At least once a year I re-read "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu. I strongly recommend you acquaint yourself with this seminal and insightful work.

Friday night I was master of ceremonies for a California Eagle Forum event in San Jose. Phyllis Schafly talked about the dangers of treaties, and how the "one-worlders" have been/are/and will employ treaties to undermine, and abrogate our Constitution. I ended up in the hotel bar speaking with the president of the California Eagle Forum, Sandee Becker, and Holly Swanson (author of "Set Up and Sold Out"). One of the issues we were discussing was how successful the "bad guys" have been in keeping "the good guys" divided. Conversely, what a lousy job constitutionally-minded folks have done in cooperating and building alliances.

I see it every day. My day job is host of a radio talk show in San Francisco. My task is to build and maintain an audience. However, I have the dubious task of fighting two nine hundred-pound gorillas. I compete in a time period against Rush Limbaugh, and the guy (in San Francisco) who routinely beats him, Ronn Owens. This daily challenge is a blessing and a curse. In order to attract audience, I have been able to do whatever will work ... for me. In a business of "schtick," for good or ill, I have chosen not to compete in the arena of "form," but rather "substance." I don't focus on the petty battles of "Who" is right or wrong, or the outrageous. Rather, I focus on "What" is right or wrong, based on my values and my litmus test. The test is simple: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights is right ... anything that serves to undermine those documents is wrong.

In order to combat the strengths of Owens and Limbaugh, I have provided my listeners with two elements they cannot find elsewhere. First, I introduce news which is "outside the mainstream" (but shouldn't be). Some of that has been presented in my columns here on WorldNetDaily for over a year. I take pride in having introduced issues ahead of the curve.

• I wrote about Monica Lewinsky two days before the national press embraced it.
• My first columns addressed morals and ethics and Duty, Honor, Country.
• My piece on the death of Jim McDougal sparked a series of Washington Weekly follow-ups.


"

•  The Quigley Factor" sparked multiple similar examinations.
• The "Echelon" piece on privacy prompted a flood of international email.
• My Y2K column last year was a contributing factor to the WorldNetDaily series of articles.
• Locally I started exposing the problems of a vehicle inspection program (Smog Check 2) which was then embraced by colleagues (most notably Lee Rodgers and Melanie Morgan) and resulted in two separate 5,000 plus rallies at the state capitol. Our combined effort resulted in legislation, and momentum. We continued (and continue) to fight for the removal of the gas additive MTBE.

The good news is I have enjoyed modest success. Despite the challenges of competition (exacerbated by broadcasting in one of the most liberal major markets in the country), I have been able to improve my ranking from 49th in the market to the top 10 ... not good enough, but not too shabby.

The bad news is, despite my gains, and the access I have provided to people routinely shunned by major market radio, the criticism I get from supporters overshadows the vitriol I receive from the liberal left. I think because I have addressed ignored issues (like the Fully Informed Jury Association), those groups kinda adopt me as a champion. They can't or won't understand why I don't devote more time to their pet single-issue agenda. I try to explain to them that in order for me to have the luxury of providing them any forum, I need to have a venue. If I focus on any one issue to the exclusion of a wider spectrum (it is Broad-casting), I would lose audience, and eventually the job that provides me the opportunity to peel the layers off the onion.

Holly Swanson said I provided her an epiphany. I am surprised it took her so long. If the "Right" is to ever win, we must have the "Might." We MUST unite.

The sad reality is this. Those who are our political adversaries, LOVE the fact that we conservatives so consistently get wrapped around a single issue axle that (forgive the mixed metaphor) we can't see the forest through the trees. The Socialists/Fascists/Clintonistas/One-world/Globalists LOVE our myopia. They encourage it. They revel in it ... and they pray that those who would restore the Republic to the constitutional model gifted us by the framers never join together.

There are over 20,000 grass roots organizations, which claim to be "constitutionalists." They represent something like 30-40-MILLION people. However, the strength of those numbers is neutered by the inability of any of them to recognize the imperative of unity. The NRA snipes at Gun Owners of America. The Fully Informed Jury Association grouses about the Wallace Institute. Everyone is SO focused on raising money for their little club; they can't, or won't see the big picture. The Greens are spending BILLIONS against us. Handgun Control will throw MILLIONS against any pro-gun ordinance.

How did liberal democrats succeed in acquitting a president they themselves verbally chastised for conduct that was "egregious, reprehensible and indefensible"? How and why did they remain united in defending the indefensible? They didn't/don't care Jack-spit about WHAT is right or wrong ... only WHO. They set aside petty differences, territorial squabbles, and even egos and reputations for the good of the order. Meanwhile, the gutless republicans (even after having seen the Juanita Brodderick material) folded like a house of cards.

If, or when, the scattered and splintered "Right" can ever establish an alliance of constitutional protectors, right CAN be might. However, unless or until they subordinate their vertically targeted one issue objectives to the greater common good -- "to preserve and protect the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic," we are doomed to failure.