The Shadow Man

I’ve been listening to a lot of pundits this weekend so I am sorry that I can’t remember who said this but somebody stated that the election is now between Obama and himself. Either you are voting for Obama or you are voting against him. And that made a lot of sense to me because Senator McCain has never really stood out. It felt as if he were a shadow to Obama’s incandescent personality. McCain was never able to define himself with a single message which stuck unlike Obama’s continuous message of hope and change. Even worse, McCain let Obama define who he was.

Actually, I believe that McCain’s campaign has been overshadowed by three people. From the start Obama associated McCain with President Bush. At first the comparison was used to paint him as someone who will keep us in the Iraq war and perhaps get us into new wars. (By the way, did anybody see the big coverage on the news stating that October had the lowest level of deaths in Iraq? No, I didn’t see that either….)

When the economy blew up, McCain had the chance to get away from the Bush label. He tried to take control but he fumbled this opportunity so that Obama was once again viewed as the one who was on top of the issue and had the answers. Actual truth doesn’t matter as long as people believed that the economic problems were due to Bush, and that McCain is just more of the same. Obama’s continuous advertisements showing Bush’s face made it nearly impossible for McCain to break out from behind Bush’s shadow.

The second person who defined McCain’s campaign was his choice for VP, Sarah Palin. This governor appeared out of nowhere and initially electrified the Republican Party. She became the face of McCain’s campaign as McCain himself once again drifted out of sight. Some say she is still an asset to McCain by energizing the conservatives in the party and appealing to the women voters. Others will argue that she was detrimental because of her inexperience which was highlighted by her less than stellar interviews with Gibson and Curic. But, love her or hate her she became the face of the Republican ticket and overshadowed McCain who got lost in the background.

The “October surprise” was the best thing to happen to McCain. For the last person who defined McCain’s campaign is none other than Joe the Plumber. His random question nearly brought down Obama. First, everybody likes and relates to Joe the Plumber, an average guy with dreams of making it rich someday. But Obama’s answer to “spread the wealth” is anathema to all conservatives and even some independents. For the first time it showed the true intent of this most liberal candidate.

But what really had people rallying around Joe was the outrageous treatment of the press. Conservatives had already been incensed when the press attacked Palin and her family a month ago but as she was a public figure it went with the territory. Conversely, Joe the Plumber is one of us so when the press attacked him and divulged private information it truly angered the public. For the first time McCain had a face which complemented him instead of eclipsing him.

I believe that McCain was overshadowed by Bush, Palin and Joe the Plumber and only the last was truly advantageous to him. Against him is Barack Obama, the unknown freshman senator, who’s strong and commanding presence combined with a brilliant campaign has totally eclipsed John McCain just as he had earlier defeated Hillary Clinton.

On Tuesday it appears that more people will be voting for Obama than against, except for the 1 in 7 that are still undefined. Personally I think they will actually end up voting against Obama. Their long hesitation is likely due to the fact that it might feel a bit uncomfortable to pull the lever for Obama. Maybe it’s his race or perhaps it is simply that foreign looking name but many of these undecided will turn to McCain. Unfortunately, I don’t think it will matter in the long run. McCain has spent too long in Obama’s shadow and like the groundhog in February, this means that the Republicans are in for a long dark winter.

A Lesson on Democracy

A teacher wrote to tell me that she had asked her high school students to evaluate the convention speeches by the two candidates. She had looked up the speeches shown on CNN and wrote “Obama's has a grand introduction with inspiring music, 5 minutes of thundering applause, and panning the cheering stadium. McCain's begins with his speech and a shot of a guy in the back holding a sign that says McCain does NOT support vets.” The sad state of the media is that stories like this are no longer unusual and you almost begin to expect this kind of biased coverage of the two candidates.

The writer then concluded “I try very hard to give a favorable introduction to both candidates, without bias, and also include the ideas that we benefit greatly from a 2 party system rather than a totalitarian 1 party system.” Wow. How disturbing is that? You would think that by high school the students would know about our history, our heritage as a democratic country and why this is better than a one party government. It is scary to think that the idea of America is something that now needs to be taught.

As for this election, I have no doubt that the majority of teenagers are supporting the young black man versus the old white guy. There is more than some truth in the old joke about being idealistic when young but becoming conservative the moment you get your first paycheck. When you don’t have any money it is easy to agree with Obama’s “spreading the wealth”. Anyway, I am sure the teens are very enthusiastic supporters of Obama and probably wouldn’t listen if someone tried to tell them otherwise.

Maybe this teacher has the right idea; to try to be unbiased and yet to expose the students to the blatant misuse of power by the media in favor of Obama. On one hand, you hate to disillusion the teens by showing them the seamier side of politics or even by helping them see for themselves that this is yet one more instance where life is not fair. So finding the bias on their own might make them more cynical and distrustful of not just the politicians but also of the supposedly unbiased media. Yet lessons like this will better equip them to make judgments about what they are seeing, and to learn to question even what “trusted” authoritative figures are telling them. And that might be a good idea after all.

ACORN CREEPs Into The News

I had a flashback this morning as I listened to more news regarding ACORN and their potentially illegal practices in voter registration. There are now reports of counties with more registered voters than population, plus tapes of this non profit organization’s obvious, yet illegal, support of a political candidate (Obama). Out of nowhere CREEP popped into my mind. Now that is a blast from the past.

For anyone under 50, CREEP was the Committee to ReElect the President and in this case the President was Nixon. Everyone is familiar with Watergate, the hotel where the burglaries took place, but few remember that it was at the direction of CREEP. So why does ACORN remind me of CREEP, other than the fact they both have memorable acronyms?

Richard Nixon would have clearly won his second term without the machinations of McCord, Dean, Mitchell etc. breaking into and wiretapping the offices of the Democrat Party. Assuming Obama wins in two weeks, I would think he still would have won even without ACORN’s help. Yes, it might be a lot closer race without the millions of voters registered legally and illegally by ACORN but he probably might still be the next president.

