CPAC 2010 - My thoughts

Well, I just watched Glenn Beck's keynote address at CPAC, and let me tell ya. This man is spot on in all his comments about the state of the GOP and America in general.

When I first started I wondered what he was going to do. Was he going to be nice to the GOP, or was he going to be his normal pull no punches self. Well within the first couple of minutes he was slamming (without naming him) John McCain and his admiration for a certain progressive president. At that point I was glad to see that he is not going to pull a punch about anything.

He brought his now trademarked blackboard to the platform and it was met with a "standing O". He taught about the dangers of the Progressive movement that is facing our Country, Future, and Constitution. He talked about the pride that all of us as Americans should feel for our country. We should not try to be more like Europe, they should look to us, Glenn Proudly proclaimed, and I must say. I agree!

As I was watching the 50 minute speech I thought to my own convictions, and where I stand on the current political climate. The message I got, well at least on the them, is that we need to stop accepting the status quo of "good enough" and a little better when it come to the quality of politician we elect. We need to hold our politicians to a high standard, and we need to make sure that the polices set in place are held to that same standard. What standard is that? The standards set in the constitution. We need to completely eradicate the progressive and unconstitutional behavior from Washington DC.

He spoke about mans right to fail. He spoke about how it is a a right to fail and that we should not be stripped of that right. In fact he proclaimed that for the Govt. to do so is harmful to America and its path to success. I have to say, I agree!

If you want to see the speech, then you can watch it here

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/36618/

.

finaly someon asks the tough questions

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/23400/

If only more people would point out what is happening with these politicians 

Media Is Bias

Before I get started on this topic I want to be VERY clear about one thing.  I am a conservative.  I am for small government, and I am not in any way for the progressive socialist movement. 

The last few months I have been just absolutely disgusted by the mainstream media.  They have been so biased, and I think that as the years play out and time passes people will look back at the media today and they will be using it as a lesson as what we should try to avoid in the future. 

The Media has become so arrogant, that they send the message that they have the power to decide what is right and what is important.  The word “fair” has no meaning any more.  You can see it time and again, and the last few months with this Presidential election it is more apparent than ever.  The way the media has been talking about Obama is amazing.  They treat him like he is the greatest man on the earth, and he can do no wrong.

Obama is the epitome of political correctness.  He is smooth, good looking, a great public speaker, Muslim background, Black, and White at the same time.  He has got it goin on, and of course he can do no wrong.  He has said things that if they were said by anyone else they would have ruined themselves.  He has said things like,

“she is a typical white person”

“Clinging to god or religion as a means to vent their frustrations”

However thanks to Obama he has opened the door for other people to say things, and when the media jumps ALL OVER THEM we can kindly direct them to how they let Obama get away with saying racist and elitist things.  Obama is not a typical black person.  I can go into details about it but I don’t think that I need to do so.  I have no beefs with the fact that he said it.  I see nothing wrong with what he said because it is true.  There are such things as a typical white person.  I don’t think that the typical white person today is racist like he was implying with the above quote, but I would count myself as one of them (the typical (non racist) white person).  The problem I have is the fact that the media lets him get away with it for reasons I don’t understand, and if someone else like John McCain said the opposite like “typical black person,” it would never disappear. 

I am ok with Obama being treated like the messiah, but I don’t like that he gets it with no basis for it.  I no doubt believe that Obama is an honorable man, but I don’t think he is as good as the media is portraying.  EVERYONE makes mistakes, and we ALL have problems in life.  It is ok to have them, and I would have a problem if one did not have any.  Obama is never portrayed to have them, and if one does they are squelched by the media very quickly.  McCain is played out to have nothing but problems.  I do not believe that is true. 

This is not supposed to be an Anti-Obama Blog and I am sorry that is has that spin, but as I said I am a conservative.  It is supposed to be about the media bias.  The last week the unthinkable happened.  I became 3 times more disgusted with the media than I was before.  When Sarah Palin was picked to be McCain’s VP the media went on a frenzy. It is apparent that the media does not like to be surprised.  They probably feel that they should have had the chance to vet all of the potential people, and when someone off of their radar was picked what did they do?  They went NUTS!  They had nothing prepared.  No one did but a few, and those people had nothing but good things about her and that would just simply not do.  Mainstream media was embarrassed.  We are not supposed to make our own choices on how we feel about a person!  The Media is supposed to do it for us!  What was McCain thinking not letting the Media make the choices on if she was good or not?  Well I am glad that he did. 

