By Julian Krasta

First on the list of the Seven Deadly Sins is Pride. Barack Obama’s cup runneth over with SDS No. 1, so much so that his credibility – as well as the trustworthiness of the Democratic Party – is beginning to resemble the bottom of a birdcage.

As demonstrated during his excursion to the Middle East and Europe, Obama’s vainglory character has reached full feather: What we saw and heard was not a paradigm of intellectual prowess or the mountain-moving messiah the media are in desperation pitching the world to believe he is – quite the contrary.

In spite of every attempt to present himself as a deep thinker or an “every man,” the senator remains detached and unprincipled when it comes to giving full credit to our military. He is also cold and hostile, particularly when he is caught unawares by a journalist’s impromptu questions. Absent his teleprompter of pre-arranged homilies and dog-eared clichés, his remarks are a runoff of blatant inaccuracies, such as this “Berra-ism” that would make Yogi proud:

“Let me be perfectly clear: Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s” –

All of which are bells not even the power peacocks of the liberal mainstream media are able to un-ring.

Fairness demands I give credit to Obama. The only credit I believe he deserves is for his flair for dramatic showmanship. Not since P.T. Barnum – spot-lit in the center ring, dressed in coattails and top hat – has anyone effectively impressed and entrapped the hearts, minds and chromosomes of so many.

Put more simply: Obama enchants and entertains children of all ages.

Those he electrifies eagerly dive for every pearl that slips from his lips. Unfortunately, their fascination with him is anything but academic (as compared to John McCain’s feet-on-the-ground, fact-demanding supporters, as well as his opponents).

One explanation might be that, once Obama’s gullible herds imbibe of his “wondrous waters,” they become similarly stricken – or further stricken – with his now-trademark languor (which might explain why, when I first heard them chanting “We want change!” I had thought they were actually yelling, “We want pain!”).

Was that fair enough?

Obama’s one trick is he has mastered the art of doling out only cryptic hints of the changes he intends to make if he is elected. Aside from holding to a pattern of delivering sprawling and irregular speeches (which I view as a tribute to Dr. Seuss: “I do not like them in a box. I do not like them with a fox. I do not like them in a house…” – You get the picture), he has yet to convey concrete exemplars of how he would achieve those changes.

More importantly, he has not explained – not even a speck – what those changes would unerringly entail, and just how such changes would diametrically affect Americans, though Republicans and conservatives already know what he has in mind:

It’s a given that Obama would raise taxes across the board in order to provoke the mysterious changes only he envisions. His grandiose illusions of himself have blinded him to the fact that stacking more financial stress on the American people and on American industries would only serve to fund a radical attack on our nation’s problems:

Job losses could skyrocket. Personal spending would plummet. The housing market (and residential and commercial development) could collapse entirely. And retirement, investment and savings accounts could go under – to name an important few.

Just those tied together could conceivably cause parents (one or both, or the only one) to hold down a second job in order to make ends meet, which, in turn, would rupture family unity.

Is that what Obama’s wife meant when she heatedly lectured:

“Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism … that you come out of your isolation. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved … uninformed”?

If that be true, then Obama aims to strip Americans of our freedom of choice. And if we were to lose freedom of choice, it would just be a matter of time before these, too, would be lost:

- Freedom of religion,

- Freedom of speech,

- Freedom of the press (in particular, the conservative press),

- Freedom of intellectual inquiry,

- Freedom of artistic expression, and

- Every other freedom that empowers the individual.

An equally serious setback would be this: If elected his conceit could initiate a power binge that would be a kick in the teeth to the Presidency. This is not a hypothetical in view of his track record of zero accomplishments, and his conspicuous immaturity.

His weaknesses are unlimited. His acuity is less than remarkable. In short: he would mitigate the muscle of the Commander-in-Chief and thereby exacerbate the broadening spectrum of critical issues facing this nation.

The United States is hovering closer to the thin edge of the wedge, because too large a percentage of the men and women we voted to represent our best interests – and those who will yet finagle to win our votes – are preoccupied in grudge matches for supremacy within their club quarters.

Elected civil servants mulishly persist in placing their hands on the wrong end of the stick with regard to their responsibilities to the American People. We need to jog their memories about their job function (the salaries of which we pay for):

Specifically, they, at all times, are to acquaint us with the best possible alternatives for how to shelter and maintain our basic human rights and our country’s integrity. If we do not agree, or find fault, with their proposals, we have the right to say no, and to repeat the word “no” pending acceptable answers and/or solutions.

It is common knowledge that, despite their campaign pledges (and the fact that we elected office holders on the basis of those pledges), they invariably present this wry comeback to our inquiries: “I plan to set up a task force to look into the matter” – which is code for “I have no intention of earning my keep.”

Earning their keep requires results, and results would be evidence that they deserve the position for which we elected them. So far, the only proof provided is the majority of those men and women we placed in government positions are all mouth and goiter.

For instance, there is a singular critical matter those elected abjectly refuse to work on and put right: the mounting pressure for America to, once and for all, release itself from its ties to foreign oil. It is far more appealing to members of Congress to stage a mock trial (at taxpayer expense) and drag over the coals American oil executives rather than admit to, and immediately act upon, an obvious way out: the U.S. territory designated ANWR (Artic National Wildlife Refuge).

