Ronald Reagan knew that government was (and still is) the problem, not the solution, to the problem. He once said, "Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And, if it stops moving, subsidize it."

In California the economic and social environment has become so hostile to many, that a mass exodus has begun. People are leaving California in droves, as the illegal aliens gladly move in to set up their squatter villages.

The left has taken control of California, and the state has become a battleground in America's war over values. Californians have been pushed with their kindness, their willingness, their openness, their leniency toward aberrant behavior, government control, and out of control taxation. When is enough enough?

The Liberals in California act upon all of their urges in all situations, letting it all hang out, following their guiding principle: If it feels good, do it. Anyone who disagrees is labeled a bigot, and then is run out of town, or at least pressured to do so if they don't wish to participate in the antics of Hollywood and San Francisco, California's own Sodom and Gomorrah.

Those that have self-respect and want better for their families, neighbors, and the sake of the country, are leaving. Those of the Right have values that keep them from taking a drink, lighting up a joint, or hopping in the sack with anyone that wants them to. Conservatives, more often than not, are the kind of people that drop to their knees and pray for strength, rather than give in to the worldly debauchery.

And as these people of values do what they can to escape California, as well as owners of successful businesses who have found it more and more difficult to conduct business in California because of all of the regulations and fees and taxes, the Liberal Left is doing what it can to take what it can from them as they leave.

A ballot proposal is underway in California that would amend the State Constitution with a Wealth Tax. Specifically, this is an additional tax to be levied against high valued property, and high income (between 36.5% - 54.3% one-time tax) should a resident die, or decide to leave the State of California.

The writer of the proposal is a CPA and liberal activist by the name of Paul McCauley. In addition to taxing folks for trying to get out of California (or simply dying, for that matter), the proposal imposes an additional 17.5% tax on total incomes of taxpayers with income exceeding $150,000 (which, considering the cost of living here in California, that is not really that high of an income) if single, or $250,000 if married; imposes an additional 35% tax if income exceeds $350,000 for a single person or $500,000 for a married couple, and requires the State to acquire shares of specified corporations to influence environmental policies and practices.

No wonder right-minded people are trying to get out of this idiotic State.

Why would anyone want to live in California with the rules we have, especially if this proposal were to pass?

The Liberal Democrats are basically saying that the American dream is a bad thing, and they will make it impossible to achieve such. And, if by some remote chance you do reach that dream, and become highly successful and prosperous, the government is going to step in and make sure you pay for it heavily so that you will never really truly get there.

This proposal is California's way of saying, "Hey, welcome to success, cough it up before you enjoy it, please. How dare you succeed!"

Give me a break. A 55% wealth tax? Hollywood folks won't mind that too much because they have so much frickin' money they use it as kindling in the fireplace. As for the rest of us, under this rule, that is a lot of money to have to cough up - and if your business is barely operating in the black because of all of the regulations and fees already imposed, the soup line is right around the corner.

An exit/death tax? Are you kidding me? Since we want to get the heck out of Dodge, they are going to try to fence us in with this? And then if you couple this with the Federal Estate tax, in the end, no one can financially afford to die. So much for me being able to leave anything to my kids. Also, if Business "A" moves from San Francisco to New York the CEO has to cough up at least a 36.8 additional percent of both income and the unrealized appreciation he may have in asset that are valued in excess of $5 million. Remember, he is already paying 90% plus (With a producer's existing Federal Income taxes, existing State Income taxes, payroll taxes and the many other taxes imposed, high producers will be lucky to net much of anything on their earnings. A self-employed individual could have a marginal tax rate in excess of 90%. Could you live on 10% of what you make?). This part of the ballot proposal was added to prevent a mass exodus that is already happening. A lot of money is leaving California because of the unfriendly environment to business and success, and they are simply trying to stop the bleeding.

And keep in mind that the businesses being targeted by this, those horribly successful corporations that are somehow ruining America in eyes of the idiot Left, are the individuals that are producing growth and jobs. These targeted businesses that are now finding it hard to do business in California are the major driving forces behind the State economy. A tax like this removes all of the incentive to do any of these things, and is simply another reason to get out of California. In the end, these entities with either move to another state, or they will stop producing.

Why work extra hours to make a measly 10% of your earnings when you could spend it with your friends and family elsewhere?

The goal of this proposition is to gain revenue from the rich, give it to the poor, and keep anyone from leaving the State of California. Idiotic taxes like this ballot proposal actually do the opposite of what they desire. Instead of gaining revenue, they scare away more of the businesses that keeps this economy moving, which in the end takes away more jobs, and leaves more people in the poor-house. The left doesn't seem to understand that a profit driven economy needs profit to survive. The American Dream is all about that profit. Removing any and all rewards for producing and making more money will only do one thing - turn the high producers into takers, and make more people poor.

