Rule #1: Your child is never wrong! This is the most important rule of all to remember, because as a parent, you will no doubt have to defend your little angel to other parents, teachers and police officers who would try to tell you differently. Be sure to vehemently defend your child’s position of superiority in life, preferably in front of the child so that he/she also understands that they can do no wrong. This will surely instill in them the ability to disassociate themselves from the negative effects of their actions and any guilt they might normally feel. Practice this phrase, “My kid would never do that,” and utter it with a proper tone of righteous indignation. You’ll no doubt have to use it frequently.

Rule #2: Your child’s feelings are the most important thing in the world, and this must be stressed to your child. And since their feelings are so important, they must be made aware that other people’s feelings mean diddley-squat. Be sure to teach your children that it doesn’t matter who they hurt, abuse or trample over in their pursuit of happiness. And it’s not enough that you and your child place the utmost importance on your kid’s feelings – it’s imperative that society be expected to do so, as well. Extreme egomania and a selfish, me-based orientation are sure to take your child far in life.

Rule #3: Your children need toys – the more expensive, the better – so buy them for them at every opportunity, not just special occasions. Remember, other kids’ parents are buying their children toys, video games and the most expensive clothes that they can grow out of, and you wouldn’t want your little angel to be the only one on the block to go without. Imagine what that would do to his/her feelings! (Refer to Rule #2.) And besides, the ability to delay gratification is highly overrated – studies have shown that a sense of entitlement is actually paramount to a child’s emotional development.

Rule #4: There is no authority figure higher than your child, so teach him/her to have no respect for adults. How dare a teacher, policeman, co-parent or even friendly Uncle Jerry suggest your child might be misbehaving? (They must not be aware of Rule #1.) Don’t they realize that when it comes to authority, your child(ren) need only answer to themselves. To help in this matter, make sure your child is well versed in all swear words and encourage him/her to use them frequently to adults.

Rule #5: Any kind of structure is bad for your child. Modern wisdom suggests that providing structure for your children – rules, behavioral expectations, bed times, etc. – unfairly forces them to conform to standards of behavior that are not their culture, which is tantamount to parental colonialism. It’s far better to allow your child(ren) to “decide for themselves” how best to spend their days. Should they wish to stay up until 3am eating ice cream sandwiches and watching Saw III, let them! This will help your child develop his/her own set of structure completely separate from the unfair and rigid expectations of their family and society, which no doubt seek to control them.

Rule #6: Do your child’s homework for him/her. This is a very important rule for many reasons, because it reinforces Rules 1-3. First of all, no kid really wants to do his/her homework, and your child is never wrong. Also, the same schoolwork that many of us grew up having to accomplish can cause undue stress and anxiety in your child, negatively affecting his/her emotional well being. Equally important is the time that pesky schoolwork would take away from your child’s enjoying all the video games and toys you’re constantly purchasing. So, like it or not, you better break out the pencil and notebook paper and get cracking; the homework isn’t going to do itself!

So there they are, Mr. Wonderful’s “Six Rules of Parenting,” which represents the latest in pop culture psychology. And remember, these rules are not only easy to follow; they’ve also been created with your child’s best interests at heart. Perhaps they will inspire parents the world over to turn over a new leaf and stop the despicable practice of disciplining their children. Spanking only stops the child from misbehaving for the moment, and worse yet, it could lead to criminal, anti-social, violent, aggressive behavior later in life. Giving your children everything they want, allowing them to do as they please, and not making them accountable for their actions, however, will surely result in happy, well-adjusted children who will become polite, considerate and fair-minded adults.

Good luck … and happy parenting!

Now, the facts: Beatie, who was born Tracy Lagondino, underwent a female-to-male sex change operation yet opted to keep its female reproductive organs. As it stated in a recent issue of “The Advocate,” since its wife is unable to conceive, Thomas took it upon itself to bear the couple’s child. The two modern mad scientists purchased donor vials from a sperm bank and Thomas was inseminated at home. (I don’t even want to know how they did that!) And now, Beatie is having a baby!

This issue has people divided, as can be expected. Predictably, the liberals will defend Beatie’s decision. After all, there can be no special interest group more special than a transgender person with child. And of course, there will be the collective “oohs” and “ahhs” from the crowd as Beatie is seen as a loving husband who wants to help its wife have a child when she is unable to do. Most importantly, they’ll champion Beatie’s unnatural childbirth as a clear-cut case of “individual rights.”