The crude oil we very badly need is located in abundance within ANWR, in the remotest and uninhabited area, where none of God’s creatures (except mosquitoes) would suffer inconvenience in the exploration and capture of the resource.

A neighbor nation to the south, Brazil, has done this. They tapped into a mother lode oil field approximately 150 miles out at sea, which should help keep them supplied for a significant length of time. I recognize the value of ingenuity in the face of urgency, and am pleased to pass on good wishes to Brazil for taking the necessary steps to ensure their petroleum needs are fulfilled.

In light of Brazil’s achievement, it is lunacy on the part of our elected representatives to mandate that America not exploit every other potential advantage available within our own borders to re-energize our stockpile of fuel.

Meanwhile, the price per gallon to fill our cars’ fuel tanks is rapidly approaching $5.00. This is precisely what Shell Oil’s Chief Executive Officer, John Hofmeister, cautioned the House Committee in late May would come to pass unless and until Congress removes the shackles and allows Big Oil to responsibly explore and drill for oil.

Rather than a constructive debate, an ill-mannered response to Mr. Hofmeister’s statement was delivered by Maxine Waters-(D-CA) in which she attempted to intimidate the CEO, saying the government would socialize [sic] the oil companies. Her clumsy threat was altogether an embarrassment to the office to which she was elected, counterproductive to those proceedings, and an insult to the People’s intelligence.

From Capitol Hill to our largest cities and smallest townships nationwide, scent of power has clouded common sense and sense of duty. Too many of the elected officials we chose to invest with our trust spend their terms in office undermining the laws specifically written to protect citizens. There are also those who, out of idleness, pursue – and needlessly squander taxpayer money on – phantom resolutions to unsubstantiated conundrums, such as the Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Act.

Elected officials have wrecked the inner cities with their unaccountability and allowed schools to fall to ruin. As our education systems deteriorate, so goes our children’s literacy.

Fortunately, there are diehard educators out there who are determined to fight fire with fire. They want kids to be – as they should be – our number one priority. Unfortunately, this example is one of few exceptions. Suitably educating our youngsters in secure and healthy environments is no longer the blanket rule.

Politicians hamstring law enforcement agencies (as with the deleterious Special Order 40 in Los Angeles). And when such initiatives crash and burn leaving only scorched earth in their wake, they lay blame on the federal government. While the blame games go on, the record of men, women, teenagers and children killed and injured increases by the second. The cycle is vicious.

Once they assume office, elected officials engage a bizarre 4-stage slant on central issues (e.g., national security precautions, economic stability, health and welfare, education, our country’s independence, protection of our constitutional privileges), which is directly linked to the countless problems we face today:

1.      Nothing is going to happen.

2.      Something might happen but we should do nothing about it.

3.      Maybe we should do something but there’s nothing we can do.

4.      Maybe there was something we could have done, but it’s too late now.

Example: It took three U.S. presidents to be assassinated (Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield and William McKinley) before Congress finally authorized the Secret Service to assume the full-time responsibility of protecting our Commanders in Chief.

This same jumbled attitude pertains to the Senate’s points of view today with respect to the War on Terror. They (primarily the liberals amongst them) continue to be tightfisted in recognizing the positive effects of the Surge. They pay no heed to the Iraqi people’s remarkable endeavors – working side by side with our magnificent military – to liberate themselves from fanatic ideologues. Instead, Nancy Pelosi had the impudence to give the credit for the Iraqis’ achieved goals to Iran.

To say the Speaker’s remarks are disquieting would be an understatement. She is, in point of fact, encouraging Iran to be aggressive. Her statements were both precarious and immoral in view of the fact Mahmoud Admadinejad considers the North American continent and the State of Israel his personal kill zones.

On the basis of such recklessness, it is essential that the following be circulated to our elected politicians (above all to those yet to be elected), which is the People’s response to their abortive 4-stage strategy:

1.      “We” are not confused adolescents.

2.      “We” will not be placated.

3.      “We” are not fools.

4.      “We” are mature citizens who demand for our children and for ourselves protection from terrorists, street gangs, exploding numbers of illegal immigrants, the escalating cost of fuel, the pandemic of irresponsible and wasteful bureaucrats, and higher taxes.

With a shifty general election looming on the horizon, it is mordantly clear that we become unceasingly involved in our own destiny. This is no longer just optional. It is mandatory.

Serious citizen-voters must take the time, either by telephone, facsimile, U.S. mail or electronic mail, and extend straightforward rulings to our elected representatives on their performance, including imminent and wounding legislation. We must be relentless until they clean up their act and rescind radical propositions, from unconditional amnesty for illegals to a plan (dreamed up by the Democrats’ nominee) to distribute $845 BILLION taxpayer dollars outside the United States, the outcome of which could further weaken our fragile economy as well as break the backs of the American People.

“We” put them there. It is now time to dust off the weed whacker, which would serve as fitting notice to the incoming POTUS. That is: