Thursday, April 24, 2008

Fatally Flawed

The Democratic Party has a choice between two candidates that have weakened the chances of democrats gaining the White House. Both of these candidates have some serious work to do if they are to even stand a chance of being elected this fall. It is in the best interest of the Democratic Party for them to call this nomination process off and just anoint one of them as the nominee. Neither of the candidates can win the nomination on pledged delegates alone. Barack Obama would require 536 pledged delegates in order to get the magic 2025 delegates required to secure the nomination outright without the help of super delegates. Hillary Clinton would require 692 more pledged delegates. There are only 410 delegates left to be pledged to one candidate or the other. The bottom line is both candidates require super delegates to get over the top.

The candidates have split the Democratic voter. There are huge differences between the base of both candidates. Hillary wins the white male voter, the female voter, the 40 and over voter, the poorer voter, and the union voter. Barack wins the better educated voter, the African American voter, and the liberal elite voter. It is no wonder the nomination process has produced a race where neither candidate can win without the super delegate.

In the general these demographics will show up in the polls unless the party is able to end the nomination process and heal the party. If this goes on much longer the winner will not be able to get the voters from the other camp. These alienated voters will either stay home or vote for McCain out of spite. Hillary wins the Reagan Democrats. These democrats appear ready to return home and vote the democratic candidate. However, they may find it difficult to vote for Barack when he takes them so lightly. Today his campaign blew off the Reagan democrats and said they were not necessary for a win. An Obama campaign spokesman (Axelrod) said the Democrat party has been losing this voter steadily and that they were unimportant. With an attitude like that it is no wonder the Democrats have not won but three Presidential elections in the past 40 years. For Hillary's part she has alienated the young and the African American voter. The Democratic Party has won over 90% of the African American voter in recent elections. These elections have been relatively close suggesting the country was divided. If the democrats lose alienated African Americans voters they would be lucky to keep the race within ten points.

Yes both of these candidates are fatally flawed. Much of Obama's constituency would likely stay home if he is not the candidate. He has attracted new younger voters who are unreliable. These unreliable voters are apt to stay home if their candidate is not nominated. African Americans would feel disenfranchised if Obama is not nominated. Does anyone really believe they would come out for Hillary if they feel she stole the nomination from Barack? What about Hillary? Much of her constituency is filled with "lunch bucket" democrats ( also known as Reagan Democrats). Would they show up and vote for Obama? Obama and his campaign have ridiculed them and chastised them for believing in constitutional rights like the freedom to bear arms and the freedom of religion. Would they really vote for Barack after being called bitter? Would they really vote for Barack after his spokesman said they were unimportant?

The pundits can say the party will heal all they want but the truth of the matter is that the longer this process continues the more likely both candidates will be mortally wounded. The two constituencies will not mend fences and there is a potential landslide on the horizon. This is not 1992. The democratic party was united in its message back then. They wanted to beat Bush and beat Bush they did. This year the party is divided. The Democratic Party has taken what should have been a cake walk and turned it into a race. This is a race the Democrats will lose unless the super delegates anoint a winner in the near future. Hillary is broke and Obama has to spent what he has like a fool in order to maintain his minute lead in the delegate count. Both candidates will require primary money to cast McCain as the evil Bush clone and unite the party prior to the convention. If this nomination process continues past May 6th both candidates will be mortally wounded.

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Will The Real Obama Please Step Forward

Barack Obama would like for Americans to believe his words. "Words do Matter" according to Obama. Barack is a very eloquent speaker that can rally any crowd. Barack is able to get the attention of any audience. His words seem to be spoken from the heart and he speaks of change and hope for America. The problem is that his words do not match his actions. Do actions speak louder than words?

Obama refuses to take responsibility for his actions. He blames everyone or anything else for his past actions that go against his present words. Obama does not want to take responsibility for the words of others even though it was he that decided to listen.

Barack has been tied to the Joyce foundation. This foundation provides grants aimed at denying Americans the right to bear arms. This is not just a casual tie with an organization that is against the individual right to bear arms. Obama was a board member that is responsible doling out the grants. In fact while Obama was a board member the foundation issued 2.7 million dollars in grants for organizations to study and advocate denial of the individual right to bear arms. Of course Obama has backtracked and says that he is for the constitutional right to bear arms but his actions speak different. Obama would like us to follow his words rather than his actions. I wonder if that is because he really talks around the issue. He says he is for the individual right but he is also for limiting that right with outright bans on handguns.

