McCain has a chance in what was supposed to be the Dems' year
Posted 5/9/08
Can John McCain win? That's the question I get asked more than any these days.
As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continue to slug it out, damaging each other with each passing day, many wonder if the old man from Arizona can pull it off. This election year should be an absolute landslide for the Democrats. They will pick up seats in the US House of Representatives and they will pick up seats in the US Senate.
The GOP had it all between 2002 and 2006, and they were supposed to be small government conservatives that would get spending and earmarks under control, they were supposed to shrink the power of the Federal government and the Republicans in Washington should have moved to give more power to individual citizens and the local and state governments.
They failed on all counts and frankly they have no one but themselves to blame. The Republican Party is clueless at the moment and they seem to not know where to turn. Can someone like John McCain actually turn the party around? The short answer is no. But as dark as the future appears to be for Republicans, McCain is the only member of the party that has any chance of helping the GOP keep control of the White House in November.
He has often been dubbed a “maverick” for bucking the Republican party and many conservatives loathe him for his stances on immigration, his earlier stances on taxes and his assault on free speech from that ridiculous McCain-Feingold law that limits American citizens’ speech and what they can say for or against political candidates during election season.
But in an ironic twist, McCain is the last best hope for the party to have any kind of say in how things are run for the next four years.
Barack Obama says he wants to reach across party lines and bring the country together. The idea is absurd, as he has never even tried to work with Republicans on any issue. Obama is the classic liberal. He wants high taxes, more government and he favors appeasement over peace through strength. He is to the left of Hillary Clinton, and she is a borderline socialist who believes that government has the answers for all of the issues facing America no matter how big or small. She is a divisive and polarizing figure as well.
John McCain has a history of reaching out to Democrats, so he likely has the better argument for bi-partisnaship. He actually hates Washington and its spending habits, and is quite liberal on taxes and immigration while also holding some conservative beliefs, including the strong belief that this still is a country worth fighting for. He is an enigma in American politics of the 21st century. But can he win? It's too early to tell and it really depends on how nasty the race turns, if and when the Democrats choose a candidate. But he does have a shot in what could have been a landslide victory for the Democrats.
In short, he is the only Republican that even has a chance.
***
Barack Obama has finally denounced his spiritual mentor and father figure, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The America bashing preacher was having a blast last weekend trying to prove to America that he was right and all of us were wrong. He again reiterated all that he had said before. He detests America and all it stands for, he believes that we deserved 9/11 and believes in a host of other crackpot theories like the government introduced AIDS into the black community. He had said it all before and unless Obama sleeps through church he had heard it all before. Last week, he tried to say he was shocked that this was what Wright felt. He held a quick press conference to try and smooth things over with some typical political pandering.
"The person [Wright] I saw yesterday [last Monday at the National Press Club] was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church. Now, I've already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons. As I said, I had not heard them before. And I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church.”
He added, "But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century, when he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced. And that's what I'm doing very clearly and unequivocally here today."
Does he really expect anyone to believe this? Of course he knew exactly how Wright felt.
(Email CK at ckden@yahoo.com)
When it comes to his pastor, Obama still doesn't get it
Posted 5/2/08
I don't believe that anyone has had a worse week than Barack Obama.
The one time "magical man" that was all set to join the country together with his magnificent wisdom and brilliant set of standards that would "transcend race" is again caught in a trap that was set for him by his own inaction and the words of his spiritual mentor and father figure, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The former pastor of the church that Barack Obama and his entire family still attend was exposed on Monday. Again.
One month ago, I wrote that I believed that Barack Obama needed to make this problem go away, permanently. I thought his best approach was to distance himself not from the words of this pastor, but from the man himself. All it would have taken was three words, "I was wrong."
He refused to say that and he still doesn't get it. Wright went on a media blitz over the weekend with three separate high profile appearances starting with a PBS interview. Wright was in his element with that interview that was basically a forum for him to give a speech on how he was a victim. On his words from the pulpit being exposed on cable television countless times Wright complained, "I felt it was unfair. I felt it was unjust. I felt it was untrue. I felt that those who were doing that were doing it for some devious reasons."
For the record, all of the words that were pulled and played over and over were directly from Reverend Wright from the pulpit and they were made available for sale to the public though the church's website. ABC News and Fox News put out the money and bought the DVD of Wright's greatest hits and then exposed his beliefs that America is a racist country that is involved in terrorism. I'm not certain how that is unfair, in fact it seems that Wright profited from the deal. He said he sold it for profit.
So how did Obama respond? He appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. "Do you think that Reverend Wright is just the victim here?" Wallace asked Obama. He answered, "No. I think that people were legitimately offended by some of the comments that he had made in the past. The fact he's my former pastor I think makes it a legitimate political issue. So I understand that."
Obama then complained. "I think that it is also true that to run a snippet of 30-second sound bites, selecting out of a 30-year career, simplified and caricatured him and caricatured the church. And I think that was done in a fairly deliberate way, and that is unfortunate, because as I've said before, I have strongly denounced those comments that were the subject of so much attention. I wasn't in church when he made them."
What was really unfortunate, at least for Barack Obama, is the clear fact that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright loves the sound of his own voice and the media spotlight and he made a narcissistic appearance at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on Monday. We no longer need a 30-second loop, he was again exposed as an America-bashing bigot.
He refused to disavow his oft-repeated belief that the AIDS epidemic is a US government plot to exterminate African Americans. He stood by his blame-America-for-Sept. 11 stance, saying, "You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back to you." And he strongly refused to denounce Louis Farrakhan, saying, "Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains." None of this is good for Obama and Wright wouldn't stop.
“We cannot see how what we are doing is the same thing that Al Qaeda is doing under a different color flag, calling on the name of a different God to sanction and approve our murder,” Wright said in an April 13, 2003, sermon. "Remember it was soldiers of the 3rd Marine Regiment of Rome who had fun with Jesus who was mistreated as a prisoner of war, an enemy of the occupying army stationed in Jerusalem to insure the mopping up action of Operation Israeli Freedom.”