Democrats believe there is a class war going on, and wishes to eliminate the classes so that we can all be the same. At the rate they are going, they will be a rousing success soon, because the class war will soon come to an end because there won't be any rich left. In the end, there will no longer be any disparity between the classes because we will all be poor - except for those elitist politicians who will rule from the top with the absolute power of regulations, fees, and taxation.

Thousands eagerly await his lord, the great liberal messiah Barack Obama (with all 143 days of his massive pool of experience), to take the stage built by Britney Spear's set designer.

Oooops. Didn't McCain's team call that one? Wasn't the celebrity status the media is trying to whip up about Barack Obama compared to that of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears by the McCain campaign, and was quickly countered by the Obama campaign as a silly connection for McCain's camp to make? Looks like McCain had it right all along.

And, as expected, the greek columned set is designed to make Barack Obama look larger than life. The Denver camera angles last night had him looking larger than everyone else on stage. This is because they have to make him look like that, because when it comes to his position on the issues and his character, he looks very small.

Obama's speech better be something like the one that captured everyone's imagination at the last DNC convention. More than likely it will fall short - because Obama's speech will be an attempt, I think, to recapture the magic his campaign had before people began realizing how he is simply an empty suit. There will be no specifics on the issues, except perhaps "I was against the war before it was cool to be against the war." Believe you me, Obama's speech writers crafted his speech carefully, and are making sure Obama can see the words clearly on the teleprompter so that he doesn't launch into a stuttering blast of "uh, uh, uh, hold on, I'm trying to think, uh, uh, uh."

And just remember, as you begin to think about his speech, and wonder about Obama's character, don't forget the rules according to Team Obama...

1. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS MOTHER.
2. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS FATHER.
3. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS WIFE.
4. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS PREACHER.
5. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS (typical white person) GRANDMOTHER.
6. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS MOBSTER FRIENDS.
7. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS BOMBER FRIENDS.
8. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS RELIGION.
9. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS NAME.
10. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT RACE.
11. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT APPEASEMENT.
12. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS VOTING RECORD.
13. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS (lack of) EXPERIENCE.
14. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS FLAG PIN.
15. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS INCOME.
16. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS LIBERALISM.
17. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT HIS EARS.

But you can, however, talk about hope and change - and a change for hope - and Hope the change is a change from the hope that the old hope and change never seemed to change. Or something like that.

On Day 2 of the Democratic National Convention, as Hillary Clinton took the stage hoping to convince her supporters (and probably the PUMA/Just Say No Deal - Hillary Supporters movement too) to support Barack Obama, Bill Clinton mouthed the words "I Love You" over and over and over. The CNN cameras were sure to capture Bill Clinton mouthing the words. At first thought I figured he'd caught the eye of a young intern somewhere. . . maybe not. Interesting how the most notorious cheating husband suddenly loves his wife during the Democratic National Convention - at a time when the party is trying to proclaim they are unified, and everyone is just one big, happy, loving liberal family.

Day three at the convention was much more interesting.

Unlike Obama, Joe Biden does well without a teleprompter. The bulldog was quick to say he was friends with McCain, but ripped at the GOP Presidential Nominee nonetheless. As expected, Biden essentially called McCain's possible term as simply a third Bush term. Last I checked, Bush was not on the ballot, and McCain is known as "The Maverick" for bucking the GOP leadership. Sounds like more of the same old "Everything is Bush's fault, and any Republican is simply a Bush-bot" rhetoric. Jeez, Joe, can't you come up with something original, and of substance?

After Biden told the crowd about his mom telling him to bloody bully's noses when he was a kid, it made me wonder why he, and his Democratic colleagues, wish to do the opposite in the face of Islamic Terror.

Bill Clinton was able to keep his eyes to himself long enough to deliver a speech that some folks are calling "redemption." However, the speech was more like Bill taking the opportunity to get his "digs" in, and talk about himself. Bill, being the self-serving person he has always been, used most of his speech to talk about Bill, his administration, his wife's campaign. . . and somewhere in there he was able to fit in "unity" and "vote for Obama" and "Obama's ready." In fact, Obama's lack of experience was one of the things that Clinton keyed in on. He reminded the frothing Democrats that he also was considered to be inexperienced when he ran for president. Bill said it like his presidency was something wonderful, rather than the train-wreck it truly was. To try to combat such a statement, Clinton supporters often run to welfare reform as one of Clinton's greatest accomplishments during his presidency. Problem is, the welfare reform bill was a Republican creation, and Bill Clinton vetoed it the first time.

