Presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain is trying to further embellish his foreign policy credentials with foreign travel and state visits during the current down time before the convention season heats up.
The major purpose McCain uses these trips for is to show his support for NAFTA and other trade pacts, and the importance of foreign trade to the U.S. economy. This flies directly in the face of Obama's oft-stated opposition to such trade, pandering to Big Labor by pointing out that foreign trade sucks jobs overseas, where lower wages keep company's costs down.
McCain did this in a recent trip to Canada, and Obama blasted it, as did his surrogate, Michigan Gov. Janet Granholm. They said he should go to Michigan, where high taxes and anti-business decisions by state government, have destroyed thousands of jobs and closed factories--and promote foreign trade there. It isn't foreign trade that has lost rust belt jobs--it is the tax policy and business climate established by Democratic governors like Granholm, Gov. Ted Strickland in Ohio, Ed Rendell in Pennsylvania and Jon Corzine in New Jersey--that has killed jobs. High taxes and excessive regulation drive business out of the country and to other states, not foreign trade.
McCain believes he can capitalize on this by going to South America, and point out that America is open for business. Only time will tell if he is right.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Energy a great opening for McCain
Despite his past votes in the U.S.Senate against oil drilling in ANWR, John McCain has a great opportunity to break open the presidential campaign in his favor.
He simply needs to admit he was wrong about ANWR--that it made sense when oil was $30-$40 a barrel, but at $140 a barrel we are facing a serious supply crisis, and we can no longer afford the luxury of not drilling in ANWR. After all, we only need to drill on less than 2,500 acres of the 3 million acres in ANWR, anyway.
New technology has made drilling much less environmentally unacceptable in sensitive areas, and the only answer to bringing down gasoline prices is more supply. This will play just about right in McCain's favor, as the easterners will have just started buying heating oil at vastly higher prices in the fall, just a head of the presidential election.
McCain has already backtracked on offshore oil drilling, saying he's in favor if the affected states allow it. The current economic crisis caused by high oil prices is the perfect cover for changing his position. Emergency situations require emergency action to deal with them.
He comes across looking like a statesman, not a flipflopper. He leaves Obama high and dry, who has put in with the environmentalist crowd and said we can only deal with the situation through conservation and alternative energy, like wind, solar and geothermal
He agrees with them that the earth doesn't have enough remaining supplies of oil to solve the problem by drilling. Besides, he says, it will take 10 years if we started today, for it to make a difference. What if Bill Clinton hadn't vetoed ANWR drilling 10 years ago, and it was just coming on line now? We need to get started.
This has increasingly been shown to be patently false. Counting oil shale and the tar sands in Canada, North America has more oil reserves than the Middle East, and with full scale development, we can become the Saudi Arabia of oil. The Saudis, for one, believe that, and are afraid of it, telling the recent world conference that they would ramp up oil production from 10 million barrels a day to 15 million.
The oil shieks themselves can see the day coming when their dominance will erode. John McCain can take advantage of that, and should do so pronto.
He simply needs to admit he was wrong about ANWR--that it made sense when oil was $30-$40 a barrel, but at $140 a barrel we are facing a serious supply crisis, and we can no longer afford the luxury of not drilling in ANWR. After all, we only need to drill on less than 2,500 acres of the 3 million acres in ANWR, anyway.
New technology has made drilling much less environmentally unacceptable in sensitive areas, and the only answer to bringing down gasoline prices is more supply. This will play just about right in McCain's favor, as the easterners will have just started buying heating oil at vastly higher prices in the fall, just a head of the presidential election.
McCain has already backtracked on offshore oil drilling, saying he's in favor if the affected states allow it. The current economic crisis caused by high oil prices is the perfect cover for changing his position. Emergency situations require emergency action to deal with them.
He comes across looking like a statesman, not a flipflopper. He leaves Obama high and dry, who has put in with the environmentalist crowd and said we can only deal with the situation through conservation and alternative energy, like wind, solar and geothermal
He agrees with them that the earth doesn't have enough remaining supplies of oil to solve the problem by drilling. Besides, he says, it will take 10 years if we started today, for it to make a difference. What if Bill Clinton hadn't vetoed ANWR drilling 10 years ago, and it was just coming on line now? We need to get started.
This has increasingly been shown to be patently false. Counting oil shale and the tar sands in Canada, North America has more oil reserves than the Middle East, and with full scale development, we can become the Saudi Arabia of oil. The Saudis, for one, believe that, and are afraid of it, telling the recent world conference that they would ramp up oil production from 10 million barrels a day to 15 million.
The oil shieks themselves can see the day coming when their dominance will erode. John McCain can take advantage of that, and should do so pronto.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Supreme Court gun decision rankles liberals
One of the great decisions yet to come out of the Roberts Supreme Court, and there have been several, is the decision outlawing Washington D.C.'s handgun ban. This affirms the Second Amendment to the U.S. constitution in a powerful way.
It was a 5-4 decision, of which there have been many, depending on whether wayward justice Anthony Kennedy leans left or right. He sold out the President and Congress on the Gitmo detention facility for Afghanistani terrorists and handed the liberal wing a victory.
He held firm on the handgun ban, though. To hear the liberals bleat and moan, you'd swear the gun carnage in Washington D.C. will be monumental. Actually, the right of citizens to keep and bear firearms will probably make it a safer place to live, in truth.
What is hilarious, is watching Barack Obama having to grit his teeth, and say nice things about the court decision. Afterall, he has to get the votes of all those blue collar white guys who supported Hillary Clinton. You know, the ones with the gun rack in the back window of their pickups.
You know that Barack, with the most liberal voting record of any member of the U.S. Senate, is lying through his clenched teeth. He is furious, at both the decision and his having to back it.
The Second Amendment is the one that the liberals hate the most, and are the most uncomfortable dealing with. It will be fascinating to see how they manuver around this decision.
It was a 5-4 decision, of which there have been many, depending on whether wayward justice Anthony Kennedy leans left or right. He sold out the President and Congress on the Gitmo detention facility for Afghanistani terrorists and handed the liberal wing a victory.
He held firm on the handgun ban, though. To hear the liberals bleat and moan, you'd swear the gun carnage in Washington D.C. will be monumental. Actually, the right of citizens to keep and bear firearms will probably make it a safer place to live, in truth.
What is hilarious, is watching Barack Obama having to grit his teeth, and say nice things about the court decision. Afterall, he has to get the votes of all those blue collar white guys who supported Hillary Clinton. You know, the ones with the gun rack in the back window of their pickups.
You know that Barack, with the most liberal voting record of any member of the U.S. Senate, is lying through his clenched teeth. He is furious, at both the decision and his having to back it.
The Second Amendment is the one that the liberals hate the most, and are the most uncomfortable dealing with. It will be fascinating to see how they manuver around this decision.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Hillary and Obama all chummy
Today in the tiny burg of Unity, New Hampshire, where each got 107 votes in the primary, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had a Unity Rally, to kick off the unification of the Democratic Party under his leadership.
Barack and his wife Michelle each gave the maxmimum $2,300 to Hillary's campaign earlier in the day,to help retire the $20 millio debt her effort has left over. It was the maximum they could each contribute by law, and a gesture intended to signal their best-heeled supporters to dig in for Hillary.
In truth, Obama has been a very reluctant fundraiser for anyone but himself. He has barely flicked a wrist for the $15 million the Denver organizing committee has left to raise for putting on the national Democratic convention. His effort in behalf of Hillary's debt has been equally tepid, they say.
Actually, what Hillary and Obama do matters little, in terms of party unity. It's what Hillary's middle-aged, white supporters do. The feminists are mad because a woman did not get the nomination, and the blue collar white males feel left out by Obama, who is an elitist and half black. It is Hillary's supporters Obama has to entice, and it's a real uphill climb.
The males are a natural audience for John McCain and his distinguished miliary career, and the women are more likely to just sit on their hands and reluctantly vote, but not work, for Obama.
The show today was great TV, but the results won't be known until November.
Barack and his wife Michelle each gave the maxmimum $2,300 to Hillary's campaign earlier in the day,to help retire the $20 millio debt her effort has left over. It was the maximum they could each contribute by law, and a gesture intended to signal their best-heeled supporters to dig in for Hillary.
In truth, Obama has been a very reluctant fundraiser for anyone but himself. He has barely flicked a wrist for the $15 million the Denver organizing committee has left to raise for putting on the national Democratic convention. His effort in behalf of Hillary's debt has been equally tepid, they say.
Actually, what Hillary and Obama do matters little, in terms of party unity. It's what Hillary's middle-aged, white supporters do. The feminists are mad because a woman did not get the nomination, and the blue collar white males feel left out by Obama, who is an elitist and half black. It is Hillary's supporters Obama has to entice, and it's a real uphill climb.
The males are a natural audience for John McCain and his distinguished miliary career, and the women are more likely to just sit on their hands and reluctantly vote, but not work, for Obama.
The show today was great TV, but the results won't be known until November.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Obama campaign going it alone
Barack Obama and his campaign team are making fateful decisions with huge potential for rising up to bite them.
First was the decision to eschew federal campaign funds, after pledging to do so for the general election. This "new paradigm" leader, in one stroke, became just another money-grubbing pol.
Now Obama has told Democrats in Colorado, and presumably in other states as well, that he will run his own campaign in the state, and not coordinate with the state party and the rest of the ticket. In what is expected to be a very tight race in Colorado, this could quell just enough enthusiasm to tilt the state to John McCain. George Bush narrowly carried the state in 2006, as John Kerry pretty well wrote it off, so it was thought Obama would find the state ripe for a major push.
Disappointed local Democrats may well sit on their hands, and cost Obama crucial insider enthusiasm and extra effort. Just going through the motions won't be good enough for him to Colorado.
