We live in dark times, economically and socially. This crisis, however, has been a gathering storm front that conservatives should not have missed. The insidious undermining of our societal fabric was being unraveled just as we elected Ronald Reagan and felt a conservative tide that appeared unstoppable. During this time, so-called educators like domestic terrorist William Ayres and other such radicals were busy infiltrating an already weakened public education system.

The fissures formed in the wake of the silly notion that students should not be invoking God in the classroom. With ever-increasing power, the atheist religion has gained power as a State-sponsored dogma. Evolution became fact. Prayer was forbidden. Bibles were banned. Students no longer learned the pledge of allegiance to the American Flag. By the late 1960s it was vogue to despise America, but it wasn't wide-spread. Most Americans still felt unashamedly patriotic. This was largely the result of educators who had yet to be replaced by the radicals at the school walls.

During the 1970s, rock bands railed against the 'establishment' only to have their peers become the establishment with a new set of priorities.

But the opportunity they seized was hardly a new one. It had been coming since the time C.S. Lewis wrote The Abolition Of Man. He noticed the way textbooks were teaching 'debunking' as literary criticism. This debunking has grown into what Mr. Lewis saw as a dangerous social experiment to abolish self-evident values. One might debunk someone's feelings of virtue by saying something just makes them feel abstract emotions that they describe as virtue. In other words, there is no such thing as virtue or right or wrong, simply a feeling one derives.

We now live in the world where man is abolished. Our society has evolved to make all things subjective and debunk truth as ones personal perspective. Our generations X, Y and Z have been progressively influenced by the education of politics rather than value. They learn that they are highly evolved animals who must follow their instinct, which, as pointed out by C. S. Lewis, is the only basis for doing anything in the new society. Instincts for survival or pleasure drive us to achieve success or settle for find a particular vocation. An inherent value of taking care of parents or children or concern for posterity is simply cultural. To the extent that our instinct drives us to preserve society for our personal survival, we look out for others in some semblance of common good. We certainly don't do something because we might be responsible to a higher power or because there is an inherent Right versus an inherent Wrong.

Since our public education system has become a propaganda machine for secular thought and atheist religion, our children grow up with no sense of direction, no instruction on a solid Way that is true.

Parents have been subject to this attack as well. Parents have been lured into the deception of the Women's movment, which told countless women that they were not using their full potential if they stayed at home raising children. Thus we spawned a society that has abandoned kids to centers that simply manage the basic needs but provide none of the moral nurturing children crave. In the process, women have been broken. While they are told they can be as effective in the business world men, they are not. While the elite of society claim that there are no inherent differences between men and women, there are.

Together, the abolition of values in our schools and the luring away of parents from children, our society has reached a point of moral despair. Americans have drank the wine of an idea that we are not responsible to God or to eachother. We have allowed ideas to arive that everyone's desire is a value that should be given as a right, thus the housing fiasco. Legislators have passed off a utopian ideal that flies in the face of traditional values, stating that everyone should have everything from a quality education to a nice house without having to earn either one. In short, they have set the young generations up for failure and disappointment. For no matter what government funding can give, it can't hide poor students and bad loan risks.

Our education in America is in crisis. Our children are being passed through grades with high scores in self-esteem and liberal dogma, but with no sense of right and wrong and lacking any intellectual discipline.

Our economy is in crisis. Too many feel entitled to housing they cannot yet afford. Rather than work several jobs and save up for a downpayment, they look to Government to bail them out.

It is my hope that the current crisis will continue to prove impervious to the bailout strategy and reveal itself for what it is, the check due for putting our faith in the secular socialist mentality. While that realization is crucial for our economy, it must be accompanied by a resurgence of conservatives involved in education. If we hope to turn this country around we need to abolish the National Education Association. We need to break up the monopoly of thought that the radicals have in our schools. We need to eliminate public funing for schools and force them to compete for dollars based on their educational merits. We need to eliminate government money in our colleges and allow only those who work hard achieve entrance. This will foster true competition in our colleges and put higher education back where it belongs.

But most important, we need to stand up for traditional values and teach our children that there is an objective right and an objective wrong. We are not animals and should never behave as such.

