America is in the throes of an ideological identity crisis that threatens to rattle the foundations of the world’s youngest but most vibrant nation to the crumbling point. Politicians have exacted a terrible price for pandering to the classes, not the masses. Today, we are a nation indivisible no more, we are political target markets; our Balkanization is complete.   

It has already begun this epic battle of ideologies between the fallacy of the empathetic and the rigidity of the pragmatic. On one side, worldview is driven by heartfelt visions of a world without strife. On the other, the view is not so rosy; it has been forged by the reality of hard knocks. The rhetorical war between these two positions is far from civil of late, as the utopians take up their shields of academic condescension to battle the pitchforks and shovels of those they deem the Neanderthals. 

The barbs, the shouts, the taunts and the threats are only verbal at this point but one gets the sense that the “rumble” could begin over the most innocent of infractions. The left has their radicals, those who have actually bombed the ideological windmills of industrial America. The right has their guns and a growing loathing for a class that holds them in such contempt and ridicule. 

One of the greatest examples of the contempt and condescension that both the leadership in the Democratic Party and the Obama administration holds for the people, is their relentless intention to pass legislation heralded as healthcare reform. In reality, it is nothing more than a government takeover of that industry. In spite of the quite vociferous outrage of a majority of the American people, they continue to craft a plan to utilize reconciliation as the means for passage. Out of sight, out of mind they muse.

It is this blatant disregard for the majority of the American people, coupled with an intentional plan to not only force unwanted burdens against the will of the public, but to do it with malice aforethought, that has earned the heated ire of the people with pitchforks. This outrage, when juxtaposed with the equal aggravation of the pointy-headed poseurs who believe those they regard as cave dwellers are to be controlled, not engaged, and all is not quiet on Main Street.     

On the sidelines, we have a new, relatively inexperienced, extremely ideological, stubborn and sociologically obtuse president, who holds the “hankie” in his hand. He can use it to work with the people at large to help clean up a mess, largely of his making, or he can drop it and start the headlong race into civil anarchy. A positive sign is imperative, as the din of the grumblings of the combatants has drowned out the rhetorical propaganda once sufficient to hold them in check.

Unseen by the foot soldiers poised for the clash, are the agitators in the shadows, the ones actually responsible for the exploitation of our personal passions. They, (politicians, media elite, agenda fanatics and the power-crazed) view us as the expendable or as Lenin would say, their useful idiots. They have split us along ethnic, religious, ideological and racial boundaries and they pit us against ourselves as they foster chaos and hatred to consolidate power and control.

Our first Civil War will pale in comparison to the outbreak of civil unrest if we continue to allow ourselves to be factionalized and manipulated along ideological boundaries. We are rapidly approaching the same tribal mentality that keeps many of the nations in the Middle East in a constant state of ethnic and civil anarchy. 

As Barack Obama’s decisions (or indecisions if you will) continue to shake the public back from the euphoria of his illusion of “hope and change” and the reality of a man consumed with both himself and an ultra-liberal agenda becomes apparent, the adulating, fainting, born-again enthusiasm for America’s first black president, is fast fading. The adoring throngs of Obama supporters, a mob consisting of progressive and liberal zealots, as well as many simply hoping for an end to the racial divide in America, has lost its luster. 

Now, only the zealots remain and the true face of the mob that is liberalism is just that, an angry, self-righteous, all-loathing, entitlement-demanding mob, intent on getting their “pound of flesh.” Gone is the naiveté of a public falling for a brilliant propaganda campaign, a public sold literally, a bill of goods. When they came for their “piece of the pie,” they found, as the saying goes, “there was no there, there.”

There are two faces to the mob that has overrun our government; it consists of the Lieutenants in government sending out the marching orders and the foot soldiers in the streets demanding adherence to their progressive world order. They have no tolerance for any who dare challenge their intent to remake this nation and they are intentionally oblivious to the reality of their critics as well as the consequences of their ridicule and ignorance. 