A double whammy for Colorado Democrats from Obama is his seeming failure to dig in on the local committee organizing the Democratic National Convention here in August and its need to raise some $15 million to make the confab solvent. Traditionally the anointed presidential candidate digs in to help the local host committee raise funds.
No such luck with Obama, who will have to prove it to party leaders, that he can abandon the party machinery and still expect their enthusiastic support in November. Grudging "of course I back Obama" speech with no action won't cut it.
First was the decision to eschew federal campaign funds, after pledging to do so for the general election. This "new paradigm" leader, in one stroke, became just another money-grubbing pol.
Now Obama has told Democrats in Colorado, and presumably in other states as well, that he will run his own campaign in the state, and not coordinate with the state party and the rest of the ticket. In what is expected to be a very tight race in Colorado, this could quell just enough enthusiasm to tilt the state to John McCain. George Bush narrowly carried the state in 2006, as John Kerry pretty well wrote it off, so it was thought Obama would find the state ripe for a major push.
Disappointed local Democrats may well sit on their hands, and cost Obama crucial insider enthusiasm and extra effort. Just going through the motions won't be good enough for him to Colorado.
A double whammy for Colorado Democrats from Obama is his seeming failure to dig in on the local committee organizing the Democratic National Convention here in August and its need to raise some $15 million to make the confab solvent. Traditionally the anointed presidential candidate digs in to help the local host committee raise funds.
No such luck with Obama, who will have to prove it to party leaders, that he can abandon the party machinery and still expect their enthusiastic support in November. Grudging "of course I back Obama" speech with no action won't cut it.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Dr. James Dobson gets it right on
Focus on the Family founder Dr. James Dobson blasted Barack Obama for twisting the Bible and the United States Constitution on his daily radio show today. The press tried to downplay it, but Dobson is so prominent and carried on so many radio stations nationwide, that they couldn't totally ignore it.
A politician distorting scripture is hardly news. The Bible is ignored, unless its a handy prop to advance the cause of the politician using it. Obama is certainly not alone in using the portions that suit him, out of context, and ignoring what it really says. Most people don't go to church enough, or read the Bible enough, to know the difference.
It takes a student of the Bible such as Dr. Dobson to point out the truth. Most are reticent to do so, and just let the legions of distortions slide. That's why Dobson encounters so much heat for taking a stand, because its so rare for anyone to do so.
Dr. Dobson has more credibility in his stand than the liberal mass media gives him credit for, because he is not a John McCain fan either. Dobson has said he may vote for a third party candidate for president, or only vote for the other offices on down the ticket, rather than vote for McCain.
If Barack Obama is a Christian, it is a very liberal Christianity of very loose standards, since his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, cavorts with Muslims like Louis Farakhan and Libyian dictator Moamar Khadafi, and virtually all of Obama's family in Kenya are Muslims.
Obama is being handled with kid gloves because he's half-black, and few are willing as Dr. Dobson was, to call him on his fast and loose handling of the facts.
Dr. Dobson's comments may serve to rally dispirited Christians, who are very disillusioned with the performance of the Republican Party in Congress and with John McCain in particular. The only hope for defeating Obama is for the Christian base of the GOP to come to a place where they can hold their noses and vote for McCain.
Dobson's remarks might be a start.
A politician distorting scripture is hardly news. The Bible is ignored, unless its a handy prop to advance the cause of the politician using it. Obama is certainly not alone in using the portions that suit him, out of context, and ignoring what it really says. Most people don't go to church enough, or read the Bible enough, to know the difference.
It takes a student of the Bible such as Dr. Dobson to point out the truth. Most are reticent to do so, and just let the legions of distortions slide. That's why Dobson encounters so much heat for taking a stand, because its so rare for anyone to do so.
Dr. Dobson has more credibility in his stand than the liberal mass media gives him credit for, because he is not a John McCain fan either. Dobson has said he may vote for a third party candidate for president, or only vote for the other offices on down the ticket, rather than vote for McCain.
If Barack Obama is a Christian, it is a very liberal Christianity of very loose standards, since his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, cavorts with Muslims like Louis Farakhan and Libyian dictator Moamar Khadafi, and virtually all of Obama's family in Kenya are Muslims.
Obama is being handled with kid gloves because he's half-black, and few are willing as Dr. Dobson was, to call him on his fast and loose handling of the facts.
Dr. Dobson's comments may serve to rally dispirited Christians, who are very disillusioned with the performance of the Republican Party in Congress and with John McCain in particular. The only hope for defeating Obama is for the Christian base of the GOP to come to a place where they can hold their noses and vote for McCain.
Dobson's remarks might be a start.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Hillary has just a few weeks to raise $20 million
Failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is $20 million in debt from her campaign. Under the campaign finance laws introduced and passed by GOP presidential candidate John McCain, she only has until the start of the Democratic national convention in Denver to raise money to pay off her loans to the campaign. After that, the most she can draw out is a paltry $250,000.
Hillary did a video to her supporters, asking for bucks, and is hitting up Obama to help out. Obama's campaign cannot directly pay off her debts, under the law, but he can ask his supporters to do it.
Hillary, ranked 68th in seniority among U.S. senators, returns to the Senate tomorrow and Wednesday, for the first time in 17 months as just a regular senator. She and Obama are appearing jointly at a rally Friday in Unity, New Hampshire in their first joint campaign appearance.
Somehow, there is justice in watching those who thumbed their noses at the first amendment and passed the McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" bill, having to suffer its consequences. The bill has been a complete failure, driving accountability out of political finances, as many more tens of millions of dollars than before the act, are now funneled unreported through 527 committees such as Move On.org and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, into elections.
The onerous limits and reporting requirements give the candidates themselves less control, and put political speech from the 527 committees less regulated than ever before. McCain has no one to blame but himself for Obama finding it lucrative to go back on his promise to take federal funds for the general election campaign. It is McCain-Feingold that allows and drove Obama to raise the money he has.
It is why McCain will be limited to $87 million in the fall campaign, while Obama is free to spend unlimited hundreds of millions. It serves him right, to stew in his own juices. It's just a shame the rest of the Republican Party has to do it with him.
Hillary did a video to her supporters, asking for bucks, and is hitting up Obama to help out. Obama's campaign cannot directly pay off her debts, under the law, but he can ask his supporters to do it.
Hillary, ranked 68th in seniority among U.S. senators, returns to the Senate tomorrow and Wednesday, for the first time in 17 months as just a regular senator. She and Obama are appearing jointly at a rally Friday in Unity, New Hampshire in their first joint campaign appearance.
Somehow, there is justice in watching those who thumbed their noses at the first amendment and passed the McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" bill, having to suffer its consequences. The bill has been a complete failure, driving accountability out of political finances, as many more tens of millions of dollars than before the act, are now funneled unreported through 527 committees such as Move On.org and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, into elections.
The onerous limits and reporting requirements give the candidates themselves less control, and put political speech from the 527 committees less regulated than ever before. McCain has no one to blame but himself for Obama finding it lucrative to go back on his promise to take federal funds for the general election campaign. It is McCain-Feingold that allows and drove Obama to raise the money he has.
It is why McCain will be limited to $87 million in the fall campaign, while Obama is free to spend unlimited hundreds of millions. It serves him right, to stew in his own juices. It's just a shame the rest of the Republican Party has to do it with him.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Flip flop charges, counter charges
Though their parties have not officially nominated them yet, John McCain and Barack Obama are out on the campaign trail, flailing away at each other. This weekend's action featured McCain blasting Obama for eschewing federal funds after he signed a pledge to take them, and Obama blasting McCain for now urging stepped-up domestic oil drilling.
As predicted on this blog several days ago, McCain would rue the day he ceded the energy issue by throwing in with the environmentalists. That day has already come, and suddenly he is for President Bush's call for Congress to open off-shore oil drilling in the U.S. The polls show public support for increased oil drilling, due to outrageously rising gasoline prices, has grown from 42% to 57%--and rising. And nobody's seen their winter home heating bill yet--just wait.
While the liberals try to blame high oil prices on "speculators" and claim there isn't enough oil to be drilled to solve our problem, the public increasingly recognizes this ruse for what it is--the Chicken Little environmentalists trying to tell us the world is running out of resources, and that we're destroying the planet.
As evidence of the global warming hoax grows every day, the need to curb fossil fuels becomes less evident. Conservation might have been nice on $2 gasoline, but $4? Maybe for the trustfunders and Hollywood liberals, but for us working folks, no way. We need to return to supply-and-demand, free market economics, and bring the price down by putting more product on the market.
Obama has been wildly successful, far beyond what anybody thought was possible, in raising money in $5-$25 dollops on the internet. He has had 1.5 million separate contributors that way, and raised over $250 million. No wonder the $84 million allowed if he took federal funds looks like peanuts.
The pesky problem is his pledge to campaign under federal funds in the general election, and the perception that the Mr. Clean reform candidate--the very different apostle of hope and change--would sell out for the big bucks, just like any other garden-variety pol.
So Obama and McCain are swinging big roundhouse punches, probably missing their target, since John Q. Public really doesn't engage and pay attention to presidential politics until after Labor Day, when the vacations are over and the kids are back in school.
They're involved in what the boxing handicappers call "tune up matches." Call me when it turns serious.
As predicted on this blog several days ago, McCain would rue the day he ceded the energy issue by throwing in with the environmentalists. That day has already come, and suddenly he is for President Bush's call for Congress to open off-shore oil drilling in the U.S. The polls show public support for increased oil drilling, due to outrageously rising gasoline prices, has grown from 42% to 57%--and rising. And nobody's seen their winter home heating bill yet--just wait.
While the liberals try to blame high oil prices on "speculators" and claim there isn't enough oil to be drilled to solve our problem, the public increasingly recognizes this ruse for what it is--the Chicken Little environmentalists trying to tell us the world is running out of resources, and that we're destroying the planet.
