The statement above is one of the fundamental tenets of those from the religious right or social conservatives, as some would like to call themselves. They justify their stance on abortion by quoting several bible passages (even though the bible does not specifically mention anything about abortion) and acting as if though they are the most caring individual in this world. Their fundamental believes allows them to speak very passionately about this issue. While people should depend of their religious beliefs to formulate their view on several issues, it is important that we apply our religious beliefs in its entirety and not limit it to specific issues. Furthermore, there is everything wrong with the school of thought of those who are pro-choice. This school of thought contradicts itself in so many ways and a few of them are highlighted below.

It is the same people who are anti-abortionist that believe it is not the government’s role to care for the poor. In the United States, children under the age of 6 are the poorest group. Furthermore, there are currently about 5million children in the United States without access to basic healthcare. According to a recent study, most children lacking in health care and are at risk of dying tend to be from low-income, ethnic minority groups. In the US, America-Indian and Alaska-Native infants are nearly 50 percent more likely to die than white infants, and African American infants are 2.4 times more likely to die than white infants. It seems pretty logical that we will want to take care of all these children when they are born. Preserving the sanctity of life is beyond the stage of its conception; we must also preserve life when it is out of the womb.

There are a lot of talk about preserving life and all that sweet stuff. Are my anti-abortion friends aware that this country has the second highest infant mortality rate in the world? In addition, The US ranks behind most industrialized nations on the best or worst place for the well-being of a mother and child. If we are so adamant about the sanctity of life, why not address these issues?

Let’s get off our high moral horse here for a second people and have a good dialogue about abortion and our religious value. While you people think that abortion is immoral, it is also immoral that millions of children in this country are suffering as a result of our neglect. While we go around trying to restrict a woman’s right to choose, let us also recognize that there are millions of children alive right now crying for our help and we must hear their voice. My question to you people is…..WWJD?

If we are so adamant about the sanctity of life, why not address these issues? I am pro-life. I am for caring for the poor and the sick. That child born into that poor family has done nothing wrong, let us take care of him/her. The choice is for us to make now.

Sen. Obama: Although he is still ahead in delegate counts, Sen. Obama has to find a new strategy. One of the main reason why he lost this past Tuesday was because his campaign failed to address the shot that was being thrown at them a day before the primaries. Most notable, the NAFTA comment by one of his surrogates and his ties with the Chicago business man who is now on trial. His campaign simple ignored those charges and act as if though voters were not paying attention. They were basically hanging on hoping to clinch the Texas and Ohio hereby, forcing Hillary Clinton out of the race. This is simply a rookie mistake.

Here is the new strategy that he needs to employ.

1. He needs to prove to the American people that he is actually strong on the issue of national security. His inability to articulate that to voters is what made “middle of the night phone call” ad by the Clinton campaign highly successful. He needs to calm down on his “I didn’t vote for the war” rhetoric but rather focus on communicating his plan for maintaining America’s economic and security interest in the world. The reality is that we are already in Iraq and the American people recognize that. I did not vote for the way rhetoric is not going to get us out of the quagmire that we are currently in.

2.He needs to balance his message about change and hope with a clear articulation of his policies to voters. This is his best chance of eradicating the critique that he is running his campaign on “false hopes.” He is going to have a very tough time in the general election against McCain if he does not start doing that now.

3.He also need to find a way to maintain his composure when responding to attacks from the republicans, Clinton campaign and the media. The speech he gave on Tuesday night is a manifestation of the effect their attacks has had on his style and demeanor. He cannot afford to let them throw him off his game, because come the GE, the republicans are going to be throwing all kinds of stuff at him.

4. Keep breaking the fundraising record.

Sen Clinton: She has run a very incredible campaign in the past week. Her team was able to take advantage of the pompous attitude of the Obama campaign by increasing their attacks on him, developing a very effective media strategy (attack on the media’s biasness, comedy show appearance, ect), and keeping Bill away from here. The reason why she lost 11 straight primaries was because she was using the same ‘ol strategy of throwing cheap political shots and not focusing on the real issues. However, she still has a lot of work to do. Here is what her campaign needs to do.

1. Stop crying about Florida and Michigan!!!!! Focus all your energy on winning the upcoming primaries and worry about the other states later. Her concern right now should be making it to the convention in a pretty good shape. She will also alienate a lot of supporter is she keeps asking for those states to be counted, because she clearly broke the rule by keeping her name on the ballots in those states despite agreeing not to.