This issue came up in a fund raiser in California. At the fund raiser Obama says the problem he is having connecting with small town America is due to the small town Americans clinging to guns and religion out of bitterness. Obama backtracked on his actions at the fund raiser and says his words were poorly chosen.

Barack has also backtracked from his notes on a questionnaire regarding his beliefs on gun control. He blames a staffer for incorrectly filling the questionnaire out even though his own handwritten notes are on the document. Again Obama would like us to listen to his empty rhetoric rather than his own actions.

Barack attended a church for twenty years. The sermons spewed anti American hatred. The reverend also provided colorful sermons with racist undertones. The reverend blamed "white America" for the ills of his parishioners. Obama does not want to be held accountable for the words of the reverend but his actions say he liked what he heard.

Obama wined and dined with known terrorists. His connection with William Ayers is not just a casual relationship. He attended formal dinners and accepted funds from Ayers. Obama would rather not be held accountable for his relationships with known criminals. He would rather say listen to his words. He denounces terrorism and anti American rhetoric. Who cares about his actions that say he is more than comfortable socializing with corrupt criminal elements.

Nothing is ever Obama's fault. He says words matter and we need to listen to his. Obama speaks of hope and change. Two very empty words for hope is not a strategy. Obama wants us to listen to his empty rhetoric because if he had to lay out a strategy he would be unelectable.

America desires a change. Most believe we are on the wrong track or that we derailed somewhere. It is easy to fall for Obama because he promises change. However, until the real Obama steps forward we all should be very leery. Are we to believe Obama's words or his actions? Until Obama lays out a plan and strategy we should be extremely careful because if his actions mean anything they mean we will be in for a change that America does not need.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Childish Antics

The eloquent one has shown his true colors. The one that speaks of "The Audacity of Hope" is tremendous at rousing a crowd with empty rhetoric but fails when it comes to substance. Barack looked woefully inept during this weeks debate in Pennsylvania. Now he criticizes the debates and refused to be involved in any more.

Barack reminds me of the child that can not have their own way. He is the spoiled kid with all the toys (in this case delegates). He has now decided that because he couldn't have his own way he wants to take his toys and go home. Barack has the audacity to believe Americans do not care about character. Barack has the audacity to believe Americans are shallow and only vote for trivial constitutional rights because our government does not redistribute income. In Obama's words Americans cling to guns and religion because they are bitter because they do not have the wealth of our great country distributed to the communes.

Barack has complained vociferously over it taking 45 minutes for the debate moderators to ask one question that matters to Americans. Does Obama take our constitution so lightly that when asked to clarify his comments about small town America being bitter and clinging to guns and religion that he dismisses this question as unimportant? Does Obama believe that character means so little that his ties to terrorists organizations (weather underground) should go unnoticed? Does Obama believe that his questionable dealing with Rezco and Auchi are details we as Americans should not be entitled to know about our potential Presidential candidates? All this in 45 minutes and Little Barry missed it just like the hate filled sermons by Reverend Wright.

Obama speaks with a forked tongue. He speaks of change and hope. Yet he does not present a picture of his vision for either. When he gets unanticipated questions in a debate his vision becomes clear. He wishes for the wealth of the country to be redistributed. This is the same marxist garbage that the soviets tried. Remember the greatest socialist empire of all time failed due to the marxist ideals. The lack of competition made a society weak and complacent. After all why should an individual try to excel when at the end of the day they get the same thing as the bum that does nothing. Socialism steals the human spirit. Baracks ideal of tax the wealthy to give to the poor is nothing more than a fancy way of saying redistribute the wealth. No one should have more than another. We are just one big communal collective.

Obama believes the actions of others should not be a reflection of him. It should not matter that his self proclaimed spiritual advisor is an anti-American racist. It should not matter that a major associate plotted against America and conspired with other terrorists to destroy America's infrastructure. It should not matter that one of Obama's biggest fans is a shady land dealer that is currently on trial for fraud. These are the associates of Barack Obama. There has to be some reason Barack was attracted these characters.

No, Obama believes he should be getting a free ride. Afterall, he speaks eloquently and rouses crowds with his empty rhetoric. Obama believes his rhetoric should carry him to the Presidency. We as Americans are supposed to fall for his marxist visions. Now because of his dismal performance in a debate he wants to take his toys and go home.

