Since the votes were tallied and the final election results were in naming Barack Obama winner of the 2008 election, there have been countless discussions and postings concerning conservative support for Obama because he would be the Nation’s President. After all whether one votes for the person who sits in the Oval Office or not he is the President of all Americans.

Over the last few days this conversation has come to the fore front again with Obama telling GOP lawmakers that they cannot follow Rush Limbaugh and expect anything to get done. On the other side of this coin Rush has stated that because of his conservative beliefs and principles that if Obama pushes the socialist agenda that he stated during the campaign he does not want him to succeed because of the path it would take the Nation.

Now that Obama is President of the United States, then the question for conservatives is once again, ” do we support Obama because he is the President ?” To this question, as a conservative, I would have to follow my conscience and principled beliefs and say emphatically, “NO !”

There are those, who because he is President, that would consider this attitude to be unpatriotic and nothing that I state here will convince them otherwise. But to my fellow conservatives I offer this explanation as to why we cannot support Obama or even state that we do because he is the President.

Though I do not support Obama, I still and always will respect the office of President of The United States. But for me to use that respect for the office and state that because a certain individual is holding that office, I should then support what he does would be hypocrisy on my part.

Nothing that Obama has stated as his policy, goal o the direction he wishes to take this Nation agrees with my political, moral and ideological beliefs or principles. For me to state that I support the President but not his policies is a similar argument that was used by the left concerning the status of our troops and their mission in Iraq.

Throughout that political discord liberals continually stated that they supported the troops but not their mission. Conservatives countered the cry from the left with, ” how can you say you support the troops but not what they are doing ?” The same argument holds for Obama. How can we as conservatives state that we support the President but not what he is doing without falling into the same counter accusation from the left that we used during the troop support argument ?

If I am completely honest with myself and my convictions, then I have to admit that I do not want Obama’s agenda to succeed and therefore cannot support him just because he is the President. If he insists on continuing the agenda that he has stated and that he has already begun how can I state that I support him and hold true to my beliefs and principles ?

Of course I would hope for the sake of the country that he understands the short and long term ramifications of what he is doing and what he plans to do and the negative impact it will have on the country. Not to mention that the socialist ideas that he presents take this Nation down a path that was never intended by our Founders.

I believe that the moves that he has made and is planning on making weaken this country and make us even more vulnerable to attack from our enemies. He is taking us back to a pre- 9/11 atmosphere and as such the security of this country could be threatened in a way that it has not been since that fateful day in 2001.

His socialist agenda promises to take this country down a path that may never be reversed. I ask you, how many government programs once started have ever been stopped ? The answer is zero and Obama plans expanding government more than any other President including Franklin Roosevelt.

If we do come under attack, as an American I will rally behind the President as we should and pray that he has the wisdom and sense enough to handle the situation in a manner that protects and preserves our Nation. But to state that I will support him just because he is President is not holding true to who I am and those values and beliefs that have formed my ideas, my morals and my principles.

Do I want him to fail ? Absolutely not ! But I cannot support what he plans which will bring failure and insecurity to this country both economically, morally and in the protection of the country and our people.

Did I agree 100% with President Bush ? No, in fact there were numerous times that I did not support what he was doing. His immigration stand, increasing entitlements, bailouts just to name a few were policies that I could not support. But generally I agreed with the direction Bush wanted to take the country and in the way he stood fast in protecting the Nation after 9/11. As a result I could support him while disagreeing with certain policy issues.

Obama presents and entirely different situation. I find nothing that he says or any part of his very liberal agenda that I can agree with. I do not believe that what he is and will do has any possibility of taking this Nation anywhere but Socialism and weakening our security. How then can I support him as President ?

Our Founders faced a similar dilemma when they gathered to ultimately bring about the birth of this country. They respected the British Monarchy, but not the King who held the throne and especially not his policy toward the Colonies. As a result they created a new form of government that was formed from their beliefs and principles which came from the inability to support King Charles and his agenda for the Colonies. Had they supported the King, they would never have signed the Declaration of Independence.

Am I suggesting that we rebel against the Obama Administration and begin a new Nation ? No, but I am suggesting that we take every opportunity to make it known through the blogosphere, discussion with friends and family and especially in constant contact with everyone and anyone in Washington, that we do not support the President’s agenda and emphatically know that it will take us the wrong direction and threaten the security of each of us.

This is our responsibility as a citizen. Our Constitution begins with the words, “We the people.” These words were not written by James Madison because they had a certain poetic ring to them. They were included at the very beginning of the document that created our government and the laws that formed our Nation as a testament of who we are and what our responsibilities as Americans are to each other and our country.

Those in government do not dictate to us what we are to do, even the President. It is our responsibility as Americans to tell them what we expect and then hold them accountable to those expectations. As a whole we Americans have forgotten this blessed liberty which was instilled in this country from the very beginning.

Is it radical to stand against our leaders when we disagree with them ? Some today consider it to be. But if we truly believe in our Constitution and understand how our Nation was founded and what the words found within this precious document provide in freedom, then we will also understand that we cannot support that which we believe is wrong and it is our duty to stand against it especially if it is the agenda of a President whose ideas and policy promises to change the very foundation of our country and the principles instilled by our Constitution.

Ken Taylor    http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

Call it political expediency, keeping a campaign promise, appeasing his left wing constituency, whatever you call it issuing the order to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is not just risky but a sign of a President that either has no clue or just does not care. The risk that Obama is taking with the closing is not a personal political risk because it satisfies his liberal friends therefore keeping those who backed him happy.

No the risk that he is taking is with our National Security and that shows that either he does not have a clue or does not care or both. The detainees that are held in Gitmo are there for a reason. They are dangerous, an enemy to The United States and her people and pose a serious threat to the country and everyone who lives here.

The left and Obama, (one in the same), would have us believe that the reasoning behind the closing of Gitmo is because the detainees are being denied ,”their Constitutional rights,” and that the existence of the detention center is damaging to the countries image around the world.

Yet if this damage is as real as they portray then why is it that there is not a country including the home lands of the detainees who want these scum bags once they are removed from Gitmo. Next is the loose interpretation of Constitutional rights. The Constitution provides for the right of a fair and expedient trial and Habeus Corpus, which the detainees are not receiving, but the stickler here is that those rights so espoused for detainees by the left are for United States citizens and NOT enemy combatants who have no rights by out Constitution.

Obama in order to satisfy his liberal friends, keep a campaign promise and look like a hero to the critics of President Bush for his own political expediency has issued an order endangering the country and obviously does not begin to understand who he is dealing with concerning the detainees or again does not care about the real and dangerous ramifications.

A few facts about these enemies might shed some light on what and who he is claiming deserve the same rights as citizens of this country.

Fact one – the detainees are not interested in rights or Constitutional provisions because their goal as detainees is to fulfill their Jihad which is to be a martyr for their Islamic cause and either die killing infidel Americans or die at the hands of the infidel in a prison or by execution. This is evidenced by the actions of the, “master mind,” behind 9/11 when he was brought before the tribunal for trial.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Al Qaeda scum held at Gitmo and planner of 9/11 when brought before the tribunal instructed his council that he wished to plead guilty to all charges with the expressed reason being that a guilty finding would lead to execution which would fulfill his Jihad and make him a martyr thus giving him his 72 virgins and a trip to sit by Mohammad. So these murderous enemies are not interested in rights just martyrdom at the hands of infidels.

Fact two – No one wants them. Once the order was issued Senators, Congressman, Governors and citizens began an out cry of, “we don’t want them here.” So when Obama has his way and Gitmo is closed there is not a location in this country that would not anger an entire State if these scum are transferred anywhere in the States.

The world also does not want them even the countries that they belong to and were captured from. Talk about your basic man without a country, these detainees fit that bill to a tee and not because of political turmoil but because even their own home lands understand that these are undesirables who create more problems than they are worth and since we captured them we can have them.