Just in case you don’t know.  The McCain campaign intentionally kept this a secret.  There was not a whole lot of communication so that the media could not get a sniff of it.  The face to face meeting prior to the selection was made in secret, and when she was brought down for the official announcement she was brought down on a normal commercial airline and stayed in an $89 a night motel, and was checked in under a different name.  Was this fair?  I don’t know, and quite honestly I don’t freakin care!  The Media will say that this was not a fair way to do this, but who cares what they think.

The Obama campaign has such a grip over McCain in the media of course the McCain campaign is going to play this out right to upstage Obama as best as they can.  They let us all know about this choice right after Obama’s speech and totally blew him out of the news.  It was great.  There was nothing on this person out there,  and for a couple of days I had all the time I needed to my research on this lady and find out who she is, and what she stands for without having to wade through all of the bias media mud.  The Media did not like this at all because if one did this they would probably like her, and I mean a lot.

One would find that she is just like us.  She is what Obama and Biden pretend to be.  She is real, and knows what life is like for the rest of us.  So as this happened what did the media do?  They posted awful things, and got dirty in their tactics.  Attacking her family, making false outrages claims with no proof whatsoever.  I am not going to say what they were, as you can do a Google search and find out all of them in about 5 seconds.  They had nothing prepared on how to tear her down as a person and as a politician so they had to get dirty about it. 

I just hope that as the weeks play on that the media will calm down and take a more fair, and honorable approach on how they deliver the news to us.  There are some people that due to what they have done I will not even watch because I am so disgusted at how poorly they go about News Broadcasting.  It is ok to like one person more than another and to let it come out in your message, but please be more honorable and fair in how you do it.

If you want to attack her, than attack her.  Leave her family out of it.  We had to do it for the Clintons with Chelsea.  I just want to see some sort of fairness on the news.  I am talking about within the same organization.  MSNBC could perhaps try to be a little fairer in what they say about the republicans in contrast to the democrats.  MSNBC and the New York Times are the absolute worst about biasness.  They are so bad about it, and it is so obvious.

In 3 days the New York Times carried 67 articles attacking Sarah Palin. Everything from "she's no Hillary"; to her hair looks "20 years out of date"; to "her Fargo accent"; mentioning her husband DUI charge from TWENTY-TWO YEARS ago; attacking her 17 year old pregnant daughter; bringing up "trooper gate" without key details, and on and on. Maybe a little over the top? Barack Obama has been on the cover of Time Magazine SEVEN times this year alone...McCain, twice. Obama stories have outnumbered McCain news stories by almost 4-1 in the media.

I am going to conclude with one example of how different the media can be.  Just with a simple picture.

I have SPS Really Bad

Man I have a wicked case of SPS (Sarah Palin Syndrome).  The more I learn about this woman the more I am filled with hope for the future of this country.  The more I see and hear about this woman the more and more I like her.

Tonight I watched her give an AMAZING speech!  At the Republican National Convention she gave a speech so amazing I was cheering at home for her.  She is Real, and I can identify with this person.  When I look and Obama and or Biden, there is absolutely NOTHING I can identify with.  They try to make him out to the a man of the people, and that Biden is just like us.  Well I am here to tell you that they are not, unless you make LOTS of money a year.  Like 4 million last year to keep up with Obama.  They don't have a clue what my life is like.

When Palin talks, and you just give here 10 minutes to tell you about herself you can see that she is a regular person.  She has a family, and it is filled with highs and lows.  She has a son that is about to be deployed to Iraq.  Her husband is a fisherman, and a great husband.  She also is the mother a special needs child.  She is a person that knows how hard it can b

e at home, and that there is a proper way to help out people.  She understands that Taxing us into oblivion is not the way to do that.

I would love to give my commentary on her speech, but I don't think it needs any.  I am sure that the media is going to sound byte her to death, but if you don't watch the entire speech then you have nothing to say about her.  She covers it all, and shows that she is every bit as qualified to do the Job as our beloved savior Barrack Obama if not more so.  (yes I watched the ENTIRE DNC)  

As soon as I find a video of the entire speech I will link it here for you to see if you missed it.