“I just want to emphasize that this is my former pastor," Obama said. "Any of the statements that he's made both to trigger this controversy and that he's made over the last several days are not statements that I've heard him make previously. They don't represent my views. And they don't represent what this campaign's about."
Asked if he was disappointed that Obama put distance between himself and Wright, Wright said: “He didn't distance himself. He had to distance himself, because he's a politician.”
Wright believes that Obama is lying to the American people to get elected. This is why the "nuanced" approach will not work for Barack Obama, and he still seems very confused on what to say and how to answer. He refuses to denounce Jeremiah Wright, and even though he says he disagrees with what he says, he seems to believe he must remain loyal to Wright.
That is really a tough sell to working class voters, both Democrat and Republican. And with Jeremiah Wright looking to cash in on the publicity and raise his profile, this will get far worse before it gets better.
(Email CK at ckden@yahoo.com)
Hey Al, please don't go away mad.
Just go away.
Posted 4/25/08
Tuesday was Earth Day, which is apparently when we are all supposed to believe that we should work our hearts out to save the Earth from the brutal harm that has now been placed upon this third rock from the Sun by humans.
And as it may be, at least according to all of the experts, it is not just any humans that are causing the harm to this big ball that spins on an axis and rotates around that giant fireball we call the sun, the people that are destroying it are Americans.
Oh don't worry, there are plenty of self-loathing American complainers at the ready to make certain the blame is placed on the United States.
I'm not one of those, of course, though I believe conservation of resources is a good thing, and I actually practice that without preaching. We have made several substantial improvements to the Casa Del Rairden compound in the last few years to make it very "green.” The latest venture is that now the acreage inside the heavily fortified compound houses a newly remodeled office just steps from the main home. That means my commute is only a few hundred feet as opposed to driving miles to work as some of my liberal self-loathing friends do, all the while explaining to me the importance of "going green.”
While I always appreciate their concern and the fact that they are more than willing to tell me how I should live my life, I'm already there. I don't drive a car to work and I don't ride a scooter or take the bus or even hop on any kind of a light rail service. Basically, I walk to work each and every day.
So my carbon footprint is small, but I certainly don't begrudge those that sit in their SUV's or their Hybrids burning fossil fuels each day while they commute back and forth to their job. In fact, other than the traffic jams they have to fight, I'm quite happy for them. I don't feel it is my place to tell them how to earn a living, or where they should work, or what type of a vehicle they should drive.
Of course, I don't have to lecture them, as we all have the collective conscience of Al Gore for that. The leader of the fear and loathing crowd is the loser of the 2000 US presidential election and he is still complaining that no one is listening.
In an interview this week with the UK Sun, he whined that little has changed since he put out his scare mongering film, "Earth in the Balance.”
Gore said recent polls had found that while people rate climate change as a "serious problem,” some ranked it lower than cleaning up dog poop.
Gore told the British paper, "I remember one poll where it came under dog litter. People are more likely to respond to problems that can be felt. . .terrorism, traffic jams, anything that activates the responses in an immediate way." He added, "We think, 'If it's never happened before maybe it won't ever happen in the future'. That's a rule that can work but the exceptions can kill you. And global warming is one of the exceptions."
Gore can't prove any of this of course, but the he finally gets down to what he really wants later in the interview. Control. He said he plans to lead a "grass roots" movement of ten million people to press for change in the US and calls America the world's worst offender in the crisis. And he says that until America acts, the rest of the world will not follow. Wait - doesn't the rest of the world hate us?
In Al Gore's mind only when America is under the control of the global warming fear mongers will countries such as China and India take action. Gore seemed baffled that we just don't care what he thinks and confessed, "I have to say the situation has not improved since I made the movie in 2006. Sure, awareness has grown and more people are concerned since scientists said we had just 10 years to take action to halt rising sea levels. But the situation has got worse. The entire North Polar ice cap is melting and could be gone in some areas in as little as five years."
This is where it all turns into blah, blah, blah. Al Gore is background noise to most Americans. He believes that people actually care what he has to say, but other than the elites in Hollywood, who gave him an Academy Award for his film, and those elitists that handed him the Nobel Peace Prize for his work to try to undermine American prosperity, few care what he has to say about how we live our day-to-day lives.
Cool the hot air, Al, and cool the planet. America seems to be saying to Al Gore, don't go away mad, just go away. Earth Day or not, that is a reason to celebrate.
(Email CK at ckden@yahoo.com)
Obama trashes small town America
Posted 4/18/08
Trashing small town America is a bitter pill to swallow. This was going to be a Barack Obama free week for "Off the Wall" as his missteps have been so many I feel like I am piling on. But the Democratic Presidential frontrunner delivers so much entertainment each week it may impossible to ever take a week off.
This just in, if you live in Platte City, Missouri, perhaps Weston, St. Joseph, Northeastern Kansas or even in Kansas City, you are a rube. Those aren't my words - those are straight from the mouth of Obama. In his eyes, many of you fools likely head off to some church most every Sunday clinging to the hope of God and just as many of you likely own a gun to protect your home and your family.
Like most small town rubes, you are nothing more than a sad lot of ignorance and of course bitterness. The real question for Middle America, small town America and pretty much everywhere with the exception of San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City and parts of Chicago, Illinois now becomes, "Are you stupid enough to vote for Barack Obama?" He believes you are. He's counting on it.
Obama was up in Northern California a couple of weeks ago, rubbing elbows and allowing the west coast elite to kiss up to him, when he was attending a fundraiser in San Francisco. He was trying to explain his troubles winning over the rubes of what the elites refer to as "Fly Over Country" especially those angry and bitter folks in small town Pennsylvania. He offered this quote: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
You always dream of people that are so arrogant as politicians they believe they can say stuff like this and get away with it, and with Barack Obama, we may have the most elitist snob in politics today. First, it should be noted that no matter how many times Obama tries to explain this and spin it, he meant exactly what he said.
In his elitist mind, rubes like you are fools. You are losing your jobs, times are tough and prices are high on everything from gas to bread to milk. In these times of trouble, instead of worshiping a government program, you seek comfort in your relationship with God. You fall back in knowing that the US Constitution has a First and Second Amendment (that's the God and guns part rube, try to keep up) and you believe that perhaps if America would secure its borders and invest in jobs that that Americans can do life could be just a bit better.