Fact three – The information that has been acquired through interrogation of the detainees has be invaluable in successfully stopping attacks against The United States and the rest of the world since their capture after 9/11. The true advantage that they have given us in fighting terrorism will never be known because of the necessity of not revealing intelligence information or the quantity of such information but suffice it to say that it has been enough to prevent an untold number of attacks.

Fact four – the recent revelation of the result of releasing a detainee emphasises the danger that they pose. Ali al-Shihri was released to the Saudi government from Gitmo for rehabilitation in 2007. The Saudis then released him from their care and he re-emerged in Yemen once again with Al Qaeda and as the commander of Al Qaeda in the country.

Because these scum bags have been held by, “the great satan,” not only do they become heroes to their cause if released, but even if they once were considered peons in Al Qaeda before their capture the fact that they stood fast, in the mind of these scum, any detainee that is returned to the streets becomes a hero and living martyr to the Jihad cause and as such made a leader in the terrorist organization.

But none of this seems to matter to Barack Obama because he wishes to satisfy his liberal friends and seeks good opinion rather than fulfilling his Constitutional Oath to protect this Nation. The perceived rights of the enemy are more important to him then the real rights of our citizens and the security of the country.

There are loop holes in Obama’s order that allow him to extend the closing by additional Executive Orders, but his goal of closing the detention center even with the loop holes is a priority with Obama and though giving himself an out if necessary he will pursue this madness until he accomplishes it.

This one act by Obama reveals his true belief that the war that we have been pursuing to defeat this evil enemy is in Obama’s mind not a war but a criminal police matter and defeating the enemy was just an eloquent line in his Inaugural Address and not his true intent or goal. It will not be long before Obama returns to the failed idea of issuing warrants, seeking useless indictments and hollow arrests threats thus allowing Al Qaeda to rebuild and attack us again.

Ken Taylor   http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

Throughout his campaign then candidate Barack Obama told his worshipping minions that if elected he would change the tone in Washington and there would be full bipartisan participation along with a, “let’s get along,” attitude. This theme continued through his transition as Obama spoke of cooperation, no more accusations and ,”mean spirited,” talk from his administration or anyone else in Washington.

Then the moment of truth came. Inauguration Day when all of the high sounding rhetoric would finally be put to the test. In some circles anticipation ran high that just maybe we would see a new tone set in Washington and that the constant bickering and accusations would subside. Then President Bush stepped onto the Inaugural platform to the crowd singing, “na, na, na, na hey, hey goodbye.” So much for getting along, but then this did come from followers and not those in Washington.

The left wing press spent a good amount of time giving these disrespectful Obama minions who used an Inaugural to lash out at Bush, a good deal of coverage. But again this is the press and they have always hated Bush so no surprise that they did not get the ,”getting along,” memo.

Just after noon the Oath of Office was taken, (sort of), and Obama spoke to his masses. As the speech progressed the, “let’s get along,” theme quickly faded into oblivion as Obama used the opportunity to make remarks that could only be deciphered as accusations against his predecessor and attacks on his policy.

Day two began with the purging of the White House web site removing Bush and posting Obama. Throughout the site in link after link the official White House web site takes stabs at President Bush in order to diminish the high expectations that the hype created for Obama and use Bush as the scape goat for Obama short comings.

Throughout the hearings process as Obama’s appointments are being rubber stamped, references to the last eight years are rampant from Democrat Senators in an accusatory tone. On day three Hillary took to the stage at the State Department taking stabs at Bush policy as she instructs employees and appoints two Middle East Envoys.

Nancy Pelosi has not even tried to make even the slightest attempt at bipartisanship as she has changed the rules in the House in order to prevent GOP participation in the legislative process. Then adding insult to injury when asked about President Bush, Pelosi stated that as she saw him leave on Inauguration Day, she felt as if an, ” anvil had been lifted from her shoulders.”

Obama was said to be reaching out to the GOP when he kept Robert Gates on as Secretary of Defense. Yet in his first acts as President issuing Executive Orders to close Gitmo and stop pending tribunals for admitted 9/11 participants, Obama used the moments in front of the cameras to lash out at Bush policy rather than just sign the order and state his intentions.

