Our Crazy Uncle Seems Totally Afraid To Win

"She really thought I didn't mind that crying baby"

What isn't hard to understand is the love and understanding that we all have for that crazy uncle in our family.  You know who I am talking about because every family seems to have THAT uncle.

Call him Uncle Donald if you will.

He's that uncle who always seems to say something to infuriate somebody, if not everybody at the same time, though some in the family know how to let him have his way and not poke the bear by trying to censor him.

Usually, our crazy Uncle Donald is aided by a fair amount of liquor to increase the audacity of his offensiveness, but he is perfectly capable of pissing off many, with or without liquor. The liquor is usually just an easy excuse for the kind of stuff they do all of the time anyway, but it also gives us something to excuse him for, until the next time.

After all, crazy Uncle Donald is family, and there really is no way to totally disassociate yourself from family....is there?

It was way back in 1989, with Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. campaigning mightily to stop the impending State legislature pursuit in Louisiana of former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.  That was the only other time in which a party attempted to oust one of it's own nominee's. It didn't work and Duke won that seat.
(http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/white-supremacists-feel-inspired-trumps-2016-campaign)

THE LESSON?

Sometimes when you DON'T stand up against your unruly family members, they'll only get more unruly and eventually take over the whole party.

Two years later, however, republicans learned their lesson when Duke attempted to win the Governors seat in Louisiana, but was unsuccessful due to a strong stand of resistance from members of his own party.

David Duke is nothing like crazy Uncle Donald. He is our slick Uncle Duke who is rhetorically capable of convincing you of just about anything with his gift of gab and immense intellectual capacity.  As a black political editorial writer who researches constantly, I have to watch carefully to the amount of time I spend listening to David Duke because he can totally focus on elements that you'll agree with him about, and never reveal the other elements of his intolerant self that resides at the core of his being.

Those who keep up with such things know that our racist Uncle Duke rarely talks about blacks anymore, but is an intense skeptic about the pervasive influence of Jewish money in American life in addition to the 8 billion dollar welfare payment we send to Israel even while Netanyahu spits in the face of our president. Uncle Duke and I do not disagree on this bone of contention, yet he loses me on the race purity mission that elevated him to Grand Wizard. Though he has abandoned the sheet and the hood, what became of all of that hatred?

Whether he continues to espouse such hatred and extremes or not, is a risk that Louisiana voters refused to trust again, as Duke has run for many political offices in Louisiana and beyond, but never won another seat after winning the state legislature seat in 1989.

Louisiana voters, and its republican party, have rejected his form of hatred and turned him into a fringe lunatic lost in the extremes of politics and academia until revived by his recent endorsement of our crazy Uncle Donald.

Although much more lucid a thinker and talented as a orator, Uncle Duke was denounced for turning back the clock on race relations in America. In a crazy bit of political irony, Uncle Donald, far from full fledged denunciation, is FINALLY being seen as the sincere threat to the future of the GOP that he has always been from the moment he claimed the label, and a sincere threat to the reputation of those who continue to love and support him too, much like our crazy Uncle who no one knows how to functionally separate themselves from.

The fact that the GOP is talking about some form of nominee switching intervention is good but sad when you think about the damage they have accepted by waiting so long.  At this point in the conversation, it's hard to know if they will be more damaged with a Trump victory and a path or plan that could be so progressive even Obama will wish he voted for him, or if he and Republicans lose once again and fight with presidential defeat depression while searching for the motivation to  redefine their identity by capturing some of these millions of now bewildered voters.

Hillary has a delicate line to walk on as she seeks to secure enough bewildered voters herself to win the electoral map and the presidency. No race against an opponent so immensely flawed should ever be this darn close, but it is because no one really likes Hillary that much either. At this point in the process, she'll never extend her favorabilities to even that of Mitt Romney, who must be chomping at the bit to defy his families wishes and save the country from Trump by being the secondary option of this GOP intervention plan.

The voters that Clinton must pursue are those particular family members who hate Uncle Donald's crap and might choose to spend more time at the reunion with lying Aunt Hillary- who is only hard to believe, versus crazy Uncle Donald who lies and attacks everybody in sight- but only if you make them choose between the two.

In this election, making people choose between these two is exactly what WE must do.  I say WE because Hillary will insult the voter's she needs while blaming our crazy Uncle on their support of him.  She must continue to treat him in the only way that he understands- with ridicule. Rational debate has little value with crazy Donald. With that insecure Uncle of ours, there is actually nothing better than a little name calling to piss him off and take him off his game. Trump can't focus on the issues while defending himself from name calling or angry Gold Star families. Clarifying his existence in this race by calling him crazy Uncle Donald would achieve a very intentional, two-fold purpose.

