Did Marco really come to the rescue? Hardly.

But let’s not just say that. Let’s break it down a little.

First let’s compare him to the 2009 secret weapon Bobby Jindal. Marco’s entrance was far more confident and looked far less comedic. Apparently, he opted for the wardrobe assistant that  Bobby declined, when he did the now infamous GOP rebuttal in 2009.

That being said let’s go to Marco’s substance. The first thing he was prepped to say was that Obama created more debt than Bush. Really? Even common sense would make that impossible. If Rubio had taken his politics seriously, and was not just responding because his party sees him as the bridge to the promise land of Hispanic votes, he would have been able to calculate that the cost of two wars, one of which is still being fought, was a financial burden on our limping economy. Common sense would have told him that by Obama ending the Iraq war and winding downour occupation of Afghanistan, he is actually correcting the downward trajectory of our flailing economy and is redirecting its path to a course due north.

Of course, if he were capable, Marco would have looked at the salvaging of our car industry and the plans to give tax holidays to companies bringing all the call centers and manufacturing jobs back from Asia. And these are just a few of things that should have caused Marco to rethink his young political career and not face the nation sounding like an echo to the failed Romney/Ryan and the warlocks, Graham and McCain.

But then who am I kidding? This is the GOP and the basis of their politics is to talk about how wealthy and powerful America is, even as some thirty percent of  its citizens live at or below poverty level, without basic services like health care and affordable education across the board.

Marco was blindfolded and sent into the pool of the electorate, trying to sell the very talking points that made Romney, Ryan and his party lose so miserably in November 2012. No wonder the poor guy was drinking so much Poland Springs – foreign water – to keep his throat dry enough to sell talking points that are proven failures.

And Marco failed because no one responded with the Polo, poorMarco was anticipating.

Over the years, the Catholic Church has had its issues- being exposed as a social miscreant with the covering up of sexual abuse, impregnation of congregants by supposedly celibate priests, land disputes over real estate that it allegedly strong-armed from the rightful owners.

More recently, and closer to home, we’ve seen the Catholic Church come out in very vociferous opposition to our Affordable Care Act because it favors the availability of birth control to women who request it; even filing suit against the Obama Administration to prevent the mandatory availability of birth control by so called, ‘faith –based’ employers.

http://www.wrhi.com/2012/08/ny-catholic-cardinal-suing-obama-on-birth-control-invites-president-romney-to-charity-dinner-57984.

The church has even injected itself into the argument-not discussion- of gun control and has taken a soft position on banning assault weapons and ammunition through its call for ‘responsible restrictions’; even in the face of the daily carnage Americans suffer at the hands of those who have unregulated access to guns. www.americancatholic.org/news/report.aspx?id=4039

 Considering all of the above, one gets the distinct impression that the Catholic Church, picks its social battles and errs on the side of the battle that is most likely to fought by the sex that is not so fair – which brings us to the ordination of women in the Catholic Church and their promotion from the choir to the higher ranks in the church body. http://romancatholicwomenpriests.org/ordained.htm

So, now that Pope Benedict XVI is reigning on February 28^th 2013,do you think the Roman Catholic body, will attempt to correct its male-centric ideology by even nominating a female as its Pope?

Indeed, they pay infinite homage to Holy Mother Mary , but is it because she bore Jesus Christ? Is there a subtle implication that upon child-bearing grounds only, could a woman be deemed holy?

The Catholic Church has granted Sainthood to many women of the centuries but this promotion, elevation is done posthumously; confirming that they only recognize women as leaders after they are dead.

Benedict resigns on February 28^th, 2013 and I dare the Catholic Church to prove my analysis wrong by nominating a female Pope.

If they name a female pope I pledge to fly to Vatican City and apologize for citing their misogyny, in person.

Somehow, I am confident that I am a winner in this one.

Source Wikipedia:

Article 1 Section8 Clause 7 of the US Constitution known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress to establish Postal Service and Post Roads. The clause was added to the Constitution, primarily to facilitate interstate communication as well as to create a source of revenue for the early USA.

