Monday, March 31, 2008

Return of the Three Stooges

The three stooges of politics are quickly gearing up for a meeting in Denver this August that just may be as entertaining as any one of the many hilarious comedy shorts starring Curly, Moe and Larry, who also delved into politics (You Nazty Spy! , 1940).

The political comedy troupe of Hillary, Barack and Al are on tour nationwide this year auditioning for the role of president of the United States. The original Three Stooges were actors portraying hapless characters and trying to be funny; the new stooges are hapless actors playing politician and trying to be serious.

Hillary and Moe are both serious, determined personalities that are thwarted in their efforts by hilarious missteps and less-than-competent cohorts. Barack is an appeaser, much like Larry who never appeared eager to start a fight, but always ended up in the middle of one. Gore is simply not gifted enough to be compared to Curly, but he makes a great Shemp, a buffoonish substitute for real talent when no one else is available. No offense intended to Shemp Howard.

Clinton’s Moe-like blunders are legion, health care reform, tales of facing imaginary snipers in Tuzla, using husband Bill (Curly) Clinton to insult voters after primary losses, failing to plan for an extended primary run, choosing loyalty over competence to pick her advisers. Like Moe, Hillary is quick to throw blame and unable to accept the fact that her own actions have landed her in the present predicament. Although her “sleep deprivation” excuse and manufactured tears show that she does indeed have a sense of humor, even if it is unintentional.

Larry Fine had much better hair than Obama, but his actions remind me of Barack. Larry usually tried to avoid conflict, but always got hit in the head by a pipe, hammer, or some other object. Barack just got whacked by his involvement with a radical minister, and his explanations are just are comical as Hillary’s. Obama has constantly stated that he wants to avoid negative politics and is willing to sit down with the leaders of terrorist nations and talk. Barack could learn from Larry, appeasement almost always makes you appear weak and ripe for victimization. Sometimes you have to choose a side and make hard decisions.

Al “Shemp” Gore is probably the most qualified of the three to serve as president. He continues to deny any ambitions for the presidency, and is sitting back enjoying the political blood-letting between Hillary and Obama. But don’t be fooled…Al is the best actor (Academy Award) of the three. His people are busy brokering a deal with the DNC and various super-delegates to position Gore as an alternate candidate at the convention. Much like Shemp, Gore was called on to fill in for a big star. In 2000 Gore was called wooden, robotic, and uninspiring. He was performing in Bill’s shadow, but that was eight years ago and Curly’s star no longer shines so bright.

Denver could easily become Stooge Fest ’08 if the democrats head into the convention without a clear winner or a plan to choose one. Moe won’t give up, Larry wants to be everyone’s friend, and Shemp is waiting in the wings for the whole thing to implode. I can’t wait to see how this comedy ends.

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Sinbad Gate Vs. Selma Gate

All of the hype this week centered on Sinbad Gate. It seems Hillary resorted to telling fish stories about her harrowing experience while on an official visit to Bosnia. The comedian Sinbad busted Hillary on her obvious untruths and said the most harrowing experience was wondering where they would eat next. Hillary passed her statements of as being misspoken words. In the end her story was debunked. Hillary embellished the details to make her trip sound more eventful and interesting than it really was. While I believe it is shameful for Hillary to embellish her story at the expense of the military and civilians charged with her protection there is at least some truth to what she said and the basic premise of the story (which is that she was in Bosnia and has some international experience) is at least true.

However, what Obama said in Selma Alabama said on 4 MAR 2007 is simply an untruthful statement. There is no embellishing. The basic premise in his whopper of a lie is not true. Obama spoke at a Selma Voting Rights Commemoration and said in a speech that if it were not for the Kennedy's he would not have been here. It seems that Barack claims his father was provided a Kennedy scholarship to come to America. As Barack puts it in his speech:

""If right here in our own country, John, we're not observing the ideals set fort in our Constitution, we might be accused of being hypocrites." So the Kennedy's decided we're going to do an air lift. We're going to go to Africa and start bringing young Africans over to this country and give them scholarships to study so they can learn what a wonderful country America is.

This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great great-great-great-grandfather had owned slaves; but she had a good idea there was some craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided that we know that the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don't tell me I don't have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don't tell me I'm not coming home to Selma, Alabama.

I'm here because somebody marched. I'm here because you all sacrificed for me. I stand on the shoulders of giants."