Two statements stand out as testimony to this deliberate ignorance; the statement by Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, that “the system worked” and by Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, that "there has never been a more open process for any legislation."  Ms. Napolitano’s statement came in the face of an unprecedented failure of our national security system and Ms. Pelosi’s verbal backhand was in reply to the decision to take the final negotiations of their “healthcare reform bill” behind closed doors. This incredible hubris is characteristic of the current mob rule.    

Indicative of this mob mentality is the notion that those on the left are their brothers’ keepers. They imply that those who do not see the wisdom of their ideals and perspectives are too stupid to make reasonable and rational decisions. It follows that because of this inferiority in mental capacity, that those with such limited view and scope must necessarily defer decisions on matters of importance to their betters. Further, they are to be controlled and should not be allowed to express their personal aspirations without filter and censorship.

To their dismay however, the ugly and the stupid (in their view) have not gone quietly into the night nor do they intend to succumb to the oligarchy demanding their surrender. As determined, as this mob has been to establish permanent political and social dominance, they were unprepared for the tenacity and determination of a free people, in a free nation, to stand boldly against their petulant demands. 

Now, the mob grows less threatening, its posture less steady and its members less numerous. Reason and conviction have prevailed in the face of a mob of the radical fringe, liberal extremists, hopelessly naïve academia and politicians with a dictatorial bent. 

Gone too, are the arrogant quips and insulting barbs from the self-anointed liberal intelligentsia, who so callously poured their juvenile invective on conservatives and Republicans in the first days and weeks after their significant wins in the 2008 elections. Today, they mumble just so much gibberish, ignoring the obvious as they whistle past the graveyard of dead aspirations.  It is clear, that, everyday-Americans are tired of the mob mentality, and will not tolerate a government with an intention to “rule.” 

The near miss of an American Airliner with a Nigerian suicide-attack bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, may have caused greater damage than was originally reported. While the explosion that went “poof” did not cause serious damage to the aircraft, it has ripped a huge hole in the bureaucratic fabric covering what is precariously referred to as the “Department of Homeland Security.” 

The statement of the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, that “the system worked,” in response to the enormity of the disconnect, at every level, to “connect the dots” in this instance is appalling. It is also indicative of a political mindset that assumes that the American people are too ignorant to question the obvious. 

When the barbarity of the attacks on the World Trade Center is put in the context of a “man-made disaster” and our military, in mortal combat with theocratic despotism becomes merely an “overseas contingency operation,” we have arrived at the pinnacle of stupid. The din of the demands for the resignation of Janet Napolitano is getting louder and she needs to resign her position from a job she is clearly not qualified to perform.

The one certainty that can be declared from this most recent act of terror is that our enemies have not declared a truce or a timeout from terrorism in response to the current administration’s policy of “reaching out.” The only thing that has been accomplished by extending the hand of “understanding and respect” to an enemy determined to destroy us, is to draw back a virtual bloody stub. What is equally clear, is that the security operations that should be a cohesive combination of high quality information sharing, is nothing more than a hodgepodge of competing political factions.   

“You don’t want to know how sausage is made” the saying goes and this glimpse into the bureaucratic fat and fragmented bits of disjointed operations that connect what passes for our national security operations is not a pretty sight. It has also raised serious concerns as to the quality of a product that should be the harmonious blend of cooperation between the various law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Here too, we see scraps of information being thrown together to form the basis of our plans for preventing future attacks from radical Islamic terrorists.

In order of priority, this nation has three major foreign policy and national security issues that must be addressed. They are: Preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power; aggressively pursuing and destroying the growing terrorist enclaves in areas such as Yemen and Somalia; and not allowing Afghanistan and Iraq to deteriorate into an ultimate victory for radical Islam. Should we fail in any of these three categories, the ensuing chaos in the Middle East will resemble a sausage grinder.

Instead, we dally in the necessity of applying real and punitive sanctions against Iran while giving our enemies a date certain for our surrender in Afghanistan and Iraq. Worse, we insist that nations with terrorist enclaves, like Yemen and Somalia, behave or else, as we simultaneously plan to repatriate Yemeni jihadists to their homeland. By these actions, we further expose the current inner workings of a process so laden with rhetorical fat and political spice as to make one nauseous. 