The recent election is historic not only for the fact that our country elected a man born of a race that was once relegated to slavery. That alone shows that America still leads the world in advancement of moral causes (we also have the cleanest air and best pollution control in the civilized world). What we also have is that the President's primary challenger remains in the Senate and can voice his opposition to the administration's proposals. Currently, President Obama happens to be proposing a 'stimulus' package filled with pork spending that will not even go into effect for a couple years. To the extent that it will create jobs, it would only be government make-work which will do nothing to stimulate the private sector. The alleged 'tax-cut' amounts to a welfare check to working families. In other words, it is a large-scale consumer-side economic package that will likely sink the economy. And John McCain is there to oppose it. Given his stature from a highly publicized campaign, his voice carries weight and gets headlines.

It may be that John McCain will have a greater impact for America as a highly visible Senator. Unlike John Kerry with George Bush, John McCain has credibility, accomplishments, a record of achievement. The same applies for Al Gore, though he didn't seek any public office. Essentially, every Democratic candidate has been just as filled with fluff as Senator Obama. Each declared the same empty rhetoric and short-sighted, big-government solutions rooted in class envy. But Senator McCain has always stood for government responsibility and against pork barrel spending. He's known for that, he has a record of doing those things. He's a tireless watchdog for those causes. And that befits a Senator more than a Commander In Chief.

As for me, I don't trust a word that comes from President Obama's mouth. He's proven himself filled with empty words that benefit the occassion. Thus, I don't take his "we will defeat you" verbage as anything more than a bone tossed to conservatives amid his celebrations. It was a toast to the losers and it cost him nothing. He's followed that by signing the closure of Guantanamo Bay, signaling negotiations with Iran and outlawing any use of interrogation techniques of terrorists that might be uncomfortable (or perhaps without the presence of a lawyer). In other words, his "we will outlast you" comment was clearly not followed up by actions that might suggest he meant what he said. I suspect we will see more of that from this administration.

Now John McCain can be the outcast, the voice of reason that 52% of American's failed to trust, that the media tried to malign as loony. To a lesser extent, Sarah Palin can point out that under her command, the state of Alaska is not in debt and their economy is weathering the recession just fine.

What remains to be seen is how McCain's stalwart opposition will renew the Republican Party and lead the younger generation to form a solid base of fiscal responsibility and moral leadership. His opposition to the pork stimulus is a good start.

According to Harry Reid, it is clear Al Franken won the election. That said, we really need to know how Mr. Reid defines 'won.' Since Mr. Franken lost by more than 700 votes on election night and quickly hustled up duplicate votes and discarded votes in order to gin up a 200 vote lead, I suppose that might show a shrewd quality that fits with the current leadership. This same quality is what Harry Reid is showing by flagrantly wanting to seat Mr. Franken during a contested election. What they're ultimately saying is that winning, like so many things for liberals, is relative. Since Norm Coleman beat Franken by a slim percentage, he clearly didn't win and, by golly, those votes better be re-counted until we get the right result.

For his part, Franken has taken President Obama's call to get to work personally. After all, with the President calling for a not-so-funny commedian to come to the Capital, who could argue? He may bring just the right kind of funny business this country is needing to get us out of our economic doldrums. This follows the same logic that brings us the idea that our lack of assets and debt problems will only be solved with ever more defecit spending.

While times look tough, it appears that the voters of Minnesota have opened the door for a drawn out recession and possibly a depression. Our country has put an inexperienced senator steeped in Marxist ideology and progressive economic idealism. My state might end up with an inexperienced nut whose main motivation to run was George W. Bush hatred.

The silver lining is that together these children might make such a mess that we'll demand and get some real adults in to do the hard work of limiting government and turning our economy back to those who make it run, the producers and consumers.

The First Lady Michelle Obama famously commented on America that the "bar" gets moved up right when folks are doing everything they need to succeed. Well, in keeping with that, it seems President Obama is more than happy to allow the media to keep raising the bar of expectation. He has yet to denounce the euphoria that surrounds him or correct the rising public expectation for his presidency. He hasn't come out and told people, "No, I will not be paying your mortgage, put gas in your tank or eliminate your utility bills."

With the inaugueration done with, I wonder how long it will be until the glow dims on Obama's star? There certainly were times during his campaign that he took some hits and showed his obvious displeasure at being lowered to human standards. He took vehement exception to a certain down-home girl from Alaska pointing out his absurdities regarding the supposed rising ocean levels. More importantly, I wonder if President Obama will drop the aire of self-importance?