2. Continue to make her case as to why she is stronger on keeping America safe from external threat.

3. Release her tax records as soon as possible. It can be easily predicted that her tax records are not going to help her campaign. She needs to go ahead and release it now so that people can scrutinize it now……it will all die down before the Pennsylvania primary.

4. Keep bringing in some cash. She is going to need all the money that she can to compete against Barack.

5. Call for a minimum of 2 debates before Pennsylvania primary.

Sen McCain: This has to be one of the luckiest men alive now. He has all the time in the world to get himself geared up and ready for the GE while the democrats work to sort out their mess. Here is what he needs to do.

1. Start building a relationship with the conservative base. He needs to let them know that he may not have a “conservative” record, but he will elect conservative judges to the bench. That is all they want.

2. Travel to Iraq and Afghanistan. His foreign policy rhetoric is his best chance for winning the GE. He need to go to Iraq and make some assessments on what needs to be done in the region to improve the political and security situation there. This will also help to bolster his argument that he is the most experienced person to lead this country in time of war.

3. Keep President Bush away from the campaign trail.

4. Find the most conservative running mate. I will definitely recommend Mike Huckabee or Fl. Gov Charlie Crist.

5. Reduce the attack on Sen. Obama. He can attack the dems’ policies, but need to stay away from attacking candidates. It’s simple not a wise thing to do.

However, the administration current policy in Africa is simple not sustainable for the following reasons:

1. Without strong, vibrant and viable political institutions across all countries in Africa, AIDS, malaria, starvation, etc, are still going to be prevalent in the region. Although few countries in Africa, such as Tanzania have made significant progress in fighting corruption and improving the lives of their citizenry, majority of other African nations have failed to do so. African countries, such as Nigeria, are becoming increasingly corrupt with the unequal distribution of oil revenue which has led to the oppression of several minority groups. Most African states also have a strong executive with weak judicial and legislative branches. The next US president should put money into building these governmental institutions so that there can be a system of checks and balances in these developing countries.

2. The problem with President Bush’s policy is that, it fails to address the root causes of the problems that Africa continues to face. Merely giving country money to buy mosquito nets is not going to improve the quality of health care, but rather, a very strong health care institution will (common sense). African political leaders continue to spend their legislative time discussing their salary increase as oppose to addressing the critical issues that are facing their countries. Meanwhile, they and their family member can travel to Western countries to get adequate health care at the expense of their own people. These African leaders are for the most part, uneducated, corrupt, and uncommitted to the process of development in their country. Rather, they use their political positions as a means of acquiring wealth for themselves and sending their children to elite universities in the West, while the education system is their country is decapitated.

3. There is also the issue of political instability. According to a report conducted by the Foreign Policy: The Failed State Index 2007, 8 African States are listed in the top 10 list of Failed States in the world. Failed States is a term used to define States whose central government is so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territories. Example of failed states includes Chad, Sudan, Somalia, Kenya, Congo, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, etc. Currently, there is some form of political violence (Clannism) enfolding in these countries. These countries have also been inflicted with post-election conflict, most notable in Kenya, which has led to the death of over 3000 people. Focusing on helping these countries address their internal issues will be a more sensible approach to take in helping Africa move forward.

The Bush administration continues to talk about democracy in Africa, but has failed to put money behind it. The west has to realize that the process of democratization in Africa is going to take a lot of patience and time, mainly because Africa lacks competent leaders who are willing to facilitate the process of democracy in their countries. For example, rather than welcoming the support of foreign nations, Kenyan ministers have criticized foreign nations for “meddling” in the internal affairs of Kenya. This is an unfair criticism because Kenyan political elites have proved themselves incapable of finding a peaceful solution to the post-election turmoil that has unfolded in the country for the past 2 months.

Finally, the democracy trend in Africa is very important and it has to be supported. Africa continues to play a significant role in the global economy with its increasing role in the global oil market, important voted in international organizations such as the UN, and its increasing role in confronting the global war on terror. The next president of the United States will have a huge burden to address all these issues. Failure to do so will only destroy the faith of many African men, women and children who continue to “sing a melody brushed in the colors of tomorrow, certain to be rich in confident consistency and dripping with hope…”- Cydney DuPree’

Her tragic death certainly comes as a shock to all those who continue to envision and work towards a free Pakistani society and a more stable Middle East. Pakistan matters on the global stage; it is one of the major allies on the global fight on terrorism. Even though Gen. Musharraf’s government has failed to produce any significant result, the United States continues to supply billions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan to eradicate Al-qaeda and the Taliban from the tribal regions of Pakistan. Rather than focusing on dissolving the numerous terror cells that are emerging in the tribal areas of Pakistan, Gen. Musharraf has chosen to focus on legitimizing his own power by taking a grip on power and terrorizing the people of Pakistan by declaring an unnecessary emergency rule.