But let’s hold the fanfare, ticker-tape parade and guest spot on Dr. Phil for just one second.

Let’s talk about individual rights. While all the well-intentioned whiners with a higher moral purpose might be focusing on Beatie’s rights, has anyone taken into consideration the rights of this unborn child as an individual? What kind of home life will these two really provide for the child? Really? It’s questionable if Beatie is even mentally and emotionally prepared for the demands of raising a child. Given the amount of obvious gender confusion, how could it possible be a good role model – male or female – to its child? Beatie and Roberts are forcing a lifestyle, which is bizarre to say the least, onto this child. And while lesbians with children can utilize “Heather Has Two Mommies” to help explain their situations; they don’t exactly make a children’s book to explain this!

And please don’t try to tell me they should have a child “simply because they can. Alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes and relatives living in the state of West Virginia can all have children, but it doesn’t mean they should. And the “it should be done because it’s scientifically possible” argument is equally absurd. Animals with four asses can no doubt be created in a lab; but again, this doesn’t exactly mean that they should.

If Beatie wants to get a sex change - or in liberal terminology, a “sexual reassignment” - that’s fine. If it wants to marry a woman, that’s fine too. But deciding to bear its own child under such bizarre circumstances, to me, is taking things a bit too far.

It’s like my Uncle Glenn always used to say, “You can’t have it both ways.” Of course, he never knew Thomas Beatie!

That sunny September morning in 2001, was just another day with normal people going to work or catching a plane. Thousands of them never came home. Always remember to treat everyday you have with the person you love most, as a gift. You don't want to wake up one day with huge regrets about what you could've done or should have done. Too many people have to live with that already.

Follow this advice, I know I will:

Iraqi Politicial Tells the Truth

Step One: Admit we are not powerless.

Take a look at our Constitution. Not just a transcript; find an actual picture of it. The first three words, "We the People," are at least four times larger than the others. Do you think that was an accident? Of course not. Our framers chose those words, and made them that size, because they knew they were the answer to any problem we would ever face.

Step Two: Believe that a power greater than ourselves can restore us to sanity.

I think this one pretty much speaks for itself.

Step Three: Decide to take our power back.

A recent polls says 81 percent of Americans now say that our country is on the wrong track. If you're one of those people, who do you blame? The Bush administration? Congress? The media?

Here's a crazy idea: How about blaming ourselves?

If you don't like the fact that your city has led the country in poverty and homelessness for the last 10 years, then ELECT SOMEONE NEW. Stop voting for the same people from the same party every year.

Our power hasn't gone away (see Step One), it's just been masked by politicians who are tearing us apart for their own gain. We need to reclaim that power, and then we need to use it. Don't Miss

Step Four: Make a complete and fearless moral inventory.

Alcoholics aren't exactly big fans of introspection and self-examination, but this is one of the most important steps to recovery.

What are America's faults? What are our assets? By taking stock of both, we can start to work on maximizing our strengths and eliminating our weaknesses. It sounds simple, but when's the last time you really thought about what America does right? That brings me to Step Five.

Step Five: Admit our wrongs, and our rights.

We're constantly reminded about America's faults and flaws, but what about our achievements?

If you want to teach our kids about Vietnam, that's fine, but you better also teach them about World War II. And if you want to talk about our wars, you better also talk about our welfare. America is one of the most charitable countries in the history of the world, yet our mistakes are always glorified far more than our generosity. That needs to be reversed.

Step Six: Be ready to remove our defects.

Just like an alcoholic, we simply cannot go from sleeping on the street to perfection overnight. This is a big ship, and it takes a long time to turn it around.

But we have to start somewhere, and the best place is with the defects that almost all of us agree on. For example, does anyone really believe that being addicted to Saudi Arabia's oil is a good idea? What about China owning billions of our debt? Speaking of debt, what about the fact that we've saddled our children with $53 trillion in future Social Security and Medicare obligations?

But before we can address any problems, we have to first admit we have them. Many of us are in denial about just how divided we've become. We think that it's just the election or the war that's tearing us apart, but the truth is, it's much larger than that. We're every bit as arrogant, greedy and self-destructive as I was when I hit bottom.