You rubes may work hard, play by the rules, pay your taxes and support things like the US Military, but you are fools. Barack believes every single word of what he said and while he was rubbing elbows with his snobbish elitist friends in San Francisco the truth slipped out to the rest of America. You see, this wasn't meant for the eyes and ears of everyone, this was said at a "private fundraiser.” It was said on Sunday, April 6 and it didn't make its way out for almost a week.
Obama speaks like this in private all of the time. The bad part about this time is that somebody actually heard him say it and reported on it. It wasn't the Associated Press or any other major news wire that caught the comment and ran with it. The speech was recorded by a citizen journalist. The event had been designated "closed press" by the campaign, but Mayhill Fowler, a 61-year-old Oakland woman who got an invitation, said she openly recorded the candidate's remarks. Her report first appeared on "The Huffington Post" a very liberal blog that is quite friendly to Barack Obama.
So why did they allow these comments to be printed? Simple, they didn't see them as a problem and all of these people believe this about you. They were clueless that there would be a firestorm this big, in their minds, and in his mind, he is just telling the truth. I know scads of these types in Hollywood and all around Los Angeles, they believe everything he said and they don't understand why any of you rubes would be offended. Fowler knew right away that this could be a disaster for Obama if it ever made its way out of the fundraiser. According to the Los Angeles Times, she said she thought the comment was condescending, even elitist.
"I was thinking to myself, 'Oh my God, he is confirming to my fellow Californians the worst stereotypes they have of small-town America.' I was just dismayed." She almost didn't use the comments as she is a supporter and has given almost $2,300 to the Barack Obama campaign. But after some consultation she felt that she had a story, and she accurately reported it. Kudos to her.
For her trouble, she has received some nasty threats from other Barack Obama supporters.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Obama will have to answer to a patriotism question
Posted 4/10/08
Is Barack Obama an American Patriot? He wants you to believe so and apparently his campaign is beginning to realize this might be a big question once he dispatches Hillary Clinton and is set to take on John McCain in November for the White House. If you have e-mail and friends that like to forward all sorts of chain like letters across the world wide web you have likely come across one that notes that Barack Obama did not place his hand over his heart during the singing of the National Anthem in Iowa when the Democrats were just kicking off their presidential campaign.
The e-mails states something like this, "He refused to not only put his hand on his heart during the pledge of allegiance, but refused to say the pledge...how in the hell can a man like this expect to be our next Commander-in-Chief?" So - is it true?
Sort of, though it was not the Pledge of Allegiance, it was the singing of the National Anthem. For some reason liberals have fought this and tried to say that the claim is not true, but there is a full color photograph that is not doctored in any way that shows it certainly is accurate that in this particular case, Obama did not follow protocol and place his hand over his heart during the playing of the National Anthem.
The photograph is in Time magazine and there is also a nice video that goes with it that has already been shown on ABC News and it shows Obama with his hands firmly clasped in front of him during the song. Meanwhile, Bill Richardson, the Democrat Governor of New Mexico that has since endorsed Obama and his rival Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) strike a traditional anthem pose beside him, holding their right hands over their hearts. So what? It's not really necessary to place your hand over your heart during the National Anthem, right?
Let's browse through the United States Code. Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171 clearly says, "During rendition of the National Anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart."
Easy enough and certainly most everyone knows this. Obama blew it on this one and even though it is now six months old, it will be used against him in commercials along and there will be questions raised about how much Barack Obama really loves the United States of America.
And though there is already crying from the American left, it seems that many will believe that those questions are fair. His wife Michelle Obama notes that she has never been proud of the country at all in her entire adult life, until her husband began running for president and even then, she only started getting a little American pride once he started winning the Democratic nomination. His mentor and pastor takes the Lord's name in vain from the pulpit asking for America to be damned in a church that Obama has attended for twenty years. So, what now for Barack?
On Monday the Associated Press ran what they dubbed a "news story" saying that despite all the doubts, Barack Obama is a true American patriot. The fluff piece began, "Barack Obama wants to make something clear: He loves America." "I love this country not because it's perfect but because we've always been able to move it closer to perfection," he told an audience in North Dakota recently.
Barack realizes he has a patriotism problem and he is stepping up the rhetoric to try and convince those that might have doubts of his dedication to country. There are some that will believe that it is utter nonsense to even suggest that Obama doesn't love America. Others will realize that even if many voters don't buy that line entirely, they will have doubts about his dedication.
As with his pastor problem, this will not hurt Barack until he begins to run against John McCain. But the 30-second spots that will air on television basically write themselves. In the era of "527 groups" similar to "The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" that beat up on John Kerry for months during the 2004 elections, there will be a few that start up and will challenge Obama and they will only have to splice together the video snippets to convince many voters to have doubts.
An ad may be like this. The first five seconds, play Barack Obama standing without his hand over his heart during the playing of the anthem, the second five seconds, play the Rev. Jeremiah Wright calling America the US of KKK and asking God to damn the country. The third five seconds, play Barack Obama defending Wright and saying he cannot disown him. The fourth five seconds, play Michelle Obama saying she has never ever been proud of the United States. The next five seconds, play the sound bite where Obama defends his wife. The final five seconds can tie it all up with a voice over showing the picture of Obama with his back to the American flag, the National Anthem playing in the background and his hands crossed at his waist.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Can the Democrats really blow this?
Will they?
Posted 4/2/08
Can the Democrats really blow this? Will they?
On the Democratic side of the aisle, the key to this long presidential process is not really delegates or even Super Delegates. It appears that the Democratic candidate will be judged on how big their lies are when they are exposed and how foolish they look when they tell them. Just last week Barack Obama finally confessed that he was lying about his church attendance and admitted that he did hear some "controversial" preaching from his personal mentor Reverend Jeremiah Wright.
As uneasy as that made some primary voters for the party, they elected to give him a pass. That was easily predictable as Wright will only be a problem for Obama if he makes it to the general election. But the big lie from last week came from Hillary Clinton.