Yet thanks to the illegalities of ACORN all the votes cast for Obama in areas in which ACORN was active will be questionable. Additionally, the millions raised by ACORN will now be thoroughly investigated to see if any money was diverted to Obama’s campaign. Even the NY Times, which had previously refused to write about ACORN, is now investigating this organization because of the growing accusations.

Just as in the case with CREEP, I think the overriding problem is hubris combined with stupidity. For how arrogant and dumb can you be for an ACORN executive to give a speech at an ACORN event in which they openly and forcefully support Obama while they were being taped? Did they not know it was illegal for a non profit organization to support a candidate? Or did they think that no one would dare to take them to task because Obama is the chosen one who must be elected? Additionally can’t anyone count in this organization? It is one thing to knowingly register false names but to end up with more supposedly registered voters than there is a voting population is absurd. (Yes a few areas might be attributable to college campuses but this doesn’t explain all of them.)

Whatever the reasons, ACORN is now beginning to tarnish Obama’s campaign. Unfortunately, by now ACORN and Obama are clearly tied together in the public’s mind such that any illegalities by ACORN will reflect on to Obama. Even if Obama wins, I believe that the investigations into ACORN will continue. Unlike CREEP which eventually brought down Nixon’s presidency I sincerely doubt if ACORN’s activities could do the same to Obama. An obvious difference is that Obama will have a sympathetic Congress and media who will do all that they can to shield Obama from any criminal activities by ACORN.

I have no idea how all of this will play out. It is also important to remember that it wasn’t CREEP’s activities as much as it was the cover up afterwards that caused Nixon’s downfall. It will be interesting to watch how both ACORN and Obama react to these newest charges.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PS – I wanted to add a short follow up to my blog about the first day of early voting in Florida. I had said that two of my friends had given up due to the long lines but that I expected they would try again. They did. Yesterday, on the second day of early voting, my friend returned to the downtown Orlando polling place where once again the parking lot was full and there was a long line. This time she was prepared for this and thinking that it might never get much better she spent the 90 minutes needed to park, stand in line and then vote. My second friend, who lived in an upper income suburb, also returned to his polling spot. This time there were plenty of parking spaces and no lines, and he was in and out in about 5 minutes. Considering the demographic trend of downtown urban voters vs. suburban upper income voters, this does not bode well for McCain….

Turning Out the Vote in Florida

Senator Obama held a rally in Orlando yesterday to coincide with the first day of early voting in Florida. Although there were 50,000 people at the rally, Obama’s supporters were also out at the voting booths, too. Mid afternoon I received an email from a friend who lives in Orlando and had decided to vote early. She assumed that mid day, when people are at work, would be a good time to vote as there wouldn’t be any lines or waiting. Wrong. She couldn’t even find a parking space in the large strip parking lot. There was also a long line snaking out of the front door, down a block and around the corner. She drove up to those near the back of the line and asked how long the wait was. To her amazement they said an hour and a half at which point she went back home.

A few hours later I was on the phone with another friend who was driving to his home in an affluent suburban area north of Orlando. He, too, planned to stop off and vote that afternoon. Just as I was relaying what happened to my other friend he interrupted me. Turns out, that even in this higher income suburb, people were out early to vote. The library parking lot was full, people were parking all over the place and there was even a policeman helping direct all the traffic. Needless to say, this friend also gave up on voting yesterday.

In her email, my first friend observed that in the downtown voting area the long line was made up of primarily African Americans and Hispanics. I can only imagine that for them, voting for the first African American for President must be a joyous and exciting occasion. Actually I can’t really imagine how it must feel. To know that you or your father or grandfather had been subjected to degrading and sometimes violent racism and now you are voting to elect a black man as the next president. Wow. Whites were always told that anything is possible in America. Blacks are now finding out that the same is really true for them, too.

If I were black I would vote for Obama, even if I didn’t completely agree with his politics. Why? Because I would want my children to know that they can grow up to be President if they wanted to. I believe that the second or third time that an African American is up for election everyone will be more inclined to vote based on politics. But this first time? Blacks relate to him as family, as a man who will understand what it is like to be black in America and will speak for them. (Ironically, in the Middle East and then Hawaii, Obama rarely faced the racial problems found elsewhere in America but that doesn’t seem to matter.) In spite of what Colin Powell or anyone else says this presidential race is about race and yet I don’t think it is necessarily racist. I think it is more akin to voting for your favorite Uncle even if you didn’t completely agree with his politics. But he is family, someone more like you than any other past president so yes, you would vote for him and then believe he will help you out in return.

One can assume with nearly 100% accuracy that a black man standing in line to vote will cast his vote for Obama. Then there is the white guy standing in line amidst a sea of black faces. No wonder there have been altercations regarding wearing clothing with political slogans and names when going to vote. In many states it is illegal to campaign near a voting booth therefore wearing a t-shirt that says Obama may not be allowed. However, I don’t blame the wearer of such clothing, especially if it is a white person. If, in a line full of exuberant African Americans, I was one of the few whites then I, too, would want to wear my Obama t-shirt to proudly show I was with them. On the other hand if I were planning to vote for McCain I would probably feel somewhat intimidated, especially if I were elderly as many of McCain’s supporters are.

I worry that many Republicans will turn around and go home when faced with long lines just as my friends did. However, I am sure both of my friends will try again until they do vote (although ironically they will cancel each other out). But I wonder how many other people will become discouraged by these long lines even during this early voting period? I also imagine that there are a lot of Republicans who aren’t all that fond of McCain to begin with, who are put off by the long lines, who perhaps even feel a bit intimidated by them and who believe the polls that Obama was going to win anyway. How many of these Republicans will eventually give up and go home?

