The Conservative Soldier

As your unwavering Conservative Soldier, I am not afforded the comfort or security of living in a bastion of American values and patriots. I come to you week after week from the front lines, from the place that spawned and nurtured Barack Hussein Obama, from an ethical, moral and economic wasteland clinging tenuously to its heritage as The Land of Lincoln. It is today, in stark contrast to Lincoln’s legacy, the land that produced the rocks that Obama, Sens. Dick Durbin and Roland Burris, Rod Blagojevich, et al, crawled out from under.

Today I realized that I am done with the tired logic by the Kool-Aid swillers that goes something like this: President Obama “inherited” myriad problems. We have to give him a chance to show that he has proposed the right solutions going forward. Just give the man a chance.

How did we get from Change to Chance so fast?

This is what people say when a football team hires an unknown coach. This is what PTO moms tell themselves over coffee after the school board brings in an avant garde principal. This is what we tell our kids when they’re frustrated by an activity they can’t seem to master.

Give it a chance. Don’t give up so fast.

This is very good advice for our children. But do we, at the same time, tell them, “Sure, play with the matches. You are not likely to get burned, let alone set the house ablaze”?

If we are willing to chance the demise of the America we have known, the America so beloved by the millions of people around the world, the America that is a beacon of liberty and that embodies the best of mankind, then we are by extension willing to give Socialism a chance, nationalization a chance, Fascism a chance. And on it goes. Where does it end? Do we then give Islamic radicalism a chance?

There is a jarring quotation, around for decades, by the author Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged), jarring in that it sends shivers through every fiber of anyone reasonably alive: “We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

Should Americans turn away from this looming dark period, returning to daily routines, Dancing With The Stars debates and other frivolity, all the while determined to “give Obama a chance”, I am convinced it will be at our peril.

To the extent there is a honeymoon between any U.S. President and the people he serves, please, for the love of God, let us declare this one over. Done. No one deserves a chance to strip us of our liberties or impede the march of freedom.

No one deserves a chance to stack the Supreme Court with racist radicals. No one deserves a chance to subvert the rule of law. No one deserves a chance to bankrupt our nation and our futures. No one deserves a chance to appease tyrants.

The only chance that we can cling to now is the chance that American voters will rise up in 2010 and 2012, determined to avert our rapid descent into one of the “darkest periods of human history.”

“She is not about interpreting the law; she’s about making policy from an extreme radical left-wing position.  (Obama) just wants one of his own on the court to do his dirty work from the highest court in the land, and she fits the bill.” - Rush Limbaugh, on the air, May 26, 2009

The Conservative Soldier loves humor, respects a sense of humor and does not trust those lacking same. But as much as I want to laugh at the clowns running our country, I always yield to despair just at the moment when the unrehearsed (Joe Biden) and well rehearsed (Barack Hussein Obama) begin their daily stand up routines. As Memorial Day reminds us, freedom is not something with which to trifle. And yet …

On the very day that it took mere hours for Clown Prince Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee to become quickly diminished by her feminist, anti-white Anglo-Saxon, Constitutionally marginal, and very well documented, viewpoints, Obama headed off to Las Vegas (where else?) to headline a fundraiser for none other than Nevada Sen. Harry “War Is Lost” Reid. Obama demands an empathetic court nominee but still jets off hours later to make an appearance for the man who once bemoaned the odors of D.C. tourists descending on the Capitol.

It is not clear which destination Obama would prefer to shut down first, Guantanamo Bay or the Vegas Strip, but we’re fairly certain he would sit down to chat up Iran’s dangerous Ahmadinejad more readily than he would confront Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons. In fact, Gibbons’ request to meet with Obama on this trip was denied by the White House. Obamatrons know Gibbons and Vegas resort owners are still fuming that the President threw the gilded convention city under the bus during a rant about “excess”. Come to think of it, now that Obama owns General Motors, he could have thrown Gibbons under a giant Hummer with monster truck wheels, or a tricked out Escalade.

Despite Latina roots and a so-called slam dunk c.v., Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor might yet become another Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, Bill Richardson, Timothy Geithner, et al. The Obamatrons are always the last ones to recognize the little inconvenient details that make nominees either toxic or, at the very least, controversial and thus weakened from the start (Geithner).

Sotomayor implied, amid her own nervous laughter, in 2005 that she and fellow Court of Appeals judges are lawmakers, rather than law umpires as intended by the Founding Fathers.

The “Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know this is on tape, and I should never say that, because we don’t ‘make law’, I know (laughter). I know. I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it, you know (more laughter). OK … .”

And in 2002, in a speech (so we know it was premeditated), Sotomayor went out of her way to make a point that she can not and, more alarmingly, will not separate her ethnicity, gender and socio-economic background from how she thinks and rules from the bench.

“Justice (Sandra Day) O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases,” Sotomayor said in a Cal-Berkeley speech. “I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since (another scholar) attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. … First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

As her racially charged words were ricocheting across cyberspace (she said what?), Obama boarded Air Force One, ironically, to fly west to speak at a fundraiser for one extremely white male, the Senate Majority Leader.

What conclusion(s) do we draw this day after Memorial Day? Frankly, I am at a loss as I contemplate a Left Wing Poster Bigot being measured for a Supreme Court robe.

You think Nancy Pelosi has a short memory when it comes to intelligence briefings?

Have a listen to the “Present of the United States”, former community organizer and partial birth abortion antagonist Barack Hussein Obama, as he stood before the 2009 graduating class at that former bedrock institution and fading bastion of Catholic (and Judeo-Christian) principles, Notre Dame. He seems to have forgotten, or forsaken, his pro-abortion days as an Illinois State Senator.

Sunday, May 17, 2009: “Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women. … Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.”

Honoring conscience is an admirable goal. But eight years ago, state Sen. Obama was in no mood to extend “clear ethics” to previable (premature) fetuses if doing so would pose a threat to the legality of abortion. Sound science was not on the table then. Just politics.

March 30, 2001 (speaking at the Illinois State Capitol): “There was some suggestion that we might be able to craft something that might meet constitutional muster with respect to caring for fetuses or children who were delivered in this fashion. Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further, and so I just want to suggest, not that I think it’ll make too much difference with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place.”

The 2001 speech excerpt appears in a landmark book, The Case Against Barack Obama, by David Freddoso, who wrote: “Birth has been the law’s bright line, at least since Roe v. Wade. Apparently, not for Obama. He voted ‘present’ on this (2001) bill.”

In other words, Obama was wholly unwilling to find a place in his heart or his mind for previable fetuses because they, as “persons”, might throw a dagger into the heart he most cherishes, the heart of pro-abortion logic.

Part II

Obama, speaking at Notre Dame on Sunday:  “Perhaps because the church folks I worked with (as a Chicago community ‘organizer’) were so welcoming and understanding; perhaps because they invited me to their services and sang with me from their hymnals; perhaps because I witnessed all of the good works their faith inspired them to perform, I found myself drawn — not just to work with the church, but to be in the church. It was through this service that I was brought to Christ.”

The Case Against Barack Obama, page 156: “During those days (in the 1980s) as a community organizer, Obama recognized that his work was suffering because the pastors in Chicago generally viewed him as an outsider — as someone willing to use their congregations for his own purposes, but whose motivations remained unclear because he did not attend church himself.”

And when Obama finally figured out he needed a regular church home to be a “player”, he chose Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church of Christ, where worship shared top billing with Wright’s anti-white, anti-America rants on Sundays.

Notre Dame might have lost its way. Barack Obama is still looking for his.