Wow that is powerful and moving rhetoric. Too bad none of it is true. The only part that is true is that in 1960 the Kennedy's did donate $100,000 in order to help fund for a second airlift for the Kenyan student program. Unfortunately, Barack's father came here in 1959. It was on a scholarship but it had nothing to do with the marches in Selma that started in 1965 after the young Barack was over three years old. It also had nothing to do with the Kennedy's.

Over the course of this long and seemingly endless campaign backers of Obama say words do matter. We should trust Obama because he says the right things. Obama has very little experience so we must listen to his words. The problem is that Obama is an eloquent speaker and can compose an exciting speech but the very meat of the speech is false. Why Should America trust Obama when his words are all he has and they are untrue.

Hillary embellished a story. Obama lied to make a story. Which is worse? I'll let you be the judge.

Friday, March 28, 2008

Wright and Obama: A View We Do Not Need

Today Barack Obama did his best impersonating Bill Clinton. Obama visited the view where everyone fawned over him. When a question arose concerning Baracks pastor, he changed his story and threw in new untruths.

First Obama says if it were not for Reverend Wright retiring he would have considered leaving his church. This is a far cry from Baracks original statements. At First, Barack denied ever hearing divisive, racist, and controversial comments. He downplayed the his relationship with the reverend and said he saw no reason to leave the church. A few days later as the controversy mounted Barack changed his story. As it became apparent that perhaps Obama was in attendance for at least a few sermons with racial anti-white/ anti-American undertones, Barack decided it was time to spin a speech speaking of the racial divide and saying he could not disown the reverend but yes he now did recall at least being present during some controversial sermons. He called the pastor his religious confidant and mentor. Again he denied hearing the controversial sermons but now admitted that he heard some comments he disagreed with. Now today, he yet again changed his story. Today Obama claims he would have quit the church if Wright had not retired or apologized for his controversial comments. Obama now is claiming to have only heard of "some" of the controversial comments. First it is an untruth that Wright apologized for his comments. Wright believes these comments and sermons to be true. Obama claims Wright is brilliant. Obama claims the only real problem with Wright is "he was stuck in a time warp". How could a brilliant man not see the changes we have made in crossing the racial divide? How can a brilliant man make outrageous claims that Aids was developed by the US to commit genocide against Blacks and Arabs? How could a brilliant man equate white America with Apartheid? No Mr. Obama, the reverend is an influential bigot. He preyed on the members of his own race for personal gain. He has never apologized and is part of the problem with race relations in America today. His hatred of his fellow Americans and his country are apparent in his sermons. In fact the Audacity of Hope sermon that Barack titled his book after contained anti-white rhetoric. This sermon is the first sermon Barack ever heard and moved him to tears. Yet this is the type of sermons that anger Americans. This sermon contained anti-white language. Barack should have known then that this reverend was bad news. Yet Barack stayed with the church. He attended more of the offensive sermons. In fact Obama attended thiese sermons for twenty years. Now Barack would have us believe that after twenty years of hearing anti-American untruths he would have left the church if the reverend did not retire. Who is Barack trying to fool?

Barack is desperately trying to defuse this controversy. He is following the Bill Clinton Rules. First deny all. As the controversy moves along let out that perhaps there is some truth to the controversy but still deny the most serious parts. When the polls look like the storm has passed let out some more information admitting a little more. In this fashion the truth will slowly come out and the controversy will burn itself out before serious damage is inflicted.

Many Barack supporters say we need to listen to his words. Words mean something they say. I am in agreement and words do matter. In this case Obama keeps changing his words to deceive the America public. I do not believe Barack could have listened to these sermons for twenty years without at least agreeing with most of the views. No one would continue attending a church they disagreed with even if the church did good things for the community. If a person disagrees with the views of a religious leader a normal person would seek out a church preaching views more in line with their own. Obama you must come clean. Your half truths and lack of judgment are shining through.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Is Al the Savior?

Many political pundits are suggesting that the democrats should start propping up Al Gore. A small but vocal minority of democrats believe Al Gore could be the savior of the democratic party. As we move closer to a brokered convention in Denver the voices will only get louder. Especially in light of recent polls showing 25-30 % of democratic voters jumping ship to John McCain if their candidate does not win the nomination. The democrats are are the verge of wasting a prime opportunity for control of the executive and legislative branch of government. A single party controlling both chambers in Congress and the white house is something Americans do not tolerate for long. George Bush controlled both chambers for less than half of his two terms. Bill Clinton controlled both chambers for about a quarter of his two terms. The first George Bush never controlled either chamber. So Americans flat out do not like the direction either party takes the country when they have unilateral power.