The state of Pakistan is currently in a lose/lose situation. There is the ever growing threat from Osama and his people (Taliban) and there is also the threat from Gen. Musharraf’s government, who recently fired majority of the supreme court justices, suspended the rule of law and declared a state of emergency. Musharraf recently took off his military uniform and assumed the position of a caretaker government that will lead Pakistan into a its first democratic election in about a decade.

Who killed Benazir Bhutto? Al-Qaeda should definitely be the no. 1 suspect. The terrorist organization has sought to destabilize Pakistan as part of its on going campaign to wage war against the United States and its allies. Al-Qaeda has always been after Mrs. Bhutto. She was the first female prime minister of a Muslim country and she was very well on her way to leading her party into the upcoming parliamentary election in January. She has also been very vocal against extremism. There is no doubt that Al-Qaeda is intimidated by her emerging popularity amongst the Pakistani people, and she is the last person that they want in power. There was an assassination attempt on her life when she returned to Pakistan in October, which most people believe was largely orchestrated by Al-Qaeda.

Gen. Musharraf could also be responsible for Bhutto’s assassination, or at least, know of the plot to assassinate her. Why would he want her killed? She has mounted a very strong opposition to Musharraf’s party and he is not happy with that, because of his deep thirst for power. Musharraf has to hold on to power, because he will be forced out of his country if he ever leaves power. Another reason why he would want her killed, is to over-play the danger that Pakistan faces from Islamic extremist, and to further legitimize why the US should continue to show Pakistan with billions of dollars to combat these enemies. There are two main reasons to believe that Musharraf’s government played a role in this. 1. His government provided poor security to Ms. Bhutto when she returned home to an assassination attempt in October and there was no concrete investigation set in place to find those responsible for that attack. 2. Ms. Bhutto never received the specific security measures that she requested from the Pakistani government. The Pakistani government, knowing that she is campaigning, should have provided her with extra security detail given the current security landscape of Pakistan.

Whatever the case maybe, this is truly a challenging day for all those who have a great respect for democracy. Her death is a reminder that the fight for democracy in our world is not going to take place without a heavy price. She was a woman who believed in a principle and stood by it until her death. Her death should send a strong message to the government of Pakistan, that a responsible transition to a free and democratic society with a leader that has an enormous respect for the rule of law, is the ultimate answer to a better Pakistan.

Why should you care? In 2007, an estimated 2.1 million people died of AIDS-related illnesses. It is imperative that we not ignored the pain and suffering that our fellow humans are undergoing. We must hear their cry!!!!

What can you do? You do not have to do much, just educate yourself. Below are several organizations that are making the effort to find a cure for this illness and giving hope to those that are still living with it. UNAIDS, AMFAR, International HIV/AIDS Alliance, The Body, ActionAid International,

Mike Huckabee definitely had the best performance all the night. He futher proved himself as a serious candidate by articulating his plans and responding calmly to attacks from other candidates. His deamenor, when responding to the questions were exceptional. He was very well composed, articulate, sharp, and possessed all the other characteristics that some will consider un-republican. There is no doubt that he is the smartest of all the candidtates. His high point throughout the whole night came when he responded to a criticism from Mitt Romney about his immgration record. Mike still has a tough battle to fight, but I think this debate has turned him into a more serious candidate. I thought his joke about sending Hillary Clinton to space was pretty funny. Therefore, I give him a B+

Next we have the Senator from Arizona, John McCain. He did a pretty good job responding to criticism from other candidate and as usual, he did exceptional when it came to foreign policy. He continued his usual rhetoric about fiscal responsibily, by outlining that he will veto every pork barrel spending sent to his desk if elected president. This has to be his best debate performance so far. I give him a B.

Ok, so the rest the candidates get no grades from me, simply because they do not deserve one. Here is why?

Guiliani failed to keep with the hype about him, continuing this rhetoric about what he did when he was the mayor of New York. He attempted to take a stab at Mitt by accusing him of have a “santuary mansion”- having “illegal immigrants” work on his yard- but Mitt put him right back in his place by questioning Rudy’s logic. Every answer that Rudy gave went like this…….When I was the Mayor of New York, I reduced crime rate, abortion rate, and drought rate…….Rudy, you need to be able to appeal to people in rural areas and small cities. What the hell does what you did about crime rate in New York has to do with a farmer in the middle of Arkansas somewhere who is trying to keep his farm open?