Having read the above, where is the outrage form or Congressional legislators on the recent proposal to discontinue Saturday mail? I seem to recall, our dear speaker proposing to READ the Constitution in its entirety, before making decisions that affected that document.

Of course, he never meant decisions that would extend the longevity of unions and their employees so the Postal workers, who are effectively assisted by a very large union, will be hung out to dry, in favor of small things like bailing out Wall Street bankers and ensuring that their bonuses were paid.

Oh, I know that President Obama was complicit in the Bonus for Bogus exchange but that was WHEN MITCH AND JOHN needed to stand up to the socialist policies of the President. That was one time, when Socialism should not have worked. That was when re-distribution of wealth really occurred- the wealth of we, the poor, being transferred to the thieving fat cats of Wall Street.

Now the Constitutionally protected Postal Service is on the chopping block and our Constitutionally oriented legislators are not showing outrage. Why not, you ask? Simple. There are no shares sold in the US Postal Service, so there are no dividends to be had.

So why represent, we, the people, when they do not have a dog in the fight? Many of us are already seeing drastic cuts in postal hours. Where I live, my Post Office opens FOR ONE WHOLE HOUR on Saturdays. By allowing the cessation of Saturday postal delivery, our Right wing legislators are gnawing away at what they perceive to be the real problem – The Postal Workers Union. If they can pull this off, then every other union goes on the chopping block because they would have succeeded in manipulation the Constitution they invoke to use as a weapon against life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of the Americans they feel are not entitled to enjoy that phrase in our Declaration of Independence.

This will be a test to determine the survival of the democratic elements in our society, as it will be to preserve the tenets of the Constitution. The President needs to add this to his agenda of pressing issues to address and resolve. Every Democratic legislator needs to be up in arms to protect our Postal Service and the door should not be closed to Republicans who understand that extreme Conservative stupidity undermines the efficacy of the very Constitution they vow to protect.

And we, the people, have to continue to make our voices heard, because this country and its laws, legislators and Constitution are there to serve and protect us.

And right now, I must say, these are perilous times in the Republic.

Maybe the intelligentsia of our nation is over thinking the Constitution and its parameters. If not, then what is the uproar over drone strikes and why is there the fear, of American controlled drones hovering over Any Address USA, to kill suspects of terrorism here in America?

Isn’t that speculation-over reach? Isn’t this analogy intended to create fear and as a not so distant extension, create fear and distrust in our President?

Look. I am not one for war. But I am definitely one for proactive defense.

And the thought that some Obama detractors, feel that a person who resides on foreign soil, and has been diligently dedicated to destroying Americans here, and in our embassies abroad, deserves a trial by his peers before being deemed a threat to Americans is balderdash in its purest form.

When drones are employed, it is because the threat has been determined to be imminent. We have elected our officials to work to protect us and our borders. Drone strikes have been doing this very effectively.

And if anyone feels that there needs to be a more humanitarian approach to deflect and derail an imminent threat against America or Americans abroad, they have missed the concept of proactive defense.

And for those who feel that one day they’ll look up and see a drone hovering over their home, then they must be doing something that is drone-worthy.

Well, I ve been saying it all along.

McCain  is a very bitter man whose politics have placed him, consitently,on the wrong side of success.

No doubt, he feels that as a POW of  5 years, cofined to a Vietnam cell, he is more qualified to be Secretary of Defense and, I dare say,  Commander in Chief.

Ironically, though, those thoughts may be the veryreasons that he has proven himself to be a volatile politician and an inconsistent decision maker, none of which a Maverick make.

With all of his accolades, he was trounced by W Bush,and when he finally got the chance to , albeit by default, to run for the office of President, he mucked it up by making the  unfathomable decision of picking  Sarah Palin as the person who would have the authority to push the proverbial button in defense of America!! This , man actually thought that he would have “stolen” the women’s vote but parading and empty politcal suit, spewing, colloqialisms, winking and doing the dumb politicians versionof the ‘shuckin’ and jivin’ that she seems to know so much about.  I still say that his  decision to show his Maverickiness (a Palinism) was a result of some shrapnel rubbing on the decision center of his brain.