This should by all accounts be a huge Democratic year. The Democrats have far outpaced their Republican counter parts in financial donations. The War in Iraq will remain unpopular. Now the Democrats have found a way to squander this opportunity. The clamoring for Al Gore will only get louder as neither Hillary nor Obama will win the nomination without the super delegate vote. There remains a possibility of having a brokered convention where neither Barack nor Hillary wins the nomination. But can Al Gore save the day and bring the Democrats in control of both chambers of congress and the white house?

I do not think Al Gore could save the party. Al Gore would almost certainly have to select either Obama or Hillary as Vice President in order to sway enough delegates to gain the nomination. If he selected Hillary I believe this would alienate all of the new voters Barack has brought in to the process. I believe many Obama supporters would stay home including many African Americans. The Democrats would have a difficult time winning the white house without a large African American voter turnout. I believe many Obama supporters would change their support to McCain as an alternative. These would be voters that feel the nomination was stolen from them. If Al Gore selected Obama we would have many of the same issues. Many Hillary supporters would take this as a slap in the face. After all it was Bill that provided Al with a national stage in the first place.

No I do not believe Al Gore is the savior this go around. The Democrats will have to play the hand they were dealt. The Democrats need to make a decision soon. They need to get the super delegates to swing dramatically to one side or the other immediately following the APR 22 primary in Pennsylvania. If they do not and this process drags out until the convention the democrats are in a lot of trouble. Already the tracking polls are showing McCain leading both Hillary and Obama. Some recent polls show Obama and Hillary with slight leads but they are close usually within the margin of error. This is not good news for a party in a fight to the end for the nomination.

Six months ago the democrats were ecstatic about their candidates. Today they are a polarized party that will require time to heal. Both Hillary and Obama have opened up attacks that will be rehashed by McCain and his campaign during the general election. It becomes a lot easier for McCain to hammer away at a splintered party and a wounded candidate for 70-75 days than it would be for McCain to have to hammer away for over six months. Yes the longer this goes on, the more wounds the democratic nominee will have requiring time to heal. I do not believe there is a savior for the democrats they will have to accept one of these two candidates and do it soon or their dreams of moving the country far to the left will fall by the wayside.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Light'em Up

The 110th Congress has not been able to pass much legislation over the last 15 months. The Democrat led congress was able to get a minimum wage bill passed but little else in a contentious first 15 months. Other than a minimum wage hike they were able to pass a budget with $22 Billion of ear marks attached. This do nothing Congress has proven itself very adept at spending our money. They have been too busy running for the next election to do much else. The Democrats came in promising immediate withdrawal from Iraq, health care for all, stem cell research, more jobs, and economic gains for all.

What happened when they took office? The Democratic Leadership undermined our national security by allowing the Speaker of the House to go on a foreign policy trip against the policy of the US. They allowed the Senate Majority Leader to demand an immediate withdrawal and proclaim "the war is lost". They initiated frivolous investigations that have led to nothing under the guise of oversight. Finally, they allowed the House Energy and Commerce committee to suggest some of the roughest tax increases this country has ever seen. John Dingell will propose a .50 cent a gallon tax on gasoline. The gasoline tax is one of the most regressive taxes ever thought of. This regressive tax places a greater portion of the burden on lower and middle class taxpayers than it does on the upper income earners. In addition to the tax increase for gasoline the Democrat leadership is going to let the Bush tax cuts elapse to pay for a socialized health care system. I guess that is why another democrat is proposing legalization (decriminalization) of marijuana. The Democrats must want the America people to be under the influence and in a haze so that they can permanently enact all of their tax increases under a cloud.

This country is currently facing some serious issues related to national security and the economy. But all the democrats can think of doing is legalizing marijuana. No other issue is pressing I guess. Everything must be peachy when we can afford to have our politicians proposing legislation dealing with marijuana. What a great debate.

Barney Frank: I see nothing wrong with a little pot.
American People: But we have no house to live in.
Barney Frank: Light'em up you'll feel better.
American People: But the terrorists are targeting our way of life.
Barney Frank: Smoke some more and you'll never notice
American People: But our bridges are failing
Barney Frank: While you were lightin up we increased gasoline taxes and you can longer afford to use the bridges.
American People: But you'll provide us health care?
Barney Frank: Why? You all are destroying your health anyway.

