One thing which I noted in last night’s debate was John McCain speaking to the actual concerns of those affected in their personal lives by the financial crisis – those who have seen their home values collapse while keeping up their home payments. As a for-instance, there is me. My house has lost at least $175,000 in value, and perhaps more – in a real sense, by house is actually worthless because with so many foreclosures on the market, there will be no prospective buyer’s for my house as there are plenty of nicer houses to be had for even less than the supposed market value of my home. Essentially, every month I make a mortgage payment, I’m wasting my money – I am not building equity, and I long ago lost the $40,000 I put down on the house. In terms of logic, the best thing for me to do with this house would be to bag it – go buy a house at knock-down prices and once I close on that home, allow this one to fall into foreclosure.

I’d rather not do that.

But what to do? I contacted my lender and suggested a re-working of my loan payments – not any forgiveness of debt, but just an easement on the amount I had to pay each month so that I could hang on here while building up savings until the market comes back and I can either sell the house (and pay off the bank) or refinance it (and pay off the bank). No harm, no foul – the bank has one less foreclosure on their hands, I have my house without the shame of a defaulted loan, I’m building up savings and in 5 to 10 years I sell/refinance and clear things up with the bank which will not have lost a penny on me. The answer to this suggested course of action? Not just no, but heck no. The bank wasn’t interested…and so there I sat (and sit) tossing money down the black hole of a collapsed Las Vegas housing market, watching my tax dollars go to bail out Frank and Dodd’s buddies who created this whole mess and all the while wondering if anyone was ever going to take an interest in Americans in this fix. Finally, last night, someone did – and it was John McCain. And I wasn’t the only person who noticed:

ABC News’ Rick Klein: “[M]cCain is roaming the stage, playing to his strength. And comes out with a policy proposal to help people stay in their homes — a strong lead answer, to have a meaty response to that. McCain looks confident early.” (Rick Klein, “Live Debate Blog,” ABC News’ “Live Debate Blog,” blogs.abcnews.com, 10/7/08)

Details? Don’t have them – but we really won’t fix the mess until we figure out what to do with all those houses in New Jersey, California, New Mexico, Nevada and elsewhere around the nation which have lost more than 20% of their value. Until this is resolved, a huge chunk of the American public is entirely removed from the housing market unless they ditch their current homes, thus shoving even more foreclosures on the market to drive down prices even further and make home mortgage paper even more worthless than it is now. Whatever the plan is, it has to have a component of helping those Americans who are upside down but who have not defaulted – not even so much as one late payment. Those who can afford their homes, but who’s homes have suffered a massive loss of value, thus becoming a dead weight on the housing market and on the banks who are holding paper on houses worth half of the loan amount.

All of Obama’s finger pointing at Bush; all of Obama’s ignoring of his Party’s part in this debacle, all of his welfarist notions on how to move forward are so much worthless nonsense – they don’t address the problem which needs to be fixed in order to get things moving again. A lot of wealth has been lost, and some way has to be found to make the debt load of the people match the real value of the nation’s real estate – McCain has an idea, and is clearly thinking of regular folks; the hard working people who didn’t buy houses on speculation but who have none the less been caught in the Democrat-inspired collapse of the mortgage industry. In this alone – the perception to see where the real problem lies – we can see McCain’s manifest superiority over Obama as a prospective Chief Executive.

Yet another timely warning of just how dangerous an Obama Presidency would be:

The Director of the Human Rights Foundation, Armando Valladares, said that electing Barack Obama as the next U.S. President, would go against “the values, principles and ideals that have shaped this great nation…”

…Valladares spent 22 years in a Cuban prison before moving to the United States, where he currently resides. According to him, Obama is governed by the Marxist belief that “the end justifies the means.”

The Latino leader said that if Obama wins the election, “more than ever, our society will be in great danger. One of his objectives is the dissolution of the family and its values. Obama supports marriage between same-sex partners. He wants to bring it to the Constitution. Obama is in favor of the adoption of children by gay couples. Rather than favoring prayer in schools, he advocates the distribution of condoms.”

The greatest concern of Valladares is Obama’s relationship with terrorists. “William ‘Bill’ Ayers was one of the founders of the leftist organization ‘The Weatherman.’ It was this group that put the bomb at the headquarters of the police department in New York back in 1970. Additionally, the bombings at the Capitol in Washington in 1971 and at the Pentagon in 1972 are among their other terrorist acts.”