While Hillary points out how insidious it is to give our crazy Uncle the most powerful job in the world, WE must keep informing our friends and family that THEY are the reason that he is still sticking around.  Donald is showing as many signs of wanting out as that tomato can boxer who needs to last four rounds to insure he gets paid.  Trump is well past that four round threshold and more likely to lose money and power if this keeps up much longer. If he had hired a trusted corner man, he would have fired him already for not throwing in the towel on this thing.

The only person more shocked that you crazy voters still love the crazy uncle is Trump, because he probably never got involved to actually become president.  The reason why he's running will be a secret to history or one hell of a book if he has the courage to reveal the art of this deal he made with the devil, Hillary, or someone really mad at the GOP.

It's not out of the realm of understanding for our crazy Uncle to be up on a soap box trying to convince us that he is the most talented and brilliant of us all. That is what he does at every party.

The reasons why he still has people supporting him is the reason why I am writing today.

Hitler's rise came absent the balanced informational obstruction of the Internet.  Trump is not so lucky.  If you need to know more about what he is all about, the evidence reads like a clear and present danger.  He is a self serving business man with no evidence of being benevolent or particularly good in business because he refuses to release the only proof of such things, his tax return, calling them all "under audit". In the absence of the only resume that a business man can offer for US to review, let US review the details that are available to us.

Every time I take the time out to complain about the pain in the arse we call Trump, I find myself unable to do so without some element of praise that he deserves too.

He deserves the credit for demonstrating political dominance without financially dominating the process too.  He deserves credit for exposing a delegate system that we had little functional knowledge about.  If the electors in half of the United States go rogue, as the Constitution allows, he might soon give an up close and personal look at the electoral college aspect of the two-party hustle, used to maintain the two-party grip on power. He deserves credit for forcing the conversation to happen on several hot button topics that political correctness had previously silenced, and he deserves a lot of real credit for exposing the cracks and flaws in our system of governance including our immense racial and cultural divides that function as wedges to help maintain and expand those exposed cracks in the foundation.

Stated more clearly, he has helped us to see how terribly racist and divided WE actually are.

If his candidacy is reflective of this nation, it is showing that WE are mean, somewhat vile, vain, full of hatred and polarized beyond our ability to even recognize friends and loved ones when examining them through a political lens. This political season has found millions of our friends and family members getting dropped off our social media friends list- assuming they haven't dropped you first.

For a while, both sides had serious reason, other than favorability ratings, to call the two of these candidates equally bad. Trump's former attack of John McCain and so many others after that, wasn't enough to exclude him from presidential consideration, but his recent attacks on babies and Muslim parents of slain war vets while lying about his relationship with Russian president Vladimir Putin, has at least clarified that he is uniquely horrible.

Trump is that crazy Uncle we all have, the one we would never imagine helping to become president. If you don't know how to bail out for pride or embarrassment, you are like those folks on the Titanic who realized the carrier didn't have enough life rafts for everybody, so you stand resolute in the no way out scenario you've found yourself in. What you are doing by standing steadfast in the corner of Trump is surely a grand display of courage and determination as you sink down to your slow, icy death.

Crazy Uncle Donald is not only sinking the boat on his own political race, he is destroying the political reputations and careers of everyone that hitches their wagons to him. Most of those people I politically oppose, so Uncle Donald has done something great for me. As for the voters, voters don't have to reveal their voting booth selections even though FaceBook seems to make us think we have to declare a pledge of allegiance to someone so that someone else isn't presumably winning by default.

In the words of Vice President Joe Biden, that is a bunch of malarkey.  We'll never rid ourselves of two-party rule if we remain convinced that any vote outside of one party is an instant vote for the other.  If there is no reason for me to know who you vote for, there is no reason for me to ask or care who you vote for either.  WE use a secret ballot for a reason.  If any of US are truly interested in Making America Great, finally, insuring over 90% voter participation gets us closer to a majority selection and not just a campaign season survivor. As long as voter participation remains stuck at numbers barely over 50% of the population, financial influence can, and does, win an election every time.

Hillary can do herself a ton  of supporters and  loads of Super PAC money a lot of good by championing the reforms (campaign finance, immigration) that Trump has brought to light. But don't get it twisted. Our distrust of Hillary is real, and nothing will instantly convince US that she will fulfill her campaign promises or fulfill that progressive platform after getting elected.  So, instead of blowing a bunch of presumed hot air full of political promises that no one really believes, Hillary must keep dishing the ice on the hot rhetoric of crazy Uncle Donald to help expose him as the crazy Uncle that we all know him as.

If you are still in his corner, you are doing a loyal and honorable thing as a member of America's family, but a horrendous thing for the future of this nation. Nobody is telling you not to love him and keep inviting him to the party.  Just don't make him our president.