She took a beating for making up a "war story" about sniper fire in Bosnia. It was classic Clinton speak. Basically, as a Clinton you just make stuff up and say it over and over and then it becomes true.
"I did not have sex with that woman; It's a vast right-wing conspiracy," etc. The trouble for Hillary Clinton is that YouTube and CBS spanked her with video, similar to how that darn DNA testing slapped her hubby Bill across the face.
She said when she arrived in Bosnia on March 25, 1996, "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
But news video footage of her arrival showed Clinton, then the first lady and looking quite a bit younger, calmly walking from the rear ramp of a U.S. Air Force plane with her daughter, Chelsea, then 16, at her side. Both Clintons held their heads up and there was no sniper fire, or any rush at all. The video showed Clinton spending several minutes talking with the group, including an 8-year-old Bosnian girl who presented her with a poem, and the video would also show she later greeted some U.S. troops.
The footage proving the lie was played over and over on television and of course online and she was lampooned everywhere, even by Democrats that once believed that she could save the party. She tried to dismiss it as nothing. "I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement," she said.
Democratic voters might have bought that Bill Clinton had bad aim, but they are not buying this line from Hillary. Her war story lie is bigger than the Obama preacher problem, at least for Democrats, and she is dropping like a stone in the polls.
The last Gallup Poll Daily tracking poll that was conducted March 28-30 and released on Monday finds Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton in "national Democratic preferences for the nomination, 51% to 43%." Hillary gets hit with the bigger lie. But as dominant as Democrats should be right now, it appears that they are not quite there yet.
In the same Gallup poll, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain is beating both Hillary and Barack, but by only two percentage points against Clinton 47% to 45%, and by just one point against Obama, 46% to 45%.
He holds a bigger lead in the "Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll" that was released on Monday as well and it showed McCain leading Barack Obama 47% to 42%. He leads Hillary Clinton 49% to 40% in that poll. What if this is the way it plays out? If the Democrats can't win now, will they ever win again?
(CK Rairden, a proud Platte County High School grad, can be reached via email to ckden@yahoo.com)
‘Grandma and my preacher are both bigots’
Posted 3/26/08
Just last week we learned that Barack Obama has been a member of a church for 20 years where his preacher was exposed as a bigot with his own recordings of his sermons that were available for sale on DVD.
ABC News and Fox News purchased the DVDs and played the remarks over and over on television, and the heat was turned on high. In an attempt to cool things off a bit, Obama said that he never really knew that his pastor was so hateful and had only learned of the statements when he began running for president and then he said he had never sat through any of those sermons.
But that was a lie. Damage control was in high order and Barack Obama would have to give a speech where he claimed that he was going to bring unity to America and set the record straight on his preacher and his beliefs and how he thinks America should act when it comes to race relations. With his back against the wall he revealed that yes, he had heard his preacher spew hate and bigotry from the pulpit on occasion for the last 20 years, but even with that confession he said he could never disown him.
His reason was odd and a bit cowardly as he claimed that his white grandmother is a racist as well. I wish I was kidding, but that was the excuse he gave.
In this speech that was supposed to bring an end all of the controversy, Barack tossed grandma under the bus and said that she had sometimes expressed fear of black men and uttered racial stereotypes. The idea from the speech appeared to be that white grandma and black preacher are one and the same, both bigots and both racists that Barack has had to put up with his whole adult life.
Obama was called on to distance himself from Jeremiah Wright, the preacher in question. But in his mind, and with is speech, his white granny gave him an out and now he can still pal around with the man that believes that whites in the US government injected AIDS into the black community.
"I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother," Barack would utter in his speech.
Right after the speech, which I billed last week as the upcoming "magical effort" that would change race relations for all time, some Obama supporters immediately took to the airwaves with their talking points in hand and immediately compared it to the "I Have a Dream" speech by the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
I guess if we are to believe the Obama supporters who praised the speech as being as impressive as King's historic speech that he delivered in August of 1963 from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, we will have to toss the legacy of Dr. King under the bus as well. I'm not sure I can honestly equate, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character," with 'Grandma and my preacher are both bigots.’
Obama made a clear error in the premise of his speech, as his plan appeared to be that he would lay his case out for the media and not the people. Unfortunately for Obama, that really doesn't work for the American voter. Many of the folks in Middle America who had once supported Obama quickly turned on him and wanted a confession.
Obama should have begun with three easy words, "I was wrong." This would have silenced his critics immediately and given him credibility. His words should have been along these lines, "I was wrong to continue to bring my wife and children to a church that preaches hatred."
He should have followed that with, "And I was wrong not to either confront Reverend Wright about his lies and distortions and demand that he retract them, and if he refused I should have moved on and found another church. I was wrong to stay."
Obama instead said he didn't believe in what Reverend Wright said, but if that is actually the truth that only means that he didn't have the leadership skills, or the backbone, to confront him. And it is now clear that he certainly didn't have the wisdom to pull his children from the church. As I mentioned last week, this misstep will be glossed over in the Democratic primaries, and will die down soon.
But if Obama is the nominee, his lack of leadership and his foolish defense of Reverend Wright will cost him votes from people that really do want change and would have liked to support him.
Three words could have saved Barack Obama, "I was wrong.”
(Communicate with CK Rairden, our conservative crusader,via email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Obama's pastor certainly doing him no favors
Posted 3/19/08
I understand Michelle Obama a lot better these days. In February of this year on the campaign trail the wife of Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential frontrunner said, "Hope is making a comeback and, let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country." She was mocked and people couldn't understand why an educated woman would make such an absurd statement. Now the answer is clear, it appears that for the last twenty years or so Michelle has sat in church on Sunday with her husband and presidential candidate Barack Obama and listened to a preacher named Jeremiah Wright.
Wright is not only his pastor but is Barack Obama's personal mentor, spiritual adviser and a father figure. He officiated at his wedding to Michelle and baptized his two daughters. The title of Barack's book, "The Audacity of Hope" was taken from one of Wright's sermons. In other words, they are extremely close and have been for twenty years. That is now a serious problem for the Obama campaign as tapes of his sermons have revealed that Wright spews a lot of hatred from his pulpit.
