IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of
America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one
people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them
with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the
separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of
Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of
mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government
becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People
to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying
its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in
such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that
Governments long established should not be changed for light and
transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that
mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are
accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations,
pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce
them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their
duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for
their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of
these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains
them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of
the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated
injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the
establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove
this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and
necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and
pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till
his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has
utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of
large districts of people, unless those people would
relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a
right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual,
uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their
public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into
compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for
opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of
the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to
cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers,
incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at
large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean
time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and
convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States;
for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of
Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their
migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new
Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing
his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the
tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their
salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither
swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their
substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies
without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and
superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction
foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws;
giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any
Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these
States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by
Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended
offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a
neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary
government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it
at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the
same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable
Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our
Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves
invested with power to legislate for us in all cases
whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his
Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our
towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign
Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and
tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty &
perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and
totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the
high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the
executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall
themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has
endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the
merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an
undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and
conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress
in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been
answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus
marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the
ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren.
We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their
legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We
have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and
settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and
magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common
kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably
interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been
deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must,
therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our
Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies
in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of
America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the
Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies,
solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and
of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are
Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all
political connection between them and the State of Great Britain,
is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and
Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude
Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other
Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for
the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the
protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other
our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

So, which is it Mr. Obama? Are you going to withdraw troops regardless of what’s happening on the ground - your stance while you were seeking the Democrat nomination, or is it that you want to keep the troops on the ground for as long as necessary - something you’ve nailed John McCain and the GOP on over and over again? As President, you don’t get to take your usual option and vote present, you’re the Commander in Chief - the guy who makes the decisions. Not A guy in the Congress who grandstands, the final decision maker.

A politician talking out of both sides of his mouth… that, my friends, is the antonym of “change.” However, when it comes to politicians, it’s the one thing we can all believe in.

PL <phantomlord@rochesterconservative.com>

They found her body in a shallow grave near her uncle’s house. The same uncle that dropped her off at the convenience store. The same uncle which, according to evidence already recovered from his laptop, orchestrated the emails which set up Brooke’s kidnappings. The same uncle that was arrested a couple days ago in an affidavit stating that he’s been molesting another girl for the last 5 years, since she was 9.

If that wasn’t enough, Brooke’s former stepfather, Raymond Gagnon, was charged with obstruction of justice for interfering with the investigation by messing with Jacques’ laptop. Reportedly, there is at least one more person involved who hasn’t been arrested yet.

The theories I heard in the last 24 hours, based on the affidavit of the other molested girl, is that the uncle was trying to force Brooke into a sex ring. He had told her and another girl that, whichever of them was more willing to enter the ring would live and the other would die.

Vermont is well known for being pretty lax with sex offenders. Judge Edward Cashman sentenced Mark Hulett to 60 days of jail after he molested a girl from age 6 to 10. The state has a “sex offender treatment” program which is supposed to cure their offenders, but the recidivism rate isn’t any lower and the state’s lawmakers refuse to implement Jessica’s Law, which would impose mandatory minimum sentences for anyone convicted of molesting a child. It is only one of 6 such states which haven’t passed some form of the law.

Fortunately, federal prosecutors have taken over the case, even though the entire events stayed within a state, on the grounds that an interstate communications mechanism was used. Pending an autopsy, they plan to seek the death penalty.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s time for us all to agree we need to stop trying to cure sex offenders. Most of them will admit that they can’t control themselves and they can’t be cured. Letting them back out to prey on our children again is simply crazy. Creating a haven, like Vermont, where they get a slap on the wrist, 60 days in the pokey and “treatment” is beyond ridiculous. It’s about time for Vermont to shape up, because if they don’t, cases like Brooke’s will only become more common there. There’s a time and place for having a bleeding heart, but it should be directed toward Brooke and her family, not the butchering psychopaths who did this to her.