Then Obama surprised everyone by showing up in person at the convention. "The Celebrity/Light Worker/Great One is here" stunt had the crowd in tears as they applauded endlessly. I was half expecting Obama's surprise appearance to become a Democratic Spritual revival -- "Oh, my goodness, His Lord the Obamassiah has graced us with his surprise presence" (faint, cry, kneel, throw your hands in the air).

And as expected, Obama sucked up the moment to act the part, arrogance and all, without ever saying anything of substance.

The Heading Right Convention aired tonight and I was one of the speakers on the floor. The convention aired in two parts. Visit The Heading Right Convention for the proper links. And while you are on that site, visit the voting area on the right side bar and vote for Political Pistachio and me, Douglas V. Gibbs. There is about two days of voting left for the Heading Right Awards. At last look I was 13 votes out of first place for best show, and a few more votes back for best host.

Now, the following is the transcript of my speech at the Heading Right Convention:


I am sitting here with a United States Navy hat upon my head, and a God Bless America shirt on my body. I served this nation with pride, and a patriotic love in my heart. I created Political Pistachio to spread the good news of Conservative values - To share with the world what America's moral compass is really all about.

While the Democratic Party is whipping up into a near-frenzy about dividing America in Denver with more hatred and anti-Bush rage, we are here on Blog Talk Radio at this Heading Right Convention celebrating the greatness of America.

The leftist Democrats constantly try to overcompensate their claimed beliefs in heartland American values, portraying themselves as a party of the people, proclaiming their humble origins, blue-collar beginnings, and religious convictions. Such hypocrisy.

Their positions continuously oppose American values, despite how much they try to convince us otherwise.

It is the conservatives that stand for the traditional family and the defense of marriage, less cultural pollution, educational choice, freedom of religion, fiscal restraint, pro-life, the right to bear arms, lower taxes, an end to junk lawsuits, and a general patriotic support of our fine men and women of the United States Military.

It is Conservatives fighting for a strong American Moral Compass while the liberal left is putting condoms on cucumbers, telling 8th graders that they're really gay and they need their own high school, shutting down the Boy Scouts because they support a straight and patriotic life, suing businesses on false pretenses, and jack hammering the Ten Commandments from all public displays while trying to remove God from the public square and our lives.

America's greatness is a direct result of America's strong moral compass. Our moral values as a people demands high standards of right and good conduct. The direction of societal behavior is in direct relation to our moral belief system. Our moral beliefs, in turn, directly affects our overall culture, and political system.

In the Old Testament it says that you reap what you sow. An old secular saying supports that, saying what comes around goes around. The United States has prospered for that very reason. Right is right and wrong is wrong, and this nation has always tried to do what's right. But we must remember it was the people of this nation, not the politicians in government, that made this nation prosper.

A strong central government is not capable of doing what is right because a strong moral compass is not its reason for existing. Big government exists to protect itself, and to spawn more big government. Its enslavement of the people then becomes an addiction to power, a never ending need for more and more.

The party of change desires to convince you that big government is what you need. The Democrats wish to reprogram our moral compass. The liberals support the genocidal murder of innocent, unborn lives, calling it "choice" to justify the horrific murderous practice. They support the destruction of the traditional family and the silencing of those of faith that would speak out against the radical homosexual agenda - and they call it a civil rights movement, rather than an attempt to justify a behavior that has long been considered an abnormality. The liberals have used the courts to override the moral compass of the American people. They have used the schools to indoctrinate our children to teach them to reject America's moral compass. They have assaulted us with a pop-culture of sex that is plagued with promiscuity, disease, and is pushed by the biased media and entertainment industry. And they do this in the name of change and hope. . . but what they are really doing is destroying morality in America.

Abortion on demand, a radical homosexual agenda, attacks on religion, and disarming America is not the kind of change I desire.

I believe Americans are smarter than that. This great nation is prosperous because the people refuse to succumb to such bondage. We are patriots that love our country and realize that our political tendencies rely on our moral convictions as a people. We reject the cheapening of life, and destroying the traditional family. We refuse to allow the state to take our children from us and indoctrinate them. And we reject laying down our arms so that an enemy can incrementally invade and alter our society.
This nation was founded on strong moral values, and America prospered because we always used our moral compass as our guide. And tonight, here at the Heading Right Convention, we have joined together to tell the nation that we will fight to protect it, and we will defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

And the trueness of the direction of our moral compass is most apparent in the actions of our heroes, those soldiers and sailors that serve to protect us.

Greater love than this hath no man than that he lay down his life for his friends.

Our fine members of the U.S. Military faces evil daily, and they fight that evil to defend our liberty.

But the battle rages here as well. You and I are the warriors on the homefront. The enemies of America have realized that to bring down our civilization all they must do is confuse the standards of moral behavior.