I can not believe that while we as Americans are working hard to provide the next generation with the opportunity to live the American Dream our politicians are setting up to debate a regressive tax and decriminalization of marijuana. The Democratic Leadership will have the American people believe that there is nothing more important going on that we should be debating pot. I have no problem with debating such things. But should we really be doing this debate when we are a country at war? Should we be debating this when our country is headed for a recession? Should we be debating this when many American families are facing foreclosures? Should we be debating this when our financial institutions are falling apart?

As Americans we must wake up. These career politicians are destroying our country. Vote out every incumbent or we will all be lighting up.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Freedom Demands Responsibility

America is country that was founded on freedom. We cherish our individual freedom and our right of the individual is unmatched by any other nation. Our founders laid out a constitution and amended it 10 times with our bill of rights. These first ten amendments are mostly individual rights and all of them are aimed at our individual freedoms. Individual rights are the basis of our country but it comes with a cost and that cost is represented by the liberal left and the Democratic Party.

Anytime an individual has rights they inherently have responsibilities. We have a right to worship as we see fit. However, individuals have to take responsibility for their actions. We have a right to bear arms but again we have to take responsibility for our actions. An individual right requires individual responsibility. It takes an individual to take responsibility not a village.

The Democratic Party worships victims and takes away the individual responsibility and places that responsibility in the hands of society. It is not the fault of the less educated factory worker that American Corporations closed down plants and moved out of the country. It is not the fault of the individual who murders but rather the gun itself. It is not the individual’s fault that the price of gasoline is so high but rather the greed of corporations. It is not the individual borrower’s fault they are being foreclosed on but rather the fault of the financial system and the government. To a liberal the individual is not held responsible. The individual can over indulge and take advantage of the system but when it comes time to take responsibility for our individual choices these same individuals claim victim status and refuse to take responsibility.

The labor unions came in and did great things improving working conditions and establishing fair compensation. But they went too far. They made demand after demand. Individuals decided to back the union and made the choice to strike rather than find the middle ground. Individuals indulged in the benefits provided by the collective. Now that our manufacturing plants are shutting down and using more foreign labor these same individuals are crying foul. These individuals demanded wages and compensation for unskilled assembly line workers that made our manufacturing base inefficient. We were unable to sell our high priced products. In an effort to reduce costs corporations made steep cuts in quality. They cut corners all the while laborers demanded more compensation. Now that our inefficiencies are so high the corporations are moving to foreign areas that have far less compensation costs and higher efficiencies. To the liberals this is due to the greed of corporations rather than the greed of the laborer. The labor unions and the Democrats have such a shallow view of the complicities in business that they rail against free trade. The laborers priced themselves above the means of the businesses and the businesses had to move or go bankrupt. These unskilled and less educated laborers refuse to change with the demands of the society. Many corporations offer training and education packages to improve the possibility of the laborer to attain other employment. However, many of the laborers are satisfied with the status quo and find it easier to cry foul and claim victimization then it is to improve their own individual marketability.

In our country we enjoy individual freedoms that no other country provides its citizens. What the liberals in our country must understand is that with all of these freedoms there is an inherent demand of individual responsibility. It takes an individual to take responsibility not a village. The basic building block is the individual and successful realization of the American dream is built from the bottom up. It is not forced from the top down. If everyone took responsibility for their own actions and choices the village by default would be responsible. We need to stop blaming society as a whole for our problems and place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the irresponsible individuals.

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Leadership Eludes Obama

In perhaps his first real test as a leader, Obama failed miserably. In his “made for media” speech, the man who believes he is qualified to be the next President of the United States could not summon the courage to publicly distance himself from the racist minister of Trinity United Christian Church, Jeremiah Wright.

In an unprecedented act of political sleaze, Obama compares the alleged statements of his own grandmother to Wright’s remarks in an attempt to nullify the hate inspired rants of his minister.

“I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”

I don’t know what kind of man throws his grandmother under the bus for political gain, but it scares me that he may one day be President. No one gets to choose their grandmother; Obama was a grown man when he began attending Wright’s church. He made the decision to attend, and to develop a relationship with Jeremiah Wright. Did Obama’s grandmother take him to a church that vilified the government? Did she make him sit in church and listen to the racist sermons of someone like Jeremiah Wright? Probably not.