PL <phantomlord@rochesterconservative.com>

“I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war,” Clark said of McCain on Sunday. “But he hasn’t held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded — that wasn’t a wartime squadron. He hasn’t been there and ordered the bombs to fall.”

BTW, VoteVets is currently running a campaign in support of what General Clark said. VoteVets also supports a non-veteran, Obama, for President. RV

Nathan Webster is an independent journalist who embedded with the US Army in Tarmiyah in Salahadin province, Iraq. Nathan is providing reports from Tarmiyah for The Long War Journal.

TARMIYAH, IRAQ: Iraqi children play afternoon soccer in the dusty field almost directly below the rooftop positions of Checkpoint 121, a sign of how far the city of Tarmiyah has come.

In 2007, when al Qaeda controlled this area 25 miles north of Baghdad, this same field was used for executions by beheading as shariah law was enforced. Painted-over graffiti on an unused water tower once threatened Coalition forces and the Iraqis who helped them.

American soldiers from Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 14th Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division, actually enjoy their rotations at this checkpoint in downtown Tarmiyah. Unlike the six days of straight-out missions and duties when they’re back at the Joint Security Station just a half-mile away, here they have time to sit back and relax, sort of.

“This is like our R&R,” one soldier said. Manning guard positions, generally on a four-hours-on, eight-off rotation, it’s a chance for them to catch up on lots of sleep. The Americans do not man traffic-control positions. That’s the Iraqis’ job.

The Americans do conduct nightly patrols down the market street, still lit after curfew, or along the dark north and south streets, where sounds from the marshes of the Tigris River are a noisy backdrop. There, the NCOs talk to the leaders of several Sons of Iraq and Iraqi Army checkpoints, making sure that they are manned, and verifying that the local Iraqis are doing their job.

The Americans at Joint Security Station Tarmiyah are already “outside the wire” of Camp Taji a few miles away, and soldiers at Checkpoint 121 are a little further outside, manning positions on Tarmiyah’s eastern edge, at a T-intersection of primary north-south entry points to the Sunni city of about 75,000 people.

The checkpoint is in a compound of buildings making up Bhukary Hall, a large meeting area just outside the city’s main marketplace. The squad-sized element of soldiers man rooftop positions and a Stryker infantry vehicle, adding even more firepower, is parked outside. A company of Iraqi soldiers are stationed here as well, with several armored vehicles. .

In Tarmiyah itself, the Iraqis handle most of the local security, with Sons of Iraq manning small positions throughout the city. A mix of Sons of Iraq members and Iraqi soldiers from the 37th Brigade work together, tenuously. The two groups don’t trust or like each other. The Shia-dominated Iraqi Army is not trusted in this Sunni region, and there are often disagreements between the local Sons of Iraq, who might recognize a local resident and give him the benefit of the doubt, and the Iraqi Army, who might demand a search anyway.

A recent daytime attack, by a bomb-laden moped driven by a 15-year-old boy, killed two Sons of Iraq members at a bunker just 200 yards away from Checkpoint 121 and just as significantly, 150 yards away from the market itself and a second bunker at the entrance to the home of Sheikh Imad, leader of the local Sons of Iraq, and his father, Sheikh Sa’ed Jassim, a very influential leader of the local Mashadani tribe. The explosion also injured about 15 local residents, but Sheikh Imad and Sheikh Jassim were uninjured.

In a tragic way, the deaths were not in vain. While it’s unlikely the moped would have reached the sheik’s home itself, just the act of being able to get the moped-borne bomb into the marketplace itself would have been a victory, likely by al Qaeda-linked terrorists, though some nationalist Sunni insurgent groups also operate in the area.

It was a lesson learned. Other checkpoints, either Sons of Iraq or Iraqi Army, had been in the habit of letting mopeds pass unmolested. Once again, soldiers at traffic-control points often learn what to check only after something bad has happened.

