Wednesday, October 15, 2008


Question: I have just recently learned that Obama has been running television ads that totally distort the record of John McCain. The media have not reported this. His associations with Acorn and their illegal voter registrations have not been reported in the mass media. The polls that the media are reporting all show him ahead. He has been caught in numerous lies lately and those have been glossed over by the media. His place of birth has never been substantiated. Why won't the media at least do their job regarding that? The more I learn about Obama, the less it seems that he has any business being anywhere near the Whtie House. You clearly pointed out his lack of achievements but his character is awful. I now know what you mean by the media protecting him. It is a shame we have come to this. It makes me wonder what will be revealed about him next. Why would the media so strongly support one candidate over the other? You seem to imply that only stupid people will vote for Obama and I guess that is true. Is it?
Kari Bambrough, Irving, Texas

Answer: Kari, the media selected Obama back when the primaries were beginning and they dumped Hillary Clinton. They are stuck with him as is the democratic party. I think many people have come to the conclusion that the more they learn about Obama, the less they like him. While his lack of conviction and character is important for me, the main thing that makes me not support him is the fact that he is a socialist. I will not vote for a socialist. Since I have known he was a socialist for a long time, it has made my decision obvious for a long time. I will not bother to watch the debate tonight because I already know for whom I will vote. Why waste any time watching a debate when I already know how I will vote? The media will, from now until the election, try to make everyone think that Obama already has won. He is so far ahead in the polls, that McCain might as well give up the race and his supporters might as well not vote because Obama is going to win anyway. It is a tactic that can work for some non-thinking people. There are, Kari, reasons that people will vote for Obama other than being stupid. Some people will vote for him because they are misinformed, are intellectually lazy and have not examined his dismal record, are racist, are so deeply ingrained with the democratic party that they can only vote democratic, are so far left that they are hoping Obama will take the country to a socialist place and some will buy into the media hype about him. There are many Americans like you who have figured out that this guy is totally wrong for our nation and realize that his policies would be a major mistake for the United States. This race should actually not even be close. If it were not for the media being on his side, I think Obama would not have any chance at all. Even with them, I think McCain will win by a nice margin.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Supportive and Protective

Question: You said the the media has been supportive and protective of Obama. I can see the supportive part and I suppose by protective you mean that the media have not asked him tough questions. When did this media bias start? How widespread is it? Nancy Lea, Bakersfield, California.

Answer: Nancy, I can't really say exactly when it started. I suppose that there has been media bias to some degree throughout history. I first noticed the media being openly supportive of Bill Clinton. But it wasn't completely protective of him. This was when CNN (Clinton News Network) was going strong. Again, during Al Gore's run for the Presidency, the media were supportive but not protective. The media, I noticed, began to be slightly protective of John Kerry when he ran for President. Now, with Obama, the media have sided completely with the candidate. They totally support and protect Obama. I wouldn't mind it so much except that they claim to be objective. That is, of course, total nonsense. They are completely in Obama's camp and completely support his candidacy for President. I think it is wrong (and sad) that America's media have given up any pretense at objectivity and have come out in support of one candidate over another. Of course, being leftists liberals, they always support the Democrat.

Tuesday, September 09, 2008

The correct choice for America in 2008

Question: Okay. You said in one of your earlier responses that you would tell everyone, after the conventions, who you are going to vote for for President. So how about it? Who has your support? Walt Jenkins, Salem, Oregon.

Answer: I am totally serious when I say that I do not think any objective thinking person could possibly vote for anyone other than the McCain - Palin ticket. So yes, I will be voting Republican this year. Why? In my view, in the Presidency, character counts. Both McCain and Palin have character. Neither Obama nor Biden do. In my view, in the Presidency, experience matters. Both McCain and Palin have it. Obama does not. In my view, in the Presidency, judgement is valuable. Both McCain and Palin have demonstrated good and sound judgement. Obama has not.

I have seen no evidence that Obama has ever had an original or creative idea in his life. I do not think he is a very intelligent man. Every single thing that this person has proposed for the future of America would actually be bad for America. By this, I mean his higher tax proposals, his education proposals, his military proposals, his economic proposals -- everything would be detrimental to the welfare of this nation and its citizens. In short, I cannot find a single reason to support Obama.

On the other hand, I am not a huge McCain fan. I will vote for him because he is clearly the better of the two choices. He does have several strong points. And he is a man of honor who has real beliefs. Obama does not. I don't have to agree with a person's beliefs but I think a President should have real core beliefs that guide him or her. McCain does and Obama does not.

Biden said that we could not question Obama's patriotism. He then continued by saying that several of Obama's relatives had served honorably in World War II. When I heard that, I thought, "What a load of crap." I also thought, "I most certainly can question Obama's patriotism." Not only can I but I do! He is an American who proposed that we surrender the war in Iraq. He is an American who was a member of a church in which the pastor preached anti-American sermons for 20 years. He is friends and associates with a man who bombed the Pentagon. I most certainly do question his patriotism. There is absolutely nothing about this person that makes me think he would be any good as President.