As evidence of the global warming hoax grows every day, the need to curb fossil fuels becomes less evident. Conservation might have been nice on $2 gasoline, but $4? Maybe for the trustfunders and Hollywood liberals, but for us working folks, no way. We need to return to supply-and-demand, free market economics, and bring the price down by putting more product on the market.
Obama has been wildly successful, far beyond what anybody thought was possible, in raising money in $5-$25 dollops on the internet. He has had 1.5 million separate contributors that way, and raised over $250 million. No wonder the $84 million allowed if he took federal funds looks like peanuts.
The pesky problem is his pledge to campaign under federal funds in the general election, and the perception that the Mr. Clean reform candidate--the very different apostle of hope and change--would sell out for the big bucks, just like any other garden-variety pol.
So Obama and McCain are swinging big roundhouse punches, probably missing their target, since John Q. Public really doesn't engage and pay attention to presidential politics until after Labor Day, when the vacations are over and the kids are back in school.
They're involved in what the boxing handicappers call "tune up matches." Call me when it turns serious.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Al Franken proving inept as candidate
One likely Democratic pickup in the U.S. Senate is looking less likely, as the Minnesota challenger to incumbent GOP Sen. Norm Coleman, comedian Al Franken, is fumbling his lines. It is getting so bad that former independent, off-the-wall Gov. Jesse Ventura, a former pro wrestler, is threatening to run for the Senate as an independent, which would seal Franken's fate.
Franken has been continually called to account for sexist, racist, lewd and just plain poor taste "comedy" sketches during his lucrative show biz career. He has also stiffed several states for incomes taxes earned in their states, and this is to say nothing of several years of audio tape Republicans have of his radical lefist call-in show on the bankrupt "progressive" network Air America.
Coleman was the mayor of St. Paul, MN and the GOP nominee for the Senate against well-known leftist Sen. Paul Wellstone. The worm turned quick, as Wellstone was killed in a plane crash during the campaign. The Democrats held a tasteless, blast- Republicans funeral for Wellstone that was broadcast internationally. It caused such a negative ruckus that Coleman went on to handily defeat the replacement candidate, former Minnesota Senator and U.S. Vice President Walter Mondale.
It may be the luck of the draw for Coleman again, with Franken as his opponent. The joke is that Franken's campaign plane is always overweight, just to carry all his baggage. This, coupled with Coleman's high energy, intense campaigning in the state, may just save the GOP Senate seat in a very tough Republican year.
Thanks, Al!
Franken has been continually called to account for sexist, racist, lewd and just plain poor taste "comedy" sketches during his lucrative show biz career. He has also stiffed several states for incomes taxes earned in their states, and this is to say nothing of several years of audio tape Republicans have of his radical lefist call-in show on the bankrupt "progressive" network Air America.
Coleman was the mayor of St. Paul, MN and the GOP nominee for the Senate against well-known leftist Sen. Paul Wellstone. The worm turned quick, as Wellstone was killed in a plane crash during the campaign. The Democrats held a tasteless, blast- Republicans funeral for Wellstone that was broadcast internationally. It caused such a negative ruckus that Coleman went on to handily defeat the replacement candidate, former Minnesota Senator and U.S. Vice President Walter Mondale.
It may be the luck of the draw for Coleman again, with Franken as his opponent. The joke is that Franken's campaign plane is always overweight, just to carry all his baggage. This, coupled with Coleman's high energy, intense campaigning in the state, may just save the GOP Senate seat in a very tough Republican year.
Thanks, Al!
Friday, June 20, 2008
Obama proving unusually unreliable
The tradition is that the local host committee for each party's national political convention raises $50 million or so in private money to subsidize the big show.
Almost always, the host committee comes up short of the funds needed, a few weeks before the convention, and the party's presidential candidate and his organization help them out at the last minute, to put the fundraising over the top.
Barack Obama, in addition to opting out of receiving federal campaign funds, because he's proven he can raise far more than the available federal $84 million (which he pledged earlier to take), has let it be known that he wll not allow his organization to help raise funds for the national Democratic convention in Denver. He is shunning this traditional role of the nominee, even though he presently has $43 million in the bank. This is leaving his party in the lurch.
Obama is couching it terms of eschewing PAC and lobbyist money--the major private source for party convention funds. He is claiming to be all about reform and integrity, and that the system needs changing. It may well, but right dead in the middle of the campaign is not the place to start.
Obama is already in trouble with old line Democrats, who made their distaste for him painfully obvious by rolling up huge margins for his opponent, Hillary Clinton, in several major, big Democratic states. Hanging the party faithful out to dry on their convention is only making the problem worse.
A close Obama loss in November, and he'll come to rue the day he abandoned the federal election system and his party in its hour of need--all on the same day.
What a woeful campaign beginning!
Almost always, the host committee comes up short of the funds needed, a few weeks before the convention, and the party's presidential candidate and his organization help them out at the last minute, to put the fundraising over the top.
Barack Obama, in addition to opting out of receiving federal campaign funds, because he's proven he can raise far more than the available federal $84 million (which he pledged earlier to take), has let it be known that he wll not allow his organization to help raise funds for the national Democratic convention in Denver. He is shunning this traditional role of the nominee, even though he presently has $43 million in the bank. This is leaving his party in the lurch.
Obama is couching it terms of eschewing PAC and lobbyist money--the major private source for party convention funds. He is claiming to be all about reform and integrity, and that the system needs changing. It may well, but right dead in the middle of the campaign is not the place to start.
Obama is already in trouble with old line Democrats, who made their distaste for him painfully obvious by rolling up huge margins for his opponent, Hillary Clinton, in several major, big Democratic states. Hanging the party faithful out to dry on their convention is only making the problem worse.
A close Obama loss in November, and he'll come to rue the day he abandoned the federal election system and his party in its hour of need--all on the same day.
What a woeful campaign beginning!
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Obama finance hypocrisy overwhelming
Hypocrisy in any form is hard to take. When it is particularly naked, blatant and obvious, it borders on scandal.
So it is with Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's announcement today that he will not accept federal funds for his presidential campaign. He has vowed all along, and voted in his brief U.S. Senate tenure, to accept the total spending limitation contained in taking federal financing. In typical "do what I say, not what I do" fashion, Obama has discovered the internet and the ability to get 1.5 million people to send him small contributions, dwarfing the spending limits of the federal program.
So today Obama announced that he will be the first presidential candidate since the system went in effect after Watergate, to opt out of federal funds. He had earlier said he would take federal funds, but is going back on his word.
No one should really be surprised, because greed and avarice has marked his political career from Day One. His shady dealings with convicting influence peddler Tony Rezko, his "consulting" payments for 18 months from another lobbyist and the other typical Chicago backroom financial dealings in his early career show he is just one more garden variety politician, not a reformer or "new breed."
The public outrage that should accompany this announcement will be muted by a compliant liberal press, and was announced months early to have the brief burble of publicity out of the way well in advance of the Democratic national convention in Denver and the fall election campaign.
Last year it was discovered that Al Gore's stately southern mansion in Nashville was an energy hog, with utility bills putting it in the top 5% of all such homes in the U.S. He vowed to take energy conservation measures, and of course, to buy conservation credits to offset his carbon footprint. Guess what: a year later, he's still spouting the same environmentalist line, trying to put poor folks in straight jackets to curb their energy use--but the consumption in his mansion actually went UP 10% over the previous year.
This hypocrisy rivals that of Obama refusing to take federal funds. Liberal Democratic politicians talk out one side of their mouth, and act out of another.
Beware. Latch your pocketbook before Obama takes power. Wait until you see what he actually does, rather than what he says.
So it is with Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's announcement today that he will not accept federal funds for his presidential campaign. He has vowed all along, and voted in his brief U.S. Senate tenure, to accept the total spending limitation contained in taking federal financing. In typical "do what I say, not what I do" fashion, Obama has discovered the internet and the ability to get 1.5 million people to send him small contributions, dwarfing the spending limits of the federal program.
So today Obama announced that he will be the first presidential candidate since the system went in effect after Watergate, to opt out of federal funds. He had earlier said he would take federal funds, but is going back on his word.
No one should really be surprised, because greed and avarice has marked his political career from Day One. His shady dealings with convicting influence peddler Tony Rezko, his "consulting" payments for 18 months from another lobbyist and the other typical Chicago backroom financial dealings in his early career show he is just one more garden variety politician, not a reformer or "new breed."
The public outrage that should accompany this announcement will be muted by a compliant liberal press, and was announced months early to have the brief burble of publicity out of the way well in advance of the Democratic national convention in Denver and the fall election campaign.
Last year it was discovered that Al Gore's stately southern mansion in Nashville was an energy hog, with utility bills putting it in the top 5% of all such homes in the U.S. He vowed to take energy conservation measures, and of course, to buy conservation credits to offset his carbon footprint. Guess what: a year later, he's still spouting the same environmentalist line, trying to put poor folks in straight jackets to curb their energy use--but the consumption in his mansion actually went UP 10% over the previous year.
This hypocrisy rivals that of Obama refusing to take federal funds. Liberal Democratic politicians talk out one side of their mouth, and act out of another.
Beware. Latch your pocketbook before Obama takes power. Wait until you see what he actually does, rather than what he says.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
McCain on thin ice with Lieberman on ticket
Ultra-liberal political commentators are urging presumptive GOP presidential candidate John McCain to select his good buddy Sen. Joe Lieberman as his vice presidential running mate. No respectable Republican has come forward with that suggestion, let alone a conservative. The liberals should keep their nose out of Republican's business.
Joe Lieberman is not acceptable. He is a liberal Democrat who got re-elected as an independent, because he wasn't liberal enough for the radical wing of the Democratic party in Connecticut. He caucuses in the Senate with the Democrats, and except for agreeing with McCain and President Bush on Iraq, has little in common with the GOP.