The only hope McCain has is if he has the kind of grass roots support that Obama has. For he will need supporters who will encourage and help his voters go and stay in lines, perhaps for more than an hour, in order to cast their votes for him otherwise it could be a landslide victory for Obama.

And yet, I almost worry more about the process then the results. Already there are all these problems about invalid voters, fraudulent practices and lawsuits. I truly hope that the combination of McCain supporters, Obama supporters, ACORN workers, “independent” observers and of course the media looking for a story doesn’t turn our election process into a sham and our voting precincts into battlefields.

Newsworthy

I was surprised by what I saw on Friday night as I surfed the major network’s evening news and then glanced at CNN. Here are some highlights of what I heard:
· NBC – Brian Williams actually had a piece that was positive towards big business. He and a couple of MSNBC hosts discussed the economy saying “if there is no government figure with towering amounts of credibility on this…” then added that big business CEOs should step forward to help out. Imagine that. First, did they just imply that Obama doesn’t have a lot of credibility? Secondly instead of saying the economy is the fault of big businesses (i.e. Republicans) they are actually looking for a corporate CEO to save the day!

· CBS – I was very surprised to see a segment on ACORN. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/10/cbsnews_investigates/main4514429.shtml?source=search_story) They first interviewed a voter registration official who showed the top of his desk overflowing with false forms. He blamed ACORN employees for massive cheating which was encouraged by ACORN management. They followed this with a woman who is the chief organizer for ACORN. She said of the recent raid in Las Vegas “It was purely politically motivated.” She also denied that they had quotas which would force employees to sign up so many people every day. However, CBS said they interviewed dozens of employees who disagreed with her and CBS went back to the registrar who again said falsifying forms is a major problem. No surprise that the ACORN employee was an African American but to my amazement the voter registration Registrar was also black! And they ended this piece by saying this could cause questions and problems in key states in this election.

· ABC – I didn’t see much change in this network’s tone or point of view. But when interviewing supporters of the two presidential candidates, McCain’s supporters discussed his policies and plans to help the economy while Obamas’ supporters admitted they were voting for Obama but didn’t know anything about his policies. I am not use to that kind of editing which made the supporters for Obama look bad.

· Larry King – I didn’t watch him but I did see that King also did a segment Friday night on ACORN. The right wing fear that this story would be buried turns out to be misguided as the main stream media (MSM) is finally investigating ACORN.

The polls show Obama with a 7-11 point lead so it will be difficult for McCain to catch up. Yet I believe there is a slight shift in the support for Obama. I doubt if anyone from the media would actually turn against him but I think the magnitude of the economic quake that rattled the world this past week is having an unintended reaction. I could be completely wrong but here is my take on what might be happening.

I think many Liberals truly believe that they want to help the poor and disadvantaged, and protect them from big business. Not only does Obama support these causes near and dear to liberals but simply voting for a black man is a symbol of their progressive ideals. So when the Stock Market first started its downward trend, liberals were quick to blame Bush, Republicans and big business and Obama skyrocketed in the polls. Then to fix the economy they did what they always do – have government throw a lot of money at the problem. But the Stock Market continued to fall and fall and fall into unimaginable levels.

Major corporations found their stocks cut drastically, some to levels not seen in over 50 years. Democrats always viewed the corporate world as the home of Republicans and the stereotypical white, wealthy businessman. They demonized companies to the point where it was an “us vs. them” mentality. The left saw themselves as the benefactor helping the poor and less fortunate “us” against the mean Republicans and big businesses.

This week we watched corporations crumble and names you thought would always be there are now disappearing. It was one thing to mock corporations or even make sarcastic docudramas about them but to have these companies disappear completely? Sure the liberals have continuously hampered corporations with taxes and minimum wages, OSHA laws and Sarbane-Oxley legislature, yet they still expected the corporations to continue functioning. As in the past, big business was supposed to take whatever the liberals did to them and somehow keep producing their goods. They are not supposed to stop no matter what was done to them. Besides, how can you champion the downtrodden “us” if there is no longer a “them” out there anymore?

Plus, liberals are now being personally affected by what is happening with businesses on Wall Street. They, too, are watching their portfolios and 401k’s take a nose dove and are also trying to reassure elderly parents who are no longer as comfortably fixed as they were just a week ago. Suddenly these wealthy liberals are becoming fearful about their future as it is their wealth which is affected when these major corporations finally buckle under the weight placed on them by the liberal laws.

On top of all this is the specter of socialism. Since the Great Depression this country has slipped more and more into socialism. Yet this movement to the left has always been cloaked as policies to help the poor and disenfranchised or even simply buried under other laws. Now, though, we are blatantly discussing government taking over businesses and even talk openly of redistribution of wealth. A line has been reached and I think people are having second thoughts. Some liberals are realizing that it is our democracy that is at stake and are beginning to move back slightly from crossing that line.

In this new economically challenged world many liberals are now taking another look at the two candidates. I think that they are beginning to question the wisdom of electing a first term 47 year old Senator with little to no experience. These journalists and other liberals might be asking themselves if they can trust America to this young man and more importantly, wondering if they can also entrust their own personal future to an inexperienced politician surrounded by radical advisors. Speaking of radicals, in the past anyone who brought up Obama’s associations with various radical groups and people were either ignored or mocked. Today, though, the main stream media is beginning to take a closer look at these relationships, starting with ACORN.

It is all probably too little too late for McCain. And there are still the far left supporters such as Chris Matthews who will never change. Yet start to watch the news for not only what is being said, but also how it is presented and of course what isn’t being said. Maybe some in the networks are belatedly trying to be fairer but I wonder if perhaps some are beginning to fear turning our damaged country over to someone so young with such little experience and yet with such questionable taste in wives, friends and pastors…

Carter, Clinton and Liberal Congress to Blame

When the financial problems surfaced my first reaction was to place a big portion of the blame on Jimmy Carter and the liberal Congress who passed the first CRA law. I then read an article that explained why I was wrong and silly me, I believed it. Since then I have read too many other reports that indicate that my initial gut response was, in fact, right. CRA is to blame for a big part of the housing and mortgage problem.