Which Came First, Islamic Terror Or It's Anger ?

What if America had saved up all of its anger towards 9-11 to use against ISIS.

Are female Army Ranger's
necessary with the changing nature of war?

 I have long since agreed with presidential candidate Lindsey Graham who thinks we should be at full blown war with ISIS right now regardless of the retributive conflicts that arise along the way.

Whatever we called ourselves doing to Saddam Hussein and the barren hills of Afghanistan was a waste of time, energy, money, credibility and most importantly a waste of our will to do our f__ing job now.



Big Sister Is Ready to Join 
Big Brother On Front Line


To whom much is given, much is expected.
We are America and ISIS, Iran, Syria and even  misbehaving Russia all represent our f__ing job as the Big Brother of the world and the God ordained bastion of Hope and Freedom for ALL.  That being said, I understand that this nation is war weary and tired of sacrificing our actual sons and daughters to an unclear goal. As our daughters slowly take over the front line of the famed Army Ranger's from Fort Benning, GA, it's really time to decide how much of this natural treasure are we willing to sacrifice to address world issues that have no good options.

If we are seriously pondering placing women on the front line of today's uncommon battlefields, it's hard not to think that we should have saved the anger, the bullets and the sweat equity  of our recent wars for a purpose befitting of a noble Big Brother- one who would never beat up the whole neighborhood just to deal with our own ANGER, GRIEF and failure in imagination relative to an act of war as old a war itself.

No Matter What The Form...TERRORISM WORKS!!

Terrorism is as old as war  because it works.  It requires coordinated thought and energy and effort, and would be named differently had it been described from the perspective of the weak who use its power as their greatest tool against a seemingly insurmountable foe.

Political terrorism is the form of terrorism that the Black Lives Matter movement has waged on the democrat political candidates who've allowed them to hijack the mic at campaign events. Whether driven by an Islamic caliphate or by the killing of unarmed black Americans, terror exploits the weary as it seeks the camera's eye and overtakes the microphone.  No matter what the form of terror, IT THRIVES WHILE THE ENEMY SLEEPS, typically dropping bombs or indictments, but rarely pointing the way with a compelling message when opportunity presents itself.

ISIS has taken over the mic and the camera with  beheading's and a cry for worldwide Jihad, however, because they are the only combatant with a time tested approach, they are the only combatant currently capable of winning.

Peace Through Strength Is Not Just A Slogan
and war is a profitable industry.

WE need a new style of war against Islamic terror- against Iran if they cheat the deal- and against Russia if they continue to disrupt the potential for worldwide peace that sits at an interesting crossroad and against the negative view of capitalism.  NATO could justify their continued existence by coordinating an American funded effort to recruit and place a unified army of concerned citizens from throughout the troubled regions of the middle east. Instead of the normal wars that WE start, fight and fund all alone, this time WE will fund it but they will fight it, saving countless American lives that most American's aren't eager to sacrifice anymore anyway. Given the uncertainty of the source of terror's anger, I can  hardly blame the war weary, although a caliphate mission doesn't exactly offer much wiggle room for negotiation.

Iraq, Iran, Syria, Turkey and maybe Israel when Benjamin Netanyahu is no more, will have to determine the seriousness of this caliphate mission to help determine which nation houses this unified force against terror since that nation stands to gain the most from the industry of war this promises to create for them. Similar to America's presence in Europe, additional military bases for this unified Army can be strategically located in various nations to expand the ISIS response and share the cash created by the industy of war. Hardliners everywhere will reject this plan, but they are all dying off and the coming generations of compassionate youth will be more concerned about ISIS, more open to change and totally interested in good paying military jobs that deal with it.

Iraq, who has already tried to deal with their post Saddam Hussein region without our help should be softened to the support that only WE The People can coordinate at a time like this. Iraq is a sectarian nation that will always suffer from sectarian instability and ISIS-like assault without a dictator or the support of a strong, reliable military to REMAIN in the region FOREVER.   A NATO created, Christian/Muslim/Jewish Unified Army would be a great peace gesture and job lure for the region, offering needed security and income potential to any eligible citizen in the surrounding countries; income potential that only capitalism could create adding to the improved image that capitalism needs in the middle east and across the world.

With Oil Prices Plummeting, Is Cheap Labor Now The Greatest Commodity On Earth?

Worldwide capitalism and its voracity for cheap labor has uncovered new, exploitable labor options at the short term detriment of those who are used to having something but feel it slipping away quickly.  What seems like an American economic crisis is actually an economic opportunity for America to  rise in the ranks of worldwide job quality standards. Instead of embracing this positively painful change, most Americans are lamenting the loss of back breaking industries that smart people should never do happily in the first place.