He hates America and calls on God to unleash damnation upon this country. Like Michelle, he has never been proud of this country and he preached that he was certain that a black man could never have the opportunity to be elected president, as long as "rich white folks" ruled. He's wrong as Obama has a decent shot at it, but Jeremiah Wright might be more of a prophet than a preacher as he might be the one man that makes sure that Obama is not elected. Wright preaches at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side and teaches what is called the "black liberationist theology.”
What does that mean? Here's a taste. Wright was speaking after the attacks on America that killed 3,000 people and told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism. "We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye."
"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he railed from the pulpit. That video has now been played numerous times on several news channels and on YouTube.
There's more. In another rant of a sermon he preached, "The government gives (African Americans) the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God Damn America, that's in the Bible." Who knew? He would later call the country "White America, and dub it the U.S. of KKKA." He also claims that America introduced AIDS into the black community.
In another sermon he said, "The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack." He would also add in another sermon that America is a terrorist nation and said, "We cannot see how what we are doing is the same thing al-Qaeda is doing under a different color flag..."
Jeremiah Wright hates America and believes that this country is a state sponsor of terror and he preached this for twenty years while Barack and Michelle were in the audience. The would be president and first lady also bring their children to that church and allow them to be exposed to this hatred as well. Or at least that is what common sense would tell you.
Barack Obama wants you to believe otherwise. He says he was never present when the anti-American rants and hatred against whites were preached. Some reporters and commentators have said that while they don't believe Barack Obama for one minute and that there is no way he could have missed every hate filled rant from the preacher they want to give him the "benefit of the doubt."
That makes no sense as reporters are supposed to be automatic skeptics and one would believe the questions would be asked when Barack attended the church. The question is historical and quite easy, "What did Barack know and when did he know it?" All reporters really need is the specific dates that he was there and they can cross-reference those with the sermons.
Many people that hadn't gone to church in years attended church on the Sunday after the attacks of September 11, 2001. If Barack wasn't at his own church, what church did he attend that Sunday? And did that church blame America for the attacks? And when Barack finally made it back to his own church, how did he react when he was told that the preacher had no sympathy for the families or the victims of the attacks? These are easy questions for reporters.
As my deadline hits, Obama is scheduled to deliver what has been billed as a "magical speech" that will fix all of this on Tuesday. He may be able to clean the mess up for now with Democrats but this will come back to haunt him if he wins the nomination and runs against Republican John McCain in November. It will be Swift Boat 2.0 starring Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Governors, call girls and the housing bubble
Posted 3/12/08
Just when you thought that all of the politicians that were perverts of late were Republicans, along comes New York Governor Eliot Spitzer.
The Democrat is in all kinds of hot water as he has allegedly been caught with his hand in what sounds like a very expensive cookie jar. He was allegedly using some sort of a call girl ring that operated all along the Eastern Seaboard and an affidavit claims that a person identified "Client Number 9" (That is allegedly Spitzer) shelled out all kinds of cash for call girls. It is alleged that he was specifically caught by a wiretap doing a deal where he shelled out about $4,600 for a few hours with a girl named 'Kristen'.
It's not exactly a wide stance in a bathroom in Minnesota but there are so many jokes out there about Spitzer now it is hard to keep up. But it is nice to see Spitzer step up and help a fellow governor out and make Governor Matt Blunt look good in comparison.
Jay Leno joked that now Hillary Clinton is only the second angriest wife in New York. News reports noted that Spitzer came into New York vowing cut down crime to its knees and one political spin was that he was doing it one call girl at a time.
It's late Monday night and he has yet to resign, but one can guess that is coming soon and it will probably be over by the time you read this. Spitzer's one claim to fame this political season before "Black Monday" was his plan to hand out driver's licenses to illegal aliens in the state of New York. When asked if she agreed with that plan in a presidential debate New York Senator Hillary Clinton first said she agreed with it and then tried to say that she didn't, all in the same breath.
It might have been the moment when her status as Democratic presidential frontrunner began to unravel. And guess what - now she says she doesn't want to comment on the Spitzer scandal, even though he is a friend and the governor of her adopted state. The Clinton luck right now all seems to be bad, and you just know Bubba and Hillary are thinking right now, couldn't this have been the governor of Illinois?
The Housing Bubble and Politics?
When I'm asked what affect the housing bubble will have on the elections this season I'm usually stumped. I'm not really certain why politicians believe that the ninety-five percent of the people that are paying their mortgages on time should bail out the five percent that can't pay their house payments.
Many of the people that are losing their homes should have never been given loans to buy those houses in the first place. Lots of them had poor credit histories or just flat or didn't make enough money to buy some of the homes they wanted. So instead of saving up, or perhaps renting for a while or buying a less expensive home, they went to lenders that would allow them to put no money down, pay only the interest and none of the principal on the home, or use adjustable rates so they could afford the monthly payment on their dream home.
Basically they were speculators who believed that the housing market would just continue to rise with no end in sight and they tried to use the equity in the home, or in some cases just a rising home appraisal, to refinance every few months when they needed more money or to try to make the house payment stay small enough that they could afford it and stay in the house.
So the house basically became their own personal bank. When they needed cash they would just refinance and pull more cash out, speculating that the value of the house would just continue to rise and they would eventually be able to get out from under the heavy debt by selling the house for a big profit.
To get into those homes, many tried all sorts of gimmicks and various loans that had balloon payments and adjustable rates and now that the rates are moving up and the balloon payments are coming due and there is no longer a way to refinance, they can't afford that monster house payment anymore. That's a risk when you speculate; you can actually lose money and in this case lose your house.
Now I am all for helping out those with a legitimate hardship keep their homes and would expect lenders to work with them. But those that have now lost in the get rich quick real estate speculation market doesn't really reach that bar for me.
Now I know Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are promising even more tricks for the small percentage of people that are in danger of losing their homes but the government has no place in an issue like this. If everyone just steps back, just like the stock market, the housing market will adjust and prices will again return to normal, as will loans and lending practices.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
For once, Angelina Jolie getting it right
Posted 3/5/08
I like Hollywood liberals, I really do. They serve a purpose, at least for people like me. They mostly have in common the seventh grade mentality that they really want to fit in. Oh and they would like everyone to like them as well. So if that means spouting the Al Gore line on global warming while tooling around the Los Angeles valley in a Hummer and living in a 10,000 square foot home, so be it. The hypocrisy is there, but they don't really see it, as they are far too busy "saving the world."
And that's okay, at least to a point, as many of them mean well, but they are just too dense and self-absorbed to understand they are being hypocritical and that they are mocked and lampooned for their collective ideas. If you take the time to notice, many of them want America to act in Darfur. There is an atrocious situation going on there of mass killings and genocide and all of the Hollywood types want something done but they don't really seem to understand that it would require military intervention and a lot of American blood being spilled.
Which seems quite odd as even though they are nice and comfy in their hillside homes and beachfront mansions, they are all still quite squeamish over Iraq and the struggles there. I'm sure you have noticed, most of them want out of Iraq yesterday. Many are backing Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama who has promised that he will get our American troops put of Iraq. That means a really rough life for those in Iraq, a big security problem here in the United States and yet another surrender and another pull out by politicians in the United States before the job is complete.
For the good guys in Iraq, it will be very ugly. Terrorists will own the country and begin to plan attacks on the United States and its allies. It would likely turn into a situation just like Afghanistan developed into during the 1990's. This isn't difficult to figure out, if we leave and pull out, there will be a vacuum and that vacuum will be filled with enemies of the United States.
Our enemies will be sitting on a lake of oil, they will have the run of the country and it appears that Obama and those of like mind say they are quite fine with snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. This was pointed out to Obama in yet another debate this weekend and he was asked what he will do once he "pulls out the troops" and allows the terrorists a stronghold in the country. Obama said during the debate with Hillary Clinton that once he withdrew U.S. troops from Iraq, if al Qaeda were to form a base there, "then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad."
That brought a big opening from Republican presidential nominee John McCain to take the leader of the cult of Obama to school. "I have some news," McCain said. "Al Qaeda is in Iraq. It's called Al Qaeda in Iraq. My friends, if we left, they wouldn't be establishing a base, they'd be taking a country and I'm not going to allow that to happen." Fair enough answer and dead on accurate.
Obama tried to hit back."I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq." I'm not certain if Obama even realized how foolish that sounds. McCain then noted that regardless of Barack's opinion on the invasion, the facts on the ground are very clear, Al Qaeda is in Iraq and will take over the country if Obama wins and pulls out American troops.
That brings me back to Hollywood. Lots of actors and actresses are swooning over the cult of Obama. They range from the airheads like Jolie's significant other Brad Pitt to the politically active actors that actually make sense at times like George Clooney. All believe that Obama is the answer and bailing on Iraq is good idea. However there is one lone voice in the crowd and frankly that voice took me by complete surprise.
Angelina Jolie, the same mess that once married Billy Bob Thornton and carried a vial of his blood around her neck, wrote an op-ed piece for the Washington Post. It appears that she won't be supporting the cult of Obama, she will support the people of Iraq, the refugees that need help there and she will be supporting American troops. With what she wrote, it's an easy argument to make that she is supporting John McCain for president, even though she doesn't say as much.
She traveled to Iraq recently and met with Gen. David Petraeus. She then wrote a well thought-out piece titled, "Staying to Help in Iraq." In part she wrote, "My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis."
She added, "What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made...As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible."
So it would seem all in Hollywood are not drinking from the well of the cult of Obama.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Sex scandals and dirty tricks hit both sides of the aisle
Posted 2/27/08
Now I remember why I love politics so much. Sex scandals and dirty tricks hit both sides of the aisle this weekend as we will get a look at what the presidential election will look like this election season.
Hillary Clinton sounded like a defeated woman in a debate last week versus Barack Obama. The Obama momentum seems unstoppable for Hillary right now and really all the young US senator from Illinois has to do is run out the clock and not make any serious mistakes. I always anticipated that the Clinton attack machine would strike hard against Barack Obama but I never dreamed it would take this long. On Monday morning the first of what is sure to be a string of attacks appeared in the form of a picture of Barack Obama. It was blamed on Hillary and it certainly seems accurate to pin this on someone in her camp as she must win at least one of the two states that go to the polls next week.
Unless she wins Ohio or Texas she has to be finished. Right? Certainly her supporters know this as over the weekend someone seems to have hatched a plan to start what really amounts to a whisper campaign against Obama. On Monday, in what many will decry and assail as a shameless move, it was being reported by Matt Drudge that the Hillary Clinton campaign is circulating a photo that shows Barack Obama in full traditional Somali elder dress. Is it supposed to suggest that Barack is a Muslim? That would appear to be the case.
Where do Barack Obama's loyalties lie? That's the implication of the leaked photo that many will say is a dirty trick. Team Obama struck quickly and had this out by mid morning on Monday, "On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party…"
Hillary's campaign answers back, "Enough. If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed." I'm surprised it took this long. The Clinton attack machine is legendary and has seemed stalled and wandering aimlessly. Now they may zero in on anything that can slow down Obama so they can hope he will trip up.
McCain and the Blonde Lobbyist
Who knew the first bimbo eruption would be from John McCain? The New York Times gossip mill churned out some blonde lobbyist named Vicki Iseman and linked her to John McCain and dropped all kinds of hints at a romantic affair between the two in a front page story that was promoted heavily on news shows and the Internet. Is this a sex scandal or a smear or somewhere in between? It seems like nothing more than a smear. The newspaper unloaded on McCain after their endorsement weeks ago and tossed the "scandal" out there for public consumption. The trouble was that he denies any romance, let alone sex, and she denies it as well and the paper couldn't come close to proving it and in fact they really had nothing at all except some flimsy innuendo. The story was so thin that they used unnamed sources and former disgruntled McCain staffers that refused to go on the record.