What is CRA? During Jimmy Carter’s presidency, Congress created the Community Reinvestment Act to ensure that banks met the credit needs of lower income areas. I was in banking then and remember when a close friend of mine was initially put in charge of implementing the CRA requirements for my bank. I even helped her with the demographics and maps outlining where the low income areas were and showing the number and types of loans we had in those areas.

Within a year we needed to have an entire department full of people, including a lawyer, to not just make these loans but to show the government that we were in compliance with the new laws. This is because we soon realized that this law had teeth. If a bank was found to be out of compliance then the government could stop it from opening branches, merging with other banks, or even give then a Cease and Desist order! I worked for a large bank which had the manpower and expertise to not only meet the new laws but to then prove we did meet them. But for smaller banks, both making the loans and the accompanying CRA paperwork was (and still is) a huge burden.

I am assuming this but it would make sense that over the next 10-15 years the banks found and made loans to the “best” consumers and businessess in low income areas. Yet they still had to show growth and continuous new lending but there was no one left who qualified.

In 1995, when Clinton was president, there was a revision to the CRA and one of the changes was to allow the securitization of new CRA loans with subprime mortgages. I have heard but have not yet been able to prove that these changes also allowed banks to use unemployment checks as income for applying for a loan. Regardless of the exact method, the result was to offer mortgages to people who would not qualify for a loan if they lived in my neighborhood or your neighborhood. Yet they were now moving down the street and raising the prices of our houses, all thanks to CRA. And gee, guess what one of the roles of a community organizer is?

Basically, CRA is affirmative action imposed on banks. But, affirmative action to lower the requirements to get into college is one thing, lowering the requirements to make a loan is an entirely different prospect. If a person flunks out of college, no harm is done but if a person can no longer pay their mortgage, well, we now see what happens. Then again, what else should we expect when liberal congressmen, most of whom have never worked in the real world their entire lives, tell businessmen how to do business?

I hate being right. But my gut instinct to blame CRA is correct. And yet, even as I write this, banks are still being examined to see if they are compliant to CRA regulations. This makes no sense. We must reign in the CRA requirements or else we will find ourselves back in the same mess, regardless of any new proposals by Congress to resolve this issue. As the saying goes, it would simply be throwing good money after bad.

Power Play

If elected Barack Obama will be a very weak and indecisive president. How did I arrive at this conclusion? By watching the current power play over the past week in which Obama abdicated his leadership role to the Democrat leaders of Congress. It is not often that the public can see such a ruthless play for power but that is exactly what is happening over the financial bailout.

First, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority leader, Harry Reid, said they had come up with a plan. Only after getting maximum press coverage, where they looked like the heroes of the hour, was it revealed that they had not vetted it with anyone else. Then when anyone (such as the House Republicans or a good part of the nation) disagreed with their idea the dissenters were portrayed as deal breakers when in fact there never had been a deal satisfactory to enough people to pass a vote.

When McCain said he and Obama should be there to work on a bailout rather than getting ready for a debate, these Democrat leaders said that this issue was not a place for “presidential politics”. Excuse me? Since one of these men will be responsible for this country in just a few months and tasked with implementing the solution then they should definitely have a role in this. As for “politics” few people are more political than Pelosi and Reid. Their entire role seems to be less in finding a workable solution and more in claiming they were the ones who had a solution and blaming McCain for derailing their “deal”. However, even setting aside “presidential politics” Obama and McCain are Senators who should be there in that role.

This week Obama showed his inexperience and weakness by abdicating his leadership to Pelosi and Reid. Instead of asserting his role as the next potential president he bowed to their wishes and initially stayed away from Washington. Perhaps this is also a reflection of Obama’s history of avoiding making decisions by either not being there or by avoiding either a nay or aye vote. Whatever his reasons, by staying away he turned over his leadership role to Pelosi and Reid. Only a call from Bush finally got Obama back to Washington.

As I write this on Friday morning, Reid has just had another press conference. Again he said that “outsiders should stay out of it” which is a swipe at McCain and yes, even Obama. He also insinuated that a deal would have been reached if McCain had stayed away. You could see that Reid was clearly angry that his deal was shot down by the House Republicans. How dare anyone go against him! Reid even admitted that he is getting angry calls from his constituents but that Congress knows best and even though people are unhappy with it, the deal is good for Wall Street and Main Street. What hubris!

I don’t know how this whole financial mess will ultimately be resolved. What I do know is that Pelosi and Reid are already trying to flex their political muscles. This past week Obama has already set precedence by not only letting Pelosi and Reid tell him what to do but even worse by then doing their bidding. Instead of acting “presidential” he showed he was weak and could easily be controlled by Pelosi and Reid. This bodes a difficult presidency for Obama and an even worse four years for the rest of the country. For if Obama wins then Pelosi and Reid just might end up as the real leaders

Islamic Blackmail Wins Again

Remember the date of August 7, 2008. It is when America had another major loss in the war on terrorism and continued this country’s long slide into becoming subjugated by Muslims and radical Islams. Perhaps I am being overly dramatic, yet I really don’t think so. But let me tell you what happened and you can decide for yourself.

A journalist, Sherry Jones had written her first novel, “The Jewel of Medina” which followed the life of one of Mohammed’s wives. In a Reuter’s interview Sherry is quoted as saying “I have deliberately and consciously written respectfully about Islam and Mohammed…. I envisioned that my book would be a bridge-builder.”

Random House picked up the novel with a publishing date of August 12 followed by an eight-city publicity tour. However, on August 7th Random House decided it was not going to publish this book nor would they release it thereby stopping anyone from publishing it. The Reuter’s article explains Randon House's decision:

Random House deputy publisher Thomas Perry said in a statement the company received "cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment."