But Mr. Obama has been exposing his two young daughters to Wright’s twisted, paranoid oratories since they were born. The supposed racial remarks made by his grandmother more than likely would pale in comparison to what Wright puts out in most of his sermons. If his grandmother’s statements made him “cringe”, you would think that Obama would be especially concerned about exposing his two daughters to a man who constantly utters such racist nonsense. It’s hilarious that someone who attends Wright’s church can give a speech about race relations.

There are two very important reasons why Obama has not, and can not detach himself from the Reverend Wright. 1) He agrees with many of Wright’s opinions. If he didn’t, he would have stopped attending long ago. 2) He won’t risk angering black voters by distancing himself from Wright and his church.

From a leadership standpoint, Obama is a dismal failure. He sold out his own Grandmother rather than pull away from a man who despises almost everything about this country. These are the difficult decisions a leader is expected to make, and Obama tanked it.

Blue to Red

There has been much discussion on how Barack Obama will run a 50 State campaign in the general election. Markos Moulitsas and his far left daily kos web site has preached the liberal mantra and continually says the way to a permanent liberal stewardship of our government. The Liberals believe Barack is the answer to turn several red states blue. The left believes Obama can turn Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, Nevada, New Mexico, and West Virginia. These states alone represent 57 electoral votes. The assumption here is that Obama win maintain the blue states carried by John Kerry and add these States to the Blue column. This would provide Obama with over three hundred electoral votes and a victory margin considered a mandate.

However, a deeper look through the polls show a shocking story is developing. Many of the above listed States are indeed in play. But here is a list of Blue States that remain stubbornly in play. Polls from Pennsylvania show McCain winning in almost every recent poll over Obama. Pennsylvania is a large state that would more than make up for the potential loss of Ohio. A red/blue swap here and Obama mandate winning margin would be much closer resulting in a net gain with the above listed states of 36 Electoral College votes. Lets look at a deep blue state. Massachusetts has 12 electoral votes. A recent Survey USA poll shows Barack Obama and John McCain tied. This is an expensive state to advertise in and Obama could ill afford to have to tie up resources in a state that should be deep blue. Another Northeastern State that could pose problems for Obama is Connecticut. This is a State with 7 Electoral College votes. Both Massachusetts and Connecticut are deep blue States in the liberal northeast. If Obama is forced to use resources to shore up the Party base in the Northeast the flanks are open to attack. McCain is winning in Minnesota and could take those 10 votes while Obama is busy fighting for the Northeast. What about Wisconsin. This has been a blue state for the last few election cycles but it has been very close. While Obama is busy in the expensive Northeast McCain could make inroads in the less expensive Midwest. McCain could give away the six states Obama is looking at in his 50 state campaign and turn just three blue States in his favor (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota) and Obama is toast. This analysis does not even include Michigan. Will Michigan remain blue. Michigan brought in the democrats to fix the economic woes of the state. However, Michigan’s economy still lags the US economy as a whole. The problems in Michigan run deep. Now the Democrats have decided to disenfranchise voters in Michigan and Florida. Both of these renegade states run primaries contrary to party rules. The Republicans allowed the primary but penalized half of their delegates. Seems in this case the punishment fit the crime. The democrats on the other hand implemented a death penalty. The Draconian democrats stripped both states of their delegates. Neither of these states will be represented in Denver.

The bottom line is that McCain is making inroads in deep blue states and Obama is making inroads in swing purple states. This is a major problem for the Democratic Party. The Democratic base is showing signs of splintering. One in five democratic Obama voters will vote for McCain if their democratic candidate does not win the nomination. How many more will just stay home?

I believe there will be more states in play this year then there have been in the past. The anti incumbency sentiment in the US may rattle the status quo. We may just be surprised by just how many states change from red to blue and blue to red. However, the Democratic Party must choose their nominee soon. The longer this spectacle goes on the stronger McCain will get. Just remember the longer this goes on the more divided the democrats will become. If this nominee process goes on and does not get decided prior to the Denver convention I believe there will be many more blue states changing color to red. A protracted convention fight may hand McCain a landslide victory and lead to a lasting Republican government. Or it may just lead to a third moderate party that appeals to middle America. So on second thought Hillary and Obama need to keep up the fight so that the middle will get the representation they so deeply desire.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Black, White, Obama and Wright

I don’t know what is more disturbing, listening to one of Jeremiah Wright’s hate filled screeds disguised as a sermon, or the fact that a viable candidate for the Presidency of the United States has for years chosen to sit with his family and in effect become an intellectual accomplice to Wright through his continued participation in Wright’s church.