Early in the campaign we heard off-handed comparisons of Barak Obama and Abraham Lincoln. But the comparisons have not been limited to his home state. Rather, they have grown to include the inaugural Bible used by Lincoln, as well as some who seem to think President Obama has somehow fulfilled a mission started by the first Republican President. I fear that the joke about measuring Mount Rushmore for Barak Obama's bust wasn't so much of a joke.

Looking at his retoric, anyone can gleen what they like from his speech. If you want a president who is tough on our enemies, he declared we will defeat them and unapologetically, to boot. If you want us to use governement money to fund embrionic stem cell research (despite the disappointing results of that line of research) then he is going to start that. If the so-called global warming is one's cause, he will make sure we stop it. And like a good politician, he failed to spell out the specifics of any one of those declarations, leaving it up to each person to interpret it in their most desired way. I suspect our new President will dish more of the same for the next few years.

What he won't be able to do, however, is hide his actions. While he is a clever politician with a press core more loyal than any government run propaganda branch of the Soviets, he will be unable to control the ham handed liberal ajenda of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. He will face the choice of going along with his fellow Democrat "progressives" and usher in a New-New Deal of disasterous proportions, or govern from the center-right and find a less damaging middle ground.

Given his unremarkable history, I don't hold the bar too high for him. I hope he proves me wrong, but it appears we may be in for a term of exhuberant hope while willfully ignoring the lessons of history.

We stand tonight on the eve of an historic Presidential Inauguration: The first bi-racial man to take the oath of office will be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. For many, this signifies an end to racism and a beginning of a post-racial world prophesied by Martin Luther King Jr. I would like to join in the exhuberance of this momentus occasion, but something holds me back. Something about the overt display of glitz and hype seems anathema to a serious transfer of power.

The inauguration, the most costly in history, feels like another grand show from the campaign, an elaborate prop to distract us into thinking something beneficial is happening. Yet the reality is that President Elect Obama falls short of Martin Luther King's vision. He was not selected due to the content of his character. In fact, his campaign ran a slick counter-offensive using race and his name to foster an outpouring of media favor. He became the outcast with a stadium cheering him on. Songs were written about him and the mantra of hope and change became a religious belief in a man who came close to describing himself in mesianic terms. Nothing about the man's character, from his drug using youth to his radical days in Chicago would recommend him to high office or cause one to see past his race.

Rather, his race sat front and center, and still does. Had this election been a step into a post-racial era, we wouldn't be commenting on his skin color at all. 

If his character was the reason for his election to office, ads would not be touting the event tomorrow as 'starring our Commander In Chief.'

So, while I recognize the importance of Barak Obama's election, and tomorrows celebration, I simply wish the pomp was not only due to circumstance. I wish we had not debased our national leader to the level of a celebrity whose qualifications are secondary if needed at all. The result is that history is being made in symbol only and we must hope the world doesn't change too much for the worse.

Thanks to Minnesota Law, we may see a true theft of an election. This from the rabid liberals who derided George W. Bush as the Commander in Thief. Yet, Al Franken, no doubt, will not see the irony. He failed to win on election night, but thanks to a loser law, he has been able to stuff the ballot box from a unique vantage point--after finding out how many he needs to win. And so the contest began.

Against logic, Franken benefited from nearly all the contested ballots. He benefited from ballots being counted twice, for good measure. He fought, and won the right to get private voter information, destroying the purpose of the secret ballot. And while he's benefiting from his chicanery, given to him by a silly law requiring a recount, he has contested another law that prevents him from being seated until after Norm Coleman's suit is settled. In other words, he's only in favor of laws and votes that benefit him. And with his childishness, he has the gall to wag his finger at Coleman for contesting the shady results of the re-recount.

But with this cloud of corruption shading Minnesota's Senate race, conservatives need to realize that with every setback is an opportunity. If Coleman loses his lawsuit and Franken wins a seat in the Senate, conservatives will have his record until the next election, documentation of Franken's dementia and outbursts. And if they capitalize on that, he won't benefit from a single percentage point recount law.