He  is a an overly ambitious politician who refusues to accept that he is decades behind present day politics and social sentiment on world issues. He was wrong on Iraq, wrong on the surge, wrong on Libya, wrong on Egypt, and remains wrong on Syria and Iran.

Oh, did I mention that he is grotesquely wrong on Israel and Palestine??

So why not be a venomous friend, and skewer the man who stood by you during your failed campaigns and try to make him look incompetent and unworthy of being our Secretary of Defense, a job that none thinks you’re capable of handling, not even the Cheney whose water he carried and the Bush whose boots he cleaned?

After all, if Romney or any of his ilk make it in 2016 , he may still stand a chance of being recognized for the Secretary of State or Defense jobs; especially since his party is the party of old white men preoccupied with all things war – war on Iran, war, on Syria, war on women, war on the poor… to name a diverse smattering of their passions.

These are the thoughts of a man whose years are waning and whose politcal flame continues it’s rapid flckering, losing its steadiness to a rush of new political wind, to a breath of political fresh air, that scorches the nostrils of warlocks like McCain.

So he will sip from the bitter cup of political loss , and will continue to do so until the bile of hatred for all things modern and progressive, consumes him, more than likely at his desk, becasue he ain’t goin’ nowhere, at least not willingly.

That being said, I was disappointed with the lack of strength Hagel showed atthe hearing.  As a man of war, he should have come to do battle.  Being fully prepared gives the soldier an opportunity ti determine the level of his attack. He could decisde to use live rounds or simply, tear gas his enemy. But Hagel came with a stick to face cannons . I understand that he may have been blindsided by his friends, the ones he has breakfast, lunch, and dinner with  every day. But the principle of defense is preparation. And Hagel was woefully, ill -prepared.

Disappointingly, he did a little Romney dance, walking back his criticism of the jewish lobby and of the Senators and Congress people whose first obligation is to Israel and not to us, the American people. He, also, tried to ballet dance around an opinion on McCain’s claim to fame, THE SURGE, which killed too many soldiers and wounded too many too many  more.

But he was being a politician o fthe day, one who has to please Israel and it’s lobby, rather than we, the American people.
That, I will have to live with until, by sheer numbers and inevitable change in demographics, we the other people, the ones who are not old white men, worshipping at the altar, or should I say shrine , of Israel, vote some legislators into the Senate and Congress who are more concerned about protecting us, Americans of all faiths,  and not a country that dedicates the economic aid provided by our hard earned tax dollars, to routineley disenfranchsing Palestinians.

If there is a silver lining in Hagel’s very uncomfortable inquisition, it is that he was blindsided by the people he has three meals with daily, and ot becasue he is ill- equiped to lead our Department of Defense.

More comforting yet, is he is not going to declare war on Iran, war on Syria, war on The Muslim Brother hood and any other faction that would tickle his hawkis, ideological fancy.

So,I look forward to  his confirmation and another very stellar pick from a President who has all of America, all races, creeds and colors, in his sights, when he nominates these fine Americans to such offices of prominence.

This may not be a wildly popular sentiment but I think the new Obama Administration should really rescind the resignation of General Petraeus, and put him back to work, for the good of the country.

Indeed, for the nine days that his transgression  captured every media headline and every political talking point, it displaced every other political matter,  of importance, only because we are a voyeuristic bunch of consumers, who secretly long for a salacious side salad with our political entrée.

Well, we got that.

We got this buxom, toned alleged biographer, whose path to her achievements all seem very fabricated. We now learn that she went to Harvard, under very suspect academic qualifications, to do a Doctoral program which was too difficult for her to complete. But who cares, if, while she was prtending to be a scholar,  she managed to bare enough bosom to attract a four star general, who was one of the guest lecturers on the part of the program she was able to complet. No, no.  Let’s keep our focus on that  Broadwell bosom, and whatever other imagery our minds could conjure up, about this chiseled femme fatal ,and a four star general with the grin of a boy and the command of the fly of his pants that is equally as boyish.

