Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The Politics of Tragedy

One of the most respected political columnists of our time, Charles Krauthammer offers his opinion about the politics of President Obama’s attention to ‘Storm’ Sandy versus the amount of attention he paid to the terrorist attack that took place on September 11 in Benghazi, Libya.

“He says he’s not concerned about the impact on the elections,” Krauthammer said. “I’m sure he’s very sincere on that. It is a little odd that he shows up in the briefing room, where he hasn’t shown up in the briefing room for about, what — a month and a half on Libya, or for everything else for that matter? Then you get the photo-ops of him in the situation room deploying, I guess, the utility crews who will restore power all over America.

Whereas you would think he might want to use the situation room and had convened high-level people during the nine hours our people were under attack in Benghazi.”

Krauthammer went on to explain why the onus of the disaster prep and relief isn’t on the president, but on the governors of states. But in this instance he suggested it is serving as an opportunity for the commander-in-chief to steer the momentum of the election back his way.

“It’s hard to look at this, playing the president, playing the commander-in-chief in what’s a natural disaster that really doesn’t a lot of leadership from the White House,” Krauthammer said. “It’s up to the governors mostly. The White House and the governors release money. That’s about all that they do. And he’s really good at releasing money and pretending it’s not about politics.

Of course it's likely some on the left will say Krauthammer is politicizing the situation for simply stating an opinion about the facts.

See the video and read the rest of the transcript here.

In my opinion it is worth contrasting the reaction to this storm and the reaction to Katrina in 2006, specifically noting the difference in behavior between representatives of the two parties.

Most specifically, as the storm clears and the need for damage control is assessed New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a Republican, is acting as a team player and offering nothing but cooperation with President Obama. In fact, he specifically shot down a question about the possibility of a partisan divide between the two parties in wake of this tragedy.

Contrast that with the reaction of the Democrat Mayor of New Orleans and Governor of Louisiana Kathleen Blanco, who were immediate in their blame for George W. Bush and the federal government, before a true evaluation of the events took place.

Bush was practically accused of having created the storm and bringing it on shore, and of course it was for raaaaacist reasons that the feds were unable to respond as quickly and thoroughly as Democrats desired.

In the aftermath of both storms, we know now that Governor Christie was adamant in his message that New Jersey residents evacuate, and that insistence likely saved many lives. Contrarily, local officials in New Orleans and Louisiana had days of warning including statements from federal officials, yet after Katrina had passed we learned there were parking lots full of school buses that were left unused.

Those buses could have evacuated and saved hundreds if not thousands of lives, yet the Democrats in this instance instantly pointed the finger of blame – at George W. Bush.

Sounds all too familiar…

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Winds of Change

From the DesMoines Register, a newspaper that has not endorsed a Republican since Nixon in 1972:

American voters are deeply divided about this race. The Register’s editorial board, as it should, had a vigorous debate over this endorsement. Our discussion repeatedly circled back to the nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands.

Which candidate could forge the compromises in Congress to achieve these goals? When the question is framed in those terms, Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.

The former governor and business executive has a strong record of achievement in both the private and the public sectors. He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

Romney has made rebuilding the economy his No. 1 campaign priority — and rightly so.

[...]Early in his administration, President Obama reached out to Republicans but was rebuffed. Since then, he has abandoned the effort, and the partisan divide has hardened. That has hampered not only the economy, but the entire country. We remain a nation of red states and blue states.

[...] Barack Obama rocketed to the presidency from relative obscurity with a theme of hope and change. A different reality has marked his presidency. His record on the economy the past four years does not suggest he would lead in the direction the nation must go in the next four years.

From, home of the Philadelphia Intelligencer, which endorsed Obama in 2008:

As one of our board members stated, “My vote for Romney is a vote against Obama and the Democratic Party, which controlled Congress since January 3, 2007 through January 3, 2011. During that time, not one budget was passed, not one plan was put forward to tell us how the Democrats will deal with the skyrocketing deficit. This demonstrates a total lack of leadership on the most important issue of our country’s future." Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen said it best when he called the deficit: "The biggest single threat to national security."