The moral compass of America is crucial to defend, for if it falls, so does America.

My Friends, defend her, fight for her. United We Stand, Combined We Kick Butt.

God Bless America, and God Bless You.

When I first received word of the Day One lineup at the Democratic National Convention at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado, I smiled. I suppose it seemed fitting. What was planned was not nearly as circus-like as what really happened, however.

I reviewed the list of speakers before the convention began, and found it to be consistent with Democrat leanings.

Teddy Kennedy, who would be considered inspirational because of his medical condition, is a longtime far left liberal with a poisonous message of increase government control over the people.

Michelle Obama would be the first potential first lady to headline a convention. What a way to kick it off. Like her fellow Democrats, she has never been proud of her country - or at least not until her husband got a political promotion.

Nancy Pelosi, the queen herself, with her Congress's blistering 9% approval rating, would surely echo Kennedy's cry for more governmental control and restrictions over your life, while recommending the government take more money away from you with increased taxation to pay for their bigger government.

And Jimmy Carter, America's worse president ever, and Islamic Radical hand-holder and grave visitor.

What a line-up!

Michelle Obama and Teddy Kennedy were the bookends of the evening.

Obama's wife said it was time to "stop doubting and start dreaming." She discussed family, growing up, meeting Obama for the first time when they began dating. The hope was that Obama's wife would begin the work of casting Barack Obama as a leader with classic American values, something he has been lacking when people notice his views on traditional marriage and the abortion of millions of unborn children.

Nancy Pelosi called the 2008 Election a historic race, one presenting a choice of two separate paths for America. She said, "One is a path of renewing opportunity and promoting innovation here at home and of greater security and respect throughout the world. It is that path that renews our democracy by bringing us together as one nation under God." It fascinates me how the Democrats hammer Republicans for any mention of God, yet they throw the name of the Creator around with reckless abandon. As for her "greater security" comment, I wonder how the Democrats plan to achieve such while handcuffing and disarming our nation's military.

Pelosi said the Democrats plan to put America on the path of the founders. She fails to realize the founding fathers created this nation with the express intent of limiting the power of the federal government over the people, a belief that is in complete opposition to the intention of the Democratic Party.

Jimmy Carter's presidency was a failure. He has again and again committed treasonous activity overseas, rallying “supine” Europeans to undermine US policy in the Middle East, and complaining about Israel’s nuclear arsenal and their battle to protect their right to exist. Of course he is a speaker at the convention. His is the same as the Marxist liberalism at the party’s ideological core.

But the shock of the night for me was when the leader of a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization spoke, and received a standing ovation. She was there as a part of their "inter-faith" gathering. Many groups, like the Americans Against Hate, asked the DNC to disinvite Ingrid Mattson, the National President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), from speaking at its Denver convention.

Mattson, who has a history of highly questionable remarks, spoke on the 24th before the interfaith gathering and immediately declared the Democrats to be the party of faith. She received, by the time she was finished numerous standing ovations, and feels that Muslims in the U.S. need to be protected under a victim status and by "hate crimes" legislation. This coming from the same woman who has called for the murder of all Jews and Christians.

Hillary Clinton takes the stage on Day 2. This may be interesting.

-------------------------

Also read my article about Russia declaring Georgia's runaway provinces to be independent states (against international will) on American Pundit.

Vote for me as your favorite Heading Right Radio Host at the Heading Right Awards! Also, tune in to the Heading Right Convention tonight and hear me deliver a speech on America's Moral Compass!

After watching the Saddleback Forum a week ago with Pastor Rick Warren questioning the two presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain, it became clear to me who, of the two candidates, is more decisive and has strong convictions both morally, and in regards to what is best for this nation. John McCain answered the questions posed to him quickly and concisely. Obama spent a lot of time trying to make sure all angles were covered, uttering the word "uh," trying to appease everyone by spraying verbal posies in all directions, and more often than not hardly answering the questions at all. In other words, just like the cockroaches (I mean typical politicians) before him that he claims to be nothing like, it turns out Obama is no change after all

Change (or lack thereof) is grand, isn't it?

This avoidance of answering questions seems to be a habit of Obama's. In fact, when he does finally get around to answering a question, it is either too late, or contradicts one of his previous answers. Obama is hardly the decisive man of convictions we need for the presidency of the United States.

I suppose it is safe to say that Obama "hopes" nobody notices his "change" is actually empty rhetoric, flower-power laced language, and really only something that he alone truly "believes in."

Now that McCain leads the Zogby Poll 46% to 41%, it is becoming obvious that more and more people are wising up to Barack Obama's campaign of flowers, unicorns, and bags of hot air.

