Tuesday, April 29, 2008

The Pendulum Swings Again

Hillary Clinton's biggest supporter may in fact be the wrong Reverend Wright. In the last several days this paltry excuse for a preacher has set upon a personal vendetta to destroy Senator Obama's candidacy; delivering barn-burning stump speeches that ensure to keep his name on the front pages.

Now the reverend justifies his glorified media tour as nothing more than defending his name as well as the honor of his church. A common line he delivers in his interviews is regards to how many homeless individuals have benefited from contributions to the church-whether it be from soup kitchens or clothing drives. But for a man as articulate as Wright can be at times, he is noticeably tacit when it comes to addressing the million dollar mansion the church is building him.

To add more dismay to a struggling Obama campaign, the always entertaining Al Sharpton has been blasting the Senator for his reaction to the Sean Bell verdict in New York. The New York Post today has Sharpton accusing Obama of attempting to "grandstand in front of white people".

The African American community is too complex, and too diverse to attribute all of its beliefs and ideologies onto a select few individuals. However, the mainstream American electorate will flock en masse towards Senators Clinton and McCain if they fear an Afro-Centric ideology in the White House.

And just how serious is Mrs. Clinton about her chances of winning this chaotic primary? Well Wednesday night she will be appearing on the Gospel According to William (Known as The O'Reilly Factor to non-believers) for the very first time.

Be sure to Tivo this one.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Clinton News Network Running Out Of News

While we are about two hours away from polling places closing in Pennsylvania, CNN had a story banner at the bottom of the screen entitled "White Men: Racist or Sexist?"

Now I have known for years that this network lacks both ethics and professionalism but this might be a new low. Nora Ephron is a Hollywood writer (When Harry Met Sally, Sleepless in Seattle) who also happens to be quite an active liberal. Activism is perfectly acceptable but I have a problem with CNN passing off a nonsensical article published on the Huffington Post website (run by another liberal crackpot) as legitimate news and to give it actual airtime and debate is laughable.

This network's primary objective is to deliver a headline without any expansion of the substance. This is a network that exists solely for shock value and should not be regarded as a bona fide news outlet. They will go to great lengths to avoid analyzing a story because facts are irrelevant to them in the race for higher ratings.

They could not accept that Caucasian males potentially may cast their vote in favor of McCain so they lead with a story about a C-list celebrity and her incompetent ramblings on a far-left blog. In the very article they chose to report, Nora Ephron actually contends that these men are attracted to the Maverick "particularly because of the Torture Thing." I would hardly categorize spending five and a half grueling years of abuse and maltreatment in the Hanoi Hilton as "the Torture Thing".

CNN's authenticity ought to be called into question more often.

And as for Ms. Ephron; stick to the screenplays sweetheart.

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Obama's Fatal Slip-Up

In Pennsylvania today, Senator Obama was addressing a crowd trying to gain any last second momentum ahead of Tuesday's crucial primary. The reception was warm and optimistic until the Senator drastically diverged from not only the message of his campaign but essentially the entire liberal strategy for November.

The stress of campaigning in such a battle-ground state surely affected his reflexes otherwise I do not believe he would have allowed such a gaffe. Politicos are saying a win is not enough for Mrs. Clinton, it needs to be a blowout. The issue of elect ability in the general election is one of the most constant themes in her White House bid. Senator Clinton alleges Obama does not have the wide-ranging appeal she possesses and would potentially keep the GOP in power. She certainly has evidence to support her theory: Senator Obama is just now starting to recover from his "bitter" insult to middle Americans.

But last week's infamous remark is about to be replaced by the fatal line uttered today in Reading, Pennsylvania. Obama said "Either Democrat would be better than John McCain. And all three of us would be better than George Bush."

The liberal community has branded John McCain as some sort of Bush clone, alleging a campaign victory for the Maverick would result in a third Bush term.

And now the front-runner for that party's nomination has publicly acknowledged that there are very distinguishable contrasts between the two.

We've had a few solid days since Barack Obama's latest controversy. This will surely shake things up again.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Mrs. Clinton isn't Going Anywhere

The debate tonight between Senators Obama and Clinton was essentially another draw; we did not see any flare up of tempers or great one-liners. What was made abundantly clear however is Mrs. Clinton's determination to stay competitive in the campaign and to make sure the public and the media don't stop hearing more Reverend Wright stories and Obama's jabs at middle America.

Iraq as always was a hot-button topic and we witnessed the same cut-and-run strategy liberals spew relentlessly. Obama and Mrs. Clinton conceded regardless of recommendations from the generals on the ground they would still pull the troops out of the region.