By not denouncing Wright and disassociating himself long ago, one must believe that Barack and Michelle Obama share many of Wright’s extreme views. Obama has been attending Wright’s church for 20 years, Obama and his wife were married in the church, and their children were baptized by Wright, but after the video of Wright and his Joseph Goebbels-like hate speech hit the internet, Obama wrote this on a Huffington Post blog;

“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. … All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.”

Two decades of close association with Wright, in and out of church, and he’s never heard this type of speech from the man? Then there are only three possibilities; A. Obama has a sleep switch on his rear end that knocks him out as soon as he sits on a pew. B. the Reverend Wright has only recently begun expressing his extreme views. Or C. the more likely possibility; Obama is lying.

It defies credibility to believe that Obama would choose to associate with Wright for so many years if he did not in fact share many of the same attitudes. Like-minded people tend to gravitate toward one another and in many cases form long lasting relationships. Obama knows this guy is the equivalent of a political dirty bomb that can contaminate his candidacy with enough fallout to cost him votes and give Hillary Clinton and the GOP some much needed ammunition against him. At the very least this relationship raises serious questions concerning Obama’s judgment.

Obama is certainly hoping that his recent “reconciliation” speech will explain his motivations, beliefs and attitudes. Words have served Mr. Obama well to this point in the campaign, but as scrutiny increases on the Obama-Wright relationship, mere words may not be enough to wash away the taint of what goes on inside the Trinity United Church of Christ.

Monday, March 17, 2008

The Implosion of the Donkey

The year was 1992. Republicans had been in control of the white house for 12 straight years and for 20 of the last 24 years. President Bush had slipped dramatically in approval ratings and Ross Perot had entered into the Presidential race as an independent. The "read my lips" uttering by Bush would eventually lead to the downfall of the president and the republican party. America indeed elected William Jefferson Clinton as President of the United States.

The entire first term of President Clinton was mired in scandals; eventually leading to his impeachment. In spite of this Bill won reelection over a fractured republican party and Bob Dole. Bill became the first President in history to have won two terms as president without ever achieving an absolute majority, instead being elected twice by a plurality.

These were the best of times for the donkey party. They enjoyed the white house for eight straight years. The republican party was fractured and many believed it was dead on the presidential level. However, the republicans came together and mapped out an electoral college victory path for George Bush. President Bush then became the first president to be elected in 12 years with an absolute majority of the voters. The democrats should have taken heed of the actions of the republican party.

The republicans had fallen on hard times in the 1990's. They were splintered on the national level. The religious right and isolationists backed Pat Buchanan. The fiscal conservatives and moderates backed the party establishment. It was not until 2000 that the conservatives and moderates of the republican party mended fences.

On the other hand the Democrats fell on hard times in 2000. Their venomous hatred of George Bush had them foaming at the mouth. The Democrats did everything in their power to destroy George Bush and the republicans. The Democrats lost election after election. Finally, in 2006, the democrats made a breakthrough. America handed the democrats the keys to the legislative branch in a landslide election. All the democrats had to do was govern effectively and act as a unified party and they would have been prohibitive favorites in the 2008 elections to solidify majority status and win the white house.

Alas the democrats made some serious mistakes. First, they demanded an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Senate Majority Leader Reid said "the war is lost". Many in the democratic party leadership circles saw that losing in Iraq could only benefit themselves. By losing Iraq the Democrats could pin the loss on the republicans and they would be hero's in the eyes of the vocal extremists in their party. The democrats painted themselves into a lose at all costs corner and are not able to reposition themselves with any credibility.

The second problem with the democratic leadership is that they could not govern. They were only able to pass one piece of legislation they ran on in 2006 and that was a relatively minor victory for minimum wage earners. They were in office for over a year before they had to eventually pass an omnibus budget plan. This 2008 budget was finally passed after 1/4 of the budget year had already passed by. Their center piece ethics reform was watered down in order to pass. Transparency in government has never been less. All the barking about earmarks and they still had a banner year stuffing the budget with pork. The 110th Congress truly was a do nothing congress.