He was, afterall, Al Gore's running mate on the Democratic ticket eight years ago. He is pro-choice on abortion, a big spender on money bills and supporter of most Democratic domestic initiatives. Outside out of briefly suporting educational vouchers until the teacher's union called him to heel, Lieberman is far from even a moderate Republican.
With McCain at 72-years-old, and not in perfect health due to Vietnam War injuries, the vice presidential nomination is more important on his ticket than most. Do you want to see Joe Lieberman as president if something happens to McCain? I sure don't.
McCain's maverick streak, and moves to lard up his campaign with so-called "moderate" Republicans, has him in enough trouble with the conservative GOP base already. Adding Lieberman to the ticket would poison the relationship for good, and doom the ticket to defeat.
That's a risk he doesn't want, or need, to take.
Joe Lieberman is not acceptable. He is a liberal Democrat who got re-elected as an independent, because he wasn't liberal enough for the radical wing of the Democratic party in Connecticut. He caucuses in the Senate with the Democrats, and except for agreeing with McCain and President Bush on Iraq, has little in common with the GOP.
He was, afterall, Al Gore's running mate on the Democratic ticket eight years ago. He is pro-choice on abortion, a big spender on money bills and supporter of most Democratic domestic initiatives. Outside out of briefly suporting educational vouchers until the teacher's union called him to heel, Lieberman is far from even a moderate Republican.
With McCain at 72-years-old, and not in perfect health due to Vietnam War injuries, the vice presidential nomination is more important on his ticket than most. Do you want to see Joe Lieberman as president if something happens to McCain? I sure don't.
McCain's maverick streak, and moves to lard up his campaign with so-called "moderate" Republicans, has him in enough trouble with the conservative GOP base already. Adding Lieberman to the ticket would poison the relationship for good, and doom the ticket to defeat.
That's a risk he doesn't want, or need, to take.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Corruption charges: it pays to be a liberal
The soap opera scandal of Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter's election campaign, ring led by campaign manager Greg Kolomitz, is pooh-poohed by the Denver media. After all, we're all good liberals here, union members and all--so heh, no harm, no foul.
Ritter has totally sold out as Governor to Big Labor, forcing through a dubious executive order to allow state workers to unionize. One-hird of state employees have now done so, with more on the way. This guarantees a lush source of Democratic campaign cash, collected on the payroll checkoff by the state, and rebated to the unions. No wonder the union members manning the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News choose to wink and grin at Ritter's campaign scandal.
Kolomitz mishandled over $200,000 of Ritter's inaugural donations, paying off campaign debts with it, including $83,000 to himself. This has been out for a couple of months, but now Ritter had to come today to the Arapahoe County District Attorney, who is handling the investigation since Ritter was formerly Denver district attorney and employed most the staff there, with another $10,000 "mistake" by Kolomitz.
Kolomitz belongs in jail, but married well into a prominent Colorado Democratic family, and is a popular, hail-fellow-well-met type. He'll probably get no more than a wrist slap, if that.
The major point is, if a Republican had done a tenth of what Ritter and Kolomitz did, they'd already have been convicted by the media and be on the way to the Big House. The press has continuously been after GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez and Senate candidate Bob Schaeffer for alleged financial improprieties of a very minor nature, compared to what Ritter has done. Nothing has ever been proven or charges filed.
Ritter and Kolomitz' hypocrisy and outright corruption is beginning to smell. We can only hope the Republican DA in Arapahoe County has the courage and steadfastness to do what is right. After all, attorneys have a way of standing around with their hands in each other's pockets, laughing all the way to the bank, protecting their own.
Ritter has totally sold out as Governor to Big Labor, forcing through a dubious executive order to allow state workers to unionize. One-hird of state employees have now done so, with more on the way. This guarantees a lush source of Democratic campaign cash, collected on the payroll checkoff by the state, and rebated to the unions. No wonder the union members manning the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News choose to wink and grin at Ritter's campaign scandal.
Kolomitz mishandled over $200,000 of Ritter's inaugural donations, paying off campaign debts with it, including $83,000 to himself. This has been out for a couple of months, but now Ritter had to come today to the Arapahoe County District Attorney, who is handling the investigation since Ritter was formerly Denver district attorney and employed most the staff there, with another $10,000 "mistake" by Kolomitz.
Kolomitz belongs in jail, but married well into a prominent Colorado Democratic family, and is a popular, hail-fellow-well-met type. He'll probably get no more than a wrist slap, if that.
The major point is, if a Republican had done a tenth of what Ritter and Kolomitz did, they'd already have been convicted by the media and be on the way to the Big House. The press has continuously been after GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez and Senate candidate Bob Schaeffer for alleged financial improprieties of a very minor nature, compared to what Ritter has done. Nothing has ever been proven or charges filed.
Ritter and Kolomitz' hypocrisy and outright corruption is beginning to smell. We can only hope the Republican DA in Arapahoe County has the courage and steadfastness to do what is right. After all, attorneys have a way of standing around with their hands in each other's pockets, laughing all the way to the bank, protecting their own.
Monday, June 16, 2008
George W. Bush: legacy building
As it gets down in the dog days of the presidency of George W. Bush, who faced with a dismal popularity rating and an uncooperative Democratic Congress, is now focused on what the historians will be saying about him decades from now.
In the immediate future, it'll be pretty bad. The liberals who dominate the mass media and academia have never accepted that Al Gore lost the election eight years ago, much less that George Bush is a legitimate president. Except for a brief period right after 9/11, they have fought Bush tooth and toenail, and continue to do so.
Bush was sold out by the Republican majority in Congress in the first six years of his presidency. It had become decadent and corrupt, losing the real leaders who could have made something happen. Bill Frist as Senate Majority Leader and House Speaker Dennis Hastert were hacks at best, who could not keep the troops in line. The liberals recognized who were critical to the GOP agenda and functioning, and Borked them in a hurry, and the weak-kneed Republicans got rid of them.
I'm speaking, of course, of Louisiana Rep. Bob Livingston, who would have been far superior to Hastert as speaker; Tom DeLay, who was always the real power in the GOP caucus, even when Newt Gingrich was speaker; and Sen. Trent Lott. With these able, effective leaders out of the way, the GOP fell into disarray, log rolling and ward heeling.
Whatever else you could say about this trio, they knew how to exercise the levers of power, the liberals recognized it, and by banishing them, got a very ineffectual GOP leadership that slid into oblivion quickly. It was easy for the Democrats to reclaim the majority after the way the GOP congressional leadership stunk it up. It will be even easier to add to their majority in 2008, with a defeatist, woe-is-me mentality overtaking the congressional wing of the GOP.
For the last two years, Bush has had to fend for himself, with very little GOP leadership behind him. Despite this, he has done an impressive job wth the surge in Iraq, keeping the economy out of a major depression with his tax cuts, and building allies around the world, such as in France, Britain and Australia.
When perspective replaces crass short-term politcal pandering in a few years in evaluating the Bush presidency, it will look good indeed. He will be another Harry Truman, in terms of how he was vilified as he left office, but looked terrific as a more objective historical perspective took over.
In the immediate future, it'll be pretty bad. The liberals who dominate the mass media and academia have never accepted that Al Gore lost the election eight years ago, much less that George Bush is a legitimate president. Except for a brief period right after 9/11, they have fought Bush tooth and toenail, and continue to do so.
Bush was sold out by the Republican majority in Congress in the first six years of his presidency. It had become decadent and corrupt, losing the real leaders who could have made something happen. Bill Frist as Senate Majority Leader and House Speaker Dennis Hastert were hacks at best, who could not keep the troops in line. The liberals recognized who were critical to the GOP agenda and functioning, and Borked them in a hurry, and the weak-kneed Republicans got rid of them.
I'm speaking, of course, of Louisiana Rep. Bob Livingston, who would have been far superior to Hastert as speaker; Tom DeLay, who was always the real power in the GOP caucus, even when Newt Gingrich was speaker; and Sen. Trent Lott. With these able, effective leaders out of the way, the GOP fell into disarray, log rolling and ward heeling.
Whatever else you could say about this trio, they knew how to exercise the levers of power, the liberals recognized it, and by banishing them, got a very ineffectual GOP leadership that slid into oblivion quickly. It was easy for the Democrats to reclaim the majority after the way the GOP congressional leadership stunk it up. It will be even easier to add to their majority in 2008, with a defeatist, woe-is-me mentality overtaking the congressional wing of the GOP.
For the last two years, Bush has had to fend for himself, with very little GOP leadership behind him. Despite this, he has done an impressive job wth the surge in Iraq, keeping the economy out of a major depression with his tax cuts, and building allies around the world, such as in France, Britain and Australia.
When perspective replaces crass short-term politcal pandering in a few years in evaluating the Bush presidency, it will look good indeed. He will be another Harry Truman, in terms of how he was vilified as he left office, but looked terrific as a more objective historical perspective took over.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Obama uses the "Bill Cosby" strategem
In his Father's Day message today, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama used the "Bill Cosby" strategem to try to garner votes.
As Cosby has done repeatedly, and been roundedly panned by the Jesse Jackson-Louis Farrakhan-Al Sharpton types, Obama tore into absent black fathers, who have abandoned their families and not taken responsibility for their children. This is popular with white folks, but of questionable merit in reaching black voters.
After the Obama team ruminated about it, they probably figured they had such an insurmountable lead among black voters--after all, where are they going to go?--that it wasn't much of a risk. Upper middle class blacks and wealthy blacks would applaud the sentiment, and of course, the abandoned Moms and children. That's a lot more black votes right there, than those of a few irresponsible fathers, who probably don't vote anyway.
But you better believe, it wasn't the black vote he was after. He was playing the race card, in a subtle way. The blue collar white males that he has been unable to attract, and who voted in droves for Hillary Clinton in the primaries, would love today's message. It plays right in to whatever doubts they have about Obama. It makes him look like a hero for tackling the perceived problems of his own race.