 Of course that’s not so easy, when there are female Lebanese twins involved, albeit  tangentially, with another four star general, whose command of his fly is just as suspect as Petraeus’s . So, the imagery of Lebanese twins, a buffed biographer, a total of eight stars worth of generals, three husbands – the twins and Broadwell’s- who seem to be impotent in the presence of the generals, and the speculation of whether pillow talk consisted of classified information about current wars, Middle East uprisings, brash Bebe Netanyahu, a disarmed Ahmadinejad ,  a deposed Assad, or any other matters that may have breached national and international security, has taken a hold of our collective better judgment  and we have not asked the Commander In Chief, how strategically correct is accepting the resignation of a proven strategist, over what amounts to a mere dalliance with a woman, who seems to have gotten nothing more than a dalliance from the general. 

I say this because, Petraeus walked into the White House without handcuffs and left without handcuffs confirming that the only breach that occurred is a lapse in moral judgment.

So, now that the proverbial nine days have passed and Petraeus has been duly shamed, I say that we get back to the business of national and international security, by placing the best man at the head of the CIA. And that is Petraeus.

 I expect the usual detractors to cite his vulnerability going forward, by conjuring up images of femmes fatal, showing a little knee, and extracting highly classified information from the general. To those sententious people, who are given to aphorisms particularly during times of scandal, I say our security is more important than our morality.

Petraeus has already been embarrassed and ha,s undoubtedly, learned his lesson, but his embarrassment that will never compare to shame we will suffer if our security is threatened because we fired one of the proven strategists of our time.

It could be worse. 

We could actually get John McCain.

What we didn’t anticipate about ‘Change we can believe in’, when we first heard it 2008, was that it would have, literally changed the face of politics in America. Indeed, it s intent was to convey a very powerful message to voters who were tired of establishment politics and were yearning to see actual, palpable change and not just the intangible, vacuous, academic results that mostly exist on flow charts and not in the real line of vision of the actual voter.

So, for change to have resonated with the voters, it had to be portrayed as a seen as a slogan that was driven more by political conviction and not just political calculation. The first believable thing about change, was that it was coming from a politician of color, whose academic achievements rank among the best of any of previous President, whose social life was tainted by even a hint of scandal and whose ease of engaging the electorate was not an assumed posture, for the purpose of campaigning. So he became a cross-over candidate like none before him and subsequently won a second term as America’s first black president.

The thing to note is that the change really hasn’t stopped here. This president of change, went on to make very significant adjustments in the political landscape of America. He made appointing minorities to government a critical part of his agenda and elevated women’s rights to the level of those of men. He outlawed discriminating against sexual orientation in the military and embraced our out anchor babies as our American brothers and sisters. Those were some of the changes he gave us, changes we could see and changes we could certainly believe in.

But there is more. And that is the proximate reason why John McCain and Lindsay Graham are spear heading a charge of incompetence and doltishness against our UN Ambassador Dr. Susan Rice. It matters not that Dr. Rice is a former Brooking Institution Fellow, was on the staff of the National Security Council and has an academic base of being a Truman scholar as an undergrad, and a Rhodes Scholar during her Master’s and Doctoral programs.

You see, that wouldn’t matter when the intention of these two obsolete Republicans is to create propaganda along the character fault line. It doesn’t matter when using gutter politics has been a proven tool of success for those of this political persuasion. And for McCain, it is really personal because during the 2008 campaign, Susan Rice mad e a point of highlighting McCain’s out datedness, his silly ditty of bomb Iran, his ignorance of the difference between Hezbollah and Al-Qaida and his general lack of knowledge on matters of national and international security. In short, she constantly reminded McCain, that serving as a POW for five years, as valiant as that was, doth not a Commander in Chief make, especially when his default position is warmongering.

What they are seeing is the true propensity for change, because after Dr. Rice serves as our Secretary of State, she will be a prime candidate for a Presidential run on 2020. And the obsolete guard of the conservative party in our country will never allow history to record another American President of color, especially when that color could be borne by a gender conservatives prefer to serve in their “traditional” roles.