In the end, it is all about character, isn't it?

When the question of Obama's birthplace arose, for example, a birth certificate was not originally produced by Barack Obama. When one did surface, the alleged birth certificate from the state of Hawaii was verified to be a forgery by three independent document forensic experts. Finally, when the volcanic eruption of questions about why he would produce a fake birth certificate and have it posted on a liberal site like the Daily KOS reached a crescendo, the Obama campaign suddenly produced an apparently legitimate birth certificate. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed this original birth certificate, and it was concluded that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. Obama was born in the United States just as he has always said, after all.

The liberal left has chided The Right for this "birth certificate" series of questions and articles, saying "See? He's a citizen, shame on you for questioning Obama's eligibility for President."

Like usual, the liberal left misses the whole point, and those that are hanging on to the self-destructing Obama Campaign cannot understand why some of their liberal brothers and sisters are feeling buyer's remorse about Barack Obama, and are jumping ship with the rest of the rats as the Obama Feel-Good Ship Lollipop noses into the choppy seas of political campaigning.

Is questioning Obama's birthplace a smear tactic? Or is it simply the potential employers, better known as the voters, looking for verification of job qualifications before continuing to interview the job applicant? And even though a legitimate birth certificate finally surfaced, why is the character issue in regards to the whole deal so important?

Imagine, if you will, that I was applying for a job with a trucking company. I have a Class A Commercial Drivers License, and I have been driving big rigs for over eight years to transport the equipment I operate. To be hired with a new company, I would need to show my prospective employers that I have a commercial drivers license, and telling them over and over I have one without producing the card from my wallet would not be enough.

Sure, I could call them smear merchants because they refuse to believe that I have a Class A license based only on my word, but in the end, all of that stomping and crying and accusations are not going to convince them I am a licensed big rig driver.

Now, imagine that rather than handing over my original license to those that may hire me (and are already wondering what the hell I am trying to pull by not producing a license up to this point) I decided to give them a copy of my license, send it to them via the internet, and on top of that it turns out after they examine the copy that the Driver's License copy I sent them isn't a legitimate license after all, containing a number of flaws that makes it obvious to them that it is a forgery. Then, later, after being questioned about the copies, I finally produce the genuine article, and chastise them for doubting me in the first place. Should I be hired? What would those kind of antics say about my character?

Some would say that it is ridiculous that people are even challenging Obama's eligibility to be president in that way.

Aren't "We The People" the ones that are deciding whether or not to hire Obama or McCain? Isn't U.S. Birth Citizenship one of the requirements for the job?

One liberal even went as far to say that, "Doug thinks it's Obama's responsibility to rebut any whacked-the-f***-out B.S. claim from people who are doing nothing other than trying to damage his credibility and dignity."

So in the situation of trying to get a job driving a big rig the prospective employers are just trying to damage my credibility and dignity by asking me to prove I have a Class A license? And it is not my responsibility to rebut their claim by producing the genuine article? Barack Obama is applying for President of the United States and it is his responsibility to produce validation of his eligibility to his prospective employers. Simple as that.

Barack Obama has a total of 143 days of experience in the Senate before he formed his presidential campaign exploratory committee. Barack Obama has voted present more often than yea or nay in the Senate, showing his inability to take a stance on anything. Barack Obama does not answer questions directly (Saddleback was a great example of that), once again showing his indecisiveness and lack of convictions. Barack Obama has based his entire campaign, for the most part, on his opposition to the War in Iraq, and then has chosen his running mate to be Joe Biden, which originally voted to send troops into Iraq. Obama supports implementing Nationalized Healthcare, a failed system in Canada, Britain, and elsewhere, and a system that will further entitle the government to poke its nose into more facets of your life, and make you and I responsible for paying through increased taxes for the healthcare for others through a system, if it follows the same path of all other attempts at this, will be bankrupt and worthless down the road. Obama believes in the Marxist model of redistribution of wealth, taxing the successful even more so than they are now so that it can be given to those poor, less fortunate souls that must be miserable living in the richest nation in the world in horrific conditions better than 98% of the rest of the world. Barack Obama believes that not only the murder of innocent unborn lives should remain legal, but that also abortion survivors should be left on a table to die without any medical assistance, and supports partial birth abortion with is so barbaric and so horrendous I can't believe that anybody in their right mind would support it. With his Global Poverty Act Obama wants to tax you billions of dollars to help stamp out poverty globally (but notice that none of that money would come back to the U.S., and that Obama also complains about the deficit as he proclaims increased spending - meaning, taxes will rise and rise and rise and rise). I suppose that goes back to that Marxist redistribution of wealth thing. America is just too prosperous for his stomach to take, I suppose, so he wants to tax us into poverty so that we can give it all to those other countries that reject the economic system that made us so prosperous in the first place.