 If you work or do business in back breaking industries, you will recognize that our rejection of cheap workers in America will also include rejecting a major influx of those hard workers from various parts of Asia, the largest growing segment of undocumented workers in the entire U.S. (not South Americans!).  Asia and South America contribute greatly to our ability to mine for the kind of low-waged labor that makes the U.S. economy so admired and envied.  Either we invest in America 's educational future and progression towards jobs of the future, or we shut down our cheap worker mining,  both domestic and abroad, which makes consistent profit (capitalism) possible.

Is ISIS Mad About Capitalism?

Low wage mining is a temptingly easy approach to generating profit that also contributes to the negative view of capitalism. Due to its abuses, Socialism is similarly viewed although these two non-combative industries remain eternally married and hopelessly searching for a certain balance of the other.

Jihadi's seem angered with Israel but enraged by US- Israel's great capitalistic enabler.  Because capitalism is seen as our greatest strength as a nation, it stands to reason that it will always be the smartest target from our enemies and the most vulnerable institution for attack. If you accept that premise, WE have a choice to either give ISIS and every terrorist group the room they need to wage an attack on American capitalism, or WE diminish them to the power of using Twitter to inspire an occasional stupid American to behave stupidly in the name of terrorism du jour.

Islamic terrorism and the anger that drives it may never be defeated in the hearts of the religiously angry and psychotic or those who sympathize and kill on their behalf . WE The People, however, have a duty to seriously diminish the incredible killing power that Islamic terrorism gains from our rejection of real war and the consequential recruiting power generated by this pseudo war.


Once again, I realize that Lindsey and I are somewhat alone on an island with this real war view. Yet, the necessity of war should have never been driven by anger and retaliation before, nor neglected by weariness and fatigue now.  While we rest, terrorism works.

I respect the value of a good nap, except when the work is not at a place to be abandoned. Real war will likely be the repercussion of this nap we needed for now; sort of like the real war the hare required after resting in his losing race against the turtle.


So which came first- Islamic terror or it's anger?

To hell with terrorism and it's anger since expressing your anger by killing people- and quite frankly hijacking microphone's and camera's to point the finger instead of pointing the way is power without discipline or clear purpose. The real answers to all of our biggest problems wont involve fingers pointed in either direction because all fingers will be working together as ONE.

Microphone stealer's we can totally endure.  Head chopping murderers disrupt the peace and civility of society and must be treated like the epidemic illness that they threaten to become if not properly quarantined and eradicated.

Shouldn't Those In Congress Who Reject Iran Agreement Have To Rebuild Sanctioning Coalition?

We should all be scared to death with the reluctance of some in congress to ratify the agreement reached between the international community and the Islamic Republic of Iran.


I repeat: the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (Russia, China, France, Germany, England and the U.S.) and the Islamic Republic of Iran painstakingly reached this deal over the course of years, not months.  The original coalition created by president Barack Obama agreed on the original sanctioning documents which were as much a part of the negotiations as was the final documents that too many in congress still needs to review if you ask them where they stand on the issue. Essentially, a handful of congressional representatives are now attempting to slap down the efforts of this unprecedented act of collaboration by otherwise opposing nations.  In the absence many alternatives excluding war, opponents are repeating the same request that we've heard them declare as the "Better" remaining alternative.

The Benjamin Netanyahu Perspective

Keeping the coalition together took just as much effort as
crafting the agreement that the sanctions were created for.
Will those who reject the deal rebuild the coalition?

Get a better deal!

A better deal?  Why stop there?  Why not get the best deal in the entire universe and then sweeten it little so that it could be called "The Best Deal In The Universe" with a cherry on top?  Regardless of the breakout time for an actual nuclear weapon- which happens to be two months RIGHT NOW in case you were curious- no amount of breakout time would be seen as reasonable or safe from an Israeli, Netanyahu perspective that rejects the premise of negotiations with an enemy making any agreement equal to appeasement from the Netanyahu perspective.

This deal is an agreement that has Iran willingly expanding the CURRENT breakout time while also allowing 24 hour inspections on their peaceful weapons program, which they will be able to expand in 15 years so long as they follow the current agreement.  They will NEVER be allowed to have a nuclear weapon (according to the deal), and there will ALWAYS  be inspections to insure this (according to the deal). As President Obama clearly stated in his speech today, killing this deal leaves Iran on the CURRENT path that they are on, which is more accelerated than the path they've agreed to with this deal.

Since these confused folks in congress WILL NEVER rebuild the coalition of sanctions at the same time that they are offending those who created them, including Iran, we will assume that any rejection of this deal will also come along with an outline of that "Better Deal" that republicans and Netanyahu keep mentioning.  We'll see that right about the same time that we get that better health care plan we've been waiting for.