The third problem with the democrats is they fell in love with themselves. The loved their candidates for the presidential nomination. They loved their candidates for the house and senate races. They loved the money they were receiving in donations far outdistancing the republicans. They were so enamored with themselves that they believed they could not lose. But finally they are a party that has lost its compass.

The final stake may just be nomination process. The last two remaining candidates have divided the democratic party along racial, gender, age, and ethnic lines. Barack Obama brings in new young voters to the process. Barack garners over 91% of the African American vote. Barack surrounds himself with an America hating wife, a racist pastor, and a fund raiser on trial for fraud. Hillary Clinton wins older voters and the women vote. She wins the Hispanic voters and all of the large democratic states.

So what happens when one of these two candidates finally wins the nomination? If Barack wins will the more moderate older, Hispanic, or women voters return to Obama. Will they move towards McCain or will they stay home? Will Barack be able to hold the democratic party together in spite of the racial undertones of his main voting block? Will the moderate independents stay with a candidate surrounded by people that are not proud of their country, people that spread anti American viewpoints, people that curse America, people that call America the US of KKK A? Will Americans fall for the shallow and simplistic view of America that Obama has simply because of eloquent speeches?

What happens if Hillary wins? Will the young people stay the course and vote for an alternate candidate, even though that would be against the normal practices of the past? Will the African American voter come home to vote for Hillary even though she abandoned them and interjected race and gender into the nomination process? Will her criminal connections come to haunt her? Will she be able to unite the party or will she continue to be the divisive candidate we all know her to be?

After watching the republicans begin to splinter in the 1990's only to regroup into a stronger party I would never have believed one of the two major political parties would implode. However, after watching the democrats for the last year, I am not so sure. There is every possibility of the democrats splintering beyond repair. Hillary and Barack have effectively split the party down the middle. The democrats are split along racial and gender lines. They are also split in age and income lines. The longer this nomination process takes the more difficult it becomes to unite a splintered party. There are already polls saying that 25% of Hillary's voters will either stay home or vote for McCain. I am not so sure he democrats can win the white house by losing 25% of Hillary's voters. This 25% will only increase the longer this process takes. We also do not know what toll on the electorate there would be if Hillary should win. There is no easy way to unify a party that has drawn lines along the great racial and gender based divides.

The 2008 election year was shaping up to be a historic year. There were strong possibilities of having either the first minority or first woman president. The longer the nomination process continues the longer the odds of either being able to attain the presidency. If the process takes long enough for John McCain to win in a democratic year, 2008 may still be a historic year. It could be the year that the democratic donkey disappears.

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Birds of a Feather

There are a lot of sayings out there that describe human behavior and the types of people we each surround ourselves with. One such saying is "birds of a feather flock together". I believe the people we surround ourselves with are often very similar. We need to have something in common or we will not be able to get along. This being said I believe a closer look at Barack Obama is in Order.

One of Obama's friends is Tony Rezco. Rezco is on trial right now for fraud. Rezco has had many questionable land deals. Right now he is defending against charges of schemeing to split a cool million dollars in return for authorizing the construction of a hospital. Rezco also made a shady deal with Obama on adjoining property that made Obama's house worth more than it should have originally been worth. Rezco was a major campaign contributor to Obama. There is no doubt Rezco was an insider of the Obama inner circle. Obama claims that he made mistakes and was naive when dealing with Rezco. The dealings Obama had with Rezco definitely does not say much about Mr. Obama's judgment. But it does say a lot about Obama's character. Political payoffs and governmental corruption in Chicago go hand in hand and it appears as if Mr. Obama is not immune to political corruption.

Another person Obama has surrounded is his wife Michelle Obama. Michelle said this was the first time she has ever been proud of her country. This comment alone is an overt racist comment. The only time Michelle could be proud was when her husband became a serious contender for the democratic nomination. She was not proud of her country when we banded together as a nation to heal as a nation after 9/11. She was not proud of our nation when we worked together to bring down the iron curtain. She was not proud of our nation when we came together and supported peace in the Balkans. No Michelle was never proud of her country until America showed a willingness to vote for a serious African American contender. Her comment goes to show just how racist her views are. I guess Barack did not know just how racist his wife's views really were or are.