Obtaining the position of President would be considered a promotion by anyone. A promotion is usually given for a job "well-done." In Obama's case, his time as a "community organizer" was a complete and total disaster. He had a mediocre if not undistinguished time in the Illinois state senate. And he has spent his entire brief time in the U.S. Senate running for President. The man has not one single outstanding accomplishment in his lifetime. He has basically done nothing. Why should a man with a record like that be rewarded or promoted? He should not.

This campaign has, more than any other, shown the American people just how totally bias the media has become. Obama is, in reality, a socialist. History has clearly proven that socialism never works. But the media never points that out. The media never questions Obama's associations, judgements or lack of experience. They never question his proposals. Why? The media has been supporting Obama from the beginning of the primaries. The media has been a willing supportive participant in the Obama campaign. For example, just yesterday (September 8, 2008), the USA/Gallup poll showed McCain 10 points ahead of Obama among likely voters. However, the article did not state that until the 8th paragraph. If it had been Obama ahead, that "news" would have been in the headline. That is a prime example of media bias. I really think the media has done an excellent job of promoting, supporting and protecting Obama. I doubt he would have received the nomination without it. However, the more people begin to learn the truth about Obama, the less they like him. But the reality is that there simply is no reason to be for Obama except that he is not a Republican. Some people will put their political party above their country and vote for Obama for that reason.

Among the four candidates, my first choice for President is Sarah Palin. My second choice is McCain, then Biden and lastly, Obama. I know I've rambled on here, Walt, but I hope this answers your question about who I am voting for and why.

Monday, August 25, 2008

No to Political Conventions

Question: Now that the political conventions have begun, I am curious to know how much of them do you plan to watch? Will you watch one more than the other? Or both about the same? Don Rain, St. Petersburg, Florida.

Answer: I will watch them both exactly the same -- not at all. None. I like to think that I have more important things to do with my life than sit in front of a television and watch propaganda. I guess one of the sad things about this is that many people don't realize they are watching staged propaganda shows.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Party Girl

Question: What do you think of the John Edwards' mess with the party girl? Stevie Carr, Los Angeles, California.

Answer: I have literally received dozens of questions about this subject so I have chosen one to respond to and, hopefully, end any additional such questions. I think that the deceit involved is typical of politicians. Anyone who believes any politician is extremely naive. But more importantly to me, this episode has absolutely no impact on my life. I have never thought that John Edwards was anything more than a bag of hot air. He is a meaningless person to me. Consequently, I treat him, as I do all politicians, with complete indifference. His fooling around with a party girl really does not change my opinion of him because my opinion of him was already so low that whatever he does cannot make an impact. Stevie, I think that you should spend your time on things that influence your life and ignore things like this.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008


Question: I am writing to ask what I should do. I am in love with a man at work. He is not aware of my feelings for him. He is just the nicest, sweetest, kindest person I have ever known. If I were married to him, my life would be complete. I would be so happy. Now, the big problem. I just found out about two weeks ago that he is married. At first I couldn't believe it. It was like someone had died. But I've thought about it and realize that, if he is unhappy with his marriage, we could still be together in the future. He is several years older than me but I want to be with him more than anything and am willing to wait. "Real love is rare. It is also not logical. It is emotional. But it is real." (This is what my best friend told me.) She encouraged me to pursue my love for this man at least to see if he has any feelings for me. What do you think I should do? Bunny Stratham, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Answer: Bunny, you sound like a nice person yourself. I'm sure you would not want to be responsible for destroying a good marriage. Suppose you were married to this man and some other woman decided she should be married to him? Now you said it yourself: if he is unhappy with his marriage. The only possible chance I see of this working out as you wish is if the man's marriage is already in trouble. If he is already considering divorce or has already filed for a divorce, then you may be in a position to "step in" when the time is right (assuming that he is not getting a divorce for another woman). Men are normally extremely secretive about such things at the office. But there ought to be some way of finding out the real state of his marriage. If it is sound, then you need to find someone else. I know that love cannot be turned on and off like a water faucet. But you have kept your feelings in check thus far. It would probably be best for everyone if you could find a single man to love. Good luck.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008


Question: A friend and I were discussing your blog. He and I agreed that you usually "hit the nail on the head." But we couldn't decide why you don't get more comments. For example, your June 16th answer has only one comment. I would have thought that it would easily have a dozen. Do you filter out most comments? My friend's girlfriend read your blog and we asked her. She said you don't have many comments because your answers are so good. With the June 16th answer, she said, "what more do you want? He answered everything." But do you simply not run a lot of comments or do you not receive many? Tyler Ware, Miami, Florida
Answer: Thus far, I have used every single comment I have received. I do not receive many. I like your friend's girlfriend's reason. And, thus far, I have not had to edit any comments. I have polite readers.