The terminology of the Old West in describing a newly-arrived eastern tenderfoot pretended cowboy clad in a flashy western cowboy suit and a large ten gallon hat could well be applied to the Presidential candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama.

Obama’s repetitive, well-rehearsed and simplistic rhetoric advocating change, hope and bringing Americans together is reminiscent of that tender-footed cowboy. Where are the specifics? What changes is he advocating? Change can be good or bad. What does he propose that will increase our hopes for a better future? A review of his short work record as a state legislator and a few years as a United States Senator leaves him lacking in experience and reveals his uncompromising commitment to a far left political voting record. His claim of compromising and working together has little credibility.

Americans today are deeply divided over issues such as immigration, the composition and role of the Supreme Court, abortion, the role of religion, taxes, the war in Iraq, how to defeat terrorism, health care and host of other issues.

It has often been repeated that the art of governing is the ability to compromise. This however is easier said than accomplished. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln and other strong Presidents for example, were unable to placate their opposition. Washington could only convince one-third of the people in the colonies to support the Revolutionary War. Lincoln’s opposition came not only from the South but within the North as well. Now President Bush has about the same support as those two great Presidents as he attempts to defeat world terrorism. Even the newly-elected Democratic majority in Congress has discovered they are unable to compromise their far left political agenda and their approval rating has fallen to a record low of 22 percent.

Americans today must elect a President who believes his first priority is to protect the nation. All other considerations and issues pale in comparison. He or she must be like Washington and Lincoln, compromise if possible however, remain steadfast in this primary responsibility. Today we face an enemy who believes that time is on their side. This struggle against the terrorist will continue for decades to come.

Obama, Hillary and other liberals have unceasingly condemned deficit spending, yet their hypocrisy has become self evident as they both have proposed to increase federal spending nearly $300 billion more, much of it to create more government dependency. Perhaps they hope to bring all of us together at the public trough. Their ideas smack of socialism and come at the expense of the fifty percent of those who are working and paying the taxes.

Socialism invariably saps the energy and vitality of a country’s economy, creates government dependency, diminishes personal responsibility, initiative the work ethic.

If you want to stand in long lines, having waiting periods if you need an operation when receive lethargic impersonal care by an assigned doctor then you should vote for Hillary and Obama’s socialized health care plan. Again the fifty percent who are working and paying taxes will be forced to pay for everyone’s health care including millions of illegal immigrants.

In response to Virginia Meagher’s letter to the editor in last weeks Voice. Virginia, when the future of my child, grandchild and my country’s security may be in jeopardy, I am perfectly willing to potentially error on the side of national defense. Bob Deaton 75 Parson Drive Jackson, Kentucky 41339