His childish antics were raised to new levels yesterday. He got the sheepish little boy grin and ever so innocently slipped the bird to Hillary. He looked like an idiot but yet thought it was funny. Little Barry has decided that he can afford alienate anyone that does not blindly follow him. He does not need small town America. He does not care about Americans that believe in our constitutional rights. Baracks only care is for the few that believe marxism is a great idea. Barack keeps his spin and rhetoric above the heads and he believes Americans are blind followers that will fall for his rhetoric.

Do we really need a President that resorts to childish antics when pressed. Does Obama believe the worlds dictators will back down when he flips them off in his school boy methodology? America we can do better. Obama is not the one. He is an empty shell full of himself. Maybe Barack should come back in 50-60 years after he grows up.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Jimmy Carter: Part Time Statesman - Full Time Fool

We should all thank Jimmy Carter for his untiring efforts to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts. Mr. Carter has traveled all over the world since leaving office, embracing dictators and terrorists who have little or no regard for human life, and somehow always finding a way to put down the United States in the process.

Now the Nobel Peace Prize winner is planning a trip to Syria so he can sit down with the exiled leader of Hamas, one of the most blood -thirsty terrorist organizations on earth. The organization that produces children’s television shows depicting the murders of George Bush and even Mickey Mouse. The organization responsible for the cold- blooded murder of 9 people at a Jewish seminary in Jerusalem last month. Carter requested the meeting with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of Hamas who runs the organization from Damascus.

What can Carter hope to accomplish by this visit? Who knows? The man is like Madonna, every time she feels the need for attention, she adopts another child from Africa. When Carter feels forgotten, he jets down to Venezuela, Cuba or North Korea, adopts a dictator and badmouths the US. But Chavez has been brought down a few pegs, Castro is sick or dead, and Kim Jong-Il is getting his hair done. So Carter dug through his terrorist Rolodex to see which of his buddies was free for a week or so. For Carter it’s really all about making Bush and the US look as evil as possible in the eyes of the world and remind people that he’s still alive.

The former president surely realizes that a meeting with someone of his stature will provide Hamas with a huge amount of credibility within the Arab world, especially due to the fact that Carter requested the visit. Meeting with Meshal provides Carter the opportunity to denigrate both Israel and the United States in one short trip, a win-win for Jimmy and the murderous Meshal, who no doubt sees this as a propaganda coup of unimaginable proportions.

I hope Barack Obama is watching this unfold. Early in his campaign he stated that as president he would be willing to sit down and talk with the leaders of terrorist nations. Hopefully as Obama gains political maturity he will realize that appeasing terrorism only benefits the terrorists. Groups such as Hamas view discussion as a show of weakness and proof that their tactics are working.

Carter began making a fool of himself in front of the world back in 1977, so this latest misadventure is no real surprise. But Obama can learn from a man who like himself, was a political neophyte when he first ran for president. A man who ran on the promise of change and hope… a man who faltered when faced with the realities of Islamic fanaticism, and has never recovered.

Monday, April 7, 2008

Burning Both Ends of the Candle

Barack Obama says words matter. Obama has no record to speak of so he would like us to listen to his words and make an informed decision. Most Americans are more than ready to at least listen to his words. Obama speaks of hope and change. Most Americans believe we are on the wrong track. Many believe America has derailed somewhere. Hope and change are in the hearts and minds of the electorate. So, we as Americans listen to Obama and try to find something we can believe in. However, Obama is burning the candle from both ends.

On the one hand Obama says he could not disown his spiritual advisor. He provided a well received speech on the racial issues in America. Obama defended his pastor while throwing his Grandma under the bus. America was willing to give Obama a pass on the issue until Obama tried to burn the candle from the other end. After the political winds died down a little Obama tried to apease the moderates by saying had the reverend not retired and had not apologized (although no one can find any such apology) he would have turned his back on the church. If words do matter which set of words are the truth. Those words defending the reverend or those words condemning the pastor?

The issue of NAFTA is also a case where Obama burned both ends of the candle. On the campaign trail Obama says NAFTA has been a disaster. He was against NAFTA all along. We need to unilaterally back out of our trade deal or at least renegotiate. Obama says this in order to appease the labor unions whose members fear losing their jobs to outsourcing. On the other hand Obama has his aides and influential campaign staffers enter into a dialog with the Canadians and tells them not to worry. The staffers inform the Canadians that the talk of reneging on the trade agreement is campaign rhetoric. The Canadians are told not to worry Obama is going to say a lot of things on the campaign trail that are simply not really going to happen. Obama just needs to use the campaign rhetoric for ammunition. So Obama if words mean so much what are you for? Are you really against NAFTA or not. America has a right to know where it is you stand on the issues. An informed voter needs to know if your words really matter. Again Obama is burning the candle from both ends. Obama's words in this case mean he is either duping a foreign govenrment or lying to the American public.