Obama's view of national security is to disarm the United States while slowing down current weapons projects (which will make them more expensive over the long term), and ending what he calls the "unproven" anti-missile system ("unproven" in the way that it hasn't had to shoot down an incoming missile, I suppose, but has had recent incredible successes shooting down a moving target. Almost every test shows improvement. How idiotic would it be to scrap a system after spending tens of billions of dollars on it and at a time when we are close to success?

The list of my disagreements with the Obama Campaign's stance on the issues goes farther than that, but you get the idea.

Fact is, Barack Obama and John McCain are applying for the job of President of the United States. As their potential employers, we are entitled to ask questions, view verification of their eligibility, and question their character if necessary. That's what potential employers do. Obama has failed to answer questions directly, failed to quickly produce valid proof of his eligibility, and rather than responding like a humbled public servant, reacts with the arrogance of a liberal elitist that has limited experience, and has surrounded himself with questionable, unscrupulous people like Rezko and Ayers and Rev. Wright.

I imagine that if both candidates were together in a question and answer session and a little red wagon was wheeled onto the stage and they were asked what color the wagon is, McCain would undoubtedly respond, "The wagon is red."

Obama would launch into a long, stuttering, "uh" filled history of wagons, why everyone should be entitled to a wagon, and that the wagon production corporations are the enemy because they refuse to make wagons in other colors out of blatant bigotry and inability to understand the true nature people who simply want to feel we are united by being able to be given a wagon of any color they desire. He would then offer to hit the wagon corporations with a windfall tax to force them to bring down the price of wagons, and produce wagons in a multicultural and diverse manner.

Is that who you want to take over the most powerful office in the world? Do we really want an indecisive, inexperienced, race-baiting, socialist program pushing man with essentially no moral convictions in the White House?

Monday: Lt. Col. Allen West has lived his life in service to America. After serving in the U.S. Army, finishing his military career as an advisor in Afghanistan in an assignment that finished in November, 2007, LTC Allen West has decided to run for Congress in the 22nd District in Florida. A family man and true conservative, Allen West brings leadership and values to his candidacy. Allen West is the kind of conservative we need in Congress, and he is my guest Monday night on Political Pistachio Radio.

Tuesday: McCain and Obama were together at Saddleback questioned separately by Megachurch pastor, Rick Warren, last Saturday. Pastor Bill Devlin of Redeem The Vote will join us on Tuesday to discuss the event on Political Pistachio Radio.

Wednesday: Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and John McCain seem reluctant to take a stand with respect to their position on enforcing Federal Obscenity Laws. Morality in Media President Robert Peters is our guest on Wednesday to discuss a national survey that was conducted last spring - and the results may surprise you. Join us Wednesday on Political Pistachio Radio.

Thursday: A survey finds the majority of Americans believe parents have a constitutional right to homeschool their children. Homeschooling, however, has been under attack, and many states are trying to outlaw homeschooling right here in the United States. Mike Donnelly of the Home School Legal Defense Association will be joining us to discuss the advantages of Home Schooling, the survey conducted last spring by LifeWay Research, and the ongoing attacks against parents that have decided to homeschool their children. Mike is our guest on Thursday on Political Pistachio Radio.

My friend for well over twenty years is currently in Iraq. I hear from him on occasion by e-mail, but those are rare and far between. He has decided to send his latest message in a manner he has not done since before he left for Iraq. He gives me a little hell, and a few other folks, in the post, but I think that many will enjoy reading what this warrior has to say.

Find the message in the form of a post on his blog: Sky Dive Rick. Be warned, Rick is not afraid to use a liberal amount, pardon the expression, of profanity.

Friday night on Political Pistachio Radio Dr. Jerome Corsi, author of "The Obama Nation, Leftist Politics And The Cult of Personality," was my guest. He was on for about a half an hour, after which time he lost his cell phone signal. He was giving me this interview while travelling on a train to Washington D.C.

At the beginning of the program I asked Dr. Corsi about the criticisms The Obama Nation has been receiving. I pointed out how liberals and conservatives alike have been hammering it, saying that the book has untruths in it that, in their opinion, make it nothing more than just another attempt to use smear tactics to discredit Barack Obama. I pointed out that Media Matters and Hugh Hewitt are for once in agreement on something. The Next Right wrote a blistering criticism of Corsi, calling him a "smear artist," and "embarrassing for conservatives."

I also brought up Debbie Schlussel's past criticisms of him, to the point that she has accused him of plagiarism, and Corsi said simply, "Well, I don't read Debbie anymore."