For those reasons a majority of our editorial board endorses Mitt Romney for president.

And this from The Orlando Sentinel, which endorsed Obama in 2008:

And while the nation's economy is still sputtering nearly four years after Obama took office, the federal government is more than $5 trillion deeper in debt. It just racked up its fourth straight 13-figure shortfall.

We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.

Obama's defenders would argue that he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression, and would have made more progress if not for obstruction from Republicans in Congress. But Democrats held strong majorities in the House and Senate during his first two years.

Other presidents have succeeded even with the other party controlling Capitol Hill. Democrat Bill Clinton presided over an economic boom and balanced the budget working with Republicans. Leaders find a way.

With Obama in charge, the federal government came perilously close to a default last year. Now it's lurching toward another crisis with the impending arrival of massive tax hikes and spending cuts on Jan. 1.

The next president is likely to be dealing with a Congress where at least one, if not both, chambers are controlled by Republicans. It verges on magical thinking to expect Obama to get different results in the next four years.

[...]We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don't think he's a business-hating socialist. We don't think he's intent on weakening the American military. We don't think he's unpatriotic. And, no, we don't think he was born outside the United States.

But after reflecting on his four years in the White House, we also don't think that he's the best qualified candidate in this race.

We endorse Mitt Romney for president.

Why I Love Twitter

One Local Reporter Succeeds Where the Mainstream Media Fails

On Friday, President Obama was interviewed by Kyle Clark from Denver Channel 9 News, who asked about the September 11th terrorist attacks in Benghazi that resulted in the murder of four Americans, and has been followed by what appears to be an outright cover-up by the Obama administration.

With his very first question, Clark asked, "Were the Americans under attack at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya denied requests for help during that attack, and is it fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation and we'll all find out after the election?"

Obama avoided answering, instead misdirecting, as he said: "The election has nothing to do with four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened."

Clark next asked a very direct question about yet another failed Obama crony capitalism stimulus connections. When Clark asked the question, Obama visibly and audibly scoffed, and then went on to give a lengthy lecture about how this was not money connected to politics, and how it is so very important that we discover clean technologies.

And while I agree with the need to develop renewable sources of energy, payola to friends of politicians that come of the expense of our tax dollars is something that this man promised would not happen under his watch.

The final question of the interview has to do with Obama's use of the term "bullshitter" to describe Mitt Romney.

Here is the interview:

Regarding what this election is about, I believe President Obama couldn't be more incorrect. It is my opinion, as a constantly learning student of, and firm believer in our Constitution, that the first and most important function of our federal government is the protection of all Americans. That is the essence of the Preamble, which has nothing to do with "free" health care, by the way.

If these Americans were denied the support they needed, and the order came from President Obama or anyone in his administration, American voters deserve to know that before we cast our ballots.

And from the humble perspective of this American, this single incident is substantial and provocative enough a situation that is casts a huge shadow of question on the process of early voting. While not absolute, there exists at least a possibility that some who have already cast their ballots might have voted differently, given these circumstances.

Well that is, of course, if they only knew about it. Where the... where is the 'mainstream' media, anyway?

Remember when 30 or more 'journalists' descended on Wasilla, Alaska to 'investigate' Sarah Palin's emails, in the middle of 2011, when they meant absolutely nothing to anyone?

Where is the same kind of 'investigative' "journalism" regarding the obvious misdirection and cover-up surrounding the September 11th attacks in Benghazi, Libya that took the lives of four brave Americans?

Do a Google search for "sarah palin emails released" and then do a Google search for "benghazi cover up."

The contrast is stunning. Every major "news" outlet's website appears at the top of the search regarding a bunch of emails.

Yet when four Americans are dead, and information is beginning to surface that shows those brave souls were asking for and were denied help?

Silence. Dare I say... deadly silence.

Our media, most specifically the national "mainstream" media, is failing us because of their partisan interests. If you didn't believe it before, I don't know how you can't see it now.

Here is an excellent summary of the bias in today's Sunday Show lineup, specifically regarding Benghazi.

Friday, October 26, 2012

What Ever Happened to Truth, Justice, and The American Way?

His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye, his eyes were over my shoulder.”

Those are the words of Charles Woods, father of murdered former Navy Seal Tyrone Woods. Ty Woods lost his life saving the lives of others on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi. Here, Charles Woods was describing his moments with President Obama on the day his son Tyrone’s remains were returned stateside.

Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?

That was the question asked of Mr. Woods by our Vice-President, Joe Biden.

Thanks to the excellent reporting of Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin, we learned today that Tyrone Woods was amongst a group of Americans who disobeyed orders in order to save fellow Americans. Griffin reported that sources on the ground in Benghazi told her “that three urgent requests from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack nearly seven hours later were denied by officials in the CIA chain of command — who also told the CIA operators to ‘stand down’ rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.”

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Thursday addressed the “Monday morning quarterbacking” about why the U.S. military didn’t act sooner. He said military assets had been moved, but that the attack on the consulate in Benghazi was over before there was enough good information about what had actually happened. Not knowing exactly what was going on had he and other military leaders feel that “we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

So in the heat of the moment, regardless of the politics of the situation, Americans did what Americans do best – the right thing. Tragically, Glen Doherty and Ty Woods lost their lives because they knew the right thing to do was to try to save fellow Americans who were in harm’s way, consequences be damned.

Fox News reports:

Woods, Doherty and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire….The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight.

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Specter gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators.

In the process of risking their careers by disobeying orders, Woods and Doherty gave their lives, yet our President and his administration still will not give the truth to the families of the fallen. They’ve been spinning, misdirecting, and deflecting in an effort to “manage” this crisis, for what seems to this American to be for no reason other than political cover.

In the words of Pat Smith, mother of Sean Smith who also died that day:

“Don’t give me any baloney that comes through with this political stuff, just tell me the truth, what happened, and I still don’t know.

I look at the TV and I see bloody hand prints on walls thinking is that my son’s? I don’t know. They haven’t told me anything. They are still studying it. And the thing that is they are telling me are outright lies. That Susan Rice, she talked to me personally and she said this is the way it was because of this film that came out.

The things they are telling me are just outright lies.” U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, she said, told her the attack was a result of protests around an anti-Muslim video. “I don’t trust you anymore,” she said of the administration. “You — I’m not going to say lied to me, but you didn’t tell me and you knew.”

I cried on Obama’s shoulder and he just kind of looked off into the distance. That was worthless to me.”

Read the full story here.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

An Open Letter to President Obama

Parental advisory – explicit language is contained in this post, and while I believe it is used in context you may not want to leave this post up on your monitor.

An open letter to President Obama

Mr. President, I know you’re a busy man. You've got Letterman’s show to do; or is it The Tonight Show with Jay Leno? Or “Pimp with a Limp,” or The View, or some hard-hitting sports talk in Cleveland.

Jon Stewart, perhaps? Probably not; might not be optimal.

By the way sir, that’s where I’m from. I grew up in a south-eastern suburb of Cleveland in a nice suburb called Solon. My parents worked really hard to provide for me and my siblings. No “fair share” handouts; just good planning, a lot of hard work, a lot of stressful late nights trying to make ends meet, and a dedication to be the best parents they could be. I don’t think they ever felt “punished” with any of us three… well, maybe me, but that’s a whole different story. Thankfully we can all smile about all that today, and realize I was an idiot, even though in my mind, back then, I was a genius.

Mr. President, I know you enjoy visiting your peeps. Don’t bother with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday… those raaaacists who watch that network won’t vote for you anyway, being bitter clingers and all. I know that quote was taken slightly out of context… I just like to remind you that you said it, even though back in 2008 none of your friends in the media wanted to talk about it. Well, that or anything really.