“Obama and Ayers served together in the extreme leftist organization, Woods Fund Board, from 1999 to 2002. Ayers introduced his terrorist friends to Obama and organized parties at his house to raise money for Obama’s campaign to the Senate in Illinois. They appeared together many times in public lectures, panels. Ayers was a donor to the Obama campaign in 2001.”

According to Valladares, if Obama is elected, Ayers would have a place in his administration.

Right now, Ayers has become too toxic for him to find a spot in an Obama Administration – but the ideology of Ayers would certainly find a home in Obama’s White House. Watching Obama fumble around with mindless talking points during the “townhall” debate, I get the distinct impression that Obama wouldn’t be the leader of his Administration – he is the definition of the empty suit and his ideological mentors can pour into him whatever they please. One of the more curious things right now is that for 8 years the left has been complaining that President Bush is a mindless tool of shadowy special interests who get him to do their bidding while he’s clueless about what is really going on – and now these same leftists are determined to have a mindless tool of shadowy special interest who will be able to get him to do their bidding. Up has become down and we’ve stepped through the looking glass.

These leftists like Ayers certainly believe they are doing the right thing – that the world is never going to be the way its supposed to be until their ideology rules supreme and everyone is forced into the Marxist dispensation. How they manage to deny the truth of their own eyes is inexplicable, but not at all rare – Marx, himself, had no clue about the working class he claimed to advance…no more than did Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Castro and no more than the various leftists in the United States who have risen from the fever swamps of post-Christian philosophy to needlessly trouble the world. Ayers probably has a high opinion of himself, as does Obama – that neither of them have ever done anything to actually help a downtrodden person is neither here nor there…no leftist ever has, and none ever will. Actual people are terribly inconvenient for leftists – they prefer to deal with humanity than with humans.

And so here comes Barack Obama, product of mid- to late-20th century American education, which means that unless he exerted himself independently he has only the haziest notion of how the world works or how it got to be the way it is (and such mites of information he’s been given are usually wrong, or grossly misunderstood)…but he’s going to save us all, because he’s been told by his mentors what needs to be done, and it all seems to fit in a nice, neat ideological package – divorced from reality, but Obama lacks the grounding in real world knowledge to detect the difference between the real and the fantasy. Taught his religion by a racist con artist, joined to a grievance-mongering wife, surrounded by sycophants, told endlessly that he’s just oh, so smart and wonderful…he’s going blind into an office he doesn’t have a clue about and which he won’t be able to make work…and thus all power will slip out of his hands and fall into the hands of those who do know how to make it work…under-secretaries and senior bureaucrats and obscure lawyers will decide how things go, with Obama only being called upon to ratify their designs in public speeches, with an MSM counted on to smooth over any difficult questions which may arise. And all things done to advance the leftist agenda for the remaking of the United States.

Will we have this? I don’t think so. Its late in the game and our team is down by 7 with a long yardage, third down conversion necessary just to try and get some momentum…but I think we’re going to win. If we lose, I shan’t be surprised, nor dismayed – I am at peace…but also serenely confident in the outcome. Why? Because America is not what Obama and his handlers believe it is – we’re not a racist, sexist, homophobic society which needs to be cured by a dose of leftism. We’re not a bunch of whiners who are sucking our collective thumb and waiting for Uncle Sugar to come and take care of us. We are Americans – and we wish to live in an American nation, not a country converted into a poor copy of Euro-trash socialism. Last night’s debate showed quite clearly who is the better man to be President – and while it still could end up that the American people hand power to Obama and his Democrats, I think that those who have so far been on the fence now have the knowledge to make their decision, and my prayer – and conviction – is that they will choose correctly.

He really does – the man who wants to be Commander in Chief certainly shouldn’t be a man who thinks the magnificent men and women of the United States Armed Forces are criminals:

HARRISBURG, PA — Rear Admiral Tom Lynch, USN (Ret.) today issued the following statement on Barack Obama’s accusation of American war crimes in Afghanistan:

“Barack Obama must disavow his comments equating American forces in Afghanistan to war criminals. This dangerous rhetoric emboldens our enemy, but it also speaks to Barack Obama’s judgment and competency to serve as commander in chief. While his remarks were designed to score political points with the left wing of his party during the primary, Barack Obama stands by the comments even after securing the nomination. By defending his words, Barack Obama makes it more difficult for our American heroes in uniform to complete the job we have asked them to do.