Fortunately, it's not hopeless. It never is. If a program can work on a rodeo clown like me, it can definitely work for a country as great as ours. But until we're able to stand up and say, "Hello, my name is America and I have a problem," we'll never even have a chance.

Here’s what happened - Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski, a Carpentersville village trustee, apparently told two neighbor children who were playing in the tree next-door to her house to, “quit playing in the tree like monkeys.” Apparently, the mother of these lovely, African-American children considered the comment to be racist and she called the Carpentersville police. Ramirez-Sliwinski said she did not mean the comment as a racial slur – she claims to have said it because she was worried that the children might fall from the tree and hurt themselves. The police apparently didn’t see it that way, and issued her a $75 ticket for “disorderly conduct, which they define as “When a person does something that alarms or disturbs another.”

And when it rains, it truly pours for Ms. Ramirez-Sliwinski. Before this incident, she was elected as an Obama delegate to the Democratic National Convention, and reportedly displays an Obama sign proudly in her front yard. Not anymore! In addition to the ticket, the incident persuaded Obama’s campaign (it’s always his people doing the dirty work) to call her and ask her to step aside as a delegate, citing her remarks as “divisive and unacceptable.” Ramirez-Sliwinski complied, citing she also will not run again as Carpentersville village trustee.

In her defense, the allegations of “racism” are a bit of a stretch. First of all, as a Carpentersville village trustee, Ramirez-Sliwinski has a reputation for representing the area’s 40 percent Hispanic population. Some of the … ahem … highlights of her tenure include opposing an English-only proposition and an ordinance to crack down on illegal immigrants. Granted these actions seem to benefit the Hispanic population of which she is a member, but they still clearly indicate a leaning to the left. And if there’s one thing we’ve learned, liberals can do no wrong!

Let’s take a look at what was said. Monkeys? Seriously? Now I’m no zoologist, but I’m fairly certain that most species of monkey is known for cavorting about in trees in a wild and unrestrained fashion. Hence, children recklessly playing in trees could very well draw a legitimate comparison. In fact, my childhood memories include an incident when my brother and I were furiously jumping on and off the living room couch. Our (white) grandmother demanded we “stop acting like monkeys” or she would tell our father. Rather than phoning the ACLU, my brother and I wisely opted to find another, less rambunctious form of amusement.

This sordid case bears more than just a passing resemblance to the infamous “water buffalo” incident that happened in 1993 at the University of Pennsylvania. For those who don’t recall, then-freshman Eden Jacobowitz yelled "Shut up, you water buffalo. If you're looking for a party, there's a zoo a mile from here" from his dormitory window to a group of black women who were making noise and interrupting his studying. The infuriated women charged Jacobowitz with racial harassment under the university's hate-speech policy. In his defense, Jacobowitz insisted his comment was not racist, and that the phrase was a rough translation of a Hebrew slang "Behema," which is used by Jews to refer to a loud, rowdy person. Unlike the case involving Ramirez-Sliwinski, this one had a happy ending - the women later dropped the charges and Jacobowitz settled his lawsuit against the university. (Score one for free speech advocates everywhere!)

Putting all humor aside, though, this situation illustrates in grave detail that the true threat to free speech in this country is not coming from the right, it’s coming from the left … and in juggernaut-like fashion. What’s even more disturbing is the insidious way in which the law and “propriety” were used to legally enforce political correctness, as if it were law. For comparing the children to monkeys, the police write Ramirez-Sliwinski a ticket, Barry’s people asked her to step down, and she no doubt was pressured by the remaining Carpentersville village trustees to not seek re-election. The message here is disturbing as it is clear - be politically correct, or suffer dire consequences.

So, its seems the liberals have succeeded at legislating morality - their morality. While there’s no official law on the books that states all speech must be politically correct, and there are no official punishment guidelines for transgressors, the evil of political correctness has become the law of the land, thus usurping our rights as Americans. (Expect the liberals to be dancing in the streets.) And poor Ms. Ramirez-Sliwinski has become yet another casualty in this ongoing war on the First Amendment. But Americans who believe that their First Amendment rights are more important than Political Correctness must stand up and fight these insidious forces within our very country. When one person misspeaks, it’s easy for them to pounce, but when everyone stands up against this intolerance and injustice, it become impossible to ignore. So stand up and be heard, for if we don’t exercise our voices now, we might not have the opportunity to do so later.

