Tuesday, the president is scheduled to address children in the public school systems nation wide. Let me begin by saying, I see nothing wrong with that, and it was done by George H. W. Bush many years ago. I even this president could speak about the need for education, and how kids should work hard to achieve their goals so that they can be successful in life.

But, then this administration went a bit farther. They “worked with” the Department of Education to concoct a lesson plan for the different grade levels. Now, these lesson plans were not innocuous, asking kids what their goals in life or education were, or asking them what they hoped to accomplish. They planned to ask the children what they could do to help support the president. They planned to ask them how they were “inspired” by the president. While that may not seem too problematic, it begins with the assumption that all the kids (or more importantly, their parents) are in agreement with the current direction this administration is taking, and therefore want to help, or support him in his policies. The lesson plans did not leave much room for those who might dissent. The DOE also encouraged teachers to put up banners and posters with “great Obama sayings” from previous education speeches. Not influential people. Not all the presidents/politicians. Only President Obama. Again, not a problem? This type of propaganda is reminiscent of various world leaders of the past, none of which live fondly in my memory…

Perhaps some still don’t see why this is so upsetting to me. Perhaps we could make a quick comparison and see if the point sinks home. If President Bush, in the midst of falling poll numbers, while trying to drum up support for fighting the Iraq War, had done the same thing, Liberals would have hit the roof! Think about the timing of Obama’s address. He is trying to ram-rod through his “health care reform”, and is quickly losing support. He has lost so much support, he is calling a joint session of congress together to address his plan. That will come on Wednesday night, one day after the address to students. Think that is accidental? Nope! The American people are expressing their outrage at the Democrats intended rape of the health care system in America. In fact, there will be a gathering of over 60,000 people in southern WV on Labor day (wish I could go!) of people who are fighting against the socialized medicine plan that is being shoved through. By going into the schools, and addressing the children, Obama (I believe…remember, this post is my opinion) is trying to steal the thunder of the protesting conservatives. He is trying to have the children talking about what a great guy he is. He wants them telling their parents that he isn’t as bad as they thought. It is the typical liberal ploy…if you can’t get something you want now, start putting it in the school systems so that it will be accepted int he next generation. Haven’t seen it before? Ask yourself why Homosexual Marriage is now legal in at least 5 states. Yep, they followed the same plan!

Now, some have made the argument that we as conservatives (and perhaps Christians?) shouldn’t think we need to protect our children from things such as this. And, that this will give us the opportunity to talk to our children about it… I have a couple of thoughts. First, if we don’t realize it IS our responsibility to protect our children, then we have missed our God given responsibility. There are some things that our children just don’t need to be exposed to at age 6. Trust me, my children are not going to be taught about sex by a public school teacher in the first grade! I’m going to protect them from such ungodliness. I wonder how many people who make the “we can’t shelter them” argument take the same approach on the physical dangers of life? “I’m going to let them play in the road, I guess they will learn that’s a bad idea one way or the other.” Having said that, I am not sure (since I haven’t seen the text of the speech itself) that this issue is a “protect the children” issue. This is more of a political issue. It has to do with abuse of power, and politicizing the Department of Education. With the lesson plans that were originally released, the DOE was being used as a tool to drum up support for the president, rather than its intended purpose of educating our children.

This is why, in my original status update, I said this is proof that we should never have created the DOE. This is certainly not the first time that it has been abused. Public schools are supposed to educate our children, not indoctrinate them with the beliefs of the current administration. Every day, we see abuses. As mentioned before, tolerance of Homosexuality is propagated, as is support for the unfounded “science” of global warming and a plethora of other policies. The sad thing is, in the midst of all of these “additions”, many children still aren’t taught to read or do arithmetic! I think the actions of the White House in this issue have shown their complete distrust in the competency of the teachers in the public schools. Why would they have to release a lesson plan for the teachers? Does the Obama administration believe that teachers couldn’t use his speech as a teaching moment without guidance from them? Or were they just afraid that some might take the discussion in a different direction than he wants them to go? Obviously, they want the teachers to be used as an arm of the government to encourage the youth of America to get behind the president and his policies (regardless of what they are).

The uproar among conservatives over this has led to some changes in the “lesson plans” released by the DOE. Some of the “support” wording has been taken out now, which is a good thing. What has not been changed is the encouragement to virtually idolize this president over all of the other men and women that could be held up as educational examples.