Iranian Nuclear Negotiations Might Be Littered By Trail Of TPP Money

A close look at the map explains why Iran could be a TPP player.

Opponents of the Iranian nuclear negotiation will tell you that Obama wants this deal no matter what the cost.  My natural tendency to question blind critics gave me pause to this claim. Today I am reconsidering.

We all know that the alternatives are limited (2).  Either we maintain sanctions for the hope of a future negotiation or we wage war to force a nuclear treaty. Our bombs might destroy some parts of Iran's  nuclear technology, but it will never remove their knowledge of creating nukes, thus the war option only increases Iran's incentive to escalate nuclear protection.  To avoid war, negotiations need to be firm, but fairness is an assumption assigned to the word negotiation, which means no one ever leaves them feeling like they totally won. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believes that Iran can be sanctioned into submission similar to the way Syria was convinced to let go of its chemical weapons.  What Netanyahu seems to forget is that airstrikes lead the brainstormed suggestions of what to do about Syrian violations against humanity.

Netanyahu also seems not to recognize that two of the actors seated at the Iranian nuclear negotiation table are Russia and China.  Despite our significant differences with these nations, especially Russia over Ukraine, Russia and China joined this coalition to establish a nuclear deal that is good for the world but fair to Iran.  The fact that Iran is a perfect geographical trade partner for Russia and China didn't hurt their motivation any.  While these nations continue to describe themselves as communist, they behave as capitalism demands.  Most of Americas issue with China remains over their humanitarian record and their record of sticking it to America relative to trade. Russia, on the other hand, is at odds with Europe and the world over their invasion of Ukraine.  Our differences are not worthy of war, yet just to see these powerful communist regimes seated at this table feels peculiar and somewhat confusing.


Confusing that is until it was reported that Apple is working on a move into Iran (along with other western companies).  If you did not already know it, Apple inc. had revenues last year that rank it as the #20 nation in the world.  Let me repeat. Apple has a GDP smaller than only 19 countries in the world.  Apple ranks closely to Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates in GDP, two Persian Gulf countries that will also be vital to the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) that Barack Obama's is using to take his NAFTA like walk off swing.  The GDP growth that American companies experienced as a result of raping Mexico and other North American businesses of their place in the market made Bill Clinton deity in the hierarchy of  former presidents.  While Obama might be altruistic in many of his presidential dreams, he's pursuing a "show me the money" memory like Bill's because he knows that America judges its presidents primarily by the economy that they leave behind- something that history books can't easily dispute.

The nation of Iran could not be better geographically located for becoming a  TPP go between, and if the news of Apple setting up a few corner carts in Iran is true, I would wager that Obama and Iran are willing to negotiate because of the easing of sanctions against Iran's vast oil market and a dangling Apple as well.

Will America's Next President Be Forced To Uphold Iranian Nuke Deal?

In America, talks of the finalized negotiations with Iran have been treated like a scorching hot jacuzzi.  For some, the benefit is well worth the pain while others find it a bit too hot to trust and occasionally risky for your health.  In Iran on the other hand, you might think it was a national holiday as citizens are parading the streets celebrating the anticipated relief of removed sanctions.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei

 Leaders don't feel the pain of  sanctions until the commoners make them feel it. For Iranians, the incentive for change has primarily come from the bottom up as sanctions against Iran have fully reached the citizens they were designed to impact the most. Ten years ago, these sanctions began under President Bush for the hopes of forcing negotiations.  Actual sanctions against Iran began during the 70's. This time around we were negotiating with a sanction softened Supreme Leader in Ali Khamenei; sanctions that will remain if the deal is not finalized in June.

Despite our negative view of the nation of Iran, Iran is structured democratically enough for some hope of reasonable behavior.  They are called a nation of terror, but their most hostile leaders are still forced to win elections and deal with term limitations.

Remember me?
Former Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

 Former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad played a significant role in developing the despotic image that many people have of Iran, but his term ran out, and most people who are fearful of Iran don't realize that Hassan Rouhani replaced Ahmadinejad in 2013.

Fear of Iran has also caused most peripheral viewers to think that only America is negotiating this historic deal with Iran.  In fact, the sanctions that forced Iran to the table came from the world community, as did the negotiations.  In the final hours of the deal, negotiators from every county, except America, worked frantically to iron out the bumps.  Whether we finally sign a deal or pursue the war option, this issue is a matter of international diplomacy and not of domestic politics as MANY in America keep trying to make it.





Many- like several of the so-called presidential candidates for 2016.  Usually we wait until the first televised debate before we invoke the word GRAVITAS upon the people of choosing for our next president, but that litmus test begins now.  In essence, Americans are not only looking for a good president but we are looking for a president who looks and sounds good while doing it.  Being presidential is mostly undefinable because it's one of those things you simply recognize when you see it.  Whether they like it or not, as a direct result of these vital negotiations with Iran, the gravitas analysis now begins for every person who considers themselves a genuine candidate for president of the United States of America.