Obama was once again dogged by the Reverend Wright story and (W)rightfully so might I add. He continued to use his line of disowning the remarks but not the man.

I am exhausted from hearing liberals repeatedly bash Wall Street and continuously label them as crooks. Those lines are nothing more than tools to draw cheap applause from an ill-informed audience. I take issue with Mrs. Clinton in particular because Chelsea is a manager of Avenue Capital Group, a Wall Street hedge fund.

Barack Obama tried to paint himself as a uniter of the masses but ultimately failed once again. I heard a liberal radio host on MSNBC yesterday compare Obama's communication skills to Ronald Reagan's. I have watched this man as much as anyone out there and where this notion is coming from that he has an exceptional command of the language still completely eludes me. I thought he was onto a good line when he said "I don't think Democrats have a monopoly on good ideas". However reality must have set in for the Senator as he quickly used the line to attack President Bush saying he has fueled the division in this country more than anyone. I will say it had to be naivety on my part for thinking Obama could reach across the aisle; he might risk losing the moveon.org liberals that comprise the base of his support.

And finally during the closing remarks of tonight's debate Senator Clinton uttered the most terrifying line of the evening. After two hours of her advocating for repealing the Bush tax cuts, implementing billions of dollars in new social programs and not to mention an incredibly high-priced universal health care package; Mrs. Clinton said we need to get this country on track towards "shared prosperity".

"Shared Prosperity" = Socialism

A chill went down my spine...

Monday, April 14, 2008

Yet Another Obama Gaffe

Just when we thought we had seen everything out of the 2008 primary season, Barack Obama reinforces his status as a political novice with an insensitive remark about middle America; a now infamous quote regarding people in small towns clinging to guns and religion as a means to explain their frustrations. This incredibly offensive message has found widespread airtime for the past couple of days, providing Mrs. Clinton with plenty of ammunition for Pennsylvania's primary election just a mere week away.

She has been hammering away at his characterization of small town voters, using his own words against him in a number of campaign speeches. She has labeled him as an "elitist"; a carefully chosen term by her campaign. When Mrs. Clinton throws the label "elitist" around in the Democrat party, the average voter will surely link Obama with former "elitists" the likes of Governor Dukakis, Vice President Gore and Senator Kerry. These were well-spoken, ambitious Ivy League men who were unsuccessful in connecting with the average American. Voters in the Democratic primaries are wary that Obama might fail to make that same connection and hand the presidency to the Maverick.

However for Mrs. Clinton to suggest that it is Barack Obama who is out of touch with middle America is rather pompous in itself as she is worth multiple times the wealth of Barack Obama and has been at the center of Beltway politics since 1992. She realized this was a dangerous charge to hurl at the newcomer so to prove she could connect with the average American she knew something had to be done.

Did she hold a town-hall meeting to discuss how tax breaks would directly benefit these rural voters and put more money into their pockets? Did she discuss how she would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, the very oil costing farmers outrageous amounts of money to operate their farms? Did she hold a press conference to address her solution to the housing crisis impacting so many Americans each day?

No, she did not do any of those things.

Over the weekend however she did go to a bar in Indiana; take a shot of whiskey and drink a beer.

The Democrats are falling far short of the campaign money being raised by the RNC currently.

If I were them I would start charging admission to shows like these.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

A Blast from the Past

Is it 1977? I only ask because the media has been dominated by the story of Jimmy Carter's upcoming meeting in Syria with the leader of Hamas. This is an organization hell-bent on the ultimate destruction of the state of Israel in the Middle East. They are unwavering in their objectives and will stop at nothing in order to accomplish them. They advocate attacks upon civilians and attempt to legitimize their outfit by running for public office in the Palestinian Authority. This is an entity listed by the United States along with other countries as a terrorist organization. The bedrock principle in modern American foreign policy is our refusal to negotiate with terrorists.

Jimmy Carter must have been absent from his high school civics class during that lesson.

For a man whose presidency will not intrigue too many historians, his life since being ousted from office by Ronald Reagan (489 electoral votes compared to Carter's 49, but who's counting) has been admirable. He has worked as a humanitarian on a range of issues and has established the Carter Center specifically to address human rights conditions throughout the world.

But he hasn't been quiet in his criticisms of his successors, particularly those on the other side of the aisle. He was critical of President George Bush (41) and his operation of the Gulf War. Carter threw considerable remarks at President Clinton (and rightly so) after his pardon of Mark Rich in 2001. And recently Carter has called the current Bush administration "the worst in American history". He has also labeled the religious voters of the right as threats to American democracy and advocates against their influence in elections.