Remember, you read it here first. This wasn't some off the cuff, unplanned random comment Obama happened to utter. It was carefully vetted, and calculated to reach a target audience.
As Cosby has done repeatedly, and been roundedly panned by the Jesse Jackson-Louis Farrakhan-Al Sharpton types, Obama tore into absent black fathers, who have abandoned their families and not taken responsibility for their children. This is popular with white folks, but of questionable merit in reaching black voters.
After the Obama team ruminated about it, they probably figured they had such an insurmountable lead among black voters--after all, where are they going to go?--that it wasn't much of a risk. Upper middle class blacks and wealthy blacks would applaud the sentiment, and of course, the abandoned Moms and children. That's a lot more black votes right there, than those of a few irresponsible fathers, who probably don't vote anyway.
But you better believe, it wasn't the black vote he was after. He was playing the race card, in a subtle way. The blue collar white males that he has been unable to attract, and who voted in droves for Hillary Clinton in the primaries, would love today's message. It plays right in to whatever doubts they have about Obama. It makes him look like a hero for tackling the perceived problems of his own race.
Remember, you read it here first. This wasn't some off the cuff, unplanned random comment Obama happened to utter. It was carefully vetted, and calculated to reach a target audience.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
The Jimmy Carter comparison
Baby boomer conservatives are fond of comparing the Obama campaign to the 1976 insurgency of Jimmy Carter, at that time the former governor of Georgia. While different in many ways, there are some obvious comparisons, particularly in terms of the lack of foreign policy or Washington beltway experience. It somewhat falls on deaf ears, because a large chuck of Obama's people either weren't born yet, or were too young to remember the Carter presidency.
Jimmy Carter, of course, went on to to become one of the worst presidents of the 20th century, losing Iran to the terrorists, losing the Panama Canal, pursuing such a flimsy economic policy that interest rates shot up to 22% and of course, the worst gasoline shortages in history.
Through all this, ol' Jimmy, the Georgia peanut farmer, preached to us on television, sitting there in his cardigan sweater. He diagnosed the problem as a "national malaise." He did not diagnose it correctly as his own ineffectual leadership. He was too busy scheduling the White House tennis courts and carrying his own baggage on and off Air Force One, to be the Leader of the Free World.
There is little to suggest that Obama would be much better a president. The purpose of the comparison, of course, is to show how inexperience and naivete play out in the White House. His flubs on negotiating with terrorists, cutting and running in Iraq, and spouting the same old liberal bromides for the economy that Carter failed with, don't offer much hope.
Obama is a gifted orator with a teleprompter in front of him. He can paint the broad brush strokes that lead to thunderous applause from big crowds in arenas. The minutiae and details of policy trip him up. In debates with no script, the real Obama comes out. Nothing beats "been there, done that" when it comes to the presidency, and Obama has the thinnest resume of any recent presidential contender.
The other part of the Carter comparison, of course, was that four disasterous years of Carter led to Ronald Reagan. The GOP united and pulled its act together, to give the nation eight of the best years in the 20th century.
McCain won't do that, but I'll bet four years of Obama will.
Jimmy Carter, of course, went on to to become one of the worst presidents of the 20th century, losing Iran to the terrorists, losing the Panama Canal, pursuing such a flimsy economic policy that interest rates shot up to 22% and of course, the worst gasoline shortages in history.
Through all this, ol' Jimmy, the Georgia peanut farmer, preached to us on television, sitting there in his cardigan sweater. He diagnosed the problem as a "national malaise." He did not diagnose it correctly as his own ineffectual leadership. He was too busy scheduling the White House tennis courts and carrying his own baggage on and off Air Force One, to be the Leader of the Free World.
There is little to suggest that Obama would be much better a president. The purpose of the comparison, of course, is to show how inexperience and naivete play out in the White House. His flubs on negotiating with terrorists, cutting and running in Iraq, and spouting the same old liberal bromides for the economy that Carter failed with, don't offer much hope.
Obama is a gifted orator with a teleprompter in front of him. He can paint the broad brush strokes that lead to thunderous applause from big crowds in arenas. The minutiae and details of policy trip him up. In debates with no script, the real Obama comes out. Nothing beats "been there, done that" when it comes to the presidency, and Obama has the thinnest resume of any recent presidential contender.
The other part of the Carter comparison, of course, was that four disasterous years of Carter led to Ronald Reagan. The GOP united and pulled its act together, to give the nation eight of the best years in the 20th century.
McCain won't do that, but I'll bet four years of Obama will.
Friday, June 13, 2008
The ludicrous lobbyist wars
Rather than concerning themselves with trivia like the price of gas, the sluggish economy, the war in Iraq or rising food prices, the presumptive major party candidates for president are conducting a pissing contest about lobbyists in each other's campaigns.
This is a complete waste of time. That's what political types do between elections--go to state legislatures or Congress and lobby for legislation, paid by private business. That's been going on since time immemorial.
The GOP forced Obama's vice presidential vetter, longtime Washington insider James Johnson, to resign because he allegedly received a below-market home loan from Countrywide and overcharged the quasi-public Fannie Mae he chaired for his wife's travel expenses. Obama slammed back with the lobbying career of McCain's vice presidential vetter, A.V. Culvahouse, a longtime Washington lawyer. Who cares?
Both Obama and McCain's campaign managers are lobbyists, when they aren't taking time off to run political campaigns. So are a raft of their underlings on the campaign teams. Full time politicians have to earn a living, and that's one of the less nefarious ways they do it.
While the country is up to its collective ears in problems with the economy, prices and the war on terrorism, the great leaders are snivelling about lobbyists.
It's time to get down to the serious issues at hand, and quite the sideshows. Voters should demand no less.
This is a complete waste of time. That's what political types do between elections--go to state legislatures or Congress and lobby for legislation, paid by private business. That's been going on since time immemorial.
The GOP forced Obama's vice presidential vetter, longtime Washington insider James Johnson, to resign because he allegedly received a below-market home loan from Countrywide and overcharged the quasi-public Fannie Mae he chaired for his wife's travel expenses. Obama slammed back with the lobbying career of McCain's vice presidential vetter, A.V. Culvahouse, a longtime Washington lawyer. Who cares?
Both Obama and McCain's campaign managers are lobbyists, when they aren't taking time off to run political campaigns. So are a raft of their underlings on the campaign teams. Full time politicians have to earn a living, and that's one of the less nefarious ways they do it.
While the country is up to its collective ears in problems with the economy, prices and the war on terrorism, the great leaders are snivelling about lobbyists.
It's time to get down to the serious issues at hand, and quite the sideshows. Voters should demand no less.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Narcissists bellyache on Denver Democrat details
Narcissistic, professional protestors and demonstrators, such as Recreate '68 and Code Pink, have continuously bellyached to local Denver officials every since the city received the 2008 Democratic National Convention, about the arrangements made to protect their free speech.
The protest site wasn't close enough to the convention center, the parade route was too obscure, the police won't reveal the equipment they are buying with federal funds to protect local citizens from protestors and demonstrations. Nothing has made them happy. Here it is, 11 weeks before the convention, and they're still displeased and letting everyone know it.
The real problem is that these people are stuck in a 40-year-old mindset, and haven't updated to the 21st century way of doing things. Now we are in the internet age, the era of instant communications with cell phones, PDAs, camera phones, etc. They are graybeards trying to recapture their glorious past, rather than blazing a trail for the future. Let's face it, if you were demonstrating at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968, and were even only 18 years old, let along in your 20s or 30s then--that means you're at least 58 years old today!
That's the classic sign of old age: trying to recapture yesteryear's glory and chase after fond memories. That's great, but you're still stuck in the past. Old diatribes about how "the man" is trying to put us down, the system doesn't allow for dissent, etc. are hackneyed and fall on deaf ears.
It's a new era, of new technology and fresh, new wisdom and ideas. Obama didn't get where he is by campaigning like JFK or Hubert Humphrey did in 1968. If they were still alive, JFK would be 80 this year and Humphrey would be nearly 90. Obama is 46.
He changed the method and the message. It's time for the demonstrators and protestors to do the same thing.
The protest site wasn't close enough to the convention center, the parade route was too obscure, the police won't reveal the equipment they are buying with federal funds to protect local citizens from protestors and demonstrations. Nothing has made them happy. Here it is, 11 weeks before the convention, and they're still displeased and letting everyone know it.
The real problem is that these people are stuck in a 40-year-old mindset, and haven't updated to the 21st century way of doing things. Now we are in the internet age, the era of instant communications with cell phones, PDAs, camera phones, etc. They are graybeards trying to recapture their glorious past, rather than blazing a trail for the future. Let's face it, if you were demonstrating at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968, and were even only 18 years old, let along in your 20s or 30s then--that means you're at least 58 years old today!
That's the classic sign of old age: trying to recapture yesteryear's glory and chase after fond memories. That's great, but you're still stuck in the past. Old diatribes about how "the man" is trying to put us down, the system doesn't allow for dissent, etc. are hackneyed and fall on deaf ears.
It's a new era, of new technology and fresh, new wisdom and ideas. Obama didn't get where he is by campaigning like JFK or Hubert Humphrey did in 1968. If they were still alive, JFK would be 80 this year and Humphrey would be nearly 90. Obama is 46.
He changed the method and the message. It's time for the demonstrators and protestors to do the same thing.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
A few brave Democrats shun Obama
At least Democratic two members of the U.S. House of Representatives, admittedly from heavily Republican districts, are refusing to endorse Barack Obama for president. Under the arcane party rules, both are superdelegates to the August national convention in Denver, but are still holding out.