Obama and the Democrats arrogantly believe that they have a mandate from the people to drastically change the country and to introduce full government rule in every aspect of America forcing dependency on government and removing our liberty to choose how we live our lives. They fully intend to do this without allowing GOP opposition while Obama keeps the ruse of bipartisanship in meeting with GOP leaders. If this was nothing more than a ruse he would reign in Pelosi, but he isn’t and he won’t in order to allow this deception to continue.

A deception designed to make Obama look like the great moderator, holding to the middle ground, reaching out to everyone in a spirit of bipartisanship. Deceiving the people into believing that he has set a new tone in Washington while behind the scenes Democrats can block all opposition, use Bush as the scape goat for their failures and ram through sweeping socialism as they force this agenda on the people.

Ken Taylor   http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

He began his campaign for the Presidency by standing on the steps of the Illinois State House to make the official announcement he was running, like Lincoln did. Throughout his campaign he invoked the name of Lincoln as if the ghost of the sixteenth President, in Obama’s mind, was hovering over him giving him personal assistance as he spoke. He has compared his life experiences and his rise to the Presidency to that of Lincoln’s.

Now Barack Obama is preparing to be inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States and he acts as if he IS Lincoln. He is using Lincoln’s bible as he takes the oath of office. The meals throughout the inaugural day are either Lincoln’s favorites or foods that he ate as a child. He has traveled to Washington, again, but this time in a rail car that was patterned after the one used by Lincoln in 1861 following that final route used by Lincoln on that same trip.

Obama’s obsession of Lincoln is almost as one commentator described it a , “man crush,” on Father Abraham. Since the administration of Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s second Vice president and his successor because of the assassination, Lincoln has become the most quoted President by fellow Presidents in or Nations history. One because of the great wisdom found in his thoughts and words. And two, because Lincoln led this country through the most troublesome time our Nation has faced and what he said is applicable to many situations that have faced our Nation since his administration.

But Obama, even before becoming President is going far beyond just quoting Lincoln, he is emulating Lincoln to the extent that it seems as if he thinks he is the reincarnation of the sixteenth President. Now even historians and commentators are following Obama’s lead and digging to make comparisons between Obama and Lincoln. When in actuality like Lincoln he was elected from Illinois. And, like Lincoln, his selecting as Secretary of State a former rival who was thought by most to be the shoe in as his parties nominee rather than Obama and that she, as with Lincoln’s Secretary of State William Seward was a Senator from New York, otherwise the true comparison with Lincoln does not exist.

Obama’s party affiliation, his policies, his back ground, his experience, his character, in other words everything about him is nearly polar opposite of Lincoln. So why this obsession by Barack Obama of Abraham Lincoln ? It takes looking at other moves that Obama has made to understand why Obama is so obsessed with Lincoln.

First, invoking and emanating Lincoln is always safe and popular because Lincoln is considered by most our Nations greatest President and has the respect of almost everyone. This follows with Obama’s obvious actions to create an aura around him to say and do everything that is most popular with those who follow him and helps to continue his ,”rock star,” status.

Second, Obama comes to Washington saying that he is bringing, “change,” yet his appointments to staff and cabinet positions have offered little if any, “change,” from another Democrat administration. The majority of Obama’s administrative appointments are either former Clinton staffers or appointees who served in similar positions in the nineties or Clinton family like Hillary.

Third, his economic policy follows closely those instituted by Franklin Roosevelt with the , “New Deal.” Massive government intervention during economic trouble with little long term or real substance to solve the problem. Only placing temporary band aides to mask it with feel good solutions.

When looking at the three actions, invoking Lincoln, appointing Clinonites and policy like FDR, one then can understand just who Obama is and what he is doing. He is not an avenue of, “change,” as he claims. Nor the giver of,” hope,” as he also tries to claim, but nothing more that a great impersonator.