Barack Obama is fond of the word “unprecedented.” He should be he is presiding over a federal deficit and a rate of government spending unprecedented in the history of this nation and probably in the history of the planet. At the same time, President Obama is also fiercely pushing passage of what is being referred to as healthcare reform to be followed closely by his energy bill known as cap and trade.

With this nation facing a debt ceiling of such enormity and the personal financial impact from both government run health care and, in the president’s own words, the skyrocketing cost of energy as a result of cap and trade, the words brave and free become a near oxymoron. We will have to be brave because nothing in our futures will be free of bureaucratic encumbrance. In short, we will pay through the nose for our subservience to the government. 

In order of priority, the three issues the public finds most important are jobs, jobs, jobs. The Obama administration’s answer to this dilemma, resulting from a lack of capital in the public sector and a 1.4 trillion dollar increase in the deficit, is a plan to spend, spend, spend -- more of your money. Money grows on trees you see so let’s all go on a spending spree.  

Would that domestic spending was the whole of the problem but alas, we recognize our obligations to lead in the quest of the “settled science” of global warming. In this regard, not only will we regulate domestic energy production derived from fossil fuels into oblivion, thus putting us at the mercy of windmills and solar tanning cells, we will also pledge to be instrumental in providing 100 billion dollars a year to developing countries. Makes sense, we read by candlelight in order to help those poor nations go on a power trip.

Now, with the purchase of the vote of Nebraska Senator, Ben Nelson, it is a near certainty that a bill that is yet to be seen and obviously not read, will receive enough votes for cloture. Even if the Senate receives a copy of the bill by the following day, assuming a December 24 vote, it gives the Senate 96 total hours to evaluate, amend and debate a program that will have a significant effect on nearly 20% or our Gross Domestic Product -- as visions of dollar signs dance in their heads. 

To say that this is playing well on Main Street would be a serious misnomer. Not since the demonstrations and protests of the Vietnam War has the public been so incensed with their government. The greatest difference between that era and today is that the media was in the trenches with the protesters in the sixties and seventies. Today, the media mans the frontlines for the government and hurls agenda bombs in the form of news coverage at an angry public. 

The disconnect between those who occupy the Halls of Congress, as well as a liberal media mimicking the posture, positions and power plays of political speak, is astounding to behold. For them it is a game of strategies, parliamentary tricks, procedures and process. At no time does it appear that the consequences to those who will be subjected to the results of their petty power games are of any importance to them. To those who now hold the seats of power, people are simply the pawns by which the game is played (to say nothing of being its financiers). 

So, as the people’s debt reaches literal astronomical proportions, our personal rights and freedoms shrink inversely proportional to that debt and our elected officials devise ever more complex schemes to separate us from our income, we become nothing more than their fools and knaves. 

With the greatest of apologies to our national anthem: “Oh say does that darn mangled dollar yet cave, o’er the land of the spree and the home of the knave?” 

OK, so “all” may be a bit of a stretch but the one thing that is not in dispute is that a majority of the American people are not in favor of the current direction of the country. (34.5% say right direction, 59.5% say wrong track). From the calamitous debacle that has developed over the attempted government takeover of healthcare, to the ruinous economics of placing cap and trade restrictions on energy exploration and use, the natives are more than restless, those really are war drums sounding in the distance.

In the context of America however and the values most of us hold for this nation, its future and our posterity, the notion may not be as farfetched as one might assume. Yes, there are those on both the left and the right that are locked in ideological gridlock but for mainstream America, those goals are not so divergent.  This, not the ideological extremes is the basis of the postulate.

The intent here is not necessarily an attempt to heap criticism on Barack Obama, the key members of his administration leading his agenda or even the most partisan members of the Democratic Party; they are just the current names attached to a greater agenda. The intent is a discussion of that agenda, its impact on this nation and those who will reap the consequences of an oppressive ideology. 

A great many of those who currently support Obama and what is being touted as liberalism, will no doubt be offended by the use of the word oppressive. There is nothing liberating however about an intent to establish a government that controls the key levers of society in a way to make its people subservient to those controls. This is the current agenda and such will be the consequences. 

The only difference between past attempts at such controls and those being pursued by the Obama administration is that in the past, such attempts were covert. Under Obama and company, the mask has been shed, the gauntlet thrown down and a clear ideological challenge has been issued. That challenge has been answered by a majority of the American people; they reject the demands to lay down the arms of democracy and a government of the people. 

The unequivocal support by some for the current agenda of both Barack Obama as well as the leadership in the Democratic Party is disturbing. Their unwavering support for Obama irrespective of the controversy is reminiscent of peasants waving to their King, not an informed and rational public or a freethinking people.   

As the number of those who are losing their homes, their jobs and their businesses continues to grow however, the cold hard light of reality has been sobering. The allure of Obama appears to be fading as more and more of those who initially supported him experience remorse. Those who believed the high rhetoric of a melodious orator have come face to face with the reality that buying into the euphoria of the moment did not make them immune to layoff and loss. 

The aggressive agenda of Barack Obama and his key advisors, and their rush to “never let a crisis go to waste,” has had an unintended consequence. It has clearly exposed the difference between what they say and what they intend. It has also galvanized the electorate in a way that can only be perceived as anathema to a government determined to control the people, not the reverse. 

There are many labels that have been attributed to the increasing power of our government over its people. They range from Socialist to Fascist and Communist. Such labels may be inappropriate but there is an eerie specter of an administration comprised of so many, accountable only to the president, with the title of “Czar.” It is a haunting specter that is beginning to frighten a growing number of people.   

The rhetoric is hot, accusations abundant, and finger pointing the order of the day. This is what now serves as leadership and governance. There is no shortage of political plans, strategies and ideas for policies that are simply fodder for political debate.  All of which, eventually become nothing more than talking points for use in blaming the opposition for the failure of government. 

What is missing is a commitment to achieve practical results, as opposed to programs that achieve nothing more than growing government while fleecing the public for greater and greater sums of their income.  

It is no different in the ether of the media, from print to broadcast, cable and talk radio, a medium that once served as our voice and a check on the fog of political obfuscation. It is now nothing more than an amplifier for rhetorical barbs to sting a near comatose public conscience.  We have arrived at the age of instantaneous information, a time where action has been trumped by virtual reality. We must evolve beyond this era of “just words, just speeches” and return to the time of pragmatism, results and self-determination.

Perhaps the greatest consequence of this new war of words, has been the ability of the media, irrespective of political ideology, to exploit those ideologies and forge “one nation, indivisible,” into just so many factions. As long as we allow ourselves to be hyphenated by race, religion, national origin and ethnicity, we are easy prey for the psychological wordsmiths that infest a media now intent on serving as political propagandists. 

Just words, just speeches have paralyzed our ability to think and reason without a media crutch to support our thoughts. We are terrified when we arrive at an independent idea that has not been vetted by a panel of “experts.” We fear voicing our opinions until after we are satisfied that we are speaking with a majority that has arrived at consensus on the subject. We tremble inwardly should we disagree with the masses, lest we be outed for our blasphemy.

The disgusting by-product of this ideological bickering that has us at each other’s throats is a government that is busy arresting our personal freedoms while we are distracted by our petty squabbles. Even the government, however, is not immune to verbal paralysis. In their quest to be all things to all factions, while refusing to commit to any position that may be controversial, the only way they can function is with herd mentality, intimidation, innuendo and false promises. This, as they pray that their words and speeches do not come back to haunt them.

We are awash in words, speeches, points, counterpoints and exposés. We are tragically short of action, results and programs not laden with graft, greed, kickbacks and political favors. Teddy Roosevelt said, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” Today’s politicians speak in riddles as they stick it to us.

The times they may be a changin’ however. The, so far, peaceful Tea Party revolution shows no sign of fading into quiet oblivion in spite of both political and media attempts to humiliate and intimidate its attendees. This uprising of the public at large in reaction to a government that has stopped listening is exactly the right antidote to cure the poison of electoral lethargy. The public it seems has heard the words and they are sick of the rhyme.     