My Thoughts on the Canidates (more a rant against Obama)

Oh boy I can't wait for the election year to be over. I am not sure what I am going to blog about. I really don't want to talk about the candidates so much, but I feel compelled to do so. I want to lend my opinion about the different candidates and perhaps this will shed some light on why I do it so much.

First I want to state, that I am a conservative (not a Republican). I believe in capitalism, and letting the free market work out problems. I think the Federal Government is very bad at business and money. If I could I would never do business with them based on their track record of how they run things. Sadly I must do business with them or I will go to jail. I hate hate hate hate hate hate socialism, and I feel that is is my right to fail miserably in life and business, and also I feel that it is my right to make so much money that I light 20 dollar bills on fire just because I think it is funny and I will not miss it. If I work hard I want my money to stay with me, and not be taken from me and given to the commonwealth of the world.* Also if I fail, I want to fail and pick MYSELF up, and hit life again.

With that said here is my take on the candidates. I REALLY dislike both of them, however I dislike one WAY more than the other.

1. McCain, John: A Democrat disguised as a Republican. I am having a hard time seeing the difference between the two parties now a days. It seems that Republicans are just Democrats that like Bankers. But I feel that he would not screw up the country beyond fixing. There are many many many things about him that I do not like for example, he is not good with Economics. I feel that right now the nation needs someone that help the Economy as it is in need of some big time help. I do however, feel that his foreign policy will be alright. I don't think he will allow the US to be bullied, and he will not kill the military.

2. Obama, Barrack: If you just looked at how the media treats this man you would think that he is our Savior. Here to save us all from the bad things of the world! I have so many problems with this man I am not even sure where I need to begin. What has the man done? Not much in his EXTREMELY short government history. He is a socialist in every sense of the word, and scares me to death what he will try to do with this country should he win. I am honest and truly scared of him winning. I will vote for McCain only because I am running away from Obama. Has nothing to do with the likability of McCain, just that I am terrified of Obama.

He twists things all the time to make them sound better than they are. He can inspire a large group of people, but he does not put any real substance to his speeches. He just uses the right words that invoke the kind of emotion that he wants from people. (just a quick note: inspiration should not be a good reason to vote for a man. Last I checked Hitler was pretty good at it too) He makes promises that can't be kept and people believe that he can for example:

"Barrack Obama promises to fast track alternate energy!" Uhhhh first of all do you really think that we are going slow on it? Last I checked there are lots and lots of people, groups, organizations that are going as fast as they can, and they could care less what the President says. IT sure does sound good though. "Fast Track" lets see if I can do it.. . . . oh I got one "I Chris Terrell promise that if you elect me president I will fast track our education policies." that was fun, I see why he does it all the time.

His new tax policy will raise it so much, that if you make over 250,000 dollars a year you will be taxed 57% did you catch that? 57% of you income will be TAKEN from you. That is 142,500 dollars taken from you, leaving you with 107,500. "Well the rich people don't really need that money, other much poorer and needier people need it, and they wont notice it anyway" or "they are just paying their fair share." I know I am going to sound like a hater but, I DON'T CARE!! If I make that money you can guarantee I worked my butt off for it, and I don't want anyone taking it from me! It is MINE!

When I look at him I see a man good at what he does and he knows it. Sadly what he does is not tell the truth or represent the people. He does, and will do what HE wants and that is all that matters to him.

So there you have it. I don't like either of them, but I think some things about Barrack Obama that I can't say on the Internet, but I think he is a lier, and a deceiver. His wife is awful, and he has constantly surrounded himself with terrible people. I hope he does not win, but if he does may God be with America because we will need him more than ever to hold it together.

I know I have been extremely harsh, and politically incorrect, but I am scared so badly of this man, that I must say what I can to whomever I can about this man. This is in no way an attack on his supporters. Like whom you please, but I will not like Obama.

*I think that it should be my choice whom I give money to, and I feel that it is my responsibility as a member of society, and because God told me to. I just don't want someone forcing to do so, and not giving me any say in it. I feel that wealthy people should give but it is still their choice.

Free Compean and Ramos!

