America, I'd like you to ask one simple question every time you hear a report about a skirmish between our troops and the terrorists in Iraq; How many of the enemy were killed?

Day after day we hear prompt, descriptive and accurate reports about exactly how many of our soldiers were killed and how they died. But how many times do you hear the same about our enemy? Can you say media bias? I scream at the radio every time the media gleefully reports terrorists (they are not insurgents) have killed American soldiers. I want to know how many terrorists died in the attack!!!

From the numbers I have seen, we kill 10 terrorists for every one of our soldiers that dies. You would think this is a news worthy event. But given the world scope of the media these days and the anti-American slant, negative news about America is good for business. Never mind the fact that the so-called "insurgents" are predominantly from foreign countries. Ignore the IED's, which are increasingly of the "Made in Iran" variety. And pay no attention to the flood of weapons and people coming from Syria. The media wants to paint this multi-national band of terrorists as a homegrown militia that is courageously thwarting our military's best efforts.

The truth? We are not executing this war to the best of our ability, which is what is required to win a war. We could destroy the "insurgency" if we only had the will to do so. But as long as we fight a restrained war with politicians putting limits on our troops, we will never win. How sad to see the political tragedies of Vietnam play themselves out all over again.

We all knew it was bullshit. Several years ago, Hilary Clinton not only stated, but ASSURED the American people that she would not run for President. To those of us who are familiar with the language known as "Clinton Speak", we knew it was Bullshit. In other words, anything a Clinton says can be guaranteed to result in the exact opposite.

For example, Bill's much ballyhooed "middle class tax cut" from the campaign of '92 turned into the biggest tax increase in American history. Similarly, Clinton's promise of a "diverse" cabinet resulted in an advisory staff that was 92% white. And what was promised by Bill to be the "most ethical administration in history" ended with an impeached executive officer.

So should we be surprised that Hilary lied to us? Nope. She staunchly justified her vote for the Iraq war to anyone who would listen. Today she is against it and proclaims that the President somehow pulled the wool over her eyes after the vote. A week ago she said (to a crowd in Iowa) she's going to run her campaign the "Iowa" way. Yesterday she said (To a crowd in New Hampshire) she's going to run her campaign the "New Hampshire Way". What a surpise. Another Clinton whose lies match the direction of the prevailing wind.

Recently, Barack Obama was attacked by his own race for not being "black enough". However, Joseph Biden said he was clean, articulate and bright. Does this mean that smart blacks are not blacks?

Condoleeza Rice, Clarence Thomas and many other black politicians have been castigated by the "black community" for being "Uncle Tom" blacks or "selling out" their race to become more like whites. So, in other words, becoming successful is against the rules if you're black, right? Not exactly. Black athletes, musicians and actors escape this same stigma even if they display repugnant behavior, which mystifies me.

I want to know where the "sweet spot" is when it comes to being "black". Toyota was vilified for placing an ad in magazines depicting chrome teeth with a silhouette of a car etched in them. Jesse Jackson said Toyota was playing to a "stereotype" in the ad. That's fair, but when has "messy Jesse" ever spoken out against rappers, athletes or persons in general with chrome teeth? Jesse, did you heap the same scorn upon Nelly for his chrome grill?

Can you only be black if you play to the ghetto constituency and toe the liberal dependency line? The "Katrina Belt" lived under the thumbs of politicians who for years dealt empty promises of prosperity. But when a crisis came, the same people who should have prospered from liberal rule were left as helpless as little children when the flood waters came. They knew nothing else than to wait for the same government aid that they had lived on for generations.

Meanwhile, the helicopters that should have saved them were busy ferrying their Congressman, William Jefferson of Louisiana, to his house to retrieve $90,000 of money from his freezer so he could leave town. Similarly, Ray Nagin, Mayor of New Orleans, left town, bought a house in Houston and enrolled his children in a Houston school just days after the flood waters drown his constituents. So why were some blacks able to escape Katrina while others played the victim card??? Jesse Jackson, are you listening???

Where is the line between "Too black" and "not black enough"??

Virginia state legislator Frank Hargrove recently commented that blacks need to "get over" slavery. Was he right? Well, not to sidestep the issue, but I believe his phrase was a poor choice of words. If I had to describe the issue, I'd say that blacks need to "rise above" the slavery issue.

Let's face it, everyone has a "cross to bear", as my Mom put it. Yes, having another human own you is a massive cross, but how many living slaves are their today? And while I empathize with the ancestors of the enslaved, wallowing in that legacy will never get you anywhere. So how do you get past the past?

Well, I think African America needs to rise up and rise above all the so-called "issues" that handicap them. The age-old axiom "success is the best revenge" knows no bounds, whether they be color,race or age. Simply put, African America needs to follw the example of Tony dungy, Lovie Smith, Oprah Winfrey and the multitudes of other blacks who have risen above the supposed barriers to reach the pinnacle of achievement in their respective professions.

Why is it that rappers, movie stars, pro athletes and politicians of color can succeed but the average African American cannot? I would argue that it is because they continue to listen to poverty pimps like Al sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Throw off the chains that "Messy Jesse" has thrown upon you, African America. Rise up and show your so-called "oppressors" that they do not still own you... After all, what would be more rewarding than running a company that made you rich and was staffed with white employees?

This is a valid argument from a scientific standpoint. After all, there is no defined or concrete evidence of the existence of a "God" in our everyday lives, right? Well, consider a few things from a common sense standpoint before you define your own position.

First of all, the "Big Bang" theory is a popular one amongst those who argue against the idea that an omnipotent being created us and our world. They will say that the idea of some ghostly, mystical being waving his hand and bringing the universe to be is ridiculous. They will then go on to say that the theory of a bunch of rocks colliding with each other is much more reasonable. What?

For starters, where did the rocks come from? The space dust and matter that collided with other matter did not just magically appear like David Copperfield on top of a jetliner. So where did it come from?

Secondly, how could you believe that a collision of any magnitude could form the precision, beauty and mind blowing natural engineering that is our world today? That would be like saying that if you shot a piece of steel at a piece of aluminum at high speeds you would have a Ferrari. Or that by spilling paint from a table onto a canvas you created a Picasso.

Even evolution cannot be rationally excused as an "accident" of nature. When we cut we are healed, and when certain species suffer a deficiency they adapt their way around it over a number of generations. Without some degree of initial engineering, it is more likely that these circumstances would lead to the extinction, rather than improvement of the species.

Yet the naysayers push on in their desire to substantiate our standing as a Godless society. In my opinion, the only people more dangerous than religious zealots are those who are threatened by the thought of religion. What are they so afraid of??