Our next president will be the person most responsible for nurturing or burning and rebuilding the bridges of diplomacy that were built or missed under Barack Obama.  Already, talks are beginning on the subject of awarding a Nobel Peace Prize to Secretary of State John Kerry for engineering this deal.  It will hardly appear presidential if America's next president unravels peace prize worthy efforts. More importantly, the litmus test for each candidate will be to explain their view of the deal and their plans for upholding or destroying it as president, and to do so without scaring the hell out of would be voters.  Because of this deal and this deal alone, every extreme presidential hopeful should immediately consider themselves disqualified from the task of maintaining the path of peace that the world is building with the Iran nuke deal.

Republicans Send "Open Letter" to Iran To Thwart Nuclear Negotiations

Republicans are demanding final approval of the Iranian agreement, but don't realize that they are functionally disrupting the process of agreement negotiations?

Click Here to access the full letter

I don't buy it and neither should the American public.  Without a doubt, even congressional representatives of limited intelligence are educated by their peers on the danger of disrupting active negotiations.  The act of doing so represents a deliberate attempt to force one of the participants into a place of distrust and ultimately away from the negotiation table altogether.

Congressional Republicans and Hardliner Iranians

Apparently, Iran is full of hardliners who also do not want this deal, though probably for different reasons than congressional republicans.  Whether 10 years of uranium enrichment restrictions is a part of the final deal or not is separate from the fact that somebody has to come to the table, and those participants must negotiate in good faith in order to come to an agreement.  Open letters to Iran warning the agreement participants that their unspecified deal will not be allowed to stand is a last ditch effort to throw a grenade on Obama's potential historic negotiation.  He has already shocked the world by convincing moderate Iranian's to join the fight against ISIS or run the risk of answering to them one day.  Add to that the recent news that ISIS is starting to suffer from the impact of persistent air attacks and Obama's foes are losing a grip on their strongest area of criticism of this president, uncontrolled terrorism.

Netanyahu did not convince the world of his claim, he only came across as a desperate politician trying to hold on to his role of prime minister.  Netanyahu is already giving considerations to the idea of a unity government that would provide him access to power whether he succeeds in the March 17 Israeli elections or not.  Inherent to the unity path will be a necessity to negotiate with Palestine and Iran, a path that Netanyahu supporters defiantly resist while congressional republicans don't care about either way.  Their mission is to block the Obama legacy and Netanyahu is just a pawn in that game.

What becomes most peculiar while watching modern republicans work diligently to paint the picture of the Obama years is seeing how they miss their own place in the portrait.  Establishing your own legacy as the people who tried to destroy Obama is a twisted legacy to write for yourself.  Not only have republicans pushed their party further away from the hopes of the presidency, they are now behaving as if congress will always be the only place that they will ever be allowed to influence the direction of America.

I think they're right.

King Abdullah Believes Pathway Of Terror Points Towards Jerusalem

What makes America's path against radical Islamic terror most confusing is that we are expected to both support the fight and create the plan.

To date, I have yet to hear one credible plan that doesn't sound either too limited or too counterproductive.  Most except that Arab nations must lead this fight while disregarding that King Abdullah of Jordan has raised a hand to assume the job. As a result, very few are listening to the voices  of the same people we've asked to lead the fight.

King Abdullah of Jordan is leading, and thanks to an historic interview, he's talking too.

Did ISIS pull the wrong tiger's tail when they
burned the Jordanian pilot?

Fareed Zakaria (of CNN's GPS) has secured an exclusive interview with the person now in charge of the war against ISIS. King Abdullah, who has not spoken since the death of the Jordanian pilot, has remained consistent on the side that believes this fight must be lead by Arab nations.  Yet, determining who will lead the charge only represents one aspect of the current unrest.  Although many people don't want to hear him say it- King Adullah believes that, in the end, "all roads lead to Jerusalem".

For the love of God, the USA endures and insures a non-partisan, Christian commitment to the safety and security of the nation of Israel.  Despite the tensions that exist between Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and president Barack Obama, even Netanyahu acknowledges that Obama has committed more resources to the safety of Israel than ever before under any other US president.  If Obama's willingness to negotiate a nuclear agreement with Iran is a sticking point in the relationship between Netanyahu and Obama, it is only one big point on a very thin list.  That other big point makes Obama just as maligned as is King Abdullah in the eyes of Netanyahu supporters.  Both Obama and Abdullah ardently agree that Israel must resolve the Palestinian issue and establish a two state solution between these two nations.  The iron-dome keeping a cap upon the entire middle-eastern powder keg is an inseparable dedication to God that America makes to keep God separated from our government even while we allow Him to dictate our policy towards Israel.