“John McCain understands that, as commander in chief, words do matter. As a POW, John McCain endured years of torture to avoid making similar statements that would be used as propaganda to demoralize Americans. He put country first then, and John McCain continues to place the interests of those who bravely serve our nation above all else.”

It was a great thing when Governor Palin – the mother of a serving, US combat soldier – brought back up Obama’s absurd and anti-American statement about our troops in Afghanistan. When Obama made his hateful statement that our troops are just bombing villages and killing civilians, what he did was send a thrill up the spine of every Taliban goon and al Qaeda terrorist in Afghanistan…Obama essentially told them that they were right and America was wrong…that our troops are the bad guys. Nothing could more encourage a whipped enemy to keep fighting than such asinine statements.

Obama’s only excuse can be sheer ignorance – if he knew what he was doing, then that would make him a traitor. I prefer to think of Obama as misguided rather than malicious. But this also points out that the anti-American and unpatriotic elements of the left have gathered ’round Obama, hopeful that he wil be able to sneak into power and carry a huge amount of un-electable leftism into government with him.

Among the many reasons for backing McCain/Palin this year is the men and women we have overseas at this moment – victorious troops who have done splendidly against a cruel and wicked foe, they deserve a Commander in Chief who understands suffering, and understands the excellence of those Americans who have quitted the quite, prosperous life of an everyday American to become a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine. America needs John McCain and, more importantly, our troops in harm’s way need John McCain.

Indeed:

On Monday Pope Benedict XVI briefly remarked on the financial crisis during the opening of the first General Congregation of the Twelfth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops. In the aftermath of the “fall of the great banks,” he reminded synod attendees that money is of “secondary importance” to the Word of God, which he called the “foundation of all reality.”

The Pope referenced Christ’s words at the close of the Sermon on the Mount in which he speaks of building one’s house’s foundation upon sand or upon rock.

“Those who build on sand do so only on visible and tangible things: on success, career and money,” the Pope explained.

“These seem to true reality, but one day they will pass away”, he continued.

“We see this now with the fall of the great banks. Money disappears, it becomes nothing. And thus all these things which seem to be real and upon which we can rely, are in fact of secondary importance.

“All human things, all things we can invent and create are finite. So too all human religious experiences are finite. They show only one aspect of reality, because our limited being understands only some parts, some elements.

“Only God is infinite and through him, his Word too is universal and knows no end,” Pope Benedict remarked.

“Only the Word of God is the foundation of all reality, stable like heaven. Therefore we must change our concept of reality. A realist is one who recognizes that the Word of God – this reality that appears so weak – is in fact the foundation of everything.”

Our liberal and leftwing friends are all about money – who has it, how much they have, what they do with it, how much should be taxed, how it will resolve all problems if only leftists are allowed to control it. But money is nothing – nothing of any importance. My house was worth $400,000, now its worth about $225,000 – back when it was worth 400k, if I hadn’t shown proper love, respect and devotion to my wife that day, what does it matter that my house is worth 400k? If today I show my wife the proper love, respect and devotion, of what consequence is it that the house is worth 225k? Its all a lot of rot and nonsense – a paper chase in the worst sense of the word, and we’ve allowed ourselves to be caught up in it as if it mattered.

Yesterday afternoon, I did a Rosary – for those unfamiliar, this is a prayer Catholics frequently do (but don’t do nearly enough). Its a great devotional prayer and something is strongly pulling me towards doing it each day, starting yesterday, for nine days. Various mysteries are contemplated when doing the Rosary – for yesterday, it was what are called the “Joyful Mysteries”; the Annunciation (when Mary was told she would bear Jesus), Visitation (Mary visits Elizabeth), Nativity (birth of Jesus), Presentation (Jesus consecrated at the Temple) and Finding Jesus in the Temple. In contemplating these things, we look for the spiritual fruits of Humility, Love of Neighbor, Poverty, Obedience and Joy in Finding Jesus. If one is humble, loves his neighbor, renounces the tyranny of material things, obeys the laws human and divine and worships God, what then does it matter if a person is rich or poor? We really need to get things back into the proper perspective – to understand the relative value of things in relation to humanity.