Another example of talking from both sides of the mouth is the issue on questionnaires Obama filled out in order to receive certain endorsements. On the one hand Obama's written words say his view on abortion and gun control are so far left Carl Marx would be proud. On the other hand Obama claims he did not fill out the questionnaire. It seems a staffer filled out the questionnaire and these are not really his views. Obama says these forms were filled out in haste only to gain an endorsement. We as Americans are supposed to believe Obamas words. But which are the true views? The ones that show a past record or the ones today? We already know from the previous examples that Obama will speak from both sides of his mouth. We do not really know where Obama stands because his words are sending mixed signals.

Finally, Obama has yet another example of burning the candle from both ends. Obama continously claims he has been a critic of the war. He was against it from the start. He has been on the liberal left bandwagon condemning the war. Obama has said we need to immediately withdraw from Iraq. Obama claims only he will get our troops out of Iraq within days or months of being sworn in. However, a key adviser in Obamas campaign is now saying behind the scenes that Obama is going to keep 60,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq for years to come. The troops would be sitting ducks of course because there would not be any combat troops to protect them. What great plans Obama has. On one hand he says an immediate withdrawal. Under this option we would abandon our responsibilities and give control of Iraq to the extremists only to have to return in the future to clean the mess up. Or we can leave 60,000 to 80,000 troops in the country to act as sitting ducks. But which set of words it the truth? Is Obama for a quick and painful withdrawal and defeat or is he for a long drawn out withdrawal spilling more American blood for an ill conceived plan?

Obama is right; words do matter. To many Americans their word is their honor. Most Americans keep their word and go to extreme lengths to ensure their word is honored. Obama has a habit of speaking out of both sides of his mouth and burning the candle from both ends. Many political pundits have passed this doublespeak off as being a political campaign. The words are rhetoric and all politicians lie. But Obama is supposed to be a different candidate. He wants to change America. He wants to end corruption and clean up Washington style politics. The problem is that Obama is a typical politician. Obama campaigns as being a different type candidate but what we get is the same old lies. Obama worse than most politicians. Most politicians know they are telling lies. Obama believes he tells no lies. Obama is burning the candle from both ends. It is only a matter of time before the media has to report on the many two faced comments Obama has made. They owe it to Americans because words really do matter.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

Hillary’s Latest Lie

You would think that after all the uproar caused by Hillary’s Bosnian sniper story, she would be more careful about what she said in public, and be especially careful not to tell any more stories that might be proven to be outright lies. But not Hillary, once again displaying that old Clinton hubris, she has been caught again telling lies in an attempt to revive her [very slim] chances at gaining the nomination, and inadvertently reminding a lot of people why they don’t want another Clinton anywhere near the White House.

Hillary’s latest tale of fiction is about a young pregnant woman with no health insurance, who [according to Clinton] was refused health care, lost her baby and later died, because she could not come up with the $100.00 co-payment. Clinton tells this story to horrify her audience and of course press the need for her brand of universal health care.

The woman Hillary refers to is real. She lived in Ohio and did in fact lose her child two weeks before her own death. That’s about the only truthful part of Hillary’s story. The woman, Trina Bachtel, actually had health insurance and was never turned down for care. The truth however is not sordid or tragic enough to suit Hillary’s needs. The honesty challenged Clinton will no doubt tell us that she heard it from someone else and accepted it as truth. Now that the hospital involved has come forward with facts, we’ll see if Hillary drops this newest piece of fiction from her speeches, or just plods ahead going on her long standing assumption that the voters are stupid, and she can do or say anything she wants because her last name is Clinton.

She currently trails Obama in both the popular vote and delegates…obviously the voters are not as stupid as Hillary believes.


Clinton’s campaign has reported that Hillary will no longer be using this story in her campaign speeches. Clinton reps claim that Hillary was told the story while campaigning in Ohio and the campaign never checked the story for accuracy. Hillary was merely regurgitating what she was told.Husband Bill denies having sexual relations with any woman in Ohio during this particular campaign.

How cruel it must seem to Hillary that her once beloved liberal media have found a new darling and have now turned a skeptical eye toward her.Where's Dan Rather when you need him?