"In this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel," Perry said.

If it weren’t so scary I would find it to be incredibly ironic. One of our most sacred freedoms is that of the free press. How often has the media berated conservatives for wanting to take out books from libraries that they deemed offensive? How many times has the ACLU defended schools that stocked books that most of the parents found inappropriate for children?

Yet when a major publishing company backs down on publishing a book there isn’t a single outcry. No one at ACLU is standing up for Sherry Jones’s. There isn’t even a whisper on how Random House was blackmailed by “the Muslim community” except by bloggers. There are a lot of heated exchanges on the internet but it still all goes back to a writer’s freedom to write whatever she likes, even if it might offend some Muslims. Boo hoo. Could you imagine the outcry if that best seller The Da Vinci Code treated Mohammed in the same way it treated Jesus? Or the uproar by the biased media if it had been a Christian group that threatened violence if Random House published an anti Christian book? It would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.

It almost makes me say why bother? The press is crucifying anyone who supports the war in Iraq and the war on terror. Why should our soldiers give their lives to protect freedoms that the press is willing to roll over on when there is the first hint of violence? It is simply unbelievable that a major company such as Random House is terrified of upsetting the Muslims and actually gave in to their blackmail. And yet it did happen.

I use to think the conservative talk radio and TV shows were getting pretty extreme at times. I don’t any more. And to go back to the start of this article, do you think I was exaggerating about the importance of what just happened? No, I don’t think so, either. Not sure what we can do other than keep a watch for other instances of how this country is bowing down to the radical Islams. If the liberal press won’t do their job then we must do it for them. And if you agree then please feel free to start emailing this article and any others like it to your friends and even to conservative radio and TV shows. We need to let the Muslims and the liberals know that once again it is the conservatives, the true patriots, who will save the far left from their own cowardice and will protect all of America’s freedoms, including the freedom of the press.

Changing Everything But His Own Mind

For some reason I keep imagining the following scene…..

Dinner time and everyone is sitting around the kitchen table.

“I don’t like this.” said Joshua looking at the peas on his dinner plate.

“You haven’t even tried them.” Replies his Dad.

“Don’t care. I just know I won’t like them.”

“Why?”
.
“Because it’s green and looks funny and it smells!” Joshua is now building up to a full fledged temper tantrum.

“Stop that screaming and just eat your peas.” Dad is starting to get another headache.

“No. You can eat them.”

“Don't talk back to me like that. You can’t get down from the table until you try them." Dad's getting annoyed with his son's attitude. "How can you say you don’t like something if you haven’t even tried it? That doesn't make any sense” (Apparently Dad has forgotten that adolescent boys rarely make sense.)

“I don't care. I just know I don't like them.”

Father and son stare at each other.

“Oh alright”, Joshua pouts. He balances two peas on his fork, puts them in his mouth and starts to make a gagging sound. “Yechhhh! Are you trying to poison me? That’s really gross! You never listen to me. I knew they would be awful even before I tasted them. And I was right - they are awful and I don't like them! So now get the rest of them off of my plate!"

~

Hmmm. Maybe some little boys never do grow up…

Hillary’s Slip

Poor Hillary. Talk about open mouth and insert foot! Maybe I am naïve but I honestly don’t think she meant that she was staying in the race hoping that Obama might be assassinated in June as was Bobby Kennedy. I know it sounded that way and the media and pundits jumped on her but I really think it was more of a case of not being more careful of how she was saying something.

She was trying to defend why she should stay in the primaries and was simply giving examples of other primaries that were still being contested in the summer months. She said that her husband didn’t wrap up his first primaries until June and that Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June. Again, she was only trying to point out that Bobby was still campaigning in the month of June, not that she was waiting for someone to assassinate Obama.

What is interesting is how everyone immediately thought the worst of her. It says a lot about her character or at least how others perceive her character that they would even think she might be hoping her opponent was shot. And more than anything else that is why she should never be president. How could you possibly trust Hillary when you believe she is capable of doing almost anything to obtain her goals? And some would say that she has done the unthinkable before to protect herself (think Vince Foster).

Even though Hillary might not have meant she was waiting for Obama to be assassinated I am nervous that there are some who might take her up on that. God forbid, if Obama were to be shot, Hillary could not be the candidate for too many people would remember this statement and say she was the cause. One bright spot is that the majority of Hillary’s most ardent supporters are middle aged white woman. That is the least likely group to pick up a gun and go after somebody. But as they say, it only takes one crazy person and no matter what the demographics every group has at least one nut case.

On the other side, John McCain should be on his hands and knees thanking Hillary for her controversial statement. Late Friday he published his medical records and his wife’s tax returns from last year. It is a typical politician’s tactic to provide potentially damaging information on the eve of a three day weekend when most people have the TV’s turned off and aren’t paying attention to the news. Clinton’s faux pas combined with all the continuing weather related disasters and stories on the high gas prices dropped McCain’s news to the bottom of the stories being reported.

Most people, though. aren’t paying much attention to politics right now. And I must admit that I love this weekend. As a child it meant a big parade in my small town where if I wasn’t marching in my Girl Scout uniform then I could be found with my family under the big tree waving my little flag. And then regardless of how cold it still might be you just had to take a dip in the pool even if it was just a quick in and out. As an adult this was always the first big national holiday since February and I really looked forward to the much needed three day weekend.

As you enjoy your holiday here is a final fun political thought. In addition to parades, pools, beaches and cook outs, this weekend also marks the start of the summer movie season. For me, as for many others, I can’t wait to go see the new Indiana Jones movie. But keep this in mind as you watch Harrison Ford in this action packed movie – this vibrant, energetic, man is just 7 years younger than John McCain!