They’re still not investigating your past, your media friends, even though some of them are sure worried about Mitt Romney’s taxes, still, even after we learned that between taxes and charity he gave away almost sixty percent of his earnings. And a cool thirty percent of his earnings were given to charity. Thirty percent, voluntarily, without the government forcing it to be removed from his account before it went to The Cayman Islands, or wherever he hides all his loot.

But I digress, sir, and you’re a busy man. Let me get to my point. Imagine this if you will, Mr. President:

Wendy’s puts out a new burger. It really is better than McDonald's. I mean, seriously better. It’s less expensive, it’s more filling, and it has less calories.

McDonald's decides they want to try to say they are better than Wendy's, even though they know people are going to Wendy's and McDonald’s has no idea how to give them something even equally as good… because after all, many people going to Wendy's are lifelong McDonald's customers. These McDonald’s customers are completely disillusioned, because they believed they really had found the best burger ever. This burger was supposed to be ‘da bomb,’ to use some hip Hollywood lingo.

So McDonald’s marketing department schemes a new tactic; they will run ads saying “Wendy’s is telling you their burger is better, but they’re bullshitters!”

You are asking for four more years, Mr. President. Should we give you four more years when you can’t even act in a way that’s becoming of the office you ask us to trust you with?

Mr. President, whatever language you and Joe Biden use behind closed doors may be your business, but when you put yourself in front of us, it becomes our business.

While working, I don’t use obscenities when I am in areas a customer could possibly hear me. Yet while signing your signature health care ‘reform’ bill, we heard you and Vice-President Biden loud and clear. Well, we heard him, anyway.

The fact that we heard what he said to you, sir; that was a big fucking deal that day. Our nation will forever have that moment to remember you by. Is that the legacy you want, Mr. President?

While on the campaign trail, sir, your customers hear you. We, sir, are your customers. You serve us, remember, just as I serve the customers of my place of business. If I act out of line or disrespectfully I risk losing a customer, and with the loss of every customer comes the possibility I may lose my job, if I am found to be part or all of the reason for said loss.

Sir, we don’t need you to use the word “bullshitter” on the campaign trail as you rally your base against Mitt Romney. If you have honest differences, be honest. Lay out the facts. Plead a reasonable case for your record, compare it to Romney's projected agenda, and let the chips fall.

And I know my nieces’ and nephews’ ears don’t need to be shielded, as the evening news describes your use of that word, as The President of The United States, while campaigning for re-election. My nieces and nephews should always be able to look at The President of The United States with awe, and respect. You should be a role model; about that there is no question.

The Presidency is the highest and most respected office in the world, Mr. President. Act like it.

P.S., sir – here’s what some of your friends in the media say. European media too, by the way… I’m guessing you’ll enjoy their adulation. They use language just like yours when they do their ‘job’ of reporting about the ‘outrage’ I feel about your disrespect for our trust.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

The Office of The Presidency

With the exception of my Twitter feed I have largely kept my politics to myself this election season, because I realize I see things from a certain perspective, that my loved ones have different points of view, and my love for my family to me is infinitely more important than my desire for the political victory of any individual politician or political party. I believe my family has largely made up their minds about their vote this year, as have I.

When my family (my siblings, their spouses, and I) discuss politics, it can become heated at times. Since our discussions are usually everyone in my age group "against" me, I sometimes walk away feeling very concerned that I am somehow seen as "the opposition." I have certainly been told that my blog is "partisan," to which I have answered and will answer "yes it is." I am a conservatively-minded person, and I make no bones about it. I recognize the good and bad in both parties, and while I have not always spoken out as loudly about the wrong actions taken by Republicans, we all can grow and learn. I think, therefore I am.

