Having partial information regarding a run in between a policeman and a professor, Barack Obama chimed in with his opinion. Having not read the present tome involving government health care "reform, Barack Obama has an opinion about it. Having not gone to Israel to meet with Binyamin Netanyahu, Barack Obama has an opinion about what should be done. This is just a few, in a string of, opinions the President has provided the country. Including the Stimuls package, Guantanamo Bay, and assorted others, Mr. Obama has proven he doesn't need to know the facts before voicing his opinion about what should be done.

That's amazing. Many of us have trouble deciding on an opinion when all the facts are available. And even then, their is a sense that we are missing something. Having an opinion without the facts being made available is something the every day person has to deal with because this is how life often goes. We have to make quick decisions with the information we have available and hope for the best. The President, on the other hand, is supposed to practice restraint and keep his opinion to himself until he has everything at his disposal. Then he gets to sit with his advisors and others to discuss the matter. Barack Obama has decided to cast this decorum to the wind. The present Congress doesn't wait for facts before they speak out why should he?

Politicians, of which Barack Obama is a member, have reached the point where, not only do they not wait for facts, they discard them if they are inconvenient to the opinion they have already formed. The average citizen doesn't have this luxury. To do so would put the nation's economy into a tailspin, and destroy their families and themselves. Wait a minute! Holy Cow! Why didn't I notice this before? There's the answer. Not only do people spend money they don't have and mortgage their futures on air, they do not obtain all the knowledge they can before making decisions. If they have information they don't like, they just ignore it. Then they file suit or whine about some "ism" or another to cover up their own intentional ignorance. Why did this take so long?!

As I stated, we don't always have the luxury to wait, but when it comes to major financial, familial, and political decisions we do.

Now I know how Barack Obama was elected President of the United States. Thank you Barack Obama. If it weren't for you I never would have figured this out.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il, and Hugo Chavez are all trying out for the same role in this play called "Despotic Rule". I say this because they all seem to be reading the same script. America is the Big Satan and Israel is the Little Satan. America and Israel are the cause of all the worlds problems. If there's a traffic jam in Teheran then the Zionist is causing it. If there's starvation in North Korea it's because America wants it to be. If Hugo is having a hard time keeping the people in line it's because America is stirring up the "ignorant" masses. Everything that goes wrong in these countries gets blames on America first, and then by association, Israel.

Israel planned to assassinate Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during the country's elections last month, Teheran's Intelligence Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei claimed Friday.

Both Hugo and Jong-il have made the same claims in regards to America. Can I believe that Israel would want to kill Momo? Yes I can. However, this would not serve strategic or tactical interests for the safety of Israel. We all know who controls Iran and it isn't Momo Ineedajob. Would I be upset if Momo found himself on the other end of a sniper's bullet? Of course not. I might even begin my day with a smile if this happened. In the end, he really doesn't matter so why waste time and the money for a bullet when the destruction of the Iranian nuclear facilities would humiliate him enough that he would take his own life. Better yet, if he was faced with this kind of public humiliation the ayatollah would have him killed.

Mohseni-Ejei told the stat-run Fars news Agency that Israel, collaborating with Iranian Mujahedeen opposition members, met in Egypt and France to plan Ahmadinejad's killing.

Yeah, Right. When in doubt make accusations the Iranian people can never confirm. While your at it blame the political opposition so you can justify having them imprisoned or killed. Hugo does the same. None of this can be proved and if it is denied of course they are lying as all Zionists do. After all, there lying Jews that G-d has cast off.

It's only a matter of time and this fruitcake will leave this realm. I would love to be the proverbial fly on the wall when he tries to justify himself to the Almighty.

A deal taking shape between Israel and Western leaders will facilitate international support for an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities in exchange for concessions in peace negotiations with the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, The Times reported Thursday.

I have a hard time believing this is true. However, if it is then it is one of the dumbest, most cowardly act the west has attempted in quite some time. Let me get this straight.

Israel will be given the ok to attack Iran's nuclear facilities by western governments. This means the all powerful west can hide behind the skirt of little Israel. Israel will risk its people in order to protect the western world. Terror groups throughout the Middle East, and probably the world, will then descend on Israel with all out bombings and killings.