The Wright Stuff

I just watched John McCain come closer to winning the election this fall. His odds of becoming the next President increased with every word that Rev. Jeremiah Wright said this morning. Unfortunately most people were at work and missed a spectacle, a production, a carny show by a man who only cares for himself, Jeremiah Wright.

The phrase “It’s all about me” was created just for this man. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright likes nothing better than to be center stage and to hear himself talk. He thinks he is the smartest, wittiest and wisest man in the room. And when given free reign as he was at the National Press Club today his attempt at humor becomes heavy handed, his sarcasm sounds malicious and he turns on the innocent as he did to the young moderator during the Q and A. This poor woman was simply reading other people’s questions and there was no reason for Wright to be mean to her and to try to look witty and smart at her expense.

As for an apology for any previous statement, forgettaboutit. It would be impossible for this man to say he is sorry because he firmly believes is he always right (no pun intended), that he speaks not for himself but for all black churches, and that he and the church are the victims to whom apologies are due.

Speaking of which, victimhood was a major tenet of his speech. I certainly could understand how the black Christian church originated by the slaves. Yet it seems as if they have never left slavehood according to this preacher. He feels that white America owes an apology to black America for something that occurred over 130 years ago. Instead of an apology I kept thinking sarcastically “Get over it already.” And apparently the government is evil and capable of doing anything, even starting the Aids virus and downing the Twin Towers, according to Rev. Wright. And with every conspiracy theory he spews his credibility drops another notch (and McCain gets another vote). I also wondered where is the outcry for the separation of church and state? Is the Rev. Wright preaching politics only when it suits him and then turns around and argues that he is not a politician but a preacher and will stay a preacher regardless if Obama wins or not.

Then there was his theme of divisiveness. He hammered on the message that black America was different from everyone else. When he said that their churches were not bad, only different, I again thought of his statements of God Damn America. I am sorry but to me that kind of different is bad. But I was even more astounded when he continuously said that black children learn differently. Excuse me? What does he want, a repeal of Brown v Board of Education? And throughout his speech on how black America was different I kept thinking about our founding fathers and their message of “United We Stand, Divided We Fall”….

As for the Q and A afterwards you really had to see it to believe it. This man was so damned smug as he tossed off sarcastic or scathing or demeaning remarks. He was literally strutting behind the podium and you could see his pleasure in being the center of attention while he delivered controversial remarks. It was obvious that he had prepared for questions on his prior controversial statements and he tossed off these retorts with malicious glee knowing that his answers were nonanswers that only added fuel to the fire.

I have been channel surfing through the major news channels since Rev. Wright’s performance (and it was more performance than speech). Ironically Wright has done something that I have rarely seen before – CNN, MSNBC and Fox pundits all agreed on something! Pundits on all three channels agreed that Wright is a kook who threw Barack Obama under the bus. Of all the sound bites from Wright’s speech (and believe me there are a lot to choose from) the pundits go back to Wright’s response when asked about Barack distancing himself from his preacher. To which Wright basically said that Obama is a politician who will say anything to get elected. Wow. And this is the man that Barack compares to his beloved grandmother. To which I can’t help but think “My, Grandmother, what big teeth you have!” And unless Barack decisively walks away from the Rev. Wright then this wolf in sheep’s clothing might take him down for good.

A Classy Win

My hat’s off to Hillary’s campaign team. Oh sure, everyone knew she was going to win. But it is what happened after the win that impressed me. I went to bed right after her speech and when I woke up there were emails from both the Clinton and Obama campaigns waiting for me.

Barack’s email was pretty much as expected. His campaign wrote that although they lost in PA they still have a commanding lead. It went on to state that they still have to fight a two-prong attack by Clinton and McCain. So guess what? He needs your support right now and to send in at least $25. Typical. Even though he outspent Hillary something like 3-1 and still lost in PA. I guess that although money can’t buy everything it doesn't stop him from needing more…

Then I opened Hillary’s email expecting to read an email about her big win and how they want to keep the momentum going and so need my support and money right now. Except that wasn’t what they wrote. Instead the email first talked about the importance of the win in PA. Then it went on that there will be a lot to do starting tomorrow but for tonight just celebrate the win and ended with a thank you for your support. That was it. No request for money or help of any kind. I am sure that later today or tomorrow I will get another email requesting money but that doesn’t negate that this was a classy gesture. I can’t help but think that this also reflects the new campaign manager now that Mark Penn is gone. Nonetheless for the first time Hillary’s campaign impressed me with this thoughtful and restrained email.

It is all too little too late as Obama has the numbers to win this primary. And yet …. Every time you think the Clintons (husband or wife) is down and out they somehow manage to come back again. About the only sure thing on this day after the PA primaries and Hillary’s win is that the only person celebrating more than she is John McCain!

A Better Not Bitter America

As I sit here watching the Pope and listening to his preaching I can’t help but think back to the “preaching’s” of Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Add in the repugnant statement last week by Barack Obama and I have come to some interesting conclusions.

The Pope in his very first speech at the White House concluded with “God Bless America”. I don’t know if it was intentional but I bet a lot of folks were comparing that to Wright’s “God Damn America”. So far the Pope has been preaching a sermon of forgiveness, encouragement and love. Wright, on the other hand, seems to spend a lot of time preaching about blame and anger and even hatred.

Ironically, Pope Benedict XVI has more reason to hate a group of people than Wright ever will. This German Pope lived through Hitler’s regime and had to deal with the terror and ugliness of Nazism. Now Jeremiah Wright may talk of slavery but he was never shackled in chains, nor his father or probably even his grandfather.

Anyway, in addition to comparing the Pope’s message of love and forgiveness to that of Wright’s hate and anger filled sermons throw in Barack Obama’s message last week. If Barack does attend a church that preaches hatred then you can almost understand why he might think that bitter people turn to religion when they are frustrated.