“The American soldiers at Checkpoint 121 don’t often respond to incidents, and their job here is almost exclusively overwatch. But, after the moped bomb, the first response was from soldiers at Checkpoint 121, who returned to their position once soldiers responded from the JSS itself. About a dozen wounded were brought to the nearby hospital and some were treated at the JSS itself.”

At the start of one two-day checkpoint cycle, U.S. Staff Sergeant Adam Lisius does his rounds, checking along the concertina wire and IA checkpoints. It’s important, he says, to double check that Iraqi soldiers haven’t wandered off and are actually at their positions.

At the first post Lisius checks, only one soldier is present. There should be two. Lisius, who knows a few Arabic phrases, tries to establish that the second Iraqi soldier will be returning. The lone Iraqi seems reassuring.

As he walks to the other checkpoint, however, Lisius doesn’t seem convinced. He checks one more position, but then walks back to the lone soldier. There he waits until the second Iraqi reappears from a bathroom break. All’s well.

On a patrol by another unit, U.S. Staff Sergeant Agaiotueu Tuiolemotu chides another Iraqi unit, this time the two soldiers in the checkpoint just outside Bhukary Hall. The two soldiers are sitting outside their bunker. The weapons are inside the bunker. The Iraqis’ .240 machine gun could be grabbed quickly by one of the Iraqi soldiers, but that soldier’s body would be completely unprotected – which defeats the point of the bunker.

The two Iraqis tell Tuiolemotu, through “Arthur” the interpreter – nicknamed like most Iraqis who work for the coalition to protect their identity - that they understand what he wants them to do, and that they’ll move into their bunker. But absolutely everything in their body language says they are telling the American only what he wants to hear, and as soon as he’s gone, they will resume their positions in the comfortable chairs in the cool night air.“Sitting in front of their weapons. What’s the point of that?” Tuiolemotu asks rhetorically, as the American squad re-enters the compound for a night’s sleep.

Nevertheless, the relationship between the Americans and the Iraqis is obviously a decent one, respectful and even friendly. In the morning, one Iraqi soldier, in his own company area outside the American compound, offers a bottle of hot chai tea up to the rooftop Americans. He makes an impressive underhanded throw to the second story, clearing both the roof and the high canvas-lined fenceline.

Spec Eric Cutchall, who over the past six months has picked up a decent bit of Arabic pleasantries – the most in the squad, the other soldiers say – yells “shukran,” or “thank you” to the Iraqis down below.

Last week marked the 20th anniversary of the mass hysteria phenomenon known as global warming. Much of the science has since been discredited. Now it’s time for political scientists, theologians and psychiatrists to weigh in.

What, discredited? Thousands of scientists insist otherwise, none more noisily than NASA’s Jim Hansen, who first banged the gong with his June 23, 1988, congressional testimony (delivered with all the modesty of “99% confidence”).

But mother nature has opinions of her own. NASA now begrudgingly confirms that the hottest year on record in the continental 48 was not 1998, as previously believed, but 1934, and that six of the 10 hottest years since 1880 antedate 1954. Data from 3,000 scientific robots in the world’s oceans show there has been slight cooling in the past five years, never mind that “80% to 90% of global warming involves heating up ocean waters,” according to a report by NPR’s Richard Harris.

The Arctic ice cap may be thinning, but the extent of Antarctic sea ice has been expanding for years. At least as of February, last winter was the Northern Hemisphere’s coldest in decades. In May, German climate modelers reported in the journal Nature that global warming is due for a decade-long vacation. But be not not-afraid, added the modelers: The inexorable march to apocalypse resumes in 2020.

This last item is, of course, a forecast, not an empirical observation. But it raises a useful question: If even slight global cooling remains evidence of global warming, what isn’t evidence of global warming? What we have here is a nonfalsifiable hypothesis, logically indistinguishable from claims for the existence of God. This doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist, or that global warming isn’t happening. It does mean it isn’t science.