Like and impersonator he looks and sounds much like the real thing but there is always that something that is not quite right or lacking that makes the listener think or look for the actual real thing. Rich Little, in my opinion, is the best of the best in his ability to impersonate the famous. He can re-create their voice, their mannerisms, their words and in many instances even their costumes, but though great at what he does, he never quite comes up to the real thing.

He is good for a laugh, or can amaze an audience with his ability to copy those whose voices he can impersonate, but his John Wayne isn’t as tough, his Johnny Carson isn’t as witty, his George Burns isn’t as cute and his Cary Grant isn’t as charming. He entertains but always leaves you wanting for more.

Like an impersonator Obama is proving to leave the Nation wanting for more. In his press conferences he talks but says nothing, he claims, “hope and change,” but his actions bring little if any. He emulates Lincoln, but comes up far short of our sixteenth President. He appoints like Clinton, but can’t convince like the used car salesman as Clinton did. Clinton, though a flim flam as a President had the ability to sell what he did even if it was not the greatest idea or policy. Obama cannot. Even his economic ideas come from Franklin Roosevelt but he doesn’t posses the ability to make the country feel good about what he is doing like Roosevelt.

Lincoln was known as , “The Great Emancipator.” Reagan was known as, “The Great Communicator.” Is Obama, “The Great Impersonator ?” Trying to act like and look like a President but always leaving the crowd wanting more.

In the troublesome times we face as a nation we do not need a President who simply tries to act Presidential. We do not need a President who copies others just because he likes them. We need a President who is a true leader, a strong , convicted principled executive. A person with integrity and strength of character who does not just talk a good game but has the ability to actually perform once they take office.

Unfortunately rather than a strong leader, a principled man who stands with true conviction for what he knows is right and what he understands is best for the country, we have , “The Great Impersonator.” Acting and talking like others but always leaving the crowd wanting and the Nation lacking.

Ken Taylor   http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

Eight years have passed bringing us to the final full week of the administration of George Walker Bush, the forty third President of The United States. A few weeks back I posted about the legacy of President Bush so this will not be about what he will leave behind but a personal story of gratitude for what he has done for our Nation as he has led this country through some of the most historic and troublesome times in our Nations history.

President Bush is a good, honest and principled man who has been the target of the most vicious attacks by the media and the left of any sitting President in our history. He has been vilified and demonized by so many that it is no wonder that he leaves office with low approval ratings because this attempted destruction has been the goal of the left and much of the media since the 2000 election.

As a result the true accomplishments of President Bush will take the calming nature of time to show just how much this President has done and how he has protected this Nation during a time in which a lesser leader would have sat back an allowed events to control him rather than being proactive taking the initiative to act as his conscience dictated.

As a conservative there were times during his Presidency that I was somewhat aggravated with President Bush. I have found disagreement with some of his spending policies especially when he compromised and teamed up with the likes of Ted Kennedy and others who used his nature to ,”reach across the isle,” as an opportunity to take advantage of him and create entitlements that have done more harm than good.

While President Bush reached across the isle, those who grasped his hand in a non-partisan gesture, stabbed him in the back after they got what they wanted. I also found frustration as he refused so many times to take the offensive when he was attacked and seldom took his case to the American people which allowed the left and the media to have a field day in condemnation and vilification even when his actions proved right and succeeded.

But the true nature of this good man also prevailed as his love for this country, his belief in the cause of liberty and his dedicated steadfastness in fulfilling his oath of office to, “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, ” drove him to action and principled resolve in protecting this Nation in the wake of 9/11.

And defend and protect is exactly what he has done which will be his greatest accomplishment as President as he not only prevented another attack in keeping American safe after 9/11, but took the fight to the enemy with such strength and resolve to this Islamic foe whose cowardice kills innocent people. President Bush recognized this evil and went after it with an assured vengeance that has kept them running and decapitated their ability for more than seven years.