If your church reflects your frustration and anger with the world then I suppose it would be appealing to a frustrated bitter person. But most people who go to church go to one that preaches a message of love and forgiveness similar to the Pope’s sermons.

Mixing all of these thoughts together and I am arriving at two interesting conclusions. First, it isn’t small town folks who are bitter but the Democrats. Liberals, like Obama, seem to be very frustrated and bitter and angry at the USA. These liberals have yet to forgive anyone; not the people, the Supreme Court, Republicans, Southerners, Floridians nor anyone else who they think helped to elect President Bush in 2000 and again in 2004.

On the other hand, the most successful Republicans, like Reagan, campaign on the promises of hope and a better tomorrow. Their positive messages reflect that of main stream churches. History has shown that most people want leaders who are positive, who offer the masses hope and encouragement to be a better person, a better country. Actully it isn't only Republicans who are elected if they have a message of hope. Think of Roosevelt, Kennedy even Bill Clinton. All of them encourgaed the population that there would be a new tomorrow filled with hope and the good life.

Obama had initially started off campaigning on hope and the offer to bring Americans together again. But after the divisiveness of Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s proclaimed spiritual advisor, then Obama himself began to be tainted with the brush of liberal anger and hatred. Obama then compounded the problem with his bitter statement. He probably will still be the Democratic nominee for President. But if McCain can emulate the Pope by giving Americans a message of hope and prosperity he just might win over an opponent who is portrayed as seeing a bitter not better people and country.

Sigh of Relief

Is there anybody else out there giving a big sigh of relief over the Republican’s choice for president? I am not a huge McCain fan but right now I am very glad that Mitt Romney is not the GOP’s presumptive candidate for president. Why, you ask? Well, let me tell you….

When you think of Romney what comes to mind? Most people would say things like Mormon, businessman, Governor of Massachusetts and Olympics. Now, what has been headlined in the news over the past week? The 401 children found in that sick extreme Mormon compound in Texas and the debacle over the progress of the Olympic torch.

By no means is Mitt Romney the least bit involved in either of these events. Yet because he is a Mormon and because he helped save the Olympics once he is strongly associated with those two topics. Can you imagine the heat and the questions he and the GOP would be getting if Mitt were the Republican candidate? Whew. And I am afraid that because of recent events Romney shouldn't even be considered for VP. Right now Mormonism is just too big of baggage to carry into the White House.

The First Spouse

Who is Michelle Obama? Other than hearing about a few outrageous statements that she has made, I don’t know much about the woman who could very well become the next First Lady. After she did a not so glamorous interview for Glamour Magazine where she said her husband was “snore-y and stinky” in the morning she seems to have been muzzled until the more recent inflammatory statement that she is proud of the U.S. “for the first time in my adult life”.

I think it is past time to better understand who is this woman who could be living in the White House for the next four years. We already know more than we want to know about Bill but Michelle Obama is an enigma. I admit that I also know very little about John McCain’s wife, Cindy, except that she has not embarrassed her husband or his campaign. But it is time that we get to know these potential First Ladies.

We need to know if the future First Lady can act with grace under pressure. Yes, I realize we are electing her husband not her but we will nonetheless have to deal with the spouse of the next president. Today’s First Ladies are often sent overseas to represent her husband and our country so we need to know how she will handle herself. Can she answer not just softball questions from an adoring press but also tough questions about herself, her husband and her plans for the next four years? What are her values, beliefs, ideology? Can she be a modern day First Lady while still honoring the history of her role and the White House? Will she be able to help plan and then host a state dinner? Will the President, much less the American people, have to worry about what the First Lady might say to the press or a visiting head of state? Plus a better understanding of the candidate's spouses will also give us a greater insight into the candidate.

It looks as if the primaries will soon be over and both parties will have elected their candidates for president. There is a long time between now and the conventions and that time should be used to learn as much as possible about each candidate. And this includes learning about their spouses. We need to find out about them now, before they are in the White House when it may be too late.

No End Game In Sight

Howard Dean has stated that he wants Obama and Hillary to do whatever it takes to avoid a long drawn out Democratic primary. The Republican Party is going behind the scenes trying to get McCain to be nicer to the conservatives and to have the other candidates drop out so as to wrap up their primaries. But I just don’t see this happening on the Democratic side.

For the first time in the country’s history, we have the first black man and the first woman candidates. Hillary and Barack’s motivation to be president must then be more personal since it isn’t based on just what they believe but also on who they are. The Republicans also have the first Mormon and the first Baptist preacher but Romney and Huckabee could justify that a rejection of them is not personal but rather a rejection of their religious beliefs. So they probably will drop out sooner rather than later.

But for Hillary and Barack, every win is a stamp of approval while each loss is a rejection of who they are and not what they stand for. How could they not take this personally? Yet they also know that a loss is also a rejection of their race or gender. They have to feel responsible to their respective minority and so not only is their goal to be president of the United States but more importantly, to be the very first woman or black man to be president. Talk about pressure….

These internal and external motivations make it nearly impossible for either of them to drop out for it would mean publicly stating that they (and their race or gender) are not good enough for the job. Clinton and Obama have simply invested too much, too much money, too much ego, too much personal identity and sense of worth to now admit defeat. Nor are their respective groups going to let them drop out and potentially disgrace or set back the image and future success of women and blacks. So it is going to be a long primary.

Stupefyingly Dull Debate

Was it me or was the debate last night mind-numbingly boring? When I first gave up and changed channels to American Idol I thought perhaps my lack of interest in the debate was due to the fact that my state had already voted. I told myself that if I was part of Super Tuesday then I would be more interested in what McCain and Romney were saying.

I lied. No matter how I looked at it that debate was boring. Actually it was worse than that. It bordered on being stupid. I finalized realized what it reminded me of when I saw the so called “highlights” this morning.