Romney: This dude is a total joke. He proved to be dumber than a whole lot of people thought he was. Mitt Romney can flip flops on cue, he changes his mind every second. I think he should stay at home and keep raising his 5 kids or however many he has.

Fred Thompson: Fred is Fred, I don’t even know what to say about him. The guy puts everybody to sleep whenever he opens he mouth. I have to say that he is the only person that I find to be less intelligent that President Bush. He should have stuck to his role on Law Order, or start a late night comedy show because he seems to like making jokes.

Tancredo: How the heck can you have Tancredo as your last name, and you are staunchly against “illegal immigrants”? This dude just want to put a fence on everything.

Ron Paul: Come back to REALITY sir. We leave in the 21st century where the society is much more complex than the past. Failure to consider the realities of our societal structures and the role that the government should play in our society, will cause a great disarray in our society.

I know I am forgetting someone, but that means that whoever it is doesn’t deserve a recognition.

Ok, so here is the update. In the republican presidential race, Rudy Guiliani is leading on the national poll, while Mitt Romney is slowly breathing down his neck and creeping up behind him. Another candidate, Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, has also made some progress in the past couple of weeks, picking up what some call a very “prestigious” endorsement from the greatest ass kicker of all time…..Chuck Norris. Meanwhile, I am still trying to figure out since when did Chuck Norris become such a influential public figure that he can help to revive a presidential campaign.

Oh, and of course there is the good ‘ol boy- Fred Thompson- who some conservatives refer to as the next Ronald Regan, even though I am yet to find another human being that is dumber than Fred Thompson. This Fred dude was hyped up so much before he entered into the race that everybody actually thought that he was going to be the next president of the United States. He was second in several national polls with a couple of point behind Guiliani, before he entered into the race. But Fred has definitely failed his supporters, they have finally gotten a chance to see how dull he is. What were they thinking???? This guy does not even use the full minute given to him at debates to respond to questions, when most of the other candidate, including Ron Paul, have to be stopped for going over the allotted time. Let me give you a brief scenario of how Fred is going to respond tomorrow night…….

Anderson Cooper: Sen. Thompson, If elected President, how will you deal with the Russia (which Thompson recently referred to as the “Soviet union”)

Fred: Leave it up to the States.

Anderson Cooper: Sen. Thompson, if elected President, what would you do about the Iraq War?

Fred: Leave it up to the States.

You gotta be kidding me if this guy even gets 1 vote during the primary. Fred obviously wants to leave everything to the state, and I am not sure how far we will get as a nation if we let this dude be the president of this country.

Ok, so the bottom line is that the debate tomorrow night is going to be very interesting and it will once again give the candidates a chance to answer directly to the voters. I will be back tomorrow night to give an analysis about who came out as the ultimate ”douchebag” of the night.

The fact that Sen. Hillary won this debate further proves that she is too much of a ‘polarizing’ figure. The events that unfolded days before the election set the stage for her performance in the ‘Sin City’ debate. The media, especially, came into this debate with their eyes focused on Sen. Clinton, everybody wanted to know is she will ‘bounce back’ from all the attacks and mishaps that has been laid heavily upon her campaign, which was unfare to the other candidate. To put it in simple terms, all eyes were on the senator and that worked to the disadvantage of all the other candidate. The fact that she had a lot of supporters in the room (with audience ‘booing’ Obama and Edwards when they offered criticism towards Hillary) further helped her and gave her the appearance that she knew what the heck she was talking about, in other words, she felt very comfortable because she was at home. However, I must give her the credit for a job well done last night, there is no doubt that this is probably the best debate that she has ever had. Everything worked in her favor, she got the most time and also the most criticism. I give her a B.

I am still trying to figure out what is the matter with Sen. Obama. His performance last night was way below par; he simply failed to build upon the momentum that he had gained coming into this debate. His answers were long, drawn out, far from being precise, and very vague. He clearly showed a lack of confidence while he was standing on that stage and it easily showed that he was totally unprepared for the debate. Here is my advice to the Obama campaign: 1. There is nothing wrong with “flip-flopping.” This is one of the main factors that is helping Sen. Clinton. You have to be able to change your mind on issues because situations change, and you have to be able to adapt. When he was asked about the Iraq war, he still stood by his principle of “no progress in Iraq,” and that he will pull the troops out withing the first 18months of his term. This is definitely far from reality, there has definitely been a significant progress in the Iraq war, the violence has drastically reduce even though there has been little progress made on the political front. Sen. Obama has to acknowledge this, times change Sir and you have to adapt. 2. Do not focus on the damges that were done during this debate, continue to go after the voters. We all know that Obama does better when he is in front of a friendly audience, which is one similiarity that he has with Pres. Bush. President Bush does terrible in debate, but terrific in front of a friendly audience. 3. Obama needs to balance his criticism of Sen. Clinton with articulating his plans for creating a greater America. There is no doubt that this is one of his worst performance, therefore I give him a C.