He understood that this enemy would not yield to negotiations or pacification but that the only course was action through strength in defeating this evil enemy. His faith in the tremendous ability and dedication of our brave men and women in uniform and his caring leadership as Commander in Chief has protected this Nation and brought freedom to thousands who had known nothing but oppression in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

It has been comforting to me to know that each night that I lay down on my pillow that because of the principled dedication of President Bush and the sacrifice and equal dedication of the troops that he led as Commander in Chief protected this Nation from harm and that while he and the heroes he led and served were on watch nothing or no one would again attack us.

Yet I also knew that this relentless enemy continued to seek opportunity too attack America and kill Americans. But President Bush stood fast and with our troops on the front line both he and they said, “not on my watch,” and This Nation is better for it. And because of that sincere dedication we owe both President Bush and our troops a debt of gratitude that we can never repay.

Their love for this country and respect for their Commander in Chief has defended our freedom and strengthened the cause of liberty both here and abroad. And while our troops deserve praise for their sacrifice and tremendous accomplishments in defense of our Nation, President Bush deserves like praise in his ability to stand firm when others would have fallen. To hold fast when others would have let go and to continue to fight when his detractors and opposition said to surrender.

His belief in freedom and it being a gift to mankind from God drove him to stand when political opposition and polls would have caused a less principled man to yield to save his popularity. He understood that to lead one does not necessarily remain popular and chose rather to sacrifice that popularity in order to make the decisions and actions needed to protect this Nation.

For this dedication he has been condemned because he refused to yield. His love for this country and his belief in its greatness were far more important than good poll numbers or the praise of the media. History will vindicate him for this dedication and this Nation remains free and strong because of that same dedication.

While the politically correct look forward to January 20 when President Bush will peacefully transfer to his successor the Presidency in one of the greatest traditions of our Republic, this conservative and millions like me will miss him when he leaves office. President Bush deserves our thanks for what he has done and his many accomplishments. He deserves our respect for his principled steadfastness in the face of undue opposition.

Thank you Mr. President for keeping us safe. Thank you Mr. President for putting our country first. Thank you Mr. President for standing true and strong. Thank you Mr. President for your leadership and dedication. Thank you Mr. President for being who you are and for being the right man at the right time for our Nation. Thank you Mr. President !

Ken Taylor  http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

Roland Burris went to Washington with papers in hand stating that he was the Junior Senator from Illinois. Papers that prove that he was appointed legally to fill the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama. Papers that gave him the legal authority to take the oath of office along with 99 other Senators who began the 111th Congress.

So Hapless Harry Reid read the papers, (actually the Senate Secretary acting on Reids behalf), looked Roland Burris in the eye and told him that he didn’t get one signature from the Illinois Secretary of State so his papers were no good, then proceeded to slam the Senate door in Rolands face.

If this does not prove just how screwed up the 58 ,(or 59 depending on whether Al Franken succeeds in stealing the Minnesota Senate race), seat majority of Democrats is going to be then I don’t know what else will. Unless it is possibly the fact that Vice President Elect Joe Biden took the Senate oath with the other 98 for the 111th Congress and plans on holding his seat as a Senator until the day before the inauguration when he will resign and his already appointed successor can actually come to Washington and take the seat. That is provided his papers are signed!

Now back to the unsigned papers of Roland Burris. The signature of the Illinois Secretary of State on the Senate credentials are only a ceremonial gesture because the power to appoint belongs , BY LAW, both State and Federal to the States Executive which is the Governor who is still Rod Balgojevich in Illinois. Blago still has all of his Gubernatorial powers and authority and as such is the legal representative to appoint the Senate seat.

Which is exactly what he did in appointing Burris. Now everyone knows that this appointment by Blago was a political move to help his case and that he is most likely as guilty as sin concerning the accusation leveled against him. I mean when has ANY Chicago politician who was caught NOT been guilty of the accusations against them ?

But at this point they are ONLY accusation. He has not been indicted, he has not been removed from office. The Illinois legislature has not removed ANY of his authority so the appointment of Burris is legal and as such Burris deserves to be seated in the Senate. But not according to the power mad Harry Reid who sites Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution saying, (according to Reid’s interpretation), that the Senate decides who will serve and who will not. Obviously he has not actually looked at the Constitution because Harry the PEOPLE decide who serves and who does not by their vote.