The following is a transcript of the Glenn Beck Show from yesterday.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

GLENN: We've added a lot of new stations and, you know, a lot of new people that, you know, are just, they stumbled in, they might have been drunk and the radio stuck on this station and then they're like, I can't turn it off now; I don't know what happened. And so now they're forced to listen. So there's a lot of people in the audience that doesn't -- they're not really even aware of some of the things that we have discovered on the Compean and Ramos case. These are the two border agents that were thrown in jail for what it looked like shooting somebody in the back or in the butt as they were running away, just this poor helpless victim and then trying to cover it up. That's what it looks like. That's what the government would like to have you believe. That is not the case.

We go to Tara Setmayer who has been on this case now for how long, Tara? Two years?

SETMAYER: Almost two years, yeah.

GLENN: And you and your illustrious boss in Washington have been on this case trying to set this right and so far you're beating your head against the wall. Let's start with the story, and if we could tell the story here in a five minute period here as much as you can, tell everybody the history of this case.

SETMAYER: Well, in February 2005 Ramos and Compean were on routine patrol down in Fabens, Texas along the border. A drug smuggler was detected -- well, they didn't know he was smuggling drugs yet. A border breach was detected by Compean, he radioed it in. They gave chase to a van, started to speed back toward the border. The individual, which is Aldrete Davila, he abandoned the van and decided to head for the border on foot. At the time other border patrol agents joined the pursuit and the drug smuggler confronted Compean on the other side of a drainage ditch on his way back to Mexico. At the time Compean tried to arrest him, he tried to apprehend him, they got into a scuffle and shots were fired. In the meantime Ramos is climbing down this drainage ditch to assist his fellow border agent. He hears shots fired. As he emerges, he sees Compean on the ground, he sees a drug smuggler running away. He shoots at him. He thinks he has a gun. He doesn't know what's happening. He shoots at him. He hits him, but he doesn't know he hit him because the guy kept running and escapes back to Mexico, where on the other side of the border there were other people waiting to pick him up and take him away.

As they walk back, they noticed that inside this van is a million dollars worth of marijuana, about 750 pounds. So other agents are on scene including two supervisors. The mistake they made, they did not orally report the shooting.

GLENN: But it's important at this point of the story to know that supervisors were on the scene.

SETMAYER: Yes.

GLENN: Others were there. It is almost a loophole there that they nailed them on and said, well, they didn't report the shooting. The idea was they didn't need to report the shooting. People were on the scene.

SETMAYER: That's right. And border patrol regulations state that they're only supposed to orally report it. That supervisor is supposed to file a written report. So this is a policy violation. It's not criminal. Well, three weeks go by. They catalog the drugs. You know, the guy absconded, he escaped to New Mexico. You know, routine day on the border so one would think. Anyone who knows or is familiar with what's going on in the southern border, it's a war zone there. So the fact that they weren't shot is actually a good thing.

A few weeks go by and we find out that the Department of Homeland Security has opened up an internal affairs investigation because the drug smuggler that they shot grew up with a border patrol agent in Arizona. The incident happened in Texas. Their families talk and they find out that Aldrete Davila has been shot by a border agent. So this agent in Arizona takes it upon himself to research what's going on, look for the shooting report.

GLENN: Okay. Stop for a second. This is an important thing for people to really focus on for just 10 seconds. A border agent who grew up with a drug smuggler in Mexico. Their families still talk. The drug smuggler called -- the drug smuggler's mother called the border agent and said, "My son's just been shot on the border," et cetera, et cetera. So you've got the connections now between the U.S. border agents and a drug smuggler. Now, it's never been -- nobody's ever accused this guy of being a dirty border agent, if I'm not mistaken, Tara, right?

SETMAYER: Oh, that's correct. No one questioned or investigated the nature of this relationship.

GLENN: Correct.

SETMAYER: I mean, he was best friends with the drug smuggler's brother. He accompanied the drug smuggler's sister on her 15th birthday. They have close ties.

So we move forward. No one seems to think anything's wrong with that. They move forward and Homeland Security opens up this investigation. They send Christopher Sanchez, who is the investigator, down to Fabens, Texas and they send him over into Mexico to find the drug smuggler. They offer him immunity, free border crossing cards and free healthcare to come back across the border and testify against Ramos and Compean.

Now, at this point Ramos and Compean are arrested, and I have to tell you that when they interviewed the other agents who were on scene, those other agents' stories changed dramatically from their initial version of events to what they testified to at trial. Basically they were all given proffer letters, which is some sort of an immunity deal after --

GLENN: We won't come after you.

SETMAYER: That's right, we won't come after you if you tell us the "Real" story.

GLENN: Right.

SETMAYER: Which was that Ramos and Compean shot an innocent guy as he was running away. Now, anyone who knows Ramos and Compean or just looks at the basic facts of this case, it's reasonable for them to believe this gentleman was armed. Sara Carter, who is a reporter who broke this story nationally, she interviewed Davila's family and they said that he's been running drugs since he was 14 years old and he was never seen without a gun.

Now, during the trial that image of Mr. Davila was completely changed. He was a poor innocent waif who was just smuggling drugs one time to pay for money for his sick mother's medicine -- to get money for his sick mother's medicine. We all know that that's not true. As a matter of fact, while he was under immunity waiting to testify against the agent, he smuggled another load of drugs four months before the trial. The government knew it and they went before the judge and asked all of that evidence to be sealed so the jury would never hear about it.

GLENN: Which is highly unusual when somebody is convicted -- or when somebody else is arrested again. During a trial usually that person is thrown out.

SETMAYER: Well, the interesting thing about this, Glenn, is that he actually was not arrested. According to the -- this is --

GLENN: I know.

SETMAYER: This is where it gets interesting. According to the DEA report which we were able to obtain, about six months after all hell broke loose, they had already been convicted and Johnny Sutton was denying that the October load ever happened and he was, you know, speaking in lawyer, lawyerly terms to try to deny that that had ever happened because it was all under seal. One day the DEA documents show up at my door and it was proof and it was a full account of what happened in October of 2005 before the trial. And what happened is that Davila was identified as dropping off a load of 800 pounds of drugs at a stash house in Texas. When the DEA and border patrol raided that stash house, they were told by the U.S. attorney's office that no one was to be taken into custody at that time. That came from Johnny Sutton's office. So it's very curious why they didn't pursue arresting anyone at the stash house even though they fully identified -- the occupants of that stash house fully identified Aldrete Davila as being the individual who dropped off that load of drugs. So no, technically he wasn't arrested. Why the hell not.

GLENN: Now, Johnny Sutton at the time said there weren't any of these cards that helped people go across the border and if he knew where he was, he would make sure that he was arrested and all of these things, which have all turned out to be false. Johnny Sutton I believe is a dirty official and I believe the dirt and the grime go all the way to the President of the United States. I think this is a -- my spider senses, everything in me tells me something isn't right. But to try to get anybody to talk is impossible. I've talked to several people who have been instrumental in this case and other cases like it, who have been -- who are instrumental at the highest levels that are now starting to say, "Wait a minute, you know what, I was part of, you know, X, Y and Z and now I see I've been lied to and being used and we're in real trouble because there's something else going on. But they won't go on the air because some of these people are still sitting in those positions and they are trying to figure out what it is. But they are looking.

SETMAYER: Glenn, let me tell you. When we first start -- when members of congress first started to raise the profile of this case a year and a half ago, right before the agents had to report for it to begin their prison terms in January, there were a lot of very strange things going on, including the fact that Department of Homeland Security officials lied to four Texas members of congress.

GLENN: This is where I got involved.

SETMAYER: Yes. This is in September of 2006 when members of congress first started to investigate, they asked for a briefing from Homeland Security to say, okay, what's really going on here. Well, those Homeland Security officials told those members of congress that, one, Ramos and Compean confessed; two, they knew the guy was unarmed; and three, that they said they wanted to shoot some Mexicans that day. Well, that didn't sit too well with those members of congress. So they asked for proof of these allegations. And guess what, that proof never happened. And for four and a half months after that, the official report of investigation that was used to prosecute these gentlemen was not released. It hadn't even been finished yet, which is highly unusual. And it took members of congress complaining and going public about it for the Homeland Security department to finally release the report of investigation which they did under classified -- it was classified first. And then we said, that's not acceptable. So they released a redacted version. And guess what. None of what they claimed was in that report.

GLENN: Didn't the -- didn't the head of Homeland Security or one of the head guys of Homeland Security actually say in testimony in congress that you had been -- congressman, I'm sorry, you have been misled?

SETMAYER: Yes. He said misinformed. It was the inspector general Richard Skinner. He was being questioned by congressman John Culberson and that was his response: Well, I'm sorry, but you were misinformed. Well, you know, where I come from, that's called a lie.