If we don't, it could be like my Uncle Glenn always used to say, “You don’t know what you got until it’s gone.”

However, I just read this piece by Glenn Sacks talking about how the media minimizes the contribution of men to their families. While I agree with much of what Mr. Sacks is saying I took great umbrage and yes I do mean GREAT UMBRAGE with a small section. In fact, this section:

This is a terribly unfair distortion because it disregards the fact that men are usually their families’ primary breadwinners, and often make great sacrifices in that role. Studies which account for the total amount of work that husbands and wives contribute to their households–including housework, child care, and employment–confirm that men contribute at least as much to their families as women do.

I have a problem with that. Shocked? Probably not. I have no doubt that many men and I'll even say an overwhelming majority of men probably do contribute, at least, as much to their families as women do. BUT the way that paragraph is written implies or generally states that all men do. Allow me to say this...THAT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT!

Here are some people I know. We have a woman that is the Primary breadwinner and easily does more than her share of childcare and chores. Not to say that her spouse doesn't contribute. He definitely does but it is not equal and HE does way more household chores and childcare than any other husband/father I've ever personally witnessed.

Then we have the stay at home mom and breadwinner dad. Dad does help with some cooking, some chores and does the "man stuff" but since he's the worker and she the home person; it shouldn't be and isn't equal on the homefront.

Third we have another mom/dad team, who, probably earn even money. They split the chores and childcare. Even Steven.

Last but certainly not least, we had stay at home mom and worker dad. Mom did EVERYTHING on the homefront except sometimes worker dad took out the trash. Plus, many periods existed where homemom had to also work full-time. This did not alleviate her homechores it only lightened a little bit of "childcare". "Childcare" was picked up by out-of-workdad. Out-of-workdad didn't do chores, nope, Overworked-Mom just had to do the chores upon returning home and fix any fuck ups that occurred in her absence. A part-time job could have been made from that alone.

That is my experience. So, you can say that I find the generalizations about men to be crap. Lots of men do lots of great things. Some go above and beyond. But some are lazy pieces of shit and they should not be allowed to sit under the blanket Mr. Sacks so generously weaved for them.

Yes, extreme situations occur. But that in no way means the law needs to be written in a way that takes away the rights of responsible parents and flushes them down the toilet. There should be consistency in the law. If a child is mature enough to make the decision to terminate her pregnancy; then why is she not old enough to consent to sex in the first place?

How many boys under age 18 have been labeled sex offenders and now have lifetime records for having consensual sex with these MINORS? Let's remember that so many of you think they are mature enough to consent to a life changing medical procedure but not to the sex that got them pregnant, in the first place.

We as parents are responsible for making decisions that we deem to be in the best interest of our children, until our children reach the age society determined was adulthood. Yes, some parents will force their daughter to birth a child, others will force their daughter to have an abortion. This is a horrible situation and it is compounded by bad laws and people with agendas. There should always be small loopholes for extreme situations but the overwhelming majority of these situations aren't extreme. Parents have every right to decide what is best for their child, honestly, who knows that child better? You?

But looking at these electoral data suggests to me that there's another tribal divide going on here, one that separates voters more profoundly than even race (well, maybe not more profoundly than race in Mississippi but in other states). That's the divide between academics and Jacksonians. In state after state, we have seen Obama do extraordinarily well in academic and state capital enclaves. In state after state, we have seen Clinton do extraordinarily well in enclaves dominated by Jacksonians.

Academics and public employees (and of course many, perhaps most, academics in the United States are public employees) love the arts of peace and hate the demands of war. Economically, defense spending competes for the public-sector dollars that academics and public employees think are rightfully their own. More important, I think, warriors are competitors for the honor that academics and public employees think rightfully belongs to them. Jacksonians, in contrast, place a high value on the virtues of the warrior and little value on the work of academics and public employees. They have, in historian David Hackett Fischer's phrase, a notion of natural liberty: People should be allowed to do what they want, subject to the demands of honor. If someone infringes on that liberty, beware: The Jacksonian attitude is, "If you attack my family or my country, I'll kill you." And he (or she) means it. The academic who hears the Rev. Jeremiah Wright declaiming, "God damn America," is not unnerved. He hears this sort of thing on campus all the time. The Jacksonian who watches the tape sees an enemy of everything he holds dear.