As I said when I started this post, I am not opposed to the President addressing school children. But, we need to examine all that is going on. Number one, he is giving a speech to all school children at once, from Pre-K all the way through High School. Now, if that is the case, how can address them all on a level that is understood? Can he really inspire seniors in HS with the same language that is understandable by children who are 4 or 5 years old? Of course not. So the goal must simply mean to get him in front of all the kids, and leave a positive impression. How could parents be so upset with a man who is so nice? Second, the speech itself will either contain policy, or it won’t. If it is simply encouraging kids to continue in their education and do the best they can, that is great. However, if it includes the need for them to fight global warming, be more compassionate toward others (code for socialism in most cases) and the need for “health care for all”, then it crosses the line. We don’t need any president campaigning to those that are 5 years old! Third, the propaganda that goes along with this speech is disturbing. Posters flaunting the greatness of this president can be classified as nothing less than propaganda.

Could this be done in a way that does not raise the ire of conservatives? Of course. But, this president, despite all of his claims to “bipartisanship” seems to constantly make decisions to inflame conservatives. I think it is a joke now to look back and see the accusations of the lack of bipartisanship on the part of George W. Bush and the Republicans (which actually had many, many pieces of legislation developed from reaching “across the aisle”) when considering the ram-rod governing we seem to have now! But, how could this be changed?

First, keep the DOE out of it. Teachers and school systems do not need specific lesson plans handed out to schools to tell them just how to use the president’s speech to his betterment. Second, make sure the speech itself is apolitical. There should be no policy, such as the need for universal health care, or the need for the students to fight global warming. Third, If you are going to ask questions, give the opportunity for students to voice disagreement with the president. Fourth, get rid of the posters. At the very least, put up posters of more than just the current president.

I know this is long, and that most will not read it all. But, this is why I think the speech on Tuesday is such a bad idea. I would not pull my kid out to “protect” them, I’d pull my kid out in protest of the abuse of the DOE by this White House, and attempt of this administration to indoctrinate the children with the greatness of this president, especially in the midst of his losing battle on health care reform.

Here’s an article to take a look at with some more info on the plan itself:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/

I also thought I’d add a couple of videos that were pointed out to me, that should make people think about what is happening in this country.  People are now virtually worshiping the man, Barak Obama, instead of recognizing him as being our elected official, and thus the servant to the people.  The first video is one that reminds me of Hitler’s Youth:

The second is a PSA, asking people to basically pledge their loyalties to Obama, and his causes. Notice that many of the “pledges” seem to be very good in nature, but many of them are merely supporting Liberal Obama policy. Some are essentially deceitful, using the wording of conservative movements (like Alyssa Milano’s “I pledge to have a voice for those who have none” statement, taken directly from Pro-life members) to be applied to liberal policy. In the end, we are asked to pledge ourselves to the president. Are you kidding me? Can you even imagine the outrage if a conservative put out something as extreme as this?

It is time to say, “NO!” to all of this nonsense. Perhaps, it is time to get rid of some of the nonsense that can’t be paid for in the public schools today, and teach some good old fashioned civics. Maybe then, administrations that grab power like this one could never be put into the office!

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis

And, if you have time, check out this next video as well.  In it, Glenn is addressing the reasons why we cannot tax the AIG bonuses back.  Fortunately for us (and our rule of law) most of the AIG execs have decided to give their bonuses back.  Of course, that was probably a move of self preservation.  The government was trying to put them in a dangerous situation in which their names were released so that everyone would know what who they were and where they lived.  What do you think might have happened?  Yeah, no wonder these people are for card check…same problems…  Anyway, here’s the video:

None of the big conservative talk show hosts speaks for me. I speak for myself. But it is nice to see that they are sending out the same message (to a much larger audience) that I try to send out. We are not alone. We surround them. Check out the 9/12 Project!

The Overton Window NEW by Glenn Beck

US $28.00 End Date: Monday Feb-06-2012 15:13:55 PST Buy It Now for only: US $28.00 Buy it now | Add to watch list

Tears of a Clown: Glenn Beck and the Tea Bagging of Ame

US $22.34 End Date: Monday Feb-06-2012 15:20:02 PST Buy It Now for only: US $22.34 Buy it now | Add to watch list

GIFT! Glenn Beck's Freedom Library Selection/The Real Thomas Jefferson NEW!!

US $26.74 (0 Bid) End Date: Monday Feb-06-2012 16:04:55 PST Bid now | Add to watch list

The Christmas Sweater, Glenn Beck, Kevin Balfe, Jason F

US $4.99 End Date: Monday Feb-06-2012 16:13:00 PST Buy It Now for only: US $4.99 Buy it now | Add to watch list

Why will liberals in general continue to fail?  Because they cannot think for themselves.  They simply cannot articulate why they think their position is good for the country.  Why else would Rush be such a big “news item” on the liberal channels, and among the liberal talk shows.  These people are incapable of rational thought, and articulation of a valuable view point.  Let me give you one example.  While searching the net today, I came across this broadcast on CNN of Ariana Huffington (of the (in)famous Huffington Post) being interviewed by Larry King.  Huffington had an agenda going on the show, and was incapable of moving away from her own scripted agenda to actually answer the questions that were asked by King:

Now, I don’t expect you to watch the whole video.  It becomes unbearable to hear Huffington talk about conservatives re-writing history.  Interestingly enough one of the conservatives on the show did a good job of actually going back to the root of the problems that we are facing right now (and that was before the Bush administration, just to give you a hint).  The second liberal on the show was a talk show host, Stephanie Miller.  She had a jolly good time ridiculing Limbaugh, which I think is hilarious.  Let’s put it this way, I doubt Limbaugh even know who this woman is.  From what I can tell, her show is on in 61 cities, and has ratings that rival watching paint dry.  What you will see in her is nothing but professional envy.  I mean, come on, going back to a Limbaugh drug joke?  You have to be kidding me!  Talk about not writing any new material, in what, 10 years?  These liberal talk show “giants” can’t even be successful enough to float without intervention from the government.  Limbaugh has more listeners in the first 10 minutes of his show on Monday than this woman probably has during a month of broadcasts!

This interview continues to show the problem that has been evident for at least the last 8 years, and probably even longer.  Liberals have nothing more than “its the conservatives fault…vote for our guy.”  There  is no plan.  There is no solution.  There is only blame.  Huffington claims the conservatives re-write history, and yet Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are never discussed as a source of the problems we face.  Folks, that is revisionist history.  I grant that the Bush administration was a part of the problem fiscally.  They enacted far too many liberal agenda type policies.  Expanding of entitlement policy is certainly not a “conservative value”!  However, the intervention of the government into lending practices during the Carter and Clinton administrations are far more responsible for the housing crisis (and thus the economic crisis) in the US today!

Even as the Obama administration flounders, the best we can get is that it is all Bush’s fault.  Well, you know waht?  At some point maybe they ought to try and do something productive.  The fact of the matter is that the Obama administration is failing miserably.  They are not getting us out of the current recession, and will fail to do so if they continue on the path that they have chosen.  They are masterfully following the Clinton playbook.  They try to distract us from the real issues and their colossal failures by acting like Limbaugh is a real news story.

Obama’s policies, and liberals in general will not fail because Rush Limbaugh wishes it so.  They will fail because (regardless of how the media reports it) most Americans simply will not tolerate socialism.  Every step that is taken in that direction will further solidify the American people against the policies that are being enacted.  Look at the Obama poll numbers…they have been steadily in decline since his first day in office.

As for Limbaugh’s comments wishing the Obama policies to fail?  I think he is right.  I just wish those policies had failed prior to the enactment of the  policies that will cause thousands if not millions of more babies to die world wide.

All the fundamental principles are there…but the “comedy commentator” actually hit the nail on the head. They don’t think Obama has the ability, or the guts to be able to follow through. When President Bush spoke to countries that would threaten us, the world paid attention. It doesn’t look like that will be the case under the new administration…

It is amazing to me how many liberals have been calling for “uniting with Obama.”  They keep telling us that it is our American, and patriotic duty to stand behind him and basically agree with all that he decides to do or say.  I do notice that they don’t call upon their own example of uniting behind President Bush.  That is because they fought tooth and nail with everything that he did or said, even when it really benefited their agenda.  You see, one of the differences between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives do not try to silence the liberal voice.  We do not try to stop liberals from expressing their point of view, and standing in opposition to our thoughts and policies.  Liberals, on the other hand, are threatened by conservative thought, and therefor try to put an end to it.  One quick example:  Nancy Pelosi’s new rules i nthe congress, making it essentially impossible to get a true tax cut passed.  We certainly can’t have a tax cut.  Hmmmm…I wonder if that tells us where Mr. Obama really stands on tax cuts?  This is a move to shut conservative policy on taxes out of the congress completely!

We as conservatives know that dissenting opinions are necessary in a free state.  That explains why we have not, and do not, seek to silence voices that speak in opposition to our beliefs.  But, the principle certainly does not change now that a far left liberal in the sitting president.  We have the right (and will continue to exercise) to speak as the opposition to policies that will not be good for this country.  When this administration proposes and/or supports policy that will detrimental to the wellbeing of the country, we as conservatives will be there to challenge him.  You can tell me that my obligation is to goose step in line with the administration, but it just is not true!

One thing I will be interested to see over the next 3 or 4 months is how much the Obama administration will drop from their campaigning days.  It has already started.  They campaigned on big changes.  Remember the slogans?   Change we can believe in!  Yes We Can!  Well, come to find out, there wasn’t going to be that much change, and the truth is, “No they can’t”, at least for many things.  They have already been working diligently to lower all expectations.  We will see many of the far left supporters (who got Mr. Obama elected) start to become diheartened by his actual actions as president.  They will be upset that he is really incapable of getting all that he promised done.  There are many who already have shown their disapproval for his attempted move toward the center.  How dare he nominate any Repuplicans to serve in his cabinet?