In God We Trust – in great wisdom we have placed that phrase on our currency, because we understood, once upon a time, that while money can be useful, one shouldn’t put any faith in it. Its here today and gone tomorrow – and if you win a million dollars next week and die the week after, what did the money matter? If you pile up billions, what will it advantage you upon your death? You’ll get a fancy casket, I guess. Other than that, I can’t think of anything – and for the corpse the type of casket doesn’t seem to be a matter for concern. It is time we take the one thing our money has of great value – In God We Trust – and start to re-apply it to our lives. In God We Trust – not political parties, not politicians, not business, not the media…heck, in the end, we are not even to place our trust in our rabbis, priests and pastors. In God We Trust. Our leftwing friends, especially, should take that to heart – I’ve seen “Obama Youth”, blue shirted fanatics and people fainting dead away at the mere sight of Barack Obama. He’s just a man – if you place your trust in him, you will be disappointed. He’s human – he’ll make mistakes, and all the more of them the more people ascribe to him a super-human ability to solve problems and make things all better.

I will write of politics; argue of politics; I will vote in November – I will try talk everyone I know into casting a McCain/Palin vote…but if McCain/Palin wins it won’t make life perfect, nor will an Obama/Biden win make it all miserable (though it would spread a great deal of misery). Battle! Strive! Love! Endure! – but In God We Trust; remember that.

Obama has pledged to sign this misbegotten, anti-human legislation (out of a desire to bring us together for some hopeful change, of course):

Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph in Missouri, writing in his diocesan newspaper, has discussed the proposed Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which he said would overturn all existing federal regulations on abortion. Claiming the passage of the act would lead to an increase in abortions, he also questioned whether pro-life supporters of pro-choice politicians have their priorities “backwards.”

Writing in his latest column for The Catholic Key, Bishop Finn said “It is clear that FOCA would immediately make null and void every current restriction on abortion in all jurisdictions.”

Though Bishop Finn did not mention any presidential candidates by name, Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama has pledged to pass FOCA as his first act as president.

The legislation, which was first proposed in 1989, was reproduced in its current form by Bishop Finn in his October 1 column:

“A government may not (1) deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose – (A) to bear a child; (B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability; or (C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or (2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.”

According to Bishop Finn, the bill would overturn many state laws, such as abortion reporting requirements in all 50 states. It would additionally overturn states’ laws concerning parental involvement, restrictions on later-term abortions, conscience protection laws for individual health care providers, bans on partial-birth abortions, conscience protection laws for institutions, requirements for counseling before an abortion, and laws providing ultrasounds to distressed women before an abortion.

We can also expect that a law which prohibits government from denying the alleged “right” to an abortion will be turned around in an Obama Supreme Court to mean that the government must fund abortions – the whole law is designed to make the United States of America the leader in the world-wide Culture of Death…someone may correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think any nation in the world has abortion laws as permissive as the legislation proposed here. This would be the left’s Final Solution to the abortion question.

We daren’t let it happen – not for any reason whatsoever.

First off, Obama has promised a “middle class tax cut” – what this is, exactly, is hard to define, but it seems to revolve around some Democratic focus-group results showing that middle class people are concerned with middle class issues and thus Democrats better come up with something to appeal to middle class people. The only track record we have on this particular Democratic program is Bill Clinton’s 1992 promise to give us a middle class tax cut. Sadly, Bill was unable to provide this as a spending binge commanded all funds possible…including a retroactive tax increase. We can, I believe, expect Obama’s tax cut to become a tax increase, too.

Obama’s people seem to have a hankering for a thing called the “fairness doctrine” – this is predicated upon the theory that liberalism is the default position and any non-liberal assertion in the media must be countered by a liberal response. Conservatives don’t give a two-penny dam what some liberal twit or other is saying on an obscure radio station and thus won’t avail themselves of the fairness doctrine. Liberals, on the other hand, care very much what the highly rated Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Ingram, etc say on the radio, and they will launch complaint after complaint regarding conservative comment and will demand equal time to respond. This intense harassment will be coupled with the sort of thuggish attacks on criticism we’ve seen by Team Obama against any of those who dare to question The One’s past, programs or motivations. Boiled down, we can expect a severe crimping of free speech if Obama is elected.

Senator Obama advocated a cut and run from Iraq out of a desire to build up kook left support for his candidacy. We can expect Obama to treat American foreign and military policy as if they were an adjunct to his personal, political fortunes. Only if it seems to be useful to Obama will any particular policy – good or bad – be followed. If it so happens that American need and Obama desire match, then that is fine and dandy – but if they don’t, America will come in a poor second. We can expect Obama’s foreign and military policy to be a compendium of Clinton’s erratic behavior coupled with Carter’s penchant for finding fault with America’s friends and excuses for America’s enemies.