The only Democratic congressman from Oklahoma, holder of a very marginal to Republican seat, Rep. David Boren, says he is much more conservative than Obama and is declining to endorse. His father is a former U.S. Senator from Oklahoma and currently president of the University of Oklahoma, and was something of a Bluedog Democrat in the Senate.
Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida, holder of the heavily Republican seat of disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley, is also remaining uncommitted. If the GOP can get its act together, Mahoney should be one of the most endangered incumbents in the Democratic caucus. Foley turned out to be a homosexual, who made e-mail advances to male congressional pages.
The instinct of self-preservation, obviously a major motivator in both these solon's lukewarm attitude toward their partry's all-but-crowned presidential nominee, obviously trumps party loyalty. Both congressmen face uphill re-election battles of their own in November, which probably wouldn't be helped by an excessively warm embrace of Obama.
Nonetheless, it is still rare for Democratic elected officials to shun their party's presidential nominee. Obama's close win over Hillary, and running second to her in their home state primaries, might well leave them no choice. It could leave them out in the cold though, if they lose their re-election battles and the Obama administration is handing out federal sinecures to those who loyally supported the party and his campaign.
It's a big risk to take, and yet both have chosen to be independent and take their chances. It'll be fascinating to see how this bet pays out.
The only Democratic congressman from Oklahoma, holder of a very marginal to Republican seat, Rep. David Boren, says he is much more conservative than Obama and is declining to endorse. His father is a former U.S. Senator from Oklahoma and currently president of the University of Oklahoma, and was something of a Bluedog Democrat in the Senate.
Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida, holder of the heavily Republican seat of disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley, is also remaining uncommitted. If the GOP can get its act together, Mahoney should be one of the most endangered incumbents in the Democratic caucus. Foley turned out to be a homosexual, who made e-mail advances to male congressional pages.
The instinct of self-preservation, obviously a major motivator in both these solon's lukewarm attitude toward their partry's all-but-crowned presidential nominee, obviously trumps party loyalty. Both congressmen face uphill re-election battles of their own in November, which probably wouldn't be helped by an excessively warm embrace of Obama.
Nonetheless, it is still rare for Democratic elected officials to shun their party's presidential nominee. Obama's close win over Hillary, and running second to her in their home state primaries, might well leave them no choice. It could leave them out in the cold though, if they lose their re-election battles and the Obama administration is handing out federal sinecures to those who loyally supported the party and his campaign.
It's a big risk to take, and yet both have chosen to be independent and take their chances. It'll be fascinating to see how this bet pays out.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Public moving away from Democrats on energy
While the Democrats are up to their failed old tricks of trying to pass an Energy Bill that will slap a Windfall Profits Tax on oil companies and increase surveillance of price gouging, polls show that the American public is finally discerning what the real solution is to high gasoline prices.
A recent Gallup Poll shows that the percentage of Americans blaming the oil companies for high gasoline prices has dropped from 34% to 20% in the last year. At the same time, support for more drilling for oil in U.S. coastal and wilderness areas has increased from 41% to 57%.
While Obama and the Democratic majority in Congress continue to lambaste oil companies and Republicans for high gasoline prices, the public is finally ready to allow real solutions to occur, rather than pander to radical environmentalists who have prevented drilling, nuclear power plant construction and new oil refineries that will really make a difference.
This could be a great opportunity for Republicans to champion the solutions that have suddenly become politically popular, except that their likely presidential candidate, John McCain, is in bed with the Democrats on the energy issues. He opposes ANWAR drilling and most coastal drilling--as well as favoring the Cap and Trade plan defeated in the Senate last week, that would produce less fuel and less growth.
Mark Perry at the Carpe Diem blog site says the Bakken Fields beneath North Dakota, Montana and Canada hold an estimated 400 billion barrels of oil, while Saudi Arabia's biggest field has only 55 billion barrels. There is also 279 billion barrels available on lands under federal management, but more than half of this total is off limits due to environmental regulations. There is another 86 billion barrels available offshore, but restricted by environmental regs. ANWAR contains 10.4 billion barrels.
The U.S. also has liquefied natural gas, oil shale and various coal-to-liquid carbon-capture and sequestration technologies--but all would be priced out of the market by the Cap and Trade plan. Perry points out that the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal, but can't produce due to environmental regulations, and could be the Saudi Arabia of oil, if our oil companies were free to drill.
Finally, in the face of $4-$5 gasoline prices, the American public is ready to embrace real solutions, but both parties are about to nominate candidates who are stuck in political pandering and refusing to take the lead. This is understandable in a far-out liberal like Obama--but inexcuseable in a Republican like John McCain. He has a winning stance available on gas prices, but is buried in his vaunted "unpredictable mode," and can't take it. What a blown opportunity!
A recent Gallup Poll shows that the percentage of Americans blaming the oil companies for high gasoline prices has dropped from 34% to 20% in the last year. At the same time, support for more drilling for oil in U.S. coastal and wilderness areas has increased from 41% to 57%.
While Obama and the Democratic majority in Congress continue to lambaste oil companies and Republicans for high gasoline prices, the public is finally ready to allow real solutions to occur, rather than pander to radical environmentalists who have prevented drilling, nuclear power plant construction and new oil refineries that will really make a difference.
This could be a great opportunity for Republicans to champion the solutions that have suddenly become politically popular, except that their likely presidential candidate, John McCain, is in bed with the Democrats on the energy issues. He opposes ANWAR drilling and most coastal drilling--as well as favoring the Cap and Trade plan defeated in the Senate last week, that would produce less fuel and less growth.
Mark Perry at the Carpe Diem blog site says the Bakken Fields beneath North Dakota, Montana and Canada hold an estimated 400 billion barrels of oil, while Saudi Arabia's biggest field has only 55 billion barrels. There is also 279 billion barrels available on lands under federal management, but more than half of this total is off limits due to environmental regulations. There is another 86 billion barrels available offshore, but restricted by environmental regs. ANWAR contains 10.4 billion barrels.
The U.S. also has liquefied natural gas, oil shale and various coal-to-liquid carbon-capture and sequestration technologies--but all would be priced out of the market by the Cap and Trade plan. Perry points out that the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal, but can't produce due to environmental regulations, and could be the Saudi Arabia of oil, if our oil companies were free to drill.
Finally, in the face of $4-$5 gasoline prices, the American public is ready to embrace real solutions, but both parties are about to nominate candidates who are stuck in political pandering and refusing to take the lead. This is understandable in a far-out liberal like Obama--but inexcuseable in a Republican like John McCain. He has a winning stance available on gas prices, but is buried in his vaunted "unpredictable mode," and can't take it. What a blown opportunity!
Monday, June 9, 2008
McCain staff leaves him high and dry
Poor staff work is at the core of John McCain's dreadful televised speech last Tuesday night from New Orleans. The speech itself was not exactly a work of art, plus the green backdrop behind McCain was ghastly, making McCain look like a ghost in front of it. Professional makeup and staging would have made all the difference.
But the fact is that McCain is not very good at delivering a scripted speech. To place him in that setting at the same time Obama is speaking to 20,000 in St. Paul, MN declaring victory over Hillary Clinton, was dumb, dumb, dumb. McCain is best in Town Hall meetings and debates, and that's what should have been showcased opposite Obama reading off a teleprompter. The ultimate objective is to remove the teleprompter, where Obama falls flat without the script.
McCain's staff told the media they had written a great speech, but McCain did a lousy job of delivering it. How's that for throwing your own candidate under the bus? Who's paying your salary, buddy?
Tragically, Michael Deaver is deceased (many called him Michael Devious), but he was the pro who made Ronald Reagan look good. Much of the time Reagan was older than McCain is today, and yet he looked good, was provided with soaring, inspiring speeches and in a television setting that complimented his looks and delivery. Surely there's a Deaver disciple around somewhere, who could be drafted to clean up McCain's television act.
McCain is in the Big Time now, for all the cherries. His staff still acts like he's still back in Phoenix.
But the fact is that McCain is not very good at delivering a scripted speech. To place him in that setting at the same time Obama is speaking to 20,000 in St. Paul, MN declaring victory over Hillary Clinton, was dumb, dumb, dumb. McCain is best in Town Hall meetings and debates, and that's what should have been showcased opposite Obama reading off a teleprompter. The ultimate objective is to remove the teleprompter, where Obama falls flat without the script.
McCain's staff told the media they had written a great speech, but McCain did a lousy job of delivering it. How's that for throwing your own candidate under the bus? Who's paying your salary, buddy?
Tragically, Michael Deaver is deceased (many called him Michael Devious), but he was the pro who made Ronald Reagan look good. Much of the time Reagan was older than McCain is today, and yet he looked good, was provided with soaring, inspiring speeches and in a television setting that complimented his looks and delivery. Surely there's a Deaver disciple around somewhere, who could be drafted to clean up McCain's television act.
McCain is in the Big Time now, for all the cherries. His staff still acts like he's still back in Phoenix.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Bubba cashes in legacy for failed campaign
The ultimate big loser, perhaps of his own doing, in the failed Hillary Clinton presidential bid is her dear husband Bubba.
Already controversial for the fundraising on his presidential library in Little Rock, the $25 million he harvested off Los Angeles developer and supermarket king Ron Burkle on the eve of the campaign, tainted donations to his good works foundation and the quintessential rumors of extramarital consorts--former presidenti William Jefferson Clinton proved to be a negative force in his wife's destrucition.
Rumors are his personality was changed by his heart bypass surgery, but whatever happened, Clinton lost the touch that rose him to the presidency from humble Arkansas roots. He proved hyper-sensitive to the slightist dig on the campaign trail, touching off his famous temper, getting him in trouble with blacks, the liberal mass media that used to be his oyster, and sinking his wife in controversy.
Early in the campaign, the Clinton team seemed to have the correct vision of keeping Bill in the background, as a behind-the-scenes fundraiser and stealth weapon in very tightly controlled circumstances. But after Hillary lost Iowa big to Obama, Bill took greater charge in her organization and went out on the trail non-stop, losing the respected mantle of statesman and bon vivant.