So let’s stop fussing about the interpretation of ice core samples from the South Pole and temperature readings in the troposphere. The real place where discussions of global warming belong is in the realm of belief, and particularly the motives for belief. I see three mutually compatible explanations.

The first is as a vehicle of ideological convenience. Socialism may have failed as an economic theory, but global warming alarmism, with its dire warnings about the consequences of industry and consumerism, is equally a rebuke to capitalism. Take just about any other discredited leftist nostrum of yore – population control, higher taxes, a vast new regulatory regime, global economic redistribution, an enhanced role for the United Nations – and global warming provides a justification. One wonders what the left would make of a scientific “consensus” warning that some looming environmental crisis could only be averted if every college-educated woman bore six children: Thumbs to “patriarchal” science; curtains to the species.

A second explanation is theological. Surely it is no accident that the principal catastrophe predicted by global warming alarmists is diluvian in nature. Surely it is not a coincidence that modern-day environmentalists are awfully biblical in their critique of the depredations of modern society: “And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” That’s Genesis, but it sounds like Jim Hansen.

And surely it is in keeping with this essentially religious outlook that the “solutions” chiefly offered to global warming involve radical changes to personal behavior, all of them with an ascetic, virtue-centric bent: drive less, buy less, walk lightly upon the earth and so on. A light carbon footprint has become the 21st-century equivalent of sexual abstinence.

Finally, there is a psychological explanation. Listen carefully to the global warming alarmists, and the main theme that emerges is that what the developed world needs is a large dose of penance. What’s remarkable is the extent to which penance sells among a mostly secular audience. What is there to be penitent about?

As it turns out, a lot, at least if you’re inclined to believe that our successes are undeserved and that prosperity is morally suspect. In this view, global warming is nature’s great comeuppance, affirming as nothing else our guilty conscience for our worldly success.

In “The Varieties of Religious Experience,” William James distinguishes between healthy, life-affirming religion and the monastically inclined, “morbid-minded” religion of the sick-souled. Global warming is sick-souled religion.

Write to bstephens@wsj.com

In the process of running for President, McCain claims to have learned that what people want are secure borders first with no “comprehensive” reform to provide benefits and citizenship to those who came here illegally. However, as this weekend proved, McCain still hasn’t changed his mind and is willing to sell out you, me, the millions of people who immigrated legally, millions more who will be forced to pay benefits to people who came here with no respect for our laws, etc.

Many of our readers will vote for McCain because of his stance on Iraq. Others will vote for him because he’s more likely to give us conservative judges than Obama (just like Gerald Ford gave us Stevens and GHWB gave us Souter). But, what he did this weekend is the same thing he’s always done and goes to show, yet again, that he cannot be trusted. He sold out conservatives to pander to the left for support. What makes you think when he gets into office, he won’t continue to do the very same thing he’s spend the last 10 years doing in Congress? McCain is no conservative… in fact, he’s worse. McCain is Bill Clinton - finger in the wind, always following and never leading - in conservative clothing.

George Carlin used to proudly proclaim he didn’t vote, saying out logic was all wrong. If you vote for someone, you don’t get to complain when they screw up in your name. If you don’t vote, you can always say “hey, I didn’t vote for that guy.” Now, I’m not encouraging you to not vote… I’m encouraging you to not vote for McCain (or Obama). Do you really want McCain’s view to be the standard bearer of conservatism for the next 4 years? Do you want “comprehensive immigration reform” done in the name of conservatism? Do you want carbon caps, taxes and trading done in the name of conservatism? Do you want another Justice Souter in the name of conservatism? Conservatives don’t believe in selling out our country and as McCain has repeatedly shown, he is no conservative.

If McCain wins, it’ll spell the downfall of the Republican Party, just as the Compromise of 1850 spelled the doom of the Whig Party and ultimately lead to the rise of the GOP. You would think the senior party politicians would know that bit of trivia. Much as the issue of slavery divided the day then, illegal immigration will be the chasm today. Conservatives will be forced to seek a new party that agrees with our path. As Ohio Rep Lewis Davis Campbell proclaimed after the Whigs lost the next election, “We are slayed. The party is dead–dead–dead!” 8 years later, a newly form party elected their first President.

