John McCain was in Defiance, Ohio Thursday. A city of about 17,000 that sits 55 miles southwest of Toledo and only 45 miles east of Fort Wayne, Indiana. One would think being so close to two larger cities in two red states that are starting to lean Obama, McCain would draw a huge crowd. No such thing. Not only did McCain’s new pal Joe not show up for the rally, neither did many others. In fact, only 6,000 were on hand to see John McCain and out of those were 4,000 elementary, middle, and high school children, and their teachers. The entire Defiance School District of 2,500 attended along with at least three surrounding schools districts in the area busing their schoolchildren and teachers to fill the remaining seats.

Last week when John McCain was in New Mexico, he almost drew 1000 people. The beginning of October Michelle Obama was in Boulder Colorado, 9,700 people showed up to hear her speak and no one had to bus any children in to fill the seats. When Barack Obama was in Denver on Sunday, he had over 100,000 people show up to hear him speak, a couple hours later he arrived in Ft. Collins Colorado to 50,000 people waiting to greet him. People drive from all over Colorado and neighboring states to listen to both Barack and Michelle Obama and Joe Biden. The Obama’s will be appearing together in Pueblo Colorado on Saturday, that’s about two hours or so from north Denver suburbs but I know many from the north will be making the trek south.

You know John and I feel since you always refer to me as your friend that I may call you John; it does not help matters when your staff is throwing real supporters of yours out of your rallies because of the way they look, because they “might,” protest. Especially in Iowa, at a University, with the college kids whose votes you need.  Yes, there were a few who had protested at another one of your rally’s but the rest were honest to goodness supporters. Too bad, most had already cast their votes. Perhaps that is why only a couple thousand adults showed up in Ohio.

Colorado has a wicked storm brewing over the Rockies’ in the form of Colorado’s Republican Secretary of State, Mike Coffman. Coffman also happens to be running against Democrat Hank Eng for the seat being vacated by Republican U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo in Colorado’s 6th  Congressional District. A lawsuit was filed in Denver’s federal court Friday against Mike Coffman to force him and his office to reinstate the more than 30,000 registered voters that were recently purged by the Secretary of State. 

Advancement Project, who filed the lawsuit, states Coffman illegally disqualified 26,931 voters by removing them from voter rolls between July 31 and October 31. Federal law prohibits purging voters within 90 days of Election Day unless they have died, been convicted of a felony or requested removal.  In addition, they claim another 14,089 voters were missing from that same list when a comparison was done; those names disappeared between August 15 and October 13.

As if that were not enough another 5,000 newly registered voters aren’t registered due to a check box on the new voter registration forms. In the IDENTIFCATION (Required) section voters were to enter their Colorado driver’s license number, OR Department of Revenue ID number OR if you have neither “must provide the last four digits of your Social Security number”. It goes on to say, “If you do not have a driver’s license number, a Dept. of Revenue Id number, or a Social Security number, you must check the appropriate boxes.” The “NOTE” at the bottom of that section states, “If the identification section is left blank and you do not check the boxes indicating you do not have identification you will not be registered to vote”.  One check box says “I do not have a Colorado Driver’s License or Dept. of Revenue Identification Number”, the other box says “I do not have a Social Security Number”.

Thousands of people put their Social Security number and did not check the box saying they don’t have a driver license; others put both their driver license and social security number without checking any box. What’s the problem? Mike Coffman told County Clerks these applications cannot be registered until “corrected”. While two big Republican counties who have Republican clerks have disregarded Coffman’s order saying other laws favor the voter there are still thousands of new registered voters that as of this writing won’t be given a ballot.

Colorado’s Attorney General and Bush appointee, John Suthers, says in his opinion that “people may use their SSN only if they don’t have a Colorado driver license or ID…” Why wasn’t it worded like that on the registration form, the current wording is confusing. Most people have their SSN memorized but not their DL so it’s logical many would put the last 4 digits of their SSN as a matter of convenience. If a person put their SSN, with or without their Colorado DL number, why would they check the box saying they don’t have a DL if they do? 

According to Mike Coffman, "Voters can rest assured that maintaining accurate voter rolls is our top priority”. I can assure you Mr. Coffman that not many are resting including I’m sure Hank Eng knowing that you are counting the ballots.  

Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman has characterized Obama supporters as 'cult-like', and has complained that the media has not given Obama sufficient scrutiny.

Krugman, considered to be a neo-Keynesian economist, taught at the London School of Economics before joining the faculty of Princeton University, in 2000. He also served as a consultant for an advisory board for Enron in 1999 prior to joining the New York Times as a columnist in 2000.

Krugman is a member of The Group of Thirty (G30) which was founded in 1978 by the Rockefeller Foundation  which also provided initial funding for the body. Its first chairman was Johannes  Witteveen, the former managing director of the International Monetary Fund. Its current chairman of trustees is Paul Volcker.

We have separation of church and state in the United States of America because the state - all states - exalt themselves above all other groupings of people.

When we ask ourselves, ‘what is the state?’ We quickly realize that we must first ask, ‘ what are people?’ Human beings are individual organisms. Long age, however, these individuals came to realize that they could accomplish a great deal more as members of groups than as individuals.

The individuals formed families, clans, tribes, and eventually states. At first city-states, then groups of city- states which became nation-states. The state is itself, however, a group of people.

So, the answer to our question - ‘What is the state’ - is that the state is an organization - a group of individuals. These individuals may originally be a tribe, a clan, or a family which has become capable of influencing - exerting power over - the other groups within that particular state.

Organizations exercise power through control. To effectively exercise control the state has to be the focus of the individual’s loyalty. The state must, therefore, eliminate the other organizations within the state which are capable of competing with it for the loyalty of the individual.

We can now understand that the chief proponents of the rise of a state are, themselves, a group and that they are the dominant group within the state. It doesn’t matter whether this dominant group is an aristocracy, or a group of businessmen. Whatever it’s composition the group’s continued dominance is dependent upon control. The state must, therefore, eliminate the tribal leader, the clan chief, and the family patriarch through assimilation, or execution.

In the context of a struggle for dominance the priesthood is as great a rival of the state for the loyalty of the individual as are the tribe, the clan, and the family. Like the tribal leader, the clan chief, and the family patriarch the chief of high priest can be assimilated or executed but not the entire priesthood.

Assimilation of the high priesthood is not practical because the head of the state must also become the state religion’s high priest or another individual must be invested with that power. State religions run the risk of undermining the loyalty of those who practice a different faith. Power sharing with a high priest might result in a rivalry for control of the state.

The question then becomes how best to dominate the priesthood without turning them into rivals or martyrs. When the question is posed in this fashion the obvious solution is the "separation" of church and state. Being separate from the state the priesthood can be dominated by the state through the "rule of law" as easily as any other group of individuals within the state.

Separation of church and state is, therefore, a method of control and dominance by the state. That is why the state extends tax free status to those religious organizations which do not meddle in "politics." That is, those religious organizations who do not concern themselves with whether the state is actually managed in a fair and equitable manner.

What most of you aren't understanding is the depth of the anger on the right and left of the electorate in this country.

That is what John McCain is hearing at his rallies and you are seeing on CNN.  Democrats don't hear it at their rallies because the left long ago discarded the democratic party.

This anger is not something that will somehow evaporate and just go away.  The right is just now discovering how much they have been misled and betrayed.

Taking care of the needs of the citizens is not PANDERING - it is what ruling classes do to stay in power.