Although no one voted for Burris serving in the Senate they did vote for Blagojevich which as the duly elected official with the authority to fill a vacant Senate seat makes Burris the people’s choice. Additionally this clause that Reid is using states that the Senate judges the , “qualifications,” of the member.

Let’s see if Burris meets those qualifications. He must be at least thirty years old. At seventy one I believe that qualification is met. He must be a United States citizen. He was born August 3, 1937 in Centralia, Illinois. Illinois became part of the Union as the 21st State on December 3, 1818. So that would make Burris a legal citizen. He must be a resident of the State in which he will serve as Senator. Burris served in two State offices in Illinois and until his appointment was the CEO of Chicago based Burris & Lebed Consulting, LLC and resides in Chicago which is still a city in Illinois, so it looks like the residency qualification is fulfilled.

Where then does Hapless Harry come up with the hair brained idea that Burris is not qualified to serve in the Senate ? Could it be that Reid, because of his knee jerk reaction to the Blagojevich scandal has once again backed himself into a corner that he does not know how to get out of ? Could it come from Democrats not knowing how to handle a situation without creating a circus atmosphere while scrounging for a solution ? Is it all of the above ?

This has gone past the ridiculous point. Burris is legal so as a result he by law should be seated in the Senate Chambers as the Junior Senator from Illinois right now. Obviously Balgojevich to the great dismay of Obama, Reid and every other Democrat is NOT going to just go away and take his lumps. So Democrats pretending that they do not have to deal with Blago, his appointee or anything else he does while still legally the Governor of Illinois is NOT going to do anything except make a three ring circus into the greatest show on Earth.

The only answer to this fiasco is to seat Burris, let Blago do whatever he is going to do and NOT continue to play these stupid kids games at the expense of the people of The United States. Then again we are talking about Democrats and playing games with the peoples time and money is what they do best! We are in for the ride of our lives folks and the train hasn’t even left the station yet!

Ken Taylor   http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com

2008 was one of the most interesting years in recent history. It held many surprises, which brought both reason to cheer and brought great disappointment. We experienced a historic and for conservatives very disappointing Presidential election. An economic down turn that shaped our economy and the election. Great strides in Iraq because of the tremendous efforts of Americas finest.

2009 will be another historic year and one that already holds surprises and disappointments. A new administration is preparing to take the helm of The United States Ship of State which promises change but in the preparation for taking over change is the last thing that has been shown.

So in light of the New Year and the promises or lack there of that it may hold for our future here is my effort at looking forward into the year and what it might bring. I make no claim to the ability to prognosticate nor pretend to be a Nostradamus. This is just a compilation of my opinion on what 2009 might hold. Without further ado I’ll begin with sports.

The Super Bowl – This is one I have already blown ! As late as January 3, I was discussing the Super Bowl and predicted a match of the Manning brothers between the Indianapolis Colts and the New York Giants. The San Diego Chargers blew this one in only the second game of the play offs by eliminating the Colts. So I will stick with the Giants in the NFC and add the Tennessee Titans for the AFC. With my dismal record so far I’ll not choose the winner.

The economy – As Obama takes office this will be the most important issue he faces. With the collapse of the mortgage bubble last year the economy is shaky at best. Many economist predict that the down turn will work its way through to improvement by summer. But this prediction is using current economic policy as it basis, a policy the Obama has promised to change.

With bailouts becoming the norm now for ,”solving,” economic problems allowing massive government intervention and direct involvement in the form of stock options which make the government a partner in each bailed out business, the out look for a quick recovery looks bleak. I am an optimist but government involvement does not provide optimism only pessimism.

The free market Capitalism that has made America great and the strongest economy in history, if allowed to work would feasibly bring growth and prosperity back by the summer. But Congress is already planning a ONE TRILLION dollar , “stimulus,” package whose components offer little that will actually stimulate the economy.

Also there is talk of further bailouts which even includes bailing out failing newspapers whose failure is not a result of a slow economy but years of decreased circulation due to the Internet and reporting that has caused a general lack of interest in daily papers. I know because I used to work for one!