Obama’s people are of that line of thinking which figures that Israel is the problem and if we can just figure out a way to get terrorists to love Israel, we’ll have peace – that the terrorists will never love Israel and will consider all concessions to be a sign of weakness is not a concept Obama or his people are capable of grasping. We can expect Obama to continually pressure Israel to give ground and to never, ever take a strong stand against those who seek the destruction of Israel.

Have Democrats ever had a fiscal year in which they advocated an actual reduction in the number of dollars the federal government spends? No – and thus we can expect that any idea about cutting the size of government is dead as a doornail under Obama.

Have Democrats ever had a year when they looked around and couldn’t think of a single thing to increase government spending on? No – and thus we can expect Democrats to pile on as much spending as they can.

Have Democrats come through with their 2006 promise to run the most open and ethical government in history? No. Oh, you think Obama will? I guess you can make an argument for holding that position, but the odds are that it will be corrupt business as usual for the party which hammered GOPer Foley for writing a dirty e mail or two but can’t find it in itself to eject William “Cold Cash” Jefferson (D-LA) from the House.

Democrats exerted great efforts to prevent a reigning in of Fannie and Freddie before the crunch hit. Will they now actually keep an eye out for trouble and act in a timely manner to prevent it? Perhaps – but Obama and his Democrats give no indication of having learned anything from the financial debacle than to blame Republicans for their own failures…and if it works in 2008 by helping Dems to victory, what makes anyone think they’ll change their ways in 2009? We can expect Obama and his Democrats to grandstand on things like Gitmo – which isn’t an actual problem – while real crisis are allowed to fester until they become unmanageable.

The last time the US military was in better shape at the end of a Democratic Administration than it was at the beginning was FDR/Truman…but it took a World War to convince a Democratic Administration that maybe we needed a first class military. We can expect Obama to let things slide in this area – especially as he looks for money to spend on various liberal programs.

We can expect strenuous efforts on the part of Obama and his Democrats to stop any measures designed to limit voter fraud.

Behind rhetoric about secure borders, etc, we can expect Obama and his Democrats to do nothing about illegal immigration but very much to ensure that their votes are cast and counted in American elections, provided they vote Democrat.

Any chance an Obama Administration will appoint any judge anywhere who is not pre-approved by NARAL/ACLU/NOW? Not a chance – so, we can expect Obama to appoint only ultra-liberal, activist judges from top to bottom as vacancies occur.

All in all, we can expect an Obama Administration to be a complete disaster – there is no area in which Obama has a policy edge on John McCain…its all about advancing liberalism, liberal power, liberal wealth and liberal politicians. America is a fine thing and if its not too much trouble Obama will spare a moment for her, but America will have to get used to the fact – if Obama wins – that she is subordinate to Obama and his Democrat’s personal interests.

One does start to wonder just how massive the Democratic voter fraud effort will be – and whether it will be enough to tip the election to Obama:

As we fly headfirst into election 2008, it is worth noting how big Nevada figures in the outcome.

Our measly five electoral votes are not only up for grabs, they could be the difference. There’s no greater proof of that than how many times the presidential candidates have been to Nevada — and not just in the population centers of Las Vegas and Reno.

By my count, Sen. Barack Obama’s been to Elko three times, and he even granted the editor of the Elko Daily Free Press a one-on-one, sit-down interview. Elko? Three times?…

…Given what’s at stake, I hope our public officials charged with making sure we have a clean and fair election are up to the task. I’m not saying they aren’t, I’m just saying there’s much at stake and, well, the idea of dead people voting is not exactly a Chicago-only phenomenon.

Along that line, I pass along this note from a long-time Las Vegan who began to notice some weird things. I’m not going to divulge the name, but, trust me, it’s a person who knows his way around the Las Vegas political landscape and is not given to flights of paranoia.

Here’s the note, with names changed:

“Hi Sherm — We continue to receive postal cards from the Clark County registrar of voters for my two daughters, one who was married 15 years ago, and the other that was married 12 years ago, as well as my son who moved to Atlanta nine years ago this October. The stuff comes in the girls’ maiden names, at our home address.