And for some reason the Times allowed that even though they should have demanded that someone go on the record about something. There is no national security at risk, so it would seem that those spreading the gossip could have surely attached their name. The gist of the story was that those that should remain nameless believed that McCain might have been getting too close to Iseman so they asked her to stay away. There was no proof, no DNA, no blue stained dress and really nothing other than very weak gossip. It was compared to the National Enquirer but that seems a bit unfair to the tabloid as certainly they would have put out a better story had they investigated it.
There are four bylines on the piece. Four! Can one of these highly paid scribes get someone on record with something of substance? The National Enquirer would have knocked this story out of the park if there was anything there. At least they are willing to do the leg work for scandals. Perhaps next time the New York Times might wish to contact someone at the tabloid to figure out how this is done.
The result of the story is now conservatives have an excuse to jump over and defend McCain against the evil New York Times. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham were earlier against McCain but now all jumped over and decried the story as vicious gossip designed to rip on the presumptive Republican nominee and toss a big time assist to Barack Obama.
(Email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Is plagiarism accusation desperation by Hillary?
Posted 2/20/08
How desperate is Hillary? The Hillary Clinton campaign has accused Barack Obama of plagiarism. The charges come right after a weekend where Bill Clinton was back on the campaign trail wagging his finger, screaming at hecklers and being accused of striking a man that was hassling Bubba during a speech. Are the Clintons getting ready to come unhinged or is this a legitimate charge?
Here's the scoop. Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is the man that Obama is accused of plagiarizing and the men are friends. The words Obama used in a recent speech are nearly identical and now Barack says he should have attributed them to the governor. Hillary Clinton has been slipping in recent polls and is being bested by Obama on the campaign trail and she has lost eight straight primary contests with Wisconsin and Hawaii voting on Tuesday.
So the former First Lady has decided to attack Obama as nothing more than a speechmaker that delivers only “words.”That led Barack to use this line: "Don't tell me words don't matter! 'I have a dream.' Just words. 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.' Just words! [Applause.] 'We have nothing to fear but fear itself.' Just words just speeches!"
That's a pretty good line but is almost word for word what Patrick said in a speech earlier. In a conference call on Monday with reporters, Obama campaign adviser David Plouffe attributed the issue about the similarities to Clinton's campaign "grasping at straws."He said Obama and Patrick are friends who "share thoughts on ideas and language." Is it a really big deal, and will it hurt Obama? Barack apparently ad-libbed the remark, which was not in his text.
The Massachusetts governor is an Obama backer and a pal and defended him and said in a statement: “Sen. Obama and I are longtime friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language.”
He added, “The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before. Given the recent attacks from Sen. Clinton, I applaud him [for] responding in just the way he did.”
Is this enough or will Barack to get away with it?
***
So I'm in Beverly Hills on Monday night rubbing elbows with my Hollywood friends after a weekend working the celebrity scene in Malibu for an upcoming project for “The National Ledger.” It was a California weekend business trip where I had the chance to get the pulse of the liberal elite while working my way through the Hollywood gossip mill. But a funny thing always happens; the conversation will turn from Lindsay Lohan to Britney Spears to John McCain, Hillary and Barack. Wait what? These Hollywood types want to know what I understand on the political scene and specifically they wonder what I think of John McCain. I usually answer with the question, well what do you think?
While many of my liberal friends are quite frightened of the US senator from Arizona, others claim they could live with him being president. That might give some liberals pause as McCain has vowed to stay the course and fight and win whatever wars necessary to keep America safe, but other Democrats actually like the guy. The anti-war crowd has all but lost their mojo for November 2008 as the economy takes a front seat.
As predicted, McCain has all but wrapped up the GOP nomination and is now desperately trying to get conservatives on board. I have no clue what the Rush Limbaughs of the world will do when it comes to McCain and certainly they all screamed very loudly that Johnny Mac must be stopped in the primaries.
But he wasn't and the “Straight Talk Express 2.0” is on and running. I was asked, “Can he win?” If he faces Hillary it certainly seems as if he has a very good shot. As weak as the Republican Party is at this point in history, it hasn't translated to McCain. He has bucked the party enough that he seems to come off very clean in the minds of many voters that are fed up with the GOP. Add to that the fact at least half the country despises Hillary Clinton.
If he faces Barack it would seem as if it would be more difficult, as the energy is amazing for the Illinois Senator. But a closer look shows that it might be very difficult for Obama in the South. In the latest Florida poll he trails McCain by 16 points in Florida. Sixteen points! That means we may be right back to the 2004 scenario of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Missouri being the key to the 2008 election. Get ready, the political commercials will be non-stop and certainly the Show-Me-State will be a heavy target.
(When he isn’t rubbing elbows in Hollywood, reach CK at ckden@yahoo.com)
Right wing talkers failed in efforts to aid Romney
Posted 2/13/08
Rush Limbaugh once wrote a pretty good book called "See I Told You So." Hopefully he read my column last week so he can have a good start on "(CK) Told You So Again.”
After the Super Tuesday results it was a really rough day for the talk radio crowd. It was likely even worse for those who gather around the radio and listen to Rush and fellow talker Laura Ingraham as they complained about John McCain. The right wing talkers staked everything on their power to move minds and they placed all of their eggs in the Mitt Romney basket. Now that basket is empty. As predicted (I think it is the first one I got right this entire election season) Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race for president.
This is a big hit for talk radio and certainly a big defeat for Limbaugh and Ingraham. Both took to the airwaves each day berating McCain and begging their listeners to reject the US Senator from Arizona. They also ripped former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. But on Super Tuesday no one listened. Huck and McCain have now outlasted Romney despite his huge war chest of personal funds. McCain will be the Republican nominee for president. The wringing of hands from many conservatives has already hit. Even Landmark columnist Brian Kubicki is joining Ann Coulter and claims that he will vote for Hillary over McCain.
Is this the end of conservatism and talk radio as we know it? Hardly. If Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are elected it won't be long until many listeners in the US are quickly tuning their radio dials to conservatives as the programs from the Democrats are proposed and fail. It will be a boom for talk radio. But for now, they must lick their wounds.