The word that is used to describe the criminal trials that will result from Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to move the trials for 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and his four associates to a civilian venue is “Circus.” A few other words come to mind for this act of political idiocy but they are best left in the locker-room or the lyrics of “Gangsta Rap.”

Other thoughts come to mind as well, such as, “what was he thinking?” To speculate on his motives at this point, however, would be nothing more than conjecture and now is not the time for conspiracy theories. What is not speculation is the fact the Holder’s actions in this regard have raised the hackles of mainstream America at a time when they are already suspicious and wary of the direction President Obama and his administration are taking this nation.

The phrase used to describe the failure of both our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to act on the warning signs leading up to the events on 9/11 was, “they failed to connect the dots.” It implies that there was a trail of clues that should have led to action by these agencies to preempt the horror of that day. This phrase applies well to the current administration in terms of avoiding a pending political disaster. 

From the public angst for his domestic agenda, to a foreign policy teetering on collapse, the clues are abundant and the signs unmistakable, they all read, “don’t go there.” In this regard, Barack Obama and those who advise him appear to be seriously “dot challenged.” To now add the idiocy of what will surely be show trials for those who planned and executed the most horrific attack on American soil is beyond challenged, it is serves in essence to give the middle finger to our military and the victims of that day.

To also add to this, “not-so-precision” juggling act now occurring in the center ring, Obama has asked Congress, an independent arm of government, to put their investigations into the murders at Fort Hood on hold until after the completion of investigations now under way by the military and law enforcement agencies.  Those would be the agencies that are directly under Obama’s control. The why of this request is enough to peak one’s curiosity.

If this were not curious enough, all this comes on the heels of Obama “rejecting every proposal he requested from his security team for a strategy for Afghanistan after he rejected the plan he personally commissioned as a result of rejecting the strategy in place when he assumed office.” One can almost hear the Kaliope playing in the background.

The people look to the Congress and the president for leadership in dealing with the current deep recession, rising unemployment rate and spiraling deficit. In return, and over their loud objections, they are being force-fed budget busting healthcare and cap and trade legislation, the inevitability of substantial personal tax increases and penalties on business guaranteed to stifle job growth. 

And now, with this absolutely inane decision by the Attorney General to make an international mockery of our legal system, our military and our national security, you not only have to wonder what are they thinking, you have to wonder if they have a political death wish as well. 

Either Barack Obama and the members of his administration, to include the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate, are in command of a logic and a strategy of incredible political mastery or they hold the people in such contempt that they believe no one will notice their buffoonery. How else to explain this overt defiance of the passionate objections of the people?

There is much at risk as we evaluate the issues facing this nation and the stakes are extremely high. From the critical questions of how best to proceed in the Middle East to developing realistic economic strategies that will revitalize American businesses, we cannot afford to address these issues in terms of their political price tag. 

The American people have been sending a signal to Washington to govern, not rule and if both the Republicans and the Democrats continue to ignore them, at some point, the people are likely to take matters into their own hands. It is in this regard that many Americans are beginning to look at our government in terms of investment. It is our money that is being invested in government programs and those programs are more and more becoming very high risk. The question for Republicans, is, can they “capitalize” on this attitude?

There appear to be two key factors that will have significant influence on the Congressional races in 2010. First is the growing disappointment among moderate and independent voters with the policies of the Obama administration and the second is the segment of society that was once referred to as the “silent majority.” Both factors could be quite positive for the Republicans in 2010 but it is unclear if the leadership in the Party is paying any attention.

If Republican elites weren't paying attention before however, surely they can't ignore the significance of what has happened in the run up to the special election in New York’s 23^rd Congressional district. To ignore these rumblings from the majority of the American people is to do so at their political peril. 

Of all the events that have occurred since the elections in 2008, of great significance is the phenomenon referred to as “Tea Parties.” Political events have always been organized and sponsored by political party activists, candidates and special interest groups. Tea Parties by contrast, are the clearest example of actual grassroots politics to occur in tens of decades.