“I continue to get phone calls asking for Jack and Lilly. I simply tell them they don’t live here anymore. The other day I informed the young lady that Jack had moved to Atlanta nine years ago. She said thanks and hung up. She called me back about an hour later and reminded me that I had spoken with her and told her that Jack didn’t live here, and she was told by her boss to call back because their information from the registrar’s office shows he still lives at my address. I informed her that if that was true, then the information was incorrect and unreliable.

“The kids, I suspect, all initially registered as Democrats. Lilly is now registered as an independent under her married name. Our oldest daughter, Audrey, hasn’t voted in years so she should not be on the voting rolls and neither should Jack because he hasn’t voted in Las Vegas since he moved to Chicago.

“I thought you might want to look into how the registrar’s office scrubs the voting rolls. I thought you were dropped if you missed two general elections in a row. It would really be interesting to know if they vote, or are shown to have voted in the primary.”

The Nevada Secretary of State is a Democrat – the Secretary of State runs the election process. Supposedly, our Secretary of State was diligently looking into voter fraud by Obama’s old buddies at ACORN back in August, but there’s been no follow up – how much anyone want to bet that the investigation will be finished after election day? Perhaps are State Attorney General will carry the ball? One can hope, but she is a Democrat so that would be the triumph of hope over experience. Nevada Democrats are gleeful that the registered 40,000 people in September…the big question is: did they? Or have they merely flooded the system with bogus registrations in preparation for voter fraud on election day?

Its a funny thing, this year’s reports of voter fraud – how many there are, and how little news reporting there has been about it. Odder than that is the fact that when you google “nevada voter fraud”, the top story is a 2004 report – which proved spurious – of allegations that GOPers had trashed Democratic voter registration forms. Curious, huh? Google “acorn voter fraud nevada” and you get a link to a denial by Obama that he ever organized with ACORN. Same sorts of results from a Yahoo search.

I, too, am not given to paranoia – but the pattern of fraud emerging in this election year is staggering. Now, since our Democrats are saying that Obama is a sure thing to win, why all the voter fraud? Is this another indicator that things aren’t as they appear and Democrats are cooking the books to ensure they win an election they fear they will lose?

Interesting Rasmussen survey:

Congress was front and center in the national news last week and the American people were far from impressed. If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, 59% of voters would like to throw them all out and start over again. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 17% would vote to keep the current legislators in office.

Today, just 23% have even a little confidence in the ability of Congress to deal with the nation’s economic problems and only 24% believe most Members of Congress understand legislation before they vote on it.

Last week, the House of Representatives initially rejected a financial bailout bill proposed by the Bush Administration. Later, after the Senate added a number of items that some call “pork” and others call “sweeteners,” the measure eventually passed. While the bill survived Washington, it did so at a time when just 30% of voters favored it and 45% were opposed.

Only half (49%) believe that the current Congress is better than individuals selected at random from the phone book. Thirty-three percent (33%) believe a randomly selected group of Americans could do a better job and 19% are not sure.

I like that – we can do a whole thing with it: “Random Name, ’08!”. A “throw the bums out” mood has its plusses and minusses – the plus is that it would dethrone Pelosi from the Speaker’s chair, the bad news is that it would leave Harry Reid in charge of a Senate with 60 Democrats in it (Reid doesn’t come up again until 2010…and there will be a rather interesting challenger for him – if this person can win the GOP nomination – which will be announced November 5th of this year, I understand). How it would work on the Presidential level is unknown – McCain is GOP with a GOPer in the White House, but both candidates are running as outsiders, while both of them are Senators (ie, member’s of arguably the most unpopular institution in America).

There is just so much which is unknown – by now, I had hoped to make a prediction of whom I thought would win, but I just lack sufficient data to come up with an argument in favor of either man winning (though Obama is in the lead, if the polls are right – and that is a big “if”). There is, however, one thing I’m dead certain of – people are mighty angry over the whole mess in American government. How this will play out is anyone’s guess – will anger result in massive voter turn out to demonstrate anger, or will it result in low turnout as a disgusted electorate stays home? Will the anger work to Obama’s or McCain’s favor? Has anger shifted voter ID? These and a dozen other questions are “beats all heck out of me”, as far as I can tell.

So, off we go – my view is to pray for serenity (which I have done a bit of, but will do a lot more of) and just keep doing the best one can, in all things. What will be, will be.