President Carter no longer speaks on behalf of this country. He is a distinguished man with an impressive track record of humanitarian accomplishments. His popularity as a statesmen is certainly higher out of office than it was during his presidency. But he has no legitimate authority in conducting foreign policy initiatives that directly contradict the stance of this nation. If he wishes to be included in the very important dialogues of Middle East peace, then he must go through the proper channels i.e. President Bush. The administration has an agenda it wishes to accomplish with regards to the Middle East. It is far from perfect but there are individuals working tirelessly to further the peace in the region and Carter's visit only serves as another roadblock.

Two distinctly different foreign policies are far more dangerous than a single yet admittedly flawed one.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

McCain Shares his View

Senator John McCain shocked many today by appearing with the ladies of The View. He looked calm and relaxed, not fidgeting nearly as much as Senator Obama did last week. He spoke with the charisma and enthusiasm that had been lacking in his campaign.

Unlike Senator Obama's appearance, McCain was actually thrown hardball questions that required real solutions, not merely the empty rhetoric Obama has been spewing lately. The now infamous "100 years in Iraq" quote was the top issue for the ladies. In hindsight I am sure McCain regrets uttering that phrase which has been replayed countless times by the Clinton News Network and others like it. The sound byte they use however is completely out of context. The Maverick was merely talking about a United States presence in Iraq with military bases, not an ongoing war. He likens it to U.S. presence in South Korea, Germany and Japan: former sites of military conflict where the fighting has ceased but the United States remains an entity there.

The McCain/Rice ticket was also mentioned. The Senator acknowledged Secretary Rice as a great American but has said no talks have been initiated regarding the bottom half of the ticket. Interesting however, was McCain's characterization of the vice presidency. I recently wrote about how the role has been expanded in the last several years, but McCain considerably downplayed the scope of the office. He stated the only real duties of a vice president are to break a tie vote in the Senate and to check on the health of the president. Let me say this was a relief to hear. In an age where executive power and overreaching is rampant, it is refreshing for a politician like McCain to respect the Constitution and acknowledge that it is within the walls of Congress where legislation must be created.

It was uncomfortable at times to watch as the women pummeled him with questions, barely allowing time for a thought out response before the next was hurled his way. He conducted himself professionally and came out unscathed from the "interview". This was no interview, it was a forum for the ladies to bash President Bush and Senator McCain simultaneously.

When asked rather snidely by Joy Behar, "What's the difference between you and President Bush?" McCain went into a series of comparisons which showed they are truly two different politicians with conflicting agendas. But I am sure the liberal media turned a deaf ear on that response.

All things considered, conservatives should be proud of Senator McCain for his appearance this morning. He went on a very liberal show with a New York audience behind it and held true to his principles.

Senator Obama and the moveon.org liberals like him should be very intimated by McCain's political expertise.

Monday, April 7, 2008

McCain/??? in 2008

With each day exposing another ugly story that has become the norm of the politics from the Democrat Party, Mr. McCain is in the enviable position (at least to Senators Clinton and Obama) of selecting a running mate. The Maverick broke word of this last week to a group of reporters; admitting his campaign was actively searching to fill the bottom half of the ticket.

Since Al Gore's first stint as vice-president the American people have witnessed the expansion of that particular office. Certainly the case can be argued that no one better personifies the growth of VP power more than Dick Cheney. With every election we see the name on the bottom half of the ticket gain more prestige and therefore the electorate has no choice but to recognize it as a legitimate political office. In the past, comparisons were even made between the American Vice President and the Queen of England; possessing power in title only.

Being in a new political era, polling is now being conducted to attempt to gauge public approval in a potential VP nominee. Speculation was rampant on the Sunday Morning talk shows regarding Secretary Rice's desire to fill the void in the GOP ticket. Also a new poll was published in the Washington Post asking "Who do you support as John McCain's running mate?" 453 republicans said:

Mike Huckabee 18%
Mitt Romney 15%
Condoleezza Rice 8%
Fred Thompson 4%
Ron Paul 2%
Rudy Giuliani 2%
Charlie Crist 2%
Joe Lieberman 2%
Colin Powell/John Edwards/Tim Pawlenty/Newt Gingrich/Bill Richardson 1% each
Cannot Name Anyone 31%

As Chris Cilliza (analyst of the poll) suggests, this does not necessarily represents a candidate's popularity or likability. This was used as a tool to determine name recognition and how familiar the electorate might be with an individual.