In the not too distant past folks in the Bill Clinton campaign maligned George H. W. Bush with the slogan, "It's the economy, stupid!" It worked because it condescends to the other side and, without saying it, tells everyone that side doesn't get it. By answering, "I know, I know," Mr. Bush would have been on the defensive, trying to catch up to a position Bill had already staked out. By denying the economic sense about the country, Bush seemed aloof.

We live in worse times than those. Our economy is facing ever mounting attacks from the Global Warming Fanatics who impose regulation upon regulation against companies in the name of Saving The Planet. During this onslaught, we face record numbers of people amongst us that buy into the notion that the Government can fix everything and that we the people should sit back and let it. This combination is toxic.

America was founded on the principle of the rugged individual. America is the land of the frontier. While the star-spangled imagery is certainly flawed, it isn't meant to portray reality, only an ideal. That ideal is what is currently being discarded by those in power. The Republicans have handed the Democrats this country on a silver platter because of the manipulative tactics of the Left. Spin-doctors like
Carville have systematically used slogans and sound-bytes to bully Republicans and conservatives into apologizing. They get help from the media who will jump on any anti-Christian, anti-conservative scandal and let it run with little to no scrutiny. We witnessed the bitter hazing of Sarah Palin this fall because she had the audacity to be a conservative woman who was proud of her role as a working mom in an ordinary American household (on the last frontier, I might add). In short, the leftists in the media and the Democratic party wish to kill the American spirit of individualism because it stands in the way of their government power grab.

What conservatives everywhere need to master is the use of words in turning the debate back on the liberals. For instance, our dollar is weak because our debt is so large. Our manufacturing is down and we hold fewer and fewer assets. Our country is indebted to our enemies. And yet, our government tells us we need to spend more to get out of our current crisis. Aparently, if bad money management is the problem, getting rid of more money is the solution. Or, as Glenn Beck and his guest Vince Flynn noted, it's like telling someone with food poisoning that the only way to get better is to eat more of the rancid peanuts.

Our battle cry should be to tell Obama and the Democrats, "It's the dollar, stupid!" The more we spend ourselves into oblivion the lower our dollar will dive until it sits at the bottom with the peso. To have strong buying power, we need to balance the budget, not break it. We need to eliminate our debt, not grow it. We need to foster more production through business friendly tax codes, not punish it off of our shores.

With the new congress convening, let's call on them to do what we do in hard times--cut back!

Remarkably, the Al Franken group has claimed that there are missing votes!  At last count, just over 179, to be precise.  Recently, a news anchor noted that these recounts historically favor Democrats.  This little statistical anomaly hung out there with nary a head-scratch.  You'd think that statistically speaking, excluding such nefarious things as voter fraud, these challenges would be a bit more equal in who they favor.  If, in fact, the votes are so close that they need to double-check the results, why would they invariably favor the Democrats?  Could it be that they are better at intimidation and lawsuit manipulation? 

It is also somewhat strange that we'd trust biased human beings to hand-recount the ballots rather than run them all through the machines again.  With hand-counting, couldn't two stick together, or some partisan hack drop a few in Franken's column?  It is odd that the only 'new' votes that were found went to Franken.  Statistically, wouldn't a number of them also go to Colman? 

At the end of this, Franken may 'win' the seat, but not by getting elected.  He will have wrested the seat from the winner on election day through means that will mark the rest of his career.  Make no mistake, Al Franken is a madman.  He holds no qualifications for making public policy.  He is a lunatic on the fringe.  So, the most disturbing thing about this election is that this contest is even close.  I'm not making a case for Colman being the best man for the job.  He's not stellar.  But he looks that way when compared to Franken. 

A little known fact about Pinocchio: he didn't go to Pleasure Island, he went to the United States of Fun and Games.  That was the official title in the original Italian manuscript.  It was a not so subtle indictment on what the author felt America represented.  Keep in mind, immigrants from all over were leaving the Old World and heading to the great promise of the New World, America.  To those who stayed behind it was foolishness to leave the certainty of the economic system that had served them so well for so long and embark on the land of a great experiment of Capitalism and opportunity. 