At this moment in time, given recent events and information coming to light, I now can no longer bite my tongue in good conscience. I write this expecting my family to read this, and I hope they will put aside their partisan differences with me and see the big picture of what is happening right now on the world stage, and how it is being affected by President Obama.

I also write this for anyone who comes across it, and I invite you to take my perspective into consideration as you decide who will earn your vote for President on November 6, 2012.

Please understand I don’t say these words lightly; What breaks my silence is that we are learning President Obama and his administration has been dishonest with us, and therefore cannot be trusted.

A quick “disclosure” of sorts for those who don’t know me personally or who may not read my rants: I am a recovered addict, and therefore at times in my life I was a liar. I spun truth. I deflected responsibility and pointed the finger of blame, or told complete lies in an effort to better my appearance for various reasons. I lied to employers, I lied to people I considered friends; I lied to myself, and worst of all I lied to my family. I made excuses for everything, always had someone or some circumstance to blame for my deficiencies, and only would accept responsibility for things when the outcome was in my favor.

When one lie is told, it is often because other lies have been told and the liar has been able to get away with those lies. We’ve all heard the old saying “He lies so much he probably is starting to believe his lies are truth.” I was that person at a time, and I have developed a rather keen sense for detecting such behavior in others. Takes one to know one, they say…

Of course I am not here to claim that I am perfect. I am human, therefore I am flawed. But I have insights and a sense of perspective that perhaps others may not have, due to the places my life’s choices have taken me. To say I have seen things others have not seen is an understatement, to be certain.

Below I link to a few articles describing the situation surrounding the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, what the administration knew, and when they knew it.

It is now more than evident that people inside The White House knew at approximately 6pm on September 11, 2012 that our consulate was under attack, a group was taking responsibility, and that group was an Islamic militant group. This information came to The White House from no less than The State Department, which means that multiple agencies inside our federal government knew the truth as the attack took place.

To be fair, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement which said, in part, that "posting something on Facebook is not in and of itself evidence."

I believe the evidence is and has been overwhelming since the attacks took place.

Ask yourself; Would the same Facebook account be deemed credible by this administration, were it broadcasting that America had assassinated on of the terror group's leadership?

On September 12, 2012. President Obama got on a plane after a full night’s sleep. He was headed to Las Vegas for a campaign stop. President Obama received the proverbial 3am phone call, and rather than be the leader he presents himself to be, he slept while four Americans were murdered in Benghazi, Libya.

On Sunday, September 16, 2012, The White House sent UN Ambassador Susan Rice out to five Sunday talk shows to perpetuate the lie about a YouTube video. It has been discussed as common knowledge amongst many media veterans that it would definitely be The White House that would decide who would represent the administration in such circumstances, therefore top advisers made the decision to dispatch Ms. Rice and certainly President Obama was aware of her agenda that day.

At the service where the bodies of the murdered Americans arrived stateside, both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama mentioned the video. President Obama went before the United Nations and mentioned this YouTube video no less than six times during his address to the General Assembly.

President Obama has gone on a number of talk shows – The View, Jon Stewart’s Daily Show, Letterman to name a few… and the story has been completely inconsistent. Vice-President Joe Biden has been out there spinning the same stories, just as erratically.

However, the news that continues to pour out shows us that The White House has been perpetuating misinformation, most likely for political expediency. Of course I don’t know with certainly the reason any more clearly than most anyone else, but I believe we can safely assume this administration thought that they, with the help of their friends in the complicit media, would get away with telling the ‘YouTube video’ story and keeping the truth under wraps until after the election.

It is my opinion that if you believed that George W. Bush lied to us about WMD, or was in any way "reckless" or "irresponsible" during his presidency, then you must see this as being of the same egregious nature as anything that ever happened during Bush's time in office. At this moment we already have more conclusive evidence that President Obama lied to the American people than can be found related to any claim made against Bush.