And we hope that Joe Biden (who talks as if Scranton were the center of his universe) will pay attention, especially as he claims adherence to the Catholic faith…it would also be good for Senator Obama to lend an ear:

…The American Catholic bishops initiated Respect Life Sunday in 1972, the year before the Supreme Court legalized abortion in the United States. Since that time, Catholics across the country observe the month of October with devotions and pro-life activities in order to advance the culture of life. This October, our efforts have more significance than ever. Never have we seen such abusive criticism directed toward those who believe that life begins at conception and ends at natural death.As Catholics, we should not be surprised by these developments. Forty years ago, Pope Paul VI predicted that widespread use of artificial contraceptives would lead to increased marital infidelity, lessened regard for women, and a general lowering of moral standards especially among the young. Forty years later, social scientists, not necessarily Catholics, attest to the accuracy of his predictions. As if following some bizarre script, the sexual revolution has produced widespread marital breakdown, weakened family ties, legalized abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, pornography, same-sex unions, euthanasia, destruction of human embryos for research purposes and a host of other ills.

It is impossible for me to answer all of the objections to the Church’s teaching on life that we hear every day in the media. Nevertheless, let me address a few. To begin, laws that protect abortion constitute injustice of the worst kind. They rest on several false claims including that there is no certainty regarding when life begins, that there is no certainty about when a fetus becomes a person, and that some human beings may be killed to advance the interests or convenience of others. With regard to the first, reason and science have answered the question. The life of a human being begins at conception. The Church has long taught this simple truth, and science confirms it. Biologists can now show you the delicate and beautiful development of the human embryo in its first days of existence. This is simply a fact that reasonable people accept. Regarding the second, the embryo and the fetus have the potential to do all that an adult person does. Finally, the claim that the human fetus may be sacrificed to the interests or convenience of his mother or someone else is grievously wrong. All three claims have the same result: the weakest and most vulnerable are denied, because of their age, the most basic protection that we demand for ourselves. This is discrimination at its worst, and no person of conscience should support it.

Another argument goes like this: “As wrong as abortion is, I don’t think it is the only relevant ‘life’ issue that should be considered when deciding for whom to vote.” This reasoning is sound only if other issues carry the same moral weight as abortion does, such as in the case of euthanasia and destruction of embryos for research purposes. Health care, education, economic security, immigration, and taxes are very important concerns. Neglect of any one of them has dire consequences as the recent financial crisis demonstrates. However, the solutions to problems in these areas do not usually involve a rejection of the sanctity of human life in the way that abortion does. Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life. Consider this: the finest health and education systems, the fairest immigration laws, and the soundest economy do nothing for the child who never sees the light of day. It is a tragic irony that “pro-choice” candidates have come to support homicide – the gravest injustice a society can tolerate – in the name of “social justice.”…

…My dear friends, I beg you not to be misled by confusion and lies. Our Lord, Jesus Christ, does not ask us to follow him to Calvary only for us to be afraid of contradicting a few bystanders along the way. He does not ask us to take up his Cross only to have us leave it at the voting booth door. Recently, Pope Benedict XVI said that “God is so humble that he uses us to spread his Word.” The gospel of life, which we have the privilege of proclaiming, resonates in the heart of every person – believer and non-believer – because it fulfills the heart’s most profound desire. Let us with one voice continue to speak the language of love and affirm the right of every human being to have the value of his or her life, from conception to natural death, respected to the highest degree…

We can’t do anything for the dead – this is rather common sense, but it escapes the notice of liberals, especially liberals who are running for President and are desperate to pry away some Catholic votes from the Republican candidate. It does astound, at times, to think that there are people who think that abortion can be a morally good choice – one wonders how a person comes to the conclusion that a permanent solution is needed for a temporary condition…that immediate death can be the proper response to new life.

I included that last bit of the Bishop’s letter because I think it important – even if you’re not Christian or, indeed, even a believer. It is wisdom of the highest kind to instruct a person to adhere to truth no matter what people demand. It is also such wisdom to insist on taking all of one’s self into the voting booth. And we also must keep in mind the humility needed for the ultimate triumph of the Culture of Life – in a sense, we who can barely be trusted to do the right thing from minute to minute are the people who must convince a fallen and depraved modern world that life is a beautiful thing and it is to be held precious from the first to the last moment.