Throughout our history we have endured assaults from those resentful of our audacity.  Woodrow Wilson tried to convert our country to the old way of socialist policies.  He failed to enact much change, but Franklin Roosevelt, a cabinet member got much farther.  Remember, he was the reason we enacted term limits for the President.  He tried to stack the Supreme Court to get his reforms through.  He felt that needy people were not truly free.  Freedom, to Roosevelt, was contingent upon having all needs met (personally or by government).  This idea was and is anathema to the American ideal: To each is endowed the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Nowhere does it say we have the right to be 'happy.'  We do, however, have the right to pursue happiness.  This is the essence of Capitalism.  Once we achieve happiness, no one should take that away from us.  Or spread it around. 

Interestingly, with the onslaught of FDR, then LBJ and the not-so-Great Society and now President elect Barak Obama, we are fulfilling the snide fear of Pleasure Island.  With cuts in defense we will have no cops.  With government programs to meet everyone's needs we have folks thinking that they won't have to pay to fill their tanks or pay their mortgage.  Why not have candy for dinner and stay up all night, too?  It doesn't matter anymore.  This truly is the starry-eyed vision of the United States of Fun and Games. 

Another similarity comes to mind.  Spending too long in such a place turned all the boys into donkeys.  As one might recall, Pinocchio had to finally listen to his conscience, Jiminey Cricket, and leave the false promise of Pleasure Island before he, too, turned into a donkey. 

If America is smart, it will listen to its conscience and flee the false policy promises of the Democrats before we all end up braying and enslaved. 

While many are throwing their hands up and declaring the miserable campaign of Senator McCain, I think a little perspective is needed.  True, John McCain didn't run a campaign as aggressive or pointed as he should have.  He missed the opportunity to define Barak Obama as a Socialist from day one.  The adds with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton were funny.  The add with Moses was a little over the top.  They both got a lot of buzz.  But they didn't do what John needed to do. 

I thought that he should have had an ad with a person looking at two resumes.  Voice over would say, "In choosing the right candidate one must consider each one's experience..."  Show the resume of Barak Obama.  Then show the resume for John McCain (which takes longer to view).  "In the absence of experience, one might consider if an applicant has stellar character witnesses or job references."  The screen would show William Ayres stomping on an American flag intercut with footage from his bombings and quotes from him stating "guilty as sin and free as a bird." Another shot of Reverend Wright acusing America of inventing AIDS etc.   Then show images of John McCain with President Reagan etc.  End with: "The choice has never been clearer.... John McCain for President" 

Such an ad would have been far more effective than the ads put out by his campaign.  They should have had the audio of Obama talking about the Supreme Court redistributing wealth.  They should have had Tony Rezco ads running as further "Character Reference" ads against Barak.  Then follow them quickly with "Character Reference" ads for John McCain. 

Despite the failure of the McCain campaign to hit the right notes and present a strong case for his presidency, he still came within 6% points of winning.  That's not to say that he would have been able to win, given the mood of the country.  Clearly, the electoral win for Senator Obama was greater than McCain could easily overcome on election night.  Still, he got pretty close with so much amassed against him.  For that we should hold our criticism and applaud the man. 

Going forward, however, we should learn from McCain's pitfalls.  We will also be given 4 years of Obama to use as a foundation for new attacks.  Will he try to socailize our country, and will America turn out support for that like they did when he was a novel candidate?  Will he benefit if a new wave of conservative Republicans get control of Congress in 2010 and balance the budget and bring back economic prosperity? 

Time will tell.  Names are flying around like crazy.  Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney.  I think Mike Huckabee will return, as well.  It will be an interesting few years.   

Now with a renewed emphasis on the Government providing welfare checks to families across our great nation, we might just see some common things change. 

For instance, we may not have to worry about working anymore.  If we make under the magical "rich" amount, whatever that might be, we can just stop working and let those greedy successful folks provide us the same "opportunity" as they have.  Why can't we have Jaguars and BMWs and lakefront houses.  Why, we should be admitted to exclusive country clubs, too.  How dare they make those institutions available only to those wealthy enough to pay the dues.  That's discrimination and bigotry.  That is inequality. 

After all, if having a house is a Right, if healthcare is a Right and eating good food is a Right, we shouldn't have to work to get them.  Rights are inherent, right? 

So, without having to work, we will have to take our children to welfare.  We'll take them to government clinics to have their blood drawn and teach them that they have no personal responsibility in this world.  Government will take care of them.  Of course, that means they have to keep quiet and vote for the right person.  Or else.