The key point that Republicans must take away from this newfound grassroots activism is to recognize the passion that is stirring in the electorate and tap into it, not view it as simply an emotional outburst from the great unwashed. To misread or dismiss this passion is to underscore exactly why the people are so agitated. Specifically, the government no longer represents their interests and is completely out of touch with real America.

Curiously, the current Republican leadership has been trying to "shush" these vocal members in their Party. They have expressed their concern with the vociferous outcry from the heathen masses that attended Tea Parties and crowded Town Hall meetings this past summer. They demand a more subservient posture, lest the sensitivities of the moderates be offended. 

If the Republican leadership continues to refuse to get on board with this new attitude in America, an attitude that is more than just an organized protest by some special interest group, they will lose far more than a few squishy moderate votes.

The left is in full campaign mode to diminish the momentum that has been generated by grassroots America. They are attempting to demean, humiliate and characterize those now fully engaged in the political process as “knuckle-dragging” Neanderthals. The Republican Party leadership would do well to ignore these taunts; the message their constituents are sending them is “Can you hear us now?”

The cliché is trite but appropriate; the sleeping giant that is mainstream America is now quite awake and is in no mood to be led, coerced, intimidated or threatened. In short, they fully expect those whom they elected to represent them, to legislate, not dictate. Should those in elected office fail to understand that point, they will learn the lesson of high-risk politics the hard way.  

Since the victories by the Democrats in the elections both in 2006 and their big win in 2008, the liberal media has been celebrating the demise of the GOP. Republicans, they say, are in a permanent state of decline. They declare we have no leader and we are without a rudder. Their glee in eulogizing our remains is unmistakable. A survey of the political landscape however, would indicate, to paraphrase Mark Twain, “the stories of our death have been greatly exaggerated.” 

There does however, appear to be a very real split among some who simply identify with the Republican Party and those who also identify themselves as conservatives. It is not a distinction without a difference. There is a clear segment within the Republican Party who find the conservative element distasteful, crude and an embarrassment. We must moderate our voices they tell us, we must be a centrist party and move to the middle if Republicans are to attract the moderate vote. 

To a large extent, these Republican “elites” have directed the GOP platform, designated many of its candidates and set the tone of the debate.  As a result, over the last two decades the Party of Ronald Reagan has drifted from Reagan’s conservative principles, back to a more liberal, centrist message that has sought to marginalize its more conservative base. Until recently, that base still remained loyal to the Republican Party in spite of a growing reluctance to embrace its current direction. 

Being ever the loyal soldiers, they even voted for John McCain over their serious objections to many of his “moderate” positions on the issues. But the times they are a changin’ the saying goes and with that change is a move by the conservatives in the Party to re-establish themselves as power players in what has become for them, a party of political acquiescence.  Increasing numbers of those in the Republican Party are beginning to use the acronym RINO, (Republican in name only) when referring to Republican moderates. 

The term was originally a sarcastic name for the more liberal among elected members in the Republican Party, who found it appropriate to vote more consistently with the Democrats than with their Republican counterparts. For many however, sarcasm has turned to disgust and for them, RINO is now a four letter word. Conservatives, it seems, are tired of holding their tongues, moderating their tone and following directions. They are very much intent on setting the tone, giving directions and admonishing the squishy among them with serious tongue-lashing.     

This new sense of purpose has also awakened the desire to shake off their political lethargy and become active participants in the political process. Nowhere has that desire been more evident than among those who organized and attended Tea Parties and Town Hall meetings in their hometowns and state capitals. Their message was simple and succinct; government works “for” the people, not the opposite.

It is in this regard that the ire of both conservatives and Republicans has been most vocal. Those voices have become louder as their serious concerns and attempts to contact their elected representatives have been summarily dismissed by the Democrat Majority in Congress. Moreover, these concerns, as polls confirm, are coming from a majority of the American people. To say that they are angry and concerned with a government that appears intent on “ruling” and not “governing,” would be an understatement.

The product of that anger has resulted in a majority of Republicans and conservatives who are fed up with a political party and a government that has over-stepped its constitutional authority and consequently with RINOs who support the practice.