Israel should be appalled by Gaza too!

These religious commitments of America do not technically make us a caliphate, because ALL religious ideologies are free to be in the home of the brave.  Disregard, if you can, that we do claim a Trust in a God that we reference on our demigod. Disregard also that because of that very God, WE will never allow the death of Israel, even if Benjamin Netanyahu and his political crony John Boehner ignorantly test our divine marching order.

Despite the differences that this current president has with Israel's current prime minister, why would Netanyahu wish to risk the image that America has towards Israel and those who support him?  No visit - especially one with political ramifications- should be worth the risk of disrupting a relationship that will determine the future of your people.

Nothing reasonably good could come of the behavior of Netanyahu except the re-election of Netanyahu.  Ben has read our bible too and he knows that WE are as religiously dedicated to their safety as evil is to their destruction.  At times it feels that WE are even more invested in Israel than Netanyahu and those like him.  When you make a mockery of our congress, you religiously mock the very messianic message that demands we protect you.

Since our investment in Israel might one day require the death of millions and the next true world war, King Abdullah, President Barack Obama and I are on the side of reasonable diplomacy before unabashed acceptance of the death of millions.  Diplomacy means oversight in Iran to monitor and delay their walk towards a nuclear reality instead of hoping that they will never do it absent worldwide oversight. Diplomacy means rebuilding Gaza so we don't have to keep bombing it. Diplomacy means that we quit ignoring this war torn region as though its not a humanitarian disgrace.


Gaza is a disgrace to all of humanity.

Just saying Ben.

Moreover, Gaza is as legitimate a tool for the recruitment of terror as anything in the world.  Airstrikes in response to beheading's help modern recruitment efforts, but Gaza is an old problem and far from being addressed with the kind of focus that confronts terror on all fronts, especially recruitment paths.  This mission will be won by attacking every supply chain, and all roads truly do point towards Jerusalem.

Whose Cause Do WE Further By Saying "Islamic Terrorism"?

Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)

Does FOX exploit Kelly Ayotte for her
willingness to be the last critic standing?

"I think they should spend less time on being more politically correct about how we define our enemies and spend more time on figuring out how to defeat them", said Senator Kelly Ayotte (FOX News Sunday)
with her fresh new hair-do but old blabbering ability to be the last Senator beating a dead horse to death all over again.

To the credit of the republican party, and FOX news who blindly cosigns conservative ignorance, Ayotte has finally stopped crying Benghazi for FOX.   In its place are social media updates and Obama criticism in between social media updates.  These days, every network is a late edition of social media, but FOX maintains its unique rhythm by consistently bashing Obama.  The next Democrat president (since republicans are proving incapable of winning the oval office) will be tagged to Obama by FOX mostly because they won't be able to transition the attack in a way that will maintain ratings.

 Since FOX is the last bastion of republican sentiment 
 (nobody listens to radio anymore- sorry Rush),

How bout those gas prices, heh?

FOX embraces their self described label of being fair and balanced about as much as you hear them say it these days.  They know better than anyone how profitable Obama has been for them.  They also realize how disinterested their viewers become when they do anything other than bash Obama- so they connect him to every societal problem that they can.

The latest President Obama criticism is his unwillingness to focus on the fact that evil terror organizations terrorize in the name of Islam.  As a president, this is a really prudent policy in that so many non-radical Muslims die every day in the effort to defeat these radicals. EVERYBODY- even FOX news, agrees that the war against Islamic terror groups must be lead by a coalition of Muslim people, so how does anyone, especially a world leader, try to establish that coalition while using rhetoric that is offensive towards the people who must lead the coalition?  It's almost as though FOX, or anyone who attempts to achieve world peace through hostile rhetoric, is trying to sabotage our own interests.

And then it hit me.

John Boehner and Benjamin Netanyahu are no better by political posturing during an Israeli campaign season, behind the back of the elected leader of the USA.  Neither of these men achieve their own best interest in showing a willingness to be disorderly with diplomatic relations as it brings into question America's willingness to support this ally, especially if Netanyahu wins re-election.  If Israel were to be under attack tomorrow, it would not be Boehner that decides if WE save the day.

Mitch McConnell is behaving as a grateful soul after fighting tooth and nail to survive the bid against his senatorial seat this past election season, but he was also the guy who verbalized the mission of making Obama a one term president.  His words should have been an obvious expectation of anyone in his position of opposition, but we already know that party leaders focus on winning and not losing elections, despite the self sabotaging behaviors of modern republicans.  McConnell's words oozed with revelation that even he wishes he could have kept inside.  Yet, were republicans fully invested in John McCain or any one of their brethren who would have had to oversee the worst of America's economic demise? Did Mitt Romney and his republican backers downplay the recovery to the degree that it only hurt their ability to achieve the sentiment necessary for giving the job back to a white guy?