GLENN: Yeah. Now, Tara Setmayer is with Congressman Rohrabacher and she and the congressman has been on this nonstop. Congressman is going to join us tone. In a few minutes I'm going to play some audio. Dan, is this the first time this audio has been heard? Okay. You probably have not heard this audio most likely. It is audio from the jurors saying, "Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. If I would have known these things about the drug smuggler, things would have been wildly different." And it shows how -- because remember, "The jurors have spoken. Don't you believe in the rule of law?" No, not when the rule of law has been so turned upside down on its head. Justice is justice. You've got to make sure that it is equally applied and there's not something else going on. There is something else going on. We're going to give you that audio which has not been heard and has not been played on this program until today. We will give you this audio here in just a second. And also somebody who has been very, very close to this case with some more insight coming up in just a minute. But also when -- Tara, when we come back, Tara actually had to speak to Compean and Ramos yesterday. It was just Ramos yesterday that you spoke to?

SETMAYER: Yes, just Ramos.

GLENN: And she broke the news to him. Remember, he's in solitary confinement, quote, for his own protection. We will get that story from her coming up in just a second. Don't miss a second of the next few minutes on the Glenn Beck program.

(Goldline)

GLENN: Tara, yesterday -- we've got about two minutes. Tell me what happened yesterday afternoon when you had to deliver the news yesterday afternoon that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had denied the appeal for Compean and Ramos?

SETMAYER: Now, I had my normal status call scheduled already yesterday and we got the decision about 30 minutes before I had to speak to Nacio and so, I being sure that his lawyer was on the phone, because I honestly couldn't bring myself to break the news to him but I was on the call and it was devastating. It was one of the most difficult conversations I've ever had to endure. Nacio was crushed. You know, he was obviously upset and his biggest concern was, Tara, what can you do to get me out of solitary confinement. These gentlemen are enduring conditions worse than prisoners of Guantanamo Bay. He is in a cell 23 hours of 24 hours a day. He is not allowed on weekends. He is not allowed to watch television. He is not allowed to socialize with anyone. He is in the hole.

GLENN: He does, he does listen to the radio, right?

SETMAYER: He does.

GLENN: He does listen to this program?

SETMAYER: He does. He's listening to this program. And Nacio, we're fighting for you. We're going to do what we can to get you out of there and keep your head up because the American people are behind you and members of congress are behind you and we're going to do whatever we can to get you out of there.

GLENN: You know, Nacio, I know you're listening. It is -- I, last week, what is it, two weeks ago I actually spent some time with your wife and it was -- I didn't take it lightly when I looked her in the eye and said, there's a lot of us fighting. There's a lot of us that believe in this cause and we are not going to give up. And it was something that you don't say lightly to somebody who has somebody in prison for something that you believe is an unjust verdict but I tell you it is a sentiment that runs through a large sector of our society that is aware of this case.

SETMAYER: Well, Glenn, I agree with you and it's amazing to me how the President and Johnny Sutton can sleep at night if they looked into the eyes of the wives and the children of these agents, I can't imagine they would feel the same way. I can't believe, was it really worth it for them.

GLENN: Tara, we will talk to you again and thank you so much for your hard work. And we'll also give you an opportunity to speak directly to Nacio Ramos coming up on the program here.

Yea, Sure this is a fair country.

This is copied from the Washington Post.

==============

Full Up, Fed Up On God's Avenue

Along Crowded 16th St., Residents And Congregations Turn a Cold Shoulder To Mormons' Plans For a Church With A 105-Foot Steeple

By Paul Schwartzman

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 24, 2008; Page B01

If 16th Street is famous for leading straight to the White House, it is also God's Boulevard, with at least 45 congregations lining the seven-mile stretch between Lafayette Square and Silver Spring.

But love thy neighbor? Not this time.

The Mormon church's plan to build another house of worship, one with a steeple-topped tower that will rise 105 feet, is inspiring less-than-holy thoughts among residents who recoil at the prospect of a new flock traversing their streets.

It's not just the traffic and parking congestion that they predict the Mormons will bring to 16th Street Heights, their lush residential neighborhood north of Mount Pleasant. And never mind that the area already has a dozen or so congregations, not to mention a host of other institutions such as schools and day-care centers.

But a tower that's the equivalent of 10 stories high?

