our Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens was murdered and his body was dragged through the streets. Seven more embassies have been put on high alert with anticipation of attacks on them.  What did the President do?  Talked to some workers at the State Department telling them that he could value their work because he had grown up abroad for a lot of his life.  He then boarded a helicopter to take off to Air Force One to fly to Las Vegas for a fund raiser.

We have many allies around the world.  There are those allies that we can depend on to stand by us and support us.  The United Kingdom, Australia, and Germany (to a certain degree) are allies that we have looked to time and again and they have come through for us.  Another strong ally is Israel.  The United States and Israel have been the closest of allies since the State of Israel was formed.  We have always stood with Israel to protect their right to exist and they have repaid us over the years.  Israel finds itself in a desperate situation now and the United States is ignoring them because, I think, Our President does not have a foreign policy that protects Israel.

The leadership in Iran has stated many times that they won't consider their job complete until the State of Israel is wiped off the map.  As I write this, Iran is constantly working on the purification of uranium which will give them nuclear capabilities.  Our President's response to this is an open ended sanction against Iran, hoping that they will run out of material and time from the sanctions before they gain this capability.  If they do gain Nuclear capabilities, then we have been told that Iran will use it only as a power source, not as a weapon.  I found that even hard to write it is so out of touch with reality.

Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel wants something to be done.  The United States tells him to wait.  Netanyahu wants a meeting with President Obama.  He was turned down.  It seems the President does not have enough time in his schedule to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  The Prime Minister of Israel has made it clear that if the United States does not take action to stop Iran from developing nuclear capabilities, that Israel will take pre-emptive action.  This is a serious threat and Netanyahu does not take it lightly.

Meanwhile while the President does not have time to stay in Washington and address the problem of our embassy's being attacked and our ambassadors murdered, or the time to meet with one of our closest allies concerning their very existence, he has made plans to continue his campagn for a second term.

He is going to Las Vegas.  He has booked a spot on the David Letterman Show.  He has made plans to be in New York for a $400,000 dollar a plate fundraiser next month with Beyonce and rapper Jay-Z.

This is what the President is good at.  He is charismatic.  He is an excellent orator ( as long as the teleprompters are working).  He is good at telling people what they want to hear in order to raise money.  He is a campaigner.  In my opinion, that is all he has done for the last four years.  He has been campaigning.

I will be the first to admit that Clint Eastwood's show of talking to an empty chair was more than a little cheesy.  It did little to point out the differences in the philosophies of President Obama and Governor Romney.  It had more the feel of a burlesque act than a political convention talk.

That being said, "The Empty Chair" has become more of a reality than I would like it to be.  While embassies burn and Ambassadors are murdered and their bodies dragged through the streets.  While a determined despot in Iran continues to work toward a nuclear weapon to wipe one of our best allies off the face of the earth,  the President is out raising money and playing politics.

From where I sit, there is indeed an empty chair at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  It is a chair that right now at this point in time, can not afford to be empty, and that concerns me.

Harry Truman Quote

I remember when I first came to Washington. For the first six months you wonder how the hell you ever got here. For the next six months you wonder how the hell the rest of them ever got here.