PL <phantomlord@rochesterconservative.com>

There was an episode of HBO's Curb Your Enthusiasm - one of the better shows on television - where Larry David begrudgingly brings his wife to the beach. "I don't get it, I don't understand people's fascination with the beach," David wryly says. "Don't you feel calmer being here, by the ocean?" his wife innocently asks. "I feel aggravated that I don't know what other people are getting," David replies in classic Seinfeldian form.

This is analogous to my own feelings about Sen. Obama. A buddy of mine, who supports Obama, recently wanted to know why this was the case. "Nick, don't you like hope?" was his literal inquiry.

"No, I like despair."

But after putting the sarcasm aside, the sincere spirit of his question wasn't lost on me. So I pressed on, wanting to know specifically what it was about the Illinois politician that gave my good friend so much "hope."

"He'll change things around."

"Like what?"

"Everything. But it doesn't really matter, Nick. The fact that he is inspiring so many young people like me… people that weren't ever interested in politics before. That is the change. That's the hope. That is what's so great about him."

I didn't dig too much deeper. Fair enough, I thought. This seems to be a prevalent opinion amongst Obama's supporters, and not just younger voters either. Apparently, the three-year senator has the ability to change people's views not just about vital issues, but about themselves and their perception of their own self-worth within a democracy. Thus you have tens of thousands of adoring fans at Obama rallies, wildly cheering his every other word. His followers applause and chant enthusiastically. t is a scene to see, to say the least.

While trying to talk about the Iranian nuclear program, or some other issue of modest importance, teenage girls often interrupt the candidate and shout "Barack, I love you!" to which Obama inclines himself to respond "And I love ya'll back" (followed by more wild applause). Sometimes he has to ask his crowds to quiet down a bit so he can hear himself think.

On occasion, Obama might co-host a night at the Apollo with Chris Rock, or talk about his pen pal e-mail exchanges with Scarlett Johansson, or fist bump his wife, or mimic rapper Jay-Z, or make some other hip reference to a matter of pop culture - to which the crowd uproars in He's-just-like-us comedic approval. (One might be reminded of Sonny, the intimidating mob boss from De Niro's film A Bronx Tale: "You see how all the guys feel compelled to laugh when I tell a joke? I know I'm funny. But I'm not that funny.")

Rather than have smaller, intimate town hall meetings where attendees, concerned citizens all, can question and challenge and debate one-on-one the candidate who must earn their trust and respect, Obama's audience members do not normally speak, but are spoken to as they listen attentively - in widespread concurrence - to the teleprompter-delivered inspiring words of speechwriter Jon Favreau (of "Yes we can" fame).

Makeshift poster cards help with the reinforcement: "We are the change we've been hoping for," "We are the hope we've been waiting for," "Change we can believe in," "Hope we can hope in," "Hope that we can change," "Believing we can hope and change," "One hope with one purchase of change," "Free coffee and doughnuts for everyone," etc. - the frenzy is so frantic, so odd, and yet so genuine, that people periodically faint (if you think this is an embellishment, YouTube it).

The political hybrid of Beatlemania-like audience behavior, Hare Krishna-like transcendence, and Jim Jones-like adoration is really quite fascinating. The campaign's paraphernalia is borderline messianic. On t-shirts, Obama's face rests at the forefront of an African sunset; on others, his gaze embodies that of a sanctified Che Guevara.

On the campaign trail, we are consistently presented with examples of subtle arrogance, self-referential greatness, presumption, and indignation.