Finally, Barack has surrounded himself with a controversial religious leader. Jeremiah Wright Jr. often has racially charged sermons. Obama has attended his sermons for 20 years. Obama claims to never had heard any of Wright's racial rants. He never heard Wright claim America invented AIDs to commit genocide. He never heard Wright make wild and ridiculous conspiracy claims. No Obama says he would have walked out if he heard such nonsense. I guess Obama must have been sleeping in church. Sure Obama condemns the hate speech that spews from the Reverends mouth. But he will not condemn the ministry of Mr. Wright.

Obama has "urged Americans not to reject his presidential campaign because of guilt by association". Obama has refused to spell out what his relationship with Rezco really was. Mr Obama has refused to rebuke the racial comments his own wife makes. Obama refuses to condemn a racist reverend. But he would like us to forget that these are his friends. These are his spiritual guiding lights. Obama would follow these types of individuals. Obama claims ignorance. He claims he did not know or makes statements that he misjudged. He says he was inexperienced. Is this what America needs for a President? This is a man that has surrounded himself with racists, criminals, and other corrupt political cronies.

Obama gives inspiring speeches with little details. We as a country must look at the candidates and dig for the details. When a candidate refuses to provide these details we must look at the persons friends, advisers, and associates. In the case of Obama his associates are criminals, liars, and cheats.

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Independents Will Rule 2008

2008 was shaping up to be another disastrous defeat for the Republican Party. A majority of Americans have repudiated the Bush administration and are seeking a change in direction. Americans believe the government has failed the people and believe the country is on the wrong track. It is no wonder a political new comer is drawing so much interest even though Barack has very little experience and even less substance behind his rhetoric for change. America indeed is searching for a new direction and early last year it looked to be a money maker betting on the Democratic Party.

One grueling year later the look is not so clear. The Democrat controlled 110th Congress has been left impotent. They were unable to force a withdrawal from Iraq. Their rhetoric of a war lost in the oil fields of Iraq have fallen on deaf ears as progress has been made in restoring order in the war ravaged country. The promised reforms on ear mark legislation was left in the dust as Congressman Jack Murtha was able to take home the most pork. The promised transparency was held at bay because the sheer number of earmarks for the most influential members of Congress was too much to list the pork recipients by name. The promise of having the most ethical Congress in history was sidetracked and derailed. The ethics reform with real teeth that passed the Senate had to be watered down and tamed to pass the house. The teeth in the legislation had to be reduced in order to pass an unruly House that is business as usual and as unethical as ever.

The turmoil in our government has made the ranks of the independent voter swell. People are more and more affiliating with the independents rather than the Democratic or Republican Party's. Party affiliation is reaching all time lows at a time when the country needs to change its course. Americans are very dissatisfied with the two Party system. The Republicans are having a hard time rallying around John McCain the presumptive nominee and the Democrats are on the verge of fracturing. Hillary will not go down without a fight and it all but certain that neither Hillary or Obama can win the Democratic nomination outright without the help of super delegates. Tuesday will tell us if Democrats will nominate Hillary, Obama, or fracture as the two start fighting for super delegates. If Hillary wins in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island she will have stopped the Obama rhetoric machine. Winning these three states would throw the nomination to the super delegates as most assuredly neith candidate could win the nomination without the super delegates. If Obama can win in Vermont and in Texas or Ohio he will hold off Hillary and his empty promise of hope will win the nomination.

Winning the nomination will not make Obama the winner in November. Obama will have to add some substance to his promise of hope for hope is not a strategy. Thus far, Obama's voting record in the Senate makes him the most liberal Democrat in Washington. Obama has never seen a government program he has not liked. He has never seen a free market system he was in favor of. He has never seen a tax he disliked. There is no doubt America would move far to the left if Obama is elected.

America has spoken and it is clear we need a change of direction. I do not think we are ready to move that far to the left. Obama will move the country from one extreme to the other. America is a moderate country controlled by the middle. America holds extremists in both parties in disdain. John McCain may appeal to independent voters but he is still a Republican. For the last 7 years, the MSM, the democratic Party, and liberal activists have done nothing but show hatred and contempt for the Bush administration. It is difficult to see America coming together and united behind any of the three possible contenders from the two top political parties.

Independents have a unique opportunity to rally behind a truly independent candidate. No one has stood up and attempted to take the independent mantle. This leaves yet again with having to vote for the lesser of two evils. America desperately needs a strong independent candidacy. This is the year of the independent. We need someone to run that is able to unite the middle and return the government back to the people.