Before my Dad died, he and my mom retired to their country house about 2 hours outside of Detroit. We went out there for one of the holiday weekends, I'm pretty sure it was Labor Day weekend. Anyway, my dad used to make fun of Buttons because he was so sweet and not threatening in any way. He always called him stupid dog because one of his ears was always flopping down and it wasn't a very German Shepherd like trait. Dad said that Buttons always had a dumb look on his face. He didn't, he was just a really sweet 100+ pound German Shepherd. On this particular day in 2000, Jake was just shy of his 3rd birthday and he went down the hill to the pond with my dad to watch the geese and ducks swimming. He wasn't in danger of drowning because he was wearing a life vest, dad was in the coop getting feed while Jake waited.

All of the sudden we heard a howl and then a growl. The howl was a small pack of wild dogs and a coyote heading straight for Jake. My heart stopped and I was screaming and running. There was no way anyone including my dad was going to get to Jake before the pack. Jake had wandered a bit and the pack was in between my dad and my son. The growl we heard almost an instant later, came from Buttons, who, was charging down the hill toward Jake at a speed I didn't know he was capable of. Buttons went for the coyote and took him down, the rest of the pack ran away. Buttons, without a doubt, saved Jake's life and earned my dad's respect. That was the last time my dad called him stupid. He became "good dog" from that day till my dad died a year later.

When Buttons died Jake told me that he prayed for Buttons to find his Papa (my dad) in heaven, so that he (Buttons) wouldn't be alone. Then he laughed and said it would be funny if Papa had to see that floppy ear forever.

Senators John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton released dueling advertisements Wednesday that highlighted how the housing crisis has come to dominate the presidential race, with Mrs. Clinton using a version of her red-phone commercial to question Mr. McCain’s ability to handle the souring economy.

In the advertisement, the Clinton campaign again portrays a family asleep in the middle of the night when the phone rings, meant to evoke a national crisis. The narrator then intones, “John McCain just said the government shouldn’t take any real action in the housing crisis; he’d let the phone keep ringing.”

Within hours, the McCain campaign released an advertisement on the Internet. It starts with images of the Clinton advertisement, with the narrator then commenting, “Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama just said they’d solve the problem by raising your taxes — more money out of your pockets.”

This is a good place to attack McCain since he has already admitted to being an economic retard. Here's the thing though, we don't elect economists to be Presidents. We elect leaders that we believe are best suited to decision making. They don't have to be economists or military strategists. They have to be smart and capable of hiring good economists, strategists and anything they need to assist them in making decisions for us.

Still, McCain was a dolt for outing himself as a weakling on economic issues and he deserves the hits he's no doubt going to take until November.

NATO decided Thursday not to put Georgia and Ukraine on track to join the alliance after vehement Russian opposition, but the alliance pledged that the strategically important Black Sea nations will become members one day.

Senior American officials also said that NATO leaders agreed to fully endorse U.S. missile defense plans for Europe and urge Russia to drop its objections to the system.

French and German concern over Russia's reaction dashed the two former Soviet republics' hopes of being granted a "membership action plan" that bring them into the alliance within the next five to 10 years.

But alliance Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said NATO welcomes the countries' aspirations to join. "We agree today that these countries will become members of NATO," he said.

Well, at least, they have some hope for becoming members of the group eventually. Does NATO still serve a real purpose or are they becoming like the U.N., a hollow shell of what they once were?

One positive note. Now that France has a President that isn't a cheese eating surrender monkey, they will be sending more troops and elite forces into Afghanistan to help us out over there.

YAY! Layfayette can finally rest in peace again...

Sen. Debbie Stabenow's [D,MI] husband, Thomas Athans, 46, was stopped by police who were investigating prostitution at the hotel, according to a police report obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press under the state Freedom of Information Act.

Athans, co-founder of the liberal TalkUSA Radio network, apologized in a statement issued by his attorney and said he "fully cooperated with law enforcement. My family and I are dealing with this matter in a personal and private way."