While watching McCain and Romney I kept seeing two little boys quarrelling over whose is bigger. It was just that petty. At times I wouldn’t have been surprised if they got into a pushing and shoving match all to prove who is the most “Republican” while knocking down the other guy’s claim to being the next Reagan. But instead of throwing punches they were hurling statistics at each other. Boorinngggg…

I can only hope the debate tonight with Hillary and Barack will be better. Then again, it couldn’t be much worse.

Florida Primary – Before the Count

I suppose I should say something about the vote going on in my home state. Florida is a microcosm of all Americans; seniors, Hispanics, young, blue collar, white collar, black, white, military therefore who wins is not quite as important as why they won and who voted for whom. For instance:

• Did the senior citizens vote for McCain? Or did they vote for a younger man since they know the mental and physical strains on someone in their 70’s?
• Did Huckabee get the ultra conservative vote even though he had few TV ads?
• Exactly who is voting for Romney – older, younger, conservative etc?
• Since Florida has a heavy military presence that frequently need to vote absentee ballot, did they help out Rudy or did they go for McCain?
• Although the votes don’t count, was there a heavy turnout by Democrats or did they stay home?
• Of the Democrats who did vote, did Barack still get all the black votes?
• Did the large Hispanic population continue to vote en mass for Hillary?

I guess we will find out in the next 10 hours. The smart candidate will take advantage of this knowledge to give him an edge next week on Super Tuesday.

New Hampshire Primary

It was fun to watch the New Hampshire primary results as all the broadcasters and pundits backpedaled as they tried to explain why Hillary was winning instead of Barrack. Many attributed it to her crying a few days earlier. (More on that on a later date) I attribute a lot of it to her message, including her Christmas ads.

I noticed, as did many of the pundits, that Clinton’s speeches were all about “I” whereas Obama’s were all about “You”. Clinton’s Christmas ad was a perfect example. It showed Hillary underneath the Christmas tree and talking about each of the presents. With each gift she would say what she wanted “to give” to the American people; better health care, better day care etc. etc. It was the same liberal spiels of having government take care of everybody from cradle to grave. She was selling the idea of a “Nanny state” with Clinton as the head “Nanny” helping the people. Not surprisingly, Clinton got the votes of the lower income, single Moms and senior citizens; people who historically want and need more from the government and typically expect the government to take care of them.

Obama, however, gives beautiful uplifting speeches about “You”. What you the people can do to help yourself and the country. If Hillary is the “Nanny” then I would call Barack the “Motivational Coach”. He received the votes of the younger, better educated and upper income people. Not only do they need less government handouts but they are excited by his inspirational speeches and want to help those less fortunate. I have yet to hear if Barack polled lower in the African-American community but I would assume Hillary got more of their votes. I have an idea why this would be true, but that is for another time. Edwards is out of it except as a means to upset Hillary such as with a possible win in SC. As for a nickname, well, I suppose he has to be the “Beauty Queen”.

In the Republican primary I must admit to being stumped over McCain since I personally do not like the man. As for who might win, there is no telling yet. But don’t count Rudy out yet. He just might win Florida; he at least is bombarding the state with ads and appearances.

And continuing the fun of “naming” the candidates, if Barack is the “Motivational Coach” and Hillary is the “Nanny”, then what about the Republicans? I suppose McCain should be “Grandpa”, but there is probably something better. Romney and Huckabee are easy since they should be the “CEO” and the “Preacher”. Rudy reminds me of the “Gunslinger” vowing to clean up the town and keep out the bad guys. As for the rest of them, Ron Paul has to be the “Kook” and Fred Thompson, well, I am stumped. If anybody has a better idea for McCain and one for Fred, send it in. It never hurts to add a little fun into the serious business of electing our next President.

General Impressions of ABC Debate Tonight

Overall Winner/Loser
Winners: Thompson and Edwards
Losers: Romney and Clinton


Republican Debate Overview

Thompson comes across as the adult. Steps in with acerbic answer then steps back while the others fight. Reminds me of his Law and Order role

McCain – boring monotone voice that puts me to sleep and even when he is defending his position he still never sounds excited or angry

Rudy – smiled when introduced, only one to do that, makes him seem friendly. Talked knowledgeably, rattled off facts and figures, came across Presidential. Invoked Reagan a lot

Romney – whining when others attacked him and by the end he didn't seem like his normal cool collected self – seemed rattled. As governor or CEO not used to people talking back or being that critical and he sure didn't like it

Huckabee – Fell back on constitution and God and expected to see flags waving and hear Sousa in the background when he spoke but otherwise he was a no show and seemed to disappear in the second half.

Rudy and Fred only ones to try to lighten up the debate

Ron Paul a total waste of time will be glad he isn’t in the next debate

When camera is on a candidate who is listening to someone else talk:
- Thompson looked asleep
- Rudy looked amused
- Huckabee looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights
- McCain looked blank
- Romney looked pissed off
- Ron Paul looked ….oh who cares?
-


Democratic Debate Overview

Obama – looks Presidential – tries to be above the attacks from Clinton, only one who's message is to give people the power to choose, and again showed likability and that unlike Hillary he is just one of the guys by mentioning watching the football game tonight

Clinton – initially sounded/looks exhausted – comes a bit alive when attacking Obama – and more alive, even pissed when Edwards attacked. Talked a lot about Bush and his policies – talking about the past, vs Obamsa/Edwards talk of change. In second half she seemed human when accused of not being likable, and overall better performance in the 2nd half defending her record

Edwards becomes passionate about middle class – also came alive when he turned against Clinton and aligned himself with Obama as agent of change vs. Clinton, Could now understand how he beat Clinton in Iowa

Richardson like Ron Paul, he is wasting his energy and taking time from the legit candidates

When camera is on a candidate who is listening to someone else talked:
- Obama looked thoughtful but tired
- Clinton often looked like she ate a lemon
- Edwards – looked eager to jump in and talk
- Richardson looked confused or angry