As the poison in American politics in the 1850’s could be traced to slavery, so the poison in American politics in the first decade of the 21st century can be traced to abortion. Not, of course, that abortion is the source of all ills, but because the defense of abortion – the defense, that is, of something even more abominable than slavery – leads people, step by step, into lies and hatred. Slaveholders in the South started talking themselves into believing their slaves were happy to be slaves; abortion proponents have talked themselves into believing that death is the best thing for the unborn child and, indeed, that child would thank us – if he could – for killing him and thus sparing him the burden of life. We can do much, short of an abortion ban, to lessen the evils in our political life and heal the wounds inflicted on us by the Culture of Death but, in the end, we won’t exorcise this demon until abortion is gone and viewed, as slavery is today, as some primitive aberration no decent person would contemplate.

As it relates to 2008, the good Bishop can’t say it – and even if there wasn’t a federal issue involved with men of the cloth entering deeply into politics, the Bishop would still refrain from saying, “vote for So and So”. But it is clear from his teaching – and the teaching of so many other Bishops, priests and pastors – that anyone who takes the name of “Christian” cannot, if properly informed of Christian teaching, vote for Obama. Heck, if Obama fully understood his own Christian faith, he’d vote against himself – and so would Biden. This is not to condemn those who are Christian and yet manage to find justification for supporting a pro-abortion candidate or party – but it is to point out that only ignorance or willful blindness can explain a Christian being in favor of continued legal elective abortion.

Those of us who place life at the forefront of our concerns know that in the choice of 2008, there is no choice – Only Senator McCain and Governor Palin understand that the belief in the sanctity of human life brings with it the requirement to support some actions, and oppose others. For the Culture of Life, McCain and Palin represent victory – Obama and Biden represent defeat.

The New York Post details some of them from the debate:

…some other Biden gems:

* It’s “simply not true” that Barack Obama said he’d meet Iran’s president without preconditions, Biden insisted.

Yet when Obama was asked if he would in a debate during the primaries, he said yes – a position Biden back then termed “naive.”

* Biden said he’s “always supported” clean-coal technology – after stating emphatically only last month, “We’re not supporting clean coal.”

* Biden asserted – repeatedly – that the US spends more money on three weeks’ combat in Iraq than it’s spent in Afghanistan since the war began.

That claim’s only remotely intelligible if he limits Afghan expenditures merely to US rebuilding efforts – and even then, he’s off by a factor of three, according to State Department numbers.

* Also on Afghanistan, Biden insisted – repeatedly – that “our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work” there.

That may not be an out-and-out lie, but it took supposed foreign-policy neophyte Sarah Palin to bring any context or nuance to the statement.

What Gen. David McKiernan had said was that tribal realities in Afghanistan are very different than in Iraq – requiring a different form of cooperation.

But he flatly said more troops, and more local engagement, are needed.

Sounds like a surge to us.

* Then there was what might have been the biggest head-scratcher of the night. Said Biden of the Bush administration’s supposed Middle East follies:

“When . . . along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.”

Huh?

Assuming that Biden was referring to when, in 2005, American and French pressure helped the Lebanese people kick Syrian troops out of Lebanon, who ever thought NATO occupation of that deeply divided country was a good idea?

As if America’s NATO allies would have gone in the first place.

But hey, as long as it makes Biden sound presidential.

At some point, Americans have to wonder: Is this a fellow who should be a heartbeat away from the White House?

Biden has long been known as a blowhard, but I never suspected him to be a man so entirely disconnected from the facts. These are not the verbal flubs any of us make in the normal course of events, and which Sarah Palin at times made during the debate and are now being used by Team Obama and the left to defend Biden with the “she lied, too” defense, as if that would make their guy look good, supposing that Palin had actually told a lie. Biden again and again and again just spun out the tallest of tales which require a bit of research just to connect them to one possible fact. This would be funny except for the fact that a month from now Biden could be elected Vice President of the United States of America.

This also highlights the rather consistent dishonesty of the man on the top of the ticket – Obama has, at times, lied about his connections to Rezko, lied about his connections to Ayers, lied about what he knew of Jeremiah Wright, lied about McCain’s record on stem cell research, lied about his record on gun control, lied about his record on the “born alive” law…lies, lies and more lies, each designed to get Obama out of a tight spot where the truth would sink his chances in November. Are we supposed to believe that he and Biden will suddenly discover a love of the unvarnished truth after they win? Or is it more realistic to believe that a successful liar will just keep going with what worked in the past?

The main reason for electing John McCain and Sarah Palin is that in them we will find people who love the truth – who prefer the truth, even if it causes them great difficulty. We need an Executive Branch which will stoutly go to war with business as usual in DC, not an Executive Branch which will just give us more of the same business as usual.