Dr. Corsi was immediately on the defense when the interview delved deeper into the criticisms of The Obama Nation, proclaiming that he doesn't know "why" the response is as it is, after all, "I am no psychiatrist." Media Matters, as recently as face to face with Corsi on Larry King Live, has been one of the left leaning sites that have been most critical of the book, and in response, Corsi said, "I don't read Media Matters. If asked would I rather read Media Matters, Debbie Schlussel, or jump off a tall building, I'm gonna ask you, 'well, how tall's the building?' Because it is the best choice of the three." He later said, "This group of radical leftists paid by [George] Soros with a mission to discredit conservatives, this isn't the kind of group I think we should feel compelled to be answering all the time. Our side seems to think, 'Well, I don't want to be criticized, we don't wanna look bad.' The more Media Matters criticizes me, the better I like it, and the less I intend to read it. . . we can talk about Media Matters about as long as I can tolerate it, and I'm already close to my limit."

When I mentioned that Media Matters has gone into questioning a lot of items in the book, meaning to state that they have detailed individual items as falsehoods, Corsi quickly responded, "Who cares. I don't care. . . my comment on Media Matters is, Who Cares?" Later in the show he also added, "I think that Media Matters wouldn't know a serious flaw if it bit 'em in the behind. I can't stand Media Matters. I don't think Media Matters does anything of worth. . . If you think there's a serious flaw, what is it? When you mention Media Matters, I am thinking that I am wasting my time listening for the next two minutes. . . if you want to talk to me about Media Matters, I'm out."

When the Obama Campaign was mentioned, Dr. Corsi proclaimed, "Barack Obama's people don't want people reading what's in this book," because it's "over the target."

He was also careful to explain that he is not some cocktail drinking Washington Elitist, saying: "I'm not a part of the Washington Establishment...name dropping, Washington, cocktail party establishment, and I'm never gonna be a part of that, because that is not who I am."

In defense of the accusation of Jerome Corsi appearing Sunday on the show, The Political Cesspool, which is being called by Media Matters an example of Jerome Corsi associating with White Supremacists since the show's host is admittedly pro-White and has stated in the past that "Interracial sex is white genocide," Jerome Corsi responded: "Appearing on a show is not an endorsement of the host. . . I do a 120 shows, and do most of the shows that come to me. If I had to agree with every talk show host. . . I'd never go on any shows. Being on a show does not mean I endorse a host's views. . . I have even been on Liberal shows, and I sure don't endorse them."

When I stated in the interview that I agree with him for the most part regarding his theories regarding "The North American Union Conspiracy," Jerry responded with a smile in his voice, "That'll make you a nut to those guys, you better be careful about agreeing with me about anything."

Tony Rezko was brought up near the latter part of the interview, and when asked about Rezko, Dr. Corsi became more comfortable in the interview, and began to show me his skills as the investigative reporter he has become so known for. The connections between Obama, Iraq, and Rezko is staggering, according to Dr. Corsi. The timing of the deal regarding Obama's property is more than coincidental. He said in the interview, "It certainly looks more than suspicious. And now Obama is trying to explain how all of this relates. And what is the relationship? I don't know if I was working with anybody, first of all, I can't imagine that I would ever want to be associated with someone like Rezko, let alone taking campaign contributions from him, or, um, letting him be involved in buying a property with me. I'm asking -- what I am saying is, I am not definitively concluding anything, I'm just saying that these questions aren't being sufficiently asked in the Chicago newspaper's research, they are reporting them. I'm asking the same questions the Chicago papers are asking, which Obama has not truly answered. To answer them fully, you might need the authority of a prosecutor. You might need the authority of a criminal investigator. You might even need the authority of a Grand Jury."

What has risen is questions that are not being answered, and that is what Jerry Corsi is trying to do with this book. The anger about his book, Corsi claimed on Political Pistachio Radio, is because he's asking questions that the left may not want to answer. He is raising questions, and in response his attackers are claiming he is saying that each of those questions are his definitive argument. Specifically, Corsi said, "I'm an investigative reporter saying, 'Okay, here's the issue,' and I'm raising a question about [these issues]. Now, I'm not a prosecutor, I don't have subpoena power. I don't have grand jury power. I can't tell testimony. But, you know, if I were in those positions, I might well consider doing so. [But,] I'm not. I'm an investigative reporter. I just raise questions. And I don't say anywhere in the book, I don't say anything definitive about it more than 'this looks suspicious.' There are some things that are pretty definitive. You know, I'm positive that the Frank in Dreams of my Father is Frank Marshall Davis, but even in his rebuttal it confirms that. I don't think there is any question that Frank is Frank Marshall Davis, we've established that. Now, whether the loan was involved in the purchase of the Obama dream property, I can't say for sure one way or the other. I just ask questions."