With greater government involvement by an Obama administration I am afraid that a quick recovery may not happen. In fact using history as the example and the lefts own comparison to the Great Depression, ( which is NOT even close to this down turn in severity), government involvement stretched the effects of the depression from two or three years to nearly a dozen taking a war to finally end it. History shows that government involvement worsens economic problems as opposed to free market solutions.

So Obama’s idea to get the government more involved than it already is promises the same conclusion. Making his prediction of things getting worse before they get better and the problem taking years to solve a probable reality.

Iraq – This is one issue that Obama, if he holds to current agreements, will not be able to change as he promised during the campaign. Throughout the campaign Obama called for a quick withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. As quickly as sixteen months. But the recent agreements with the Maliki government and the Bush administration tie Obama’s hands in Iraq.

The agreements call for a continual hand over of security to Iraq and transfer of control in troubled regions combined with a military presence that will decline through 2012. The success of the surge and the hand over of former hot spots such as the , “Green Zone,” which transferred at the end of last year, proves that Iraq is working and the best policy is to continue with current policy.

Of course Obama as Commander in Chief, can recall all troops whenever and however he wishes. But if he has any sense he will not. His selection of Robert Gates as his Secretary of Defense, to the dismay of the left, shows that he has taken a fresh look at Iraq and that his campaign rhetoric may not be his policy as President. I believe 2009 will see a continued policy for Iraq to reach the final conclusion agreed to by Bush.

Balgojevich - This guy is great. If the opposition ever wanted to hire a politician who could provide the greatest side show affecting an incoming administration who politically is from the other party, Governor Rod Blagojevich from Illinois would be the man!

To date there has proven to be no illegal involvement with Obama or any of his staff with Blagos, “Pay for Play, ” accusations in selecting a successor to Obama in the United States Senate. The investigation is on going and will consume quite a number of headlines for at least the first six months of 2009, to the great dismay of Obama and the Democrats.

Blago’s actions cast a shadow over an Obama administration because the allegations involve his Senate seat and most of his staff and appointees come from the same corrupt Chicago political machine that made Balgojevich. So while there looks to be no criminal involvement by Obama or his staff, Blago is NOT going away soon and will be an anvil around Obama’s neck until this case runs its full course.

Biden’s predicted , “crisis,” – Joe Biden, well known for sticking his foot in his mouth, did not disappoint during the campaign. His many gaffs became regular news, especially one in which he predicted that during the first six months of an Obama administration there would be a, “generated international crises, ” to test the new President. Of course Biden never intended for anyone to hear this but it made headlines and is, unfortunately, likely to happen in 2009.

Obama is new, untested, inexperienced and walking in uncharted waters as far as the Presidency is concerned. Uncharted because inexperience creates great questions concerning his ability to handle a crisis. His handling of the early stages of the Balgojevich scandal were less than stellar and this is a minor situation compared to those he will face in the Oval Office.

Even as this is being written foreign governments as well as our enemies especially those who use terror as their weapon are wondering what to expect from Obama and how he will act in a crisis. Our allies deal with this question by being concerned and offering advice and assistance. Our enemies are looking for a way to test the novice President through trial.

There is no way of predicting where and from whom the test will come but as Biden said it will come because Obama’s inexperience provides a real or at least a perceived vulnerability for this country that an enemy will try to take advantage of. What form this will take no one knows. And just as tragic as the probability of it happening, no one knows how Obama will handle it when it comes. But come it will and it is a situation we will face in 2009.

Of course there are many other issues and situations that 2009 will bring for each of us individually and all of us as a Nation. How we handle it as an individual will determine whether 2009 will be a good year, fair year or terrible year for each of us. In our lifetime we all have both good years and bad and we deal with them as they come. The difference between us and a President is that when a President has a bad year in some manner it affects all of us. Let us hope and pray that 2009 will be a good year for Barack Obama. The prognosis does not look promising !

Ken Taylor    http://theliberalslies.blogspot.com