I know what you're thinking. You want to know where are the jokes and insults. I'm not going to make them. I went after Spitzer because he was a special type of scum. I don't go after people just for being cheaters. That's between the couple. I'm just saying that the continued criminalization of sex for money is stupid.

All men pay for sex, one way or another. When they go to a "pro", it's just simpler and more upfront. When they buy you dinner first, it's called dating. If they get laid, they feel "lucky". Sure because they shelled out the money and got what they were hoping to get. Married guys pay too. Not always with money but unless you are on your honeymoon, there is always a little "negotiating" before sex. I'm not saying it to be cynical, I'm saying it because it's basically true. Men want sex and woman decide if they are getting it. Either way, the simple fact is all men pay for sex.

I will not ban Mr. Wonderful for his comments because he did not attack anyone here personally, unlike many others of you who can't manage to start talking without blasting an insult my way. He never attributed the "racist" remark to Obama, in fact he further stated:

Granted, Barry never said this ... at least, not to my knowledge. (It would make for one hell of a blog if he did!) But as inflammatory as those two little words might seem, they should give you Obama Apologists a good idea as to how some whites regard Barry's associations and their somewhat questionable views on race ... and his (white) grandmother. And try as he might, ol' Barry still hasn't been able to fully reconcile that with some white voters.

He tried repeatedly to engage but was rebuffed, insulted and DISRESPECTED by many of the regular commenters right away. Day 1.

Many of you are offended by his words. Guess what? I'm offended regularly, not by Mr. Wonderful but by many of my friends here. If you want me to start quoting, it could get very uncomfortable for some of you. Friends say things, in the heat of the moment, but still some of it is really vicious. I was ready to pull the plug on the blogging thing because I was sick of being your personal Conservative whipping girl. I didn't. Instead, I brought in back up.

Mr. Wonderful is a close, personal friend of mine. He was treated woefully on his first day here but still he persisted. Many of you welcomed him by savagely ripping him to shreds and he responded in kind. You treat people in the manner you wish to be treated. He came here as my guest, my friend and I hoped my other friends would give him a fair shake. It didn't happen but I have some hope that it will. You all are my friends and your continued visits to my corner of the world are important to me. Mr. Wonderful is my friend, he is someone that is very important to me and he isn't going anywhere. Maybe now that you all know that, you can try again. If you don't want to, I understand. No hard feelings.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Can we just start this political season over with new candidates? Please?

Sounds good to me. Sure, it sounds really reasonable. But then if he kept talking he'd sound way less reasonable....

On economic policy, Mr. Obama favors higher income, Social Security and corporate taxes. He supports massive increases in domestic spending and greater government regulation of the economy. He favors a significantly larger role for the federal government in health care. He opposes the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Higher taxes, higher spending and opposition to NAFTA. That's pretty standard liberal fare.

Mr. Obama has criticized the Supreme Court's decision to uphold a partial birth abortion ban, and he wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. He voted against John Roberts and Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court. In Illinois, Mr. Obama supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. And he supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Having a problem with the Partial Birth Abortion Ban? That's fucking EXTREME liberal and the article doesn't mention but he also has a problem with parental notification for minors seeking abortions. Schools need parental permission to give out aspirin but condoms and abortions - THOSE ARE COOL? Banning handguns is really extreme. We aren't talking about AK47's, he means handguns. So, he has a problem with the 2nd Amendment... Supports giving illegals driving privileges but I, a legal citizen, shouldn't be allowed to own a handgun for for self defense? Yeah, that's moderate...NOT. Good luck in the PA primary, Barack.

On national security matters, Mr. Obama voted to deny legal immunity to telecom companies that have cooperated with the government in warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists. He wants to grant habeas corpus rights to detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. He supports a full-scale withdrawal from Iraq. And he says, in his first year in office, he would meet with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea without preconditions.

I. THINK. I. HAVE. A. PROBLEM. WITH. HIS. NATIONAL. SECURITY. IDEAS.

I don't think McCain will have a tough time cleaning Obama's clock during the debate of ideas, since most of Obama's ideas are not what the average American voter would be comfortable with...

This is a post about Obama's IDEAS. So, if you can't handle debating his ideas, then you should go ask your mom for a sippy cup and some granola while the adults talk!