Mike Huckabee certainly benefits from being the last man to bow down to McCain, leading the poll here. He is certainly likable on both sides of the aisle but has shortcomings that could prove fatal to McCain's campaign.

In my opinion Governor Romney is the front-runner for VP and the job is his if he so desires. He has the charisma McCain lacks and is capable of carrying the conservative base of the party. He also possesses the economic expertise that is absent within the McCain camp. But these two men loathed each other for over a year and it will be difficult to relinquish any grudges. Romney has made it clear he has not given up on his presidential aspirations yet, but two losses (a primary run and as VP in the general) in the same year would certainly sabotage those expectations.

Condoleeza Rice has been a pioneer and crusader her entire life. She was the first woman to ever occupy the role of National Security Advisor and the first African-American woman to become Secretary of State. There is no question she is immensely qualified in terms of foreign experience, a pivotal platform in McCain's bid. With arguably the most daunting task facing McCain being winning over the conservative base of the GOP, Rice would certainly have to explain why she was a registered member of the Democrat Party until 1982, not a bright public relations move by McCain. She has also proven quite wobbly on abortion, a key issue to "values voters".

So what does all this mean? Exactly what the poll suggests possibly. The right man (or woman) for the job has yet to step into the spotlight. One thing is certain: Senator McCain needs to make a decision quickly so the GOP can have its house in order while there is still bedlam running rampant within the Democrat Party. McCain & Company would have a significant advantage in getting fund raising flowing at optimum levels as well as perfecting the message of the campaign.

The clock is ticking Senator McCain. But I would like to leave by advising everyone out there that regardless of how optimistic and uplifting the political climate might be for the GOP right now:

Never underestimate the unique ability the Republican Party possesses in blowing an election.

Thursday, April 3, 2008

How Quickly We Forget

Why has the Reverend Wright story disappeared so quickly from the liberal media? The rants made by this man should have people of all faiths and colors deeply offended and cause the electorate to be suspicious of Senator Obama's own beliefs.

However there are actually polls out in Pennsylvania showing Obama gaining considerable ground on Mrs. Clinton's lead. How is this no longer a story? Obama sat in that church for twenty years and listened to this man preach relentlessly about intolerance and hate. Are you telling me this rhetoric had no impact or effect on the Senator whatsoever? Even Mrs. Clinton remarked "I'd switch churches".

The antics of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are well-documented in the media and seem to be constantly finding air time. Years after Robertson's infamous remarks regarding homosexuality as a cause for 9/11, we still hear that sound byte. So why in an election year is the media turning the other cheek on this one? I still have not heard an acceptable excuse from Senator Obama as to why he did not get up and leave that church.

Tuesday evening members of the congregation held a vigil for the retired reverend, vowing to come to his defense. This story must not be allowed to fade from the front page. It is far too important to be overlooked; especially now as we are a mere seven months away from the election. The New York Times has plenty of space to print malicious stories regarding McCain's temper, but they do not consider Barack Obama having an abhorrent segregationist as a mentor to be newsworthy.

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Another Free Pass?

When an individual takes time to go out and campaign for a certain political candidate, message, ideology, etc. he or she is open to criticism from the public. This has always been the case and it gets particularly dirty as the campaigns draw closer to election day. So why is Chelsea Clinton consistently able to dodge the questions regarding her father's infidelity?

Candidates and their families are constantly vetted by the media and the electorate (unless of course you are Barack Obama), and the higher office being sought after the more thorough the investigations will be. This is not an unfair standard; presumably a candidate will rely upon the people he or she loves and trusts and will turn to them for guidance and support during trying times. It is reasonable for those closest to the candidate to answer tough questions.

Lynne Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Cheney, faced a barrage of attacks from both the Christian right and the liberals about her sexuality. She faced these questions head on, not shying away from the biased attacks being thrown at her. John McCain's daughter Meghan was forced to answer hardball questions when she admitted to agreeing with some of Obama's positions. Even Mayor Giuliani's wife Judith was put in the unfortunate position of trying to justify her husband leaving his wife in order to marry her.

When a member of a candidate's family goes on the campain trail, they have to accept the repercussions of advocating a particular position. They have to understand the opposition will now be coming after them as well, that's the nature of American politics. Chelsea Clinton is 28 years old and should provide answers to reasonable and valid questions, even those regarding her adulterous father. Can you imagine the firestorm that would have ensued if Mrs. Giuliani, Ms. McCain or Ms. Cheney dodged the rather personal and intimate questions posed by the media with a simple "no comment"?

The double-standard the liberal media continues to operate under never ceases to amaze me...

The Conservative Casanova Endorses Senator Obama for President of the United States