In return, Israel will give up more concessions to the "palestinians" who don't have to do a thing. In fact, "palestinians" will probably be involved in the killing of Israelis.

If the West thinks this will protect them from future terror attacks they are wrong. It will increase the likelihood of a massive terror attack that ends yup killing at least thousands. Only some dim witted, Ivy League taught, paper pushing, relativist bureaucrat could come up with an idea like this. Though I have a hard time believing it, I can actually see where this makes sense to a leftist western politician.

To Israel I say: Tell the world to kiss of. If you are going to attack Iran then do it anyway. There should be no deals or trade offs. The attack of Iran's nuclear facilities is a matter of self preservation. Israel need not get permission from those who would willingly trade your safety and security for theirs. Israel owes the "palestinians" NOTHING. Until they agree to stop killing in the name of allah and learn how to care for themselves let them suffer in their elected oppression.

The fact that the self proclaimed free world would actually propose something along these lines says more about our moral decline than anything else. Since when did a free man let someone else do what they can do themselves? Since when did a free man voluntarily put another mans life at risk? Israel would have a hard enough time if they attack Iran on their own. Making them puppets of the west would not only agitate the islamic despots it would humiliate the Israeli people. This is truthfully no better than the islamists who send their children to blow themselves up.

The west is definitely beyond the teetering point.

As I mentioned previously, people usually start arguing the "morals of health care" when they have lost the economic debate. Often times, politicians realize they can't win a legitimate debate and go straight to the emotional issue of morals. This only works on people who can't aruge the economics and don't want to appear mean spirited. However, if you take a step back and look at who is making the moral argument, you will have a major striking point. Who in their right mind would cede the moral high ground to the likes of Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and others? There are very few politicians that could argue a moral issue and have s true leg to stand on.

Also, who is anyone to tell someone else what their morals should be? Isn't this the land of individual liberty? Isn't this the land built on the idea of the individual and the individuals inherent God given rights? Once you allow someone else to determine your morals you have given up your own argument for morality and thus your own personal freedom. You have handed responsibility for your life to someone else. This is immoral. Allowing someone else to determine your life and future allocates you to the position of slave. We all agree that this is immoral. Then again maybe we don't.

It is not the government or anyone else's right to force something on someone else. this is another form of slavery. It is not a governments right to take from one and give to another. This is theft. I believe we all see theft as immoral. We don't like it when corrupt people within corporations do it, why should we accept this action from our government or our neighbor?

What really makes no sense to me is daily people complain about how politicians are corrupt, inept, ignorant, stupid, you name the derogative. Why would we hand over the selfare of ourselves and our families to them? We constantly read about fraud, waste, and abuse within government bureacracies but somehow we convince ourselves that this will be different? Who are the true stupid ones here?

Government run health care is not moral.

more to follow.

The problem with naive leftists is they approach everything from a perception of hope. Barack Obama constantly clamored about hope and change in the US Presidential campaign. Those of us who have to deal with reality on a day to day basis realized a long time ago that hope is not a strategy. Hope is only uttered when everything else has fails. Hope never replaces truth and fact. Sadly, this is exactly the approach that many in the west have taken and the islamists rely on. Hope allows when to rid themselves of responsibility and look at others in a skewed manner.

"I'm not reconciled with [Iran's possession of nuclear weapons], and I don't think the international community is reconciled with that," US President Barack Obama said Thursday in an interview with the Associated Press, ahead of a trip to Moscow.

I am not sold that he believes this entirely. I don't believe that he truly cares one way or another if Iran gets nuclear weapons. As for speaking for the rest of the "international community", he can't even speak for his own country.

Scheduled to depart next week on a trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana, Obama praised Moscow for its cooperation in attempting to persuade North Korea and Iran to abandon their nuclear development programs. The United Nations recently approved "the most robust sanction regime that we've ever seen with respect to North Korea," he said.

Moscow feigns to help while funnelling material, money, and expertise under the table. This is the equivalent of a 1930's black man thanking a Klansman for erecting a cross in his yard. How tragically pathetic is this?

In reference to his upcoming trip, Obama chided Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Thursday for keeping "one foot in the old ways of doing business." By contrast, Obama said Putin's handpicked successor as president understands that Cold War behavior is outdated.

This comment is so easy to pick apart I'll leave it to you.

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.