Was Barack Obama just another brother who got the job when the job was not so desirable? Was the likelihood of his failure and the do-nothing response of congress just an intensive effort to see Obama fail even at the cost of  a more rapid recovery and the confidence of the public at-large?

Paul Ryan, the budget hawk who republicans actually follow, seems to have many things that he agrees with within the president's SOTU/budget proposals, but verbalizing your agreement can get you ran out of town like Eric Cantor. The nation was ready to fix immigration when Cantor dared to allow a vote to occur in response to the overwhelming support that polls continue to reflect to this day. Right wing extremists (can we call them terrorists?) are not into recognizing a losing fight because America is the place where the impossible is always possible- especially if you are willing to lay your life down to defend against the freedom democracy creates- like blocking popular immigration bills or enacting voter restriction laws- or sharia law.

By golly, if this nation was founded by the right people, then its up to the right to make sure this nation remains rightly pure against the influence of too many Mexican immigrants or cheating voters.  It would be nice if all of America's undesirables would either self deport or agree to never vote, but they are not going to be allowed to comfortably belong lest it be over the dead bodies of those who oppose illegal amnesty and illegal votes.  Opposition to immigration reform will eventually die in one form or another, but how long will it take before we do what we know is right for America- like insuring the right to vote?

The rise of so many forms of republicanism says that conservatives are absolutely tired of being associated with the more or less extremes of their own ideology as well.  While it might not be too extreme to call a Libertarian a republican, it is extreme to think that they will ever convert the traditional republican given that the traditional republican is just as into big government as is the liberal.  Republicans who despise America's liberal disposal of unborn babies find no fellowship in conservatives who support these practices, hence the label RINO (republican in name only) or worse.

Liberals have extremist' too, but liberal kooks are so proudly kooky that the progressive movement doesn't have to disown its own, they just have to admonish them when they burn up ski resorts.  On the right, the  Islamic terrorism label fight is sustaining an entire network who is profiting from the fear of terror connected to Islamic extremism. If you are unsure if the word Islam is as significant to the behavior as the word extreme, then you should remind yourself that American's live peacefully in the midst of Islamic people everyday, so it must be something extreme that is driving the murderous behavior and not Islam at all.

Does anyone realize what Rand Paul
would do against ISIS? Is he presidential?

As republicans wait agonizingly to remove themselves of that sympathizing liberal (Obama) who won't venomously label extremism, they are confronted with the issue of defining their party label if they are looking to define the fight against him and them. Regular and extreme conservatives seem to want some boots on the ground, while Libertarians- the hottest growing wing of the party- are not into that save the world stuff.  If WE THE PEOPLE are to give the white house back to the conservative party, will it be a regular old republican, one that drinks the Tea or Rand Paul that  will lead the charge into the white house?  Even worse, will it be some amalgamation of the various republican labels creating a figure head leader unable to coalesce the disparate missions assigned to each label?

Nobody appreciates the rise in worldwide extremism and ISIS is a nuisance that could also be called a threat.  What was once only 3,000 recruits is now 30,000 fighters with a strong economic network and an even stronger guerilla marketing system of recruiting. Even with boots on the ground, tracking down 30,000 and killing them is not as easy as it sounds, especially since their death and captivity only adds to the recruiting efforts- which is why they are begging us to bring the boots.  Adding boots on the ground seems to make sense, but only because its the only thing we know to do when provoked.  In reality, boots on the ground would open the recruiting faucet to full throttle.  Absent an opposing soldier to kill, an ISIS recruit with an M16 has only the hope of waiting for another American drone to shoot at or a defiant Muslim group that would rather keep their town instead of handing it over. Eventually, 30,000 recruited soldiers have a limited amount of space that they can sensibly secure for very long any way, so recruiting is more vital than acquisition at this time.

Obama's policy against terror removes the visual enemy that new terror recruits need to justify their own existence.  If ISIS is so dangerous, they would not use 80's style beheading's to bolster their worldwide credibility. They wouldn't need boots on the ground to benefit their recruiting.  They wouldn't be backing up in the face of Kurds and drones, and most importantly, ISIS and those like them would not need to use the rhetoric of racial division to pit all Muslims against the world at large- but they do.  Every time we allow terrorist groups to take ill-spoken words and package them into a sound bite that seems as though the world hates Muslims, we further their cause and not our own.

In the end, the manner in which we fight our enemy is only connected to the label when the label is connected to the fight. We can shoot at them no matter what we call them, but calling them by the wrong label will only empower them  to recruit someone who will shoot back.

Why give them additional bullets?