The worse his wife did, the more he got the blame. He was behind the canning of her campaign manager, Patty Solis Doyle and the failure to can her pollster and strategist, Mark Penn. Bubba seemed not to have updated his strategy and tactics to the realities of the 21st century. Hillary was positioned wrong from the get-go as the inevitable nominee and a Washington pro, when in reality she had really high negative ratings and a resume as thin as Obama's. The public didn't buy it.
When it turned out after Super Tuesday, Feb. 5 that Hillary was broke and had lavished millions on staff perks and bureaucracy, the fundraising strategy of hitting up all Bill's rich friends failed, as they were maxed out under the law. Obama's strategy of thousands of small donors over the internet meant he could go back to them time and time again, raising record amounts. Hillary had to put in some $11 million of she and Bubba's exchequer, and still couldn't keep up with Obama media spending in crucial states.
Bill and Hillary are relataively young--in their early 60s. But Bill, in particular, seems to have burned his candle. He'll need a new strategy to recover. At least Hillary still has a Senate seat.
Already controversial for the fundraising on his presidential library in Little Rock, the $25 million he harvested off Los Angeles developer and supermarket king Ron Burkle on the eve of the campaign, tainted donations to his good works foundation and the quintessential rumors of extramarital consorts--former presidenti William Jefferson Clinton proved to be a negative force in his wife's destrucition.
Rumors are his personality was changed by his heart bypass surgery, but whatever happened, Clinton lost the touch that rose him to the presidency from humble Arkansas roots. He proved hyper-sensitive to the slightist dig on the campaign trail, touching off his famous temper, getting him in trouble with blacks, the liberal mass media that used to be his oyster, and sinking his wife in controversy.
Early in the campaign, the Clinton team seemed to have the correct vision of keeping Bill in the background, as a behind-the-scenes fundraiser and stealth weapon in very tightly controlled circumstances. But after Hillary lost Iowa big to Obama, Bill took greater charge in her organization and went out on the trail non-stop, losing the respected mantle of statesman and bon vivant.
The worse his wife did, the more he got the blame. He was behind the canning of her campaign manager, Patty Solis Doyle and the failure to can her pollster and strategist, Mark Penn. Bubba seemed not to have updated his strategy and tactics to the realities of the 21st century. Hillary was positioned wrong from the get-go as the inevitable nominee and a Washington pro, when in reality she had really high negative ratings and a resume as thin as Obama's. The public didn't buy it.
When it turned out after Super Tuesday, Feb. 5 that Hillary was broke and had lavished millions on staff perks and bureaucracy, the fundraising strategy of hitting up all Bill's rich friends failed, as they were maxed out under the law. Obama's strategy of thousands of small donors over the internet meant he could go back to them time and time again, raising record amounts. Hillary had to put in some $11 million of she and Bubba's exchequer, and still couldn't keep up with Obama media spending in crucial states.
Bill and Hillary are relataively young--in their early 60s. But Bill, in particular, seems to have burned his candle. He'll need a new strategy to recover. At least Hillary still has a Senate seat.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Extent of Hillary's cooperation crucial to Obama
They had the big Clintonian love feast today in Washington D.C., so Hillary could make a reasonably graceful exit from her presidential campaign. She said all the right stuff, and everybody cheered, but only time will tell to what extent she will actually help Obama, and how much good it will do if she does.
The old saying is "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." It would be totally in character for Hillary to remain spiteful and vindictive, whatever public front she puts up. She may well hope Obama loses the election so she can run again in 2012 as the "I told you so" candidate.
As an ardent feminist, Hillary can't help but be put out that this, the best chance so far to elect a female president, was shunted aside for a male, even if he is black. Despite the reputation of being the "black" party, the Democrats in truth use blacks to achieve their ends, but leave them enslaved in the welfare state and powerless after the election. Hillary can't be happy about being beaten by some uppity black male.
It's always been the Clintons first, the Democratic Party second--so a magnanimous, generous effort by Hillary to elect Obama would be a first. It might happen, but more likely, the Clintons still have an unfulfilled personal agenda, which doesn't include eight years of Obama as president.
Obama, on the other hand, has real problems with the blue collar white vote. McCain could well carry normally Democratic states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and Minnesota, as this vote deserts Obama. Obama's big victories were in normally GOP states that will return to the fold in November. He needs Hillary's positive, active support to stem the tide to McCain that could lose him crucial Democratic states.
The $64,000 question is "Will he get it?"
The old saying is "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." It would be totally in character for Hillary to remain spiteful and vindictive, whatever public front she puts up. She may well hope Obama loses the election so she can run again in 2012 as the "I told you so" candidate.
As an ardent feminist, Hillary can't help but be put out that this, the best chance so far to elect a female president, was shunted aside for a male, even if he is black. Despite the reputation of being the "black" party, the Democrats in truth use blacks to achieve their ends, but leave them enslaved in the welfare state and powerless after the election. Hillary can't be happy about being beaten by some uppity black male.
It's always been the Clintons first, the Democratic Party second--so a magnanimous, generous effort by Hillary to elect Obama would be a first. It might happen, but more likely, the Clintons still have an unfulfilled personal agenda, which doesn't include eight years of Obama as president.
Obama, on the other hand, has real problems with the blue collar white vote. McCain could well carry normally Democratic states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and Minnesota, as this vote deserts Obama. Obama's big victories were in normally GOP states that will return to the fold in November. He needs Hillary's positive, active support to stem the tide to McCain that could lose him crucial Democratic states.
The $64,000 question is "Will he get it?"
Friday, June 6, 2008
Obama and Hillary meeting badly overblown
You have to give Hillary and Obama credit. They did manage to get to California Sen. Diane Feinstein's Washington mansion to start planning how to unify the Democratic Party, before the press found out about it. When they emerged from the mansion, some press was there, panting breathlessly like this was some big deal.
Mainly they were just jealous that Obama and Hillary had put one over on them. How dare these people not allow the press to follow like them papparatzi over to Di's mansion? Who do they think they are, cutting out the press?
In reality this is a really little deal, of virtually no import. Hillary and Obama have met and talked before, and probably will meet and talk again. I mean, if you were $30 million in debt like Hillary's campaign is, wouldn't you be tugging on Obama's jacket pocket too?
The press was still broadcasting live, on stakeouts of Feinstein's mansion, long after Hillary and Obama had left. They played it up for all the drama that could possibly be squeezed out of a nothingburger meeting.
This was of even less consequence than chasing OJ's white Bronco by helicopter in LA a few years ago. A word is worth a thousand pictures--the story of TV news.
Spare me. Wake me up when you have something meaningful and significant to report.
Mainly they were just jealous that Obama and Hillary had put one over on them. How dare these people not allow the press to follow like them papparatzi over to Di's mansion? Who do they think they are, cutting out the press?
In reality this is a really little deal, of virtually no import. Hillary and Obama have met and talked before, and probably will meet and talk again. I mean, if you were $30 million in debt like Hillary's campaign is, wouldn't you be tugging on Obama's jacket pocket too?
The press was still broadcasting live, on stakeouts of Feinstein's mansion, long after Hillary and Obama had left. They played it up for all the drama that could possibly be squeezed out of a nothingburger meeting.
This was of even less consequence than chasing OJ's white Bronco by helicopter in LA a few years ago. A word is worth a thousand pictures--the story of TV news.
Spare me. Wake me up when you have something meaningful and significant to report.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
McCain's Town Hall gimmick just might work
Presumed GOP presidential nominee John McCain has called on Barack Obama to have a series of informal joint Town Hall question and answer meetings, with the first one to be June 12.
Evidently, Obama's people are interested, and teams from the two camps are working out the details. Understandably, Obama's people favor more of a classic Lincoln and Douglas debate format, where the candidates each do a lengthy presentation with rebuttals. Obama is at his best with a teleprompter and prepared remarks.
McCain has proposed fewer canned remarks and greater audience participation. Presumably, this would bring out McCain's strength of spontineity and short, punchy quips, and expose Obama's dull and ponderous answers so evident in the debates with Hillary, as his lack of experience makes answering spontaneous questions difficult.
This all might be fun for a season, but just as the Democratic debates got overworked and became routine with low audiences, undoubtedly the Town Hall format would wear out too. Once the debaters get to know each other and how each responds to what questions, the freshness wilts.
Face-to-face encounters have their place in the campaign, but a big part is rallying the troops in the field. This isn't done in debates, but in rallys and meetings of the loyal, committed folks.
That's what will swing the election--who gets their vote out, and has the fired-up troops on the ground to do that.
Evidently, Obama's people are interested, and teams from the two camps are working out the details. Understandably, Obama's people favor more of a classic Lincoln and Douglas debate format, where the candidates each do a lengthy presentation with rebuttals. Obama is at his best with a teleprompter and prepared remarks.
McCain has proposed fewer canned remarks and greater audience participation. Presumably, this would bring out McCain's strength of spontineity and short, punchy quips, and expose Obama's dull and ponderous answers so evident in the debates with Hillary, as his lack of experience makes answering spontaneous questions difficult.
This all might be fun for a season, but just as the Democratic debates got overworked and became routine with low audiences, undoubtedly the Town Hall format would wear out too. Once the debaters get to know each other and how each responds to what questions, the freshness wilts.
Face-to-face encounters have their place in the campaign, but a big part is rallying the troops in the field. This isn't done in debates, but in rallys and meetings of the loyal, committed folks.
That's what will swing the election--who gets their vote out, and has the fired-up troops on the ground to do that.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Media did do Hillary In
Allegedly Hillary Clinton will be dropping out of the Democratic presidential contest and endorsing Obama on Friday, if you believe the mass media reports.