"What are they trying to prove?" said Stuart Peacock, a lawyer who resides around the corner, his narrowing eyes punctuating his disgust. "It's too much."

Gloria Eblan, a software engineer who lives across from the property, at 16th and Emerson streets NW, envisions the kind of raucousness associated with a throbbing nightclub, not a church. She insists that a jackhammer-thumping construction project, followed by a weekly parade of chattering congregants will disturb her ever-precious peace.

"I don't want to come off as the anti-Christ, because I'm not. I just have my apprehensions," said Eblan, a crucifix around her neck. "The noise is going to drive me crazy. We're just trying to live our lives."

Dozens of homeowners have expressed opposition to the new church with lawn signs that read, "Too Big, Too Much, Too Many." And the Mormons are finding little support from the neighborhood's clergy, including one pastor who said his objection is rooted not in architecture, but theology.

"They don't accept Jesus as the Messiah; they accept him as the prophet," said Edward Wilson, pastor at Church of Christ, a block from the Mormon site. "It's wrong, I disagree with it, and I wouldn't want them in the neighborhood."

Mormon leaders have been surprised by the opposition, in part because so many churches are located there. But they said they're confident that their reception will improve once they build their two-story brick church, which will host two Sunday services and seat 240. The church will offer underground and aboveground parking, which the Mormons promise will minimize the congregation's affect on the neighborhood.

As for the steeple's height, they said it is a stylistic flourish necessary for an attractive church. "If you take out the steeple, it looks like a big home," said Jeffrey Holmstead, an environmental lawyer who serves as first counselor for the Mormons' Washington stake. "We want something that will be a credit to our church and the community."

The Mormon's tower would dwarf the neighborhood's detached homes, many of which are two and three stories, as well as nearby congregations, although the Sixth Presbyterian Church, a few blocks north, rises to about 90 feet.

Yet the Mormon's tower would be shorter than other congregations, such as the 160-foot All Souls Church, a mile south at 16th and Harvard streets NW. There are several soaring steeples at that broad intersection, which is also home to several apartment buildings. And the Mormons' design is a veritable afterthought compared with their Silver Spring temple, which is 288 feet tall, or the National Cathedral, which reaches 301 feet.

Lawrence Cook, a Falls Church architect who designs churches, said a common guideline is that steeples or towers should be up to twice the height of the building's roofline. By that standard, he said, the Mormons' tower is more than appropriate. In fact, he said after seeing a rendering, "It's too low. It looks like it sunk into the ground a bit.''

Congregations have migrated to 16th Street since the early 1800s, when St. John's Church opened on Lafayette Square, across from the White House, and became known as the "Church of the Presidents."

As the city evolved, and wealthy homeowners gravitated to the 16th Street corridor for its proximity to power, an eclectic mix of congregations followed, from Baptists to Episcopalians, from Jews to Buddhists, a roster that reaches 75 if adjoining streets are included. Some denominations have built national headquarters along 16th Street to enhance their stature, including the D.C. Baptist Convention and the National Church of the Nazarene.

"The congregations are like anything else, they're competing for membership," said David Maloney, the District's state historic preservation officer. "The logical place to locate was 16th Street."

But 16th Street has also been a decidedly residential strip, and homeowners over the years have railed about the encroachment of not only churches but organizations such as day-care centers and schools, particularly those that take over properties once occupied by families.

Just north of where the Mormons are moving, a civic association in 1994 protested the migration of such institutions. District officials responded by adding a bureaucratic hurdle, requiring a special permit for groups using a property for anything but a residence along 16th Street, between Colorado and Military roads.

"If you left your house on a Sunday morning to get bagels, when you came back there would be no parking," said Ellen McCarthy, a consultant to the community group, who was also the District's planning director. "The expectation is that one can enjoy the neighborhood without people coming and going to dances, without loud conversations on the street, without Bible studies or AA meetings."

No such protections exist in the Mormons' new neighborhood, which they said they chose after searching for more than eight years. The Mormons paid $4 million for a 1.5-acre corner site, which had been occupied by a convent.

"It was hard to find something in the city, because there's so much development," said Gordon Daines, the project manager. "Every time we'd go look at something, someone else would get it."

At first residents paid little attention, assuming that the Mormons would move into the nuns' building. But then a demolition team showed up and cleared the property. "Everyone was in shock," said Doreen Thompson, an attorney for the District's Taxicab Commission, who lives across the street. "Can you imagine the trucks just rolling in?"