Obama's campaign, for instance, temporarily replaced the official presidential seal with a make-believe look-alike seal to prop up on podiums for the Chicago messiah to speak in front of. Instead of "Seal of the President of the United States," it reads "Obama for America" followed by the senator's website. Rather than "E Pluribus Unum" - "Out of one, many" — the modified Obama seal reads "Vero Possumus," Latin for "Yes, we can." On Obama's presidential seal, the stern-looking eagle, reminiscent of the eagle on the actual presidential seal, is carrying no shield but rather the Obama campaign's logo (which is interpreted as a long road traveling its way to the horizon to meet what is either a giant "O" for Obama… or a large sunrise, which, someone should tell the senator, is extraordinarily similar to the insignia of Imperial Japan).

In Obama we trust, I suppose. Who needs elections?

In just over a year of campaigning, Obama has become an iconoclast… of himself. Mere curiosity as to why equates to heresy first, sympathy second, and proselytization third. Just how can I be missing out on all of this? Don't I like hope?

I hesitant to go so far as to imply a definite cult of personality, but it does amount to an almost eerie I'll-follow-you-anywhere support base. Mark Morford of the San Francisco Chronicle even pondered the possibility that Obama might be an "enlightened being" in a recent column:

Barack Obama isn't really one of us. Not in the normal way, anyway…

Dismiss it all you like, but I've heard from far too many enormously smart, wise, spiritually attuned people who've been intuitively blown away by Obama's presence - not speeches, not policies, but sheer presence…

Many spiritually advanced people I know… identify Obama as… that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.

An actual adult wrote this. Barack Obama, it turns out, apparently exudes an "attuned" aura not just in the figurative sense, but in a "spiritual" and "intuitive" sense. He is bringing about a "new way of being on the planet" in this "bizarre earthly experiment" - life? - and his "sheer presence" soothes our souls and enhances the well-being of our spirituality. He is helping us genetically and emotionally "evolve." Philosopher. Peacemaker. Socratean. Aristotelian.

And all this from a 40-something community organizer from Southside, Chicago, no less. Who knew? Mr. Morford, ironically, is fully comfortable with the admission that all of this hoopla speaks "not just to reason." No kidding.

As citizens, we should require more of ourselves than simply preferring a manifested personality - in this case, a smooth-talking, suave Chicago politician - due to freshly discovered avenues of self-empowerment. After all, this is a nation-state, not a Billy Blanks workout video. National interest, not self-enlightenment, ought to be our moral compass; "change" that makes our country stronger and more prosperous is the standard. Whether it makes one a more aware voter or cognitive citizen is merely a beneficial byproduct.

What, then, is to explain the quick ascendancy of a recently relatively unknown young man? Of course, there is much sincerity in his support (my friend, for instance). But a large share of this pandemonium can be attributed to iconoclasm and a frenzy of psychosis.

That someone else's orating abilities and skills as a rhetorician might actually alter one's own acuity and conception of the world - that one might actually allow that to be possible - is something that individual must admit to him or herself, come to peace with, and reconcile with internally.

Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Nicholas Guariglia is a polemic and essayist who writes on Islam and Middle Eastern geopolitics. He can be reached at nickguar@comcast.net.

Okay, John McCain still has a long way to go before he bowls me over. I would love to see him come out in favor of the traditional marriage amendment in his home state of Arizona. I would also love to see him come out in support of the Federal Marriage Amendment. After what has happened in Massachusetts and California, that being two rogue state supreme courts and two governors illegally ordering same-sex marriage, we need the Federal Marriage Amendment.

It would be great to have the pro-family movement leaders such as Tony Perkins of Family Research Council, Don Wildmon of American Family Association, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, and other conservative Christian leaders speak out against what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts and now what Arnold Schwarzenegger has done in California.

Notwithstanding this, we still have a battle for the US Supreme Court we must consider. A hat tip to one of my readers Joyce for sending the following email:

Today should wake everyone up.

Joyce

Senator McCain it is high time you publicly let evangelicals know your thoughts on Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzenegger’s illegal orders for same-sex marriage certificates. Something tells me though that if Senator McCain believes either one of these states are in play then he will not do so. I even fear him putting Mitt Romney on the ticket.

Time will tell…