I heard a New York cab driver commenting on this on the radio tonight and he said "The media stampeded the superdelegates into nominating Obama. Hillary won the popular vote and should have had all of Florida and Michigan. They're tired of the Clintons, and wanted them out."
In his thick, uneducated Bronx brogue, the cabbie had it exactly right. In the highly UNdemocratic Democratic convention, controlled by the so-called superdelegates, who comprise 25% of the delegates at the convention, the backroom power brokers and hacks control the outcome. They don't entrust the final decision to the democratically elected delegates.
Once the members of the House and Senate, superdelegates all, stuck their fingers in the air to see which way the wind was blowing, the media said it was Obama, and they gratefully full into line.
The Democratic voters were with Hillary. As a Republican, I'm glad it's Obama, because he is a far weaker candidate, but to be truthful about it, Hillary got jobbed. Even on the last night of primaries, she carried South Dakota, after smashing Obama on Sunday in Puerto Rico.
It's the blue collar white males who will carry this election. They were for Hillary, and now they're for McCain. It may be their last hoorah, but in November, 2008 they will speak, and the world will listen.
I heard a New York cab driver commenting on this on the radio tonight and he said "The media stampeded the superdelegates into nominating Obama. Hillary won the popular vote and should have had all of Florida and Michigan. They're tired of the Clintons, and wanted them out."
In his thick, uneducated Bronx brogue, the cabbie had it exactly right. In the highly UNdemocratic Democratic convention, controlled by the so-called superdelegates, who comprise 25% of the delegates at the convention, the backroom power brokers and hacks control the outcome. They don't entrust the final decision to the democratically elected delegates.
Once the members of the House and Senate, superdelegates all, stuck their fingers in the air to see which way the wind was blowing, the media said it was Obama, and they gratefully full into line.
The Democratic voters were with Hillary. As a Republican, I'm glad it's Obama, because he is a far weaker candidate, but to be truthful about it, Hillary got jobbed. Even on the last night of primaries, she carried South Dakota, after smashing Obama on Sunday in Puerto Rico.
It's the blue collar white males who will carry this election. They were for Hillary, and now they're for McCain. It may be their last hoorah, but in November, 2008 they will speak, and the world will listen.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Obama victory creates veep firestorm
Now that Barack Obama seemingly has corralled the requisite number of delegates to be the Democratic presidential nominee, two major items demand his immediate attention.
One is to cut a deal with Hillary Clinton that will generate her enthusiastic cooperation, rather than quiet acquiesence. One sure way to do this is to cough up enough money to clear her campaign debts, which are rumored to be $6-$12 million. Another would be to make her the vice presidential nominee, a serious mistake. Somewhere in between probably lies reality.
Secondly, Obama cannot afford a misstep on the vice presidential nominee. It will be a big enough step if America can be convinced to elect its first black president, when all voters are in the quiet of a private voting booth, with the decision between their fears and their conscience. A female vice presidential candidate--in essence electing the first black and the first woman in the same election and on the same ticket--is too big a reach.
Obama needs a nice, safe traditional white male vice presidential nominee. Someone like Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell or Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. Ticket balance demands a Governor, not another Senator, and would be even better with someone from the West or South. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson would present the same problem as Hillary: electing the first hispanic and first black on the same ticket is too big a reach.
As a Republican, I would hope Obama would do something like that, but good advice would be not to.
It's going to be tough enough to get the white, male, blue collar, voters that were Hillary's stock in trade, and are crucial for a Democratic victory. To anger them, or give them a reason to back McCain, with a gender or racie-based selection, is dangerous, to say the least.
One is to cut a deal with Hillary Clinton that will generate her enthusiastic cooperation, rather than quiet acquiesence. One sure way to do this is to cough up enough money to clear her campaign debts, which are rumored to be $6-$12 million. Another would be to make her the vice presidential nominee, a serious mistake. Somewhere in between probably lies reality.
Secondly, Obama cannot afford a misstep on the vice presidential nominee. It will be a big enough step if America can be convinced to elect its first black president, when all voters are in the quiet of a private voting booth, with the decision between their fears and their conscience. A female vice presidential candidate--in essence electing the first black and the first woman in the same election and on the same ticket--is too big a reach.
Obama needs a nice, safe traditional white male vice presidential nominee. Someone like Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell or Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. Ticket balance demands a Governor, not another Senator, and would be even better with someone from the West or South. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson would present the same problem as Hillary: electing the first hispanic and first black on the same ticket is too big a reach.
As a Republican, I would hope Obama would do something like that, but good advice would be not to.
It's going to be tough enough to get the white, male, blue collar, voters that were Hillary's stock in trade, and are crucial for a Democratic victory. To anger them, or give them a reason to back McCain, with a gender or racie-based selection, is dangerous, to say the least.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Obama's costly, pyrrhic Michigan victory
The Democratic National Committee's attempt to mediate the delegate-seating problems for Florida and Michigan at its August Denver national convention may yet blow up in its face.
Maybe Hillary Clinton, as rumored, will withdraw from the race tomorrow. But there's a big difference in terms of the November general election between a graceful, happy, unifying withdrawl--and an angry, forced surrender. The Obama team's actions on the Michigan vote could well make it the latter.
On his own volition, Obama's name did not appear on the Michigan primary ballot. The "compromise" reached at the DNC meeting over the weekend gives him over 40% of the Michigan delegates, based on ficticious "polling" data. The Clinton forces were mad as hornets. Both Flordia and Michigan will vote at half strength in Denver, as punishment for throwing their primaries in January, when the DNC had mandated no primaries before February, except Iowa and New Hampshire.
Florida is probably going for McCain regardless, but Michigan currently shows McCain with a big lead there over either Hillary or Obama, due primarily to the delegate problems with the DNC. There is no way, according to most data, for Obama to win the election without carrying Michigan, and his "compromise" on the delegates make that even less likely. No Republican has carried Michigan for president since Gerald Ford did it in 1976, so it would be a major loss for Obama.
Hillary won another huge victory in Puerto Rico Sunday over Obama by 25%, and will probably lose the last two primaries in Montana and South Dakota tomorrow. While Obama leads in delegates, until more Superdelegates commit, he's still short. In that closely-fought a race, it would behoove him to be more gracious, leaving Hillary a face-saving way out.
A power play like that executed on the Michigan delegates does not do that.
Maybe Hillary Clinton, as rumored, will withdraw from the race tomorrow. But there's a big difference in terms of the November general election between a graceful, happy, unifying withdrawl--and an angry, forced surrender. The Obama team's actions on the Michigan vote could well make it the latter.
On his own volition, Obama's name did not appear on the Michigan primary ballot. The "compromise" reached at the DNC meeting over the weekend gives him over 40% of the Michigan delegates, based on ficticious "polling" data. The Clinton forces were mad as hornets. Both Flordia and Michigan will vote at half strength in Denver, as punishment for throwing their primaries in January, when the DNC had mandated no primaries before February, except Iowa and New Hampshire.
Florida is probably going for McCain regardless, but Michigan currently shows McCain with a big lead there over either Hillary or Obama, due primarily to the delegate problems with the DNC. There is no way, according to most data, for Obama to win the election without carrying Michigan, and his "compromise" on the delegates make that even less likely. No Republican has carried Michigan for president since Gerald Ford did it in 1976, so it would be a major loss for Obama.
Hillary won another huge victory in Puerto Rico Sunday over Obama by 25%, and will probably lose the last two primaries in Montana and South Dakota tomorrow. While Obama leads in delegates, until more Superdelegates commit, he's still short. In that closely-fought a race, it would behoove him to be more gracious, leaving Hillary a face-saving way out.
A power play like that executed on the Michigan delegates does not do that.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Outrageous use of the pulpit
While Barack Obama tries furiously to distance himself from the controversy fomented by his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his successors, lost in the controversy is the gross misuse of the pulpit.
Churches are tax exempt for a reason--they are places of reverance, soul-searching, strengthening the social fabric and community service. They are not allowed under the tax code to be used for political purposes, and particularly not from the pulpit on Sunday morning.
This is precisely what Obama's pastors have done, and yet the IRS has winked and looked the other way. Sunday morning politics are a staple of the black church, and yet they are given free reign to keep doing it. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have campaigned on Sunday morning in black churches across America, with no censure. Their publicly televised remarks reek of politics and partisanship--specific church no-noes--and yet, the mass media accepts it a grand tradition.
Let a white suburban evangelical pastor dare breath a word against abortion, homosexuality or other pro-family issues from the pulpit, and the IRS is banging on his door.
A serious double standard is at work here, and it needs to stop. It turns out that the Catholic priest who blasted Hillary Clinton from the pulpit of Obama's church, Trinity, in Chicago, is a major fundraiser for Obama in all his political campaigns, and they have a tight relationship going back over a decade.
The liberal mass media refuse to report this hypocrisy. They need to start.
Churches are tax exempt for a reason--they are places of reverance, soul-searching, strengthening the social fabric and community service. They are not allowed under the tax code to be used for political purposes, and particularly not from the pulpit on Sunday morning.
This is precisely what Obama's pastors have done, and yet the IRS has winked and looked the other way. Sunday morning politics are a staple of the black church, and yet they are given free reign to keep doing it. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have campaigned on Sunday morning in black churches across America, with no censure. Their publicly televised remarks reek of politics and partisanship--specific church no-noes--and yet, the mass media accepts it a grand tradition.
Let a white suburban evangelical pastor dare breath a word against abortion, homosexuality or other pro-family issues from the pulpit, and the IRS is banging on his door.
A serious double standard is at work here, and it needs to stop. It turns out that the Catholic priest who blasted Hillary Clinton from the pulpit of Obama's church, Trinity, in Chicago, is a major fundraiser for Obama in all his political campaigns, and they have a tight relationship going back over a decade.
The liberal mass media refuse to report this hypocrisy. They need to start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)