After the Mormons unveiled their plans, the neighbors organized a coalition, started a Web site, and printed 250 lawn signs, most of which they say they have distributed. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), who lives a block from the site, has not put up a sign, though he has listened to the opponents' concerns.

Residents are lobbying the District to extend the protections granted to the neighborhood to the north. Without the city's intervention, however, their capacity for stopping the church is limited because the Mormons do not need a zoning variance. Still, said Thompson, "We would hope that a church would be sensitive to us."

The Mormons, Holmstead said, are happy to talk about the building's design, including the tower's height. But he questioned whether a revision would "get us any good will with the neighbors."

The Mormons are not without support in the neighborhood, at least from one pastor who says residents opposed his church when it moved into a sanctuary on Colorado Road in 1986. "They tried to run me out but I pressed on," said Bishop Harvey Lewis, of the Star of Bethlehem Church of God in Christ. "I exercised my rights and my desires to move my church there, and the other brother has the same right."

True enough, acknowledged Barbara Flowers, a retired public school principal, sitting on her stoop a few blocks from the site. But her priority, she said, is far less lofty. When she drives to her church, Zion Baptist, around the corner from the Mormon property, will there be enough street parking?

Flowers shrugged and glanced at her husband, Hamilton, as she tried to summon biblical wisdom.

"If we can't agree . . .' What is that saying?" she asked.

"We will bless each other," Mr. Flowers said, "and go on our merry way."

Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.

President, Change and Faith

Change, Change, Change, Change, Change, Change it is all I seem to hear from everyone. I think that I am about all changed out. Thank you Barrack for bringing this word to all of us.

The word change is becoming more and more of a buzz word each and every single day that the political race goes on. The last debate that I put myself through all I heard was the word change. Well let me tell you that my faith in politicians tends to go down with all of this talk. Talk is cheap, and a lot of the people in the political world seem to be full of this talking business. People forget that our govt is set up in such a way to prevent one person from doing HUGE changes. It takes many people to get something done. People can get in the way of it, and people can help it. Sure the president has some more power to do things on his or her own, but in reality to enact a lot of the changes that they are talking about they are not really going to be able to do it on their own. I am ok with this and I understand this, however, many people refuse to look at this little detail.

I want to hear about their ability to be able to motivate people to want to change. Just saying “I am going to bring change” does not cut it for me. I want a candidate that has gotten stuff done and not on their own, but through the use of the people around them. The President is going to need to be able to do this, and do it well to be able to get the really important things accomplished in 4 years.

I really don’t want to bash or buildup a particular candidate this entry, but merely state what I think in regards to something that I feel a candidate should do. There is one more things that I have touched on before that it very important to me in the next president. I want a president that gets down on their knees. I want a President that recognizes there is a higher power out there, and that he or she does not have all of the answers to everything. I don’t care what the religion is, but I want one that believes in God. Whether it is Christian or Jew or any other religion that recognizes the need for divine help on certain issues it is good with me.

The President is going to make some very important choices, and some of them will cost people’s lives. At some point the president is going to have to pick from really crappy choices. They are going to have to do the right thing, and at times that is not the popular choice. I want a person that I know has thought about everything, and that knows that there is someone out there that has all the answers and that is there to help out with tough choices, and asks for this help

This is not a role that a faithless person should have.

Is it really a job that a person can do alone? Is it really possible for one person to enact big change? These are just a couple questions that I like to think about from time to time.

Just Answer the Question!! - Part 2

I thought for sure that I would not have more to write about in the last 10 min of the debate. I was wrong.

The last question that was asked was, out of all your past debates what is one thing that you would like to take back? Well Thank you Hillary and Obama for not answering the question. They decided that they did not want to answer the question. They decided that they would rather talk about how much better they are than the Republicans.



Thank you for yet again proving my point. Politicians suck and answering questions.

Bush & His Talk to the Nation

I am going to start doing podcasts now. Here is the first one of many I hope. I know that it is a little scattered but I will do more and I will make them a lot better, and more structured.

I am going to try to keep them around the 5 min area, but I may do ones that are longer from time to time, and if so I will post that it is a longer one.

There will be video podcasts which I will do from time to time as well.

Same rules apply these all are ment to get thought going.

podcast