I'm not here to retry all the events that took place before 2008, and I'm not going to go into any other issue about Obama's time in office and say it's relevant. I am simply here right now asking fair-minded people to take an honest look at the facts, and then think about what you would say, were there a (R) next to Barack Obama's name on the ballot.

This is not Donald Trump or Sheriff Joe Arpaio on a fishing expedition for a birth certificate, and this is not Rush Limbaugh “twisting” the information in his favor as I know many non-conservatives believe he does. This is not about a Black man being in The Oval Office; this is about the trust that MUST exist between Americans and our elected officials; nothing more, nothing less.

This is real, blatant misinformation put forward by The President of The United States of America, and this is a travesty. The trust of The Office of The Presidency has been compromised, and we no longer can trust the man who holds that office.

Four years ago many Americans voted for Barack Obama on the hope of change. I don't say that to be snarky, I say that because it is true, and I have come to understand why.

We all want to believe that someone will do right by us when we cast our vote in their favor, but never in my lifetime has that promise been made with such an amazing force of marketing, and simultaneously believed in so strongly as was the case in 2008.

Candidate Obama made promises of transparency and transformation beyond our wildest dreams. He promised he would change Washington and politics as we know it. He told us we could trust him, because he understood our plight and felt our pain. He said his administration would be the most transparent ever. He promised we would no longer be “red states” and “blue states,” but instead we would be “The United States.”

In retrospect we can recognize that was all not much more than campaign rhetoric. And sadly as it relates to the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, it has become an insult to the memory of four Americans who served respectfully and died tragically, perhaps unnecessarily. The White House had information about two attacks on the very same facility in the months leading up to September 11, 2012, yet they did nothing to provide more security, if even for a day.

In fact, the administration and campaign spin machines have blamed Republicans, citing budget cuts they claim were the fault of The House of Representatives. No need to recognize that any legislation with such cuts would have to pass a Senate vote and be signed by The President.

We can all agree Ann Coulter should not have said "retard" the other night on Twitter, just as I hope we can all agree that Eva Longoria (a paid Obama campaign official) should not have called Mitt Romney a "racist/misogynistic twat" on Twitter, and that Bill Maher and David Letterman should never have said about Sarah Palin and her daughters all the awful things they have said over the past four years.

The politics of personal destruction has been part of American politics since our nation’s founding, and it is not any more attractive today than it was back then.

But what really matters is not what the pundit class says, nor the snarky zingers thrown by the candidates during a debate or on the campaign trail.

What really matters is the level of respect We, The People receive from our elected officials. After all, their work is called ‘public service,’ and ultimately they work for us. We, The People, are The United States of America, not our elected officials without regard for our interests.

In the early 1970’s President Richard M. Nixon was forced to resign under the certainty of impeachment hearings because of a misdemeanor breaking and entering case, as well as the cover-up of his own involvement in some very questionable actions. There were no Americans killed because of these actions, but his behavior was no doubt illegal and inappropriate.

In the late 1990’s President William Jefferson Clinton was brought up on impeachment charges because he lied under oath during his testimony about a sexual indiscretion. His behavior was immoral and his false testimony illegal, but no lives were lost.

I don’t know that this is necessarily an impeachable offense at this time. In the days and months leading up to September 11, 2012 President Barack Obama and his administration had the opportunity to investigate the security needs in Benghazi, Libya and make improvements if needed. They did not. Had the prior attacks been better known by the public, perhaps if our media was actually reporting on important issues instead of worrying about our President’s NCAA brackets or what style dress Mrs. Obama was wearing at an event…

People can differ philosophically about whether the Republican or Democrat Party has the best intentions of Americans at heart, but all that goes out the window when we have a President who is being dishonest with America.

I don’t write to instigate; I write because I care. I hope everyone who reads anything I ever write, understands that my first interest politically is always the good of all Americans, and that what I care about most is my family. Across the 2000 miles I chose to travel when I moved to Arizona nearly twelve years ago, I think of my family many times each and every day, and I always hope you are thinking of me too.

God Bless.