I hope that the reports of his move back toward the center are true.  At least that will keep him from enacting policy that will be hard to stomach.  I suspect, however, that there will be some things taht he will seek to get enacted that will forever put him at odds with true conservatives.  If he is able to get the Freedom of Choice Act passed, there is no way he can unite with true conservatives.  If he is able to get Card Checks passed for the unions, he will have crossed a bridge that will alienate him with conservatives.  Not only that, but he will set free enterprise and workplace safety back 50 years.

I don’t want this to sound like all “doom and gloom.”  I hope that the policies of this administration will be such that they do not cause irreparable harm for our country.  I hope that they are able to turn this economy around, and make our country the prosperous place that it once was.  I hope that he will do a better job of bridging race relations in this country.  There is much good that could come during this administration.  But, if Obama chooses to be a “far left” president, then it will cause nothing but further division.  Many accused President Bush of being “far right,” but those of us that are on the “far right” know that he really was not, especially in fiscal matters.  He was centrist in a lot of ways, with conservative values shining through on some topics (like stem cell research and abortion).  It will be interesting to see just what happens over the next 4 (or 8 ) years!

Seriously folks, when is there going to be uproar in this country over the corruption among democrats?  If a republican had done this type of thing, the rage would be unfathonable.  Anyone connected in any way would be targeted:  what did they know, when did they know it, what part did they play, etc.  But, I doubt that will be the case here.  I am sure there will be no questioning of the rest of the Democrats that have benefited from this corruption.

This is another case of “Chicago Politics”, which we were told was non-existent during the campaign.  I find it particularly interesting that this story was not broken until the election was over, especially considering the fact that Blagojevich has been under investigation for corruption charges since 2002.  Hmmm….Presidential Democratic candidate hailing from Chicago, but huge political corruption charges centered in Chicago are not exposed until after the election.  We got Joe the Plumber exposed.  We got “Troopergate” exposed.  And yet we learn nothing about William Ayers.  We hear nothing about this scandal.  We have no investigation into Obama’s Citizenship questions.  Yeah, the media is not biased.  No wonder something like 70% of people believed they were in the tank for Obama.

The good news for democrats is that Blagojevich’s sentence will only be about 20 years.  That means that he will be available to run for president after Obama’s second term (with parole).  When republicans do something illegal, they are forced out of office (as well they should be).  When democrats do something illegal, they are often given a promotion…Gotta’ love the good ol’ USA.

For more information on this story, check out the breaking news on Fox News Online.

The advertisement really summarizes some points that many on the right have been criticizing the Senator for lately. In recent weeks, Senator Obama has appeared to “flip-flop” positions on several occasions, leading to the criticisms from the right.

This particular advertisement focuses on a few key issues for voters:

• Gun control
• Campaign finance
• Free trade
• Withdrawal from Iraq

You can visit the organization’s website at http://www.bothwaysbarack.com and view their documentation for their claims.

These are important issues to Americans, and the voting public has the right to know what the Senator actually believes. I believe we had enough of Democratic flip-flopping with John Kerry, but it appears we’re going to get the same thing now with Senator Obama.

I know that gun control is a sensitive issue and highly important to most Americans. The Senator had made statements various times supporting the handgun ban in Washington, D.C.; he also had other statements that he believed local/state governments should be allowed to make gun control decisions on their own. After the Supreme Court decision that ruled that the D.C. ban was unconstitutional, Senator Obama said that he supported the decision. Which way is it Senator? Do you believe gun ownership can be suppressed? Or do you support the Second Amendment? We have a right to know!

The sources behind the other claims can be found on the aforementioned website. Feel free to check them out, and demand that Senator Obama tell us what he really believes before he is elected, or we may well be terrified to find out the truth after he is in office!

Enter Senator McCain. Senator McCain publicly offered to accompany Senator Obama to Iraq to examine whether things were really as bad off as Senator Obama was saying.

That offer amounted to Senator McCain calling Senator Obama’s bluff. Senator Obama has not been to Iraq in more than two years, and yet he continues to talk about how unsuccessful the Bush policies have been. Senator McCain wanted to show Senator Obama that progress is indeed being made. Senator Obama refused.

In a speech Tuesday night, Senator Obama wanted to abandon talking about Iraq entirely. When he had free reign to spout off about a subject he actually knows little about, he was bold to challenge Republicans. When confronted by someone who is more than able to debate him on the issue (Senator McCain-a veteran), Senator Obama said that Senator McCain needs to spend more time talking about domestic issues and less time talking about Iraq.

How convenient, Senator Obama. Once again you’ve proved, despite your insufferable protests to the contrary, that you are just like every other politician. How dare Senator McCain actually challenge you??