Dr. Corsi also told me on the show that it is hard to understand this man, meaning Obama. He has enough intelligence to get a Harvard Law Degree, but he can't figure out in twenty minutes that something was not right with Rezko.

In short, this book raises questions on particular issues, suggests evidence to what the answer to the questions may be, to the extent that there are some serious problems with Obama's character and history, but Barack Obama won't answer the questions. Usually, when he does respond to these questions, the response is either a lie, or a different tale from the last time he answered the question. Obama doesn't like the fact that he is being associated with people like Rezko or Ayers. It's not that he regrets the connections, he simply regrets they have been found out, and is now trying to talk his way out of these alleged connections with criminals, communists and terrorists.

Corsi believes he has provided more than enough evidence in this book to substantiate many of the questions raised in The Obama Nation. Corsi asks, "Why did it take Obama so long to conclude that Rezko was a shady character?" As I brought up later in the interview, it goes along with allowing twenty years before he decided his pastor was a racist, anti-American blow-hard. And Obama only made the decision to separate himself from Wright when the pressure to do so became too great.

Did you miss the show? Check out the archive of the program HERE.

Tonight on Political Pistachio Radio Dr. Jerome Corsi must meet controversy head on!

Dr. Jerome Corsi, staff writer for World Net Daily, has suddenly found himself in the midst of a violent storm of controversy. The WND writer, this week alone, has been the object of numerous television and radio shows as the media tries to wade through the information contained in the book, and determine if the book is truly filled with falsehoods, or is a well researched piece of literature that takes a close and hard look at the Democratic Presidential front-runner, Barack Obama.

The book at the center of the controversy is, The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality. The Huffington Post calls the book, "...one of the worst political books ever written. Corsi piles distortion upon innuendo to create a gigantic heap of right-wing garbage, with a seemingly endless parade of basic factual errors running through the text like rats. Corsi's book is an embarrassment to the craft of journalism, and any of the conservatives who have praised and promoted it should feel humiliated at how bad it truly is." Media Matters writes that The Obama Nation "contains numerous falsehoods about Sen. Barack Obama." Even Conservative talk show host and Townhall writer Hugh Hewitt exclaims about the book, "Corsi's from the fringe. . . the book contains errors."

Hugh Hewitt, however, also points out that the Obama Campaign has given us an "absurd set of non-responsive responses," and that, "Now they botch a gimmie -- defining Corsi as a nut while not putting attention on the charges he leveled."

Sean Hannity has stated that The Obama Nation "may have made his [Obama's] campaign a bit nervous."

Joseph Farah, founder of World Net Daily, says about the controversy surrounding the book, and Jerome Corsi, "Unlike most of the critics of The Obama Nation, I have actually read the book from cover to cover. It is a thoroughly well-documented piece of first-rate journalism. Are there mistakes in it? Show me a first edition that doesn't have some – other than the Bible. But is it truthful? Does it add considerably to the public's knowledge of the front-running candidate for the presidency? Do we know much more about Obama than we would had we relied exclusively for our information from the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and the Associated Press? I offer a resounding 'yes' to all three of those questions. I am privileged to call him my friend, colleague and co-worker. I stand with Jerry Corsi today as he is viciously maligned by an attack media that would prefer to aim its potent artillery at a man who dared to do their job when they refused, when they laid down, when they sucked up, when they failed to ask the tough questions, when they took sides."

In response, Barack Obama's advisers have been tracking Corsi's media appearances, quickly telephoning producers to react to the book's charges, and last night, the Democratic presidential candidate's campaign issued a 40-page response to the book.

The Democratic National Committee has its own rapid response team to take aim at Corsi's book, saying, "One of the most vile smear peddlers of the 2004 election has found a new target. We cannot afford to let Corsi get away with the same dirty tricks that fooled so many people in 2004. We can't rely on the media to hold him accountable – in fact, the sheer brazenness of the lies is attracting even more coverage. The media have shown that they aren't going to stop him. It's up to you to spread the truth."

So, what is the truth? Is this book a classic smear job? Or is Corsi's book simply caught up in the crosshairs of the leftists because it hits a chord? Is Dr. Jerome Corsi a discredited liar peddling garbage in order to help continue Bush-Cheney politics? Or is he a simply being lynched by the mainstream media and Democratic Party for daring to write the truth? Be the judge yourself. Read the book, and listen to what Dr. Jerome Corsi has to say tonight on Political Pistachio Radio.
The show airs live at 10:00 pm Eastern Time, but will be archived for later listening for those unable to listen live. Access the program HERE.

www.blogtalkradio.com/politicalpistachio