As for John Edwards, I feel very sorry for the guy. There is no doubt that he has the right vision for where this country needs to go next i.e fighting poverty, re-shaping America’s view in the international community, limit the influence of lobbyists in out political system, etc. However, he lime light has been shadowed by the battle between Obama and Hillary. I think he will make a good Vice-President, we need someone who is not going to talk stuff about other countries all the time (Dick….Cheney). I give him a C+.

In my view, Joe Biden won the debate. He was very articulate as usual, and brought the candidates back to focusing on issues after they took a brief detour barking at each other. He is also very relaxed and funny, he kept the audience enagaged and made them laugh throughout the whole debate. There is no doubt that he as the best foreign policy credibility. I give him a B+

As for the other candidate, they are a waste of time. I’d rather watch “Billo” on Foxnews before I hear them say a word.

The first question that we all should be asking is not who is the right person, BUT rather, what does this country need at this particular time and in the near to continue to maintain her global influence and protect her interest. It is only when we answer this question that we can then come up with the qualifications for the ‘right’ (right as in right, not republican right) person to lead this country.

This is what I think that this country needs; a leader who can implement policies that will curtail all the chaos that we currently have in the international community. The Middle East is in a huge quagmire; of course we have the ‘long-term’ Iraqi and Afghanistan War which has cost an estimate of $1 trillion to date and will cost about $1.6 trillion dollar by 2009; Pakistan, which happens to be our most important ally in the fight against Islamist extremist and Al-Qaeda in the mid-east is on the verge of collapsing; Iran’s pursuit of Weapon of Mass Destruction (even though there is no evidence that currently support that notion); Palestine has literally broken up into two and there is still the on-going conflict with Israel; Syria is becoming increasingly influence by Iran, Hezbollah (a terrorist organization) is also gaining a lot of influence in the country and also pursuing nuclear technology; the recent fall out in US-Russia relations over the United State proposed missile defense system in Eastern Europe which the Russians highly disagree with; there is genocide going on in the Darfur region; and I can certainly go on and on, but I believe you get the point. 

What does all this mean? We need a leader that can employ the right policies to deal with all this issues in a timely manner. The need for the United States to have workable foreign policy, especially in the mid-east, to deal with all these issues has never been greater. The last thing we need is a president (Fred Thompson and his other “tough” on terrorism brothers) who will come in and maintain the status quo or implement policies that will continue to cause chaos in the international community. Americans have to wake up and see that there is a lot at stake for this country. We need a leader that has the knowledge and experience in the areas outlined as they will become more and more important as the year unfolds. That is why I am of the notion that the only qualified candidate is……ding ding ding ding….The Senator from Delaware, Sen. Joseph Biden.

In a recent interview with MSNBC, Lynne Cheney (Cheney’s wife), revealed that while researching her husband’s genealogy for her new book “Blue Skies, No Fences,” she discovered that her husband shares the same ancestry with Sen. Obama eight century ago. Apparently, the two political heavyweights are related through a French immigrant named Mareen Duvall, who married Susannah Duvall.

Now, the fact that this research was done by a “Cheney” brings into question the credibility of the research itself. Why? Because it was her husband who also made the case that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be false, but he still stands by his word despite the fact that there has been no proof that Iraq had WMDs. I am not saying that it is not true, but as a Nation, we should question any “research” coming from the Cheneys’.

Apparently, Sen. Obama and Pres. Bush also share a common ancestor. They share the same great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents — Samuel Hinckley and Sarah Soole Hinckley of 17th century Massachusetts. Basically, they are 11th cousins.

But here is one that we absolutely cannot doubt, President Bush and Mr. Cheney are also related through a completely different ancestor. As one reporter rightly put it, “We leave it to you to figure out their relationship.” All we can do is thank God that someone turned out to be different. The good news out of all these comotion is that Barack Obama is not related to Paris Hilton; we can all sleep good tonight.