***
It's Hard Out There for a Pimp
Is Hillary Clinton pimping out her daughter Chelsea Clinton? Even if you think that, it is probably not a good idea to go on the air and say it on a nationally televised news show. That comment has the Clinton campaign in a tizzy and MSNBC host David Schuster is in some hot water for using the phrase. Basically he said that Chelsea Clinton is being "pimped out" by her parents to make calls recruiting super-delegates.
Earlier in the campaign, Hillary used Chelsea in events, I won't say she was pimping her out, in fact she would not allow her to speak. Hillary had 27-year old Chelsea so terrified of a mistake she refused to even answer a young nine-year old reporter's question in Iowa and refused to grant the kid even one statement. Still, the pint-sized reporter didn't say that Chelsea was a hooker.
The Clintons desperately have tried to control the media coverage of Hillary and Bill and of course they want that courtesy extended to Chelsea, especially when mom is being accused of pimping her out. But sex talk is always tough for the Clintons. Ten years ago, in January of 1998, the sexual misconduct of President Clinton was front and center after talk of presidential knee pads and DNA deposits. Clinton's initial reaction to the "Mother of All Bimbo Eruptions" was a bold faced lie when he said, "I did not have sex with that woman..." while wagging his finger and squinting his eyes in anger.
President Bubba used the Oval Office of the White House to play around with the help, which just happened to be a 25-year-old intern. Hillary again was outraged. Not at Bill for using the young woman (don't worry I won't dare say that Monica was pimped out) but at the "vast right-wing conspiracy" for pointing it out. But what about that 25-year old intern and the impact on her life and future? Her last name was turned into a verb that was far worse than "pimping.” But the defenders of young women (that would be Hillary, Bill and Chelsea) didn't seem to mind.
It's Hard Out There for a Pimp, Part II
Oh, and after the whole mess died down just a bit on Monday, our little innocent girl Chelsea was back out on the streets and just happened to have a date with 21-year-old junior in college named Jason Rae. Guess what he is? The student of Marquette University in Wisconsin is one of those aforementioned super-delegates that Hillary needs so desperately to win the nomination now that many Democratic voters have turned on her.
For those who don't know, actual voters don't choose the 842 unpledged super-delegates that comprise nearly 40 percent of the number of delegates needed to clinch the Democratic nomination.
They are the high and mighty of the Democratic Party and they don't have to listen to actual voters. Oh, and they are wooed by people like Chelsea Clinton. It's a very odd system that the Democrats have, basically presidential candidates can promise almost anything to these party insiders dubbed super-delegates in exchange for their votes.
Who knows what David Schuster was talking about when he suggested that Hillary was pimping out Chelsea. All she did on Monday was give Rae what ABC News called the "one-on-one treatment" as she worked the young man over to try and get him to vote for her mom.
(Our own CK Rairden knows pimpin ain't easy. Email him at ckden@yahoo.com)
McCain the only Republican left who has a shot at winning
Posted 2/6/08
Is the Republican Party dead? I like Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan a lot so I read with interest when she made a recent observation that she believed that George Bush has destroyed the Republican Party.
That might be the case as he certainly morphed into his dad in the last three years. His communication skills were never great, but ever since that victory in 2004, he has disappeared and refused to use his bully pulpit to communicate even on the simplest things. If he hasn't killed the party, he certainly has bludgeoned it over the head a few times and pushed it into a coma.
But for many, they believe the destruction is yet to come. Rush Limbaugh declared on the radio last week, "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys (John McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it!"
With Huckabee all but out of it Limbaugh has turned his wrath solely on McCain.He is apparently now using all three hours of his radio show to rip on the US Senator from Arizona saying he has stabbed the Republican party in the back on countless occasions and is just assailing him on air. On Monday's show, Limbaugh asserted that McCain has "lied about his reason for opposing the Bush tax cuts," and added: "I think McCain has an animus toward the Republican Party. I think ever since South Carolina 2000 he's had it in for the Republican Party, and one of his objectives is to destroy it and change it."
***
That brought on a scolding from the last Republican presidential candidate that lost in a general election and my favorite third person candidate Bob Dole. Bob Dole took the time to draft a letter to Rush Limbaugh and Bob Dole says, "I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain," Dole wrote. "McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the 'Hanoi Hilton.' I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost."
"Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support," Dole concludes. "Two terms for the Clintons are enough."
It is, of course, signed Bob Dole.
***
Blonde bomber Ann Coulter wanted in as well and said she would support Democrat Hillary Clinton over Republican John McCain in a potential general election match-up, if the race develops that way. In a typical Coulter moment, she even promised to campaign for the former First Lady. "She's more conservative than he is," Coulter said on Fox News.
"She lies less than John McCain. She's smarter than John McCain. "I will campaign for her if it's McCain," she said. Uh-huh.
***
So if McCain is the nominee, is the GOP really DOA? I know John McCain very wel,l having lived in Arizona for the last 15 years. He is a mess when it comes to illegal immigration. Like George W. Bush he has yet to meet an amnesty bill he doesn't like. He relishes in being a darling of the media, and like most senators, loves to make deals.
When he decided to co-author McCain-Feingold he basically told all that believe in the First Amendment to shove it and get over it as he believes that political speech by US citizens should be restricted. He has been on the wrong side of the Bush tax cuts, but now says he believes they should be extended. Certainly he is dangerous and unpredictable and on the wrong side of many issues.
But he represents where the party has to move if it expects to survive. There is no Ronald Reagan out there anymore. Mitt Romney missed his big opportunity early, absolutely failing to run as an anti-government conservative. A few weeks back he finally started railing against Washington, DC and claimed that he was the only candidate that could deliver as a Washington outsider. It may be too little too late.
***
It is Monday night as I pen this, and Super Tuesday is on deck. McCain will have a good day or a great day, while Romney will either survive or be tossed aside. It may not be the Republican party that many conservatives like, but the only way for the GOP to even have a voice for the next few years is to keep the White House.
John McCain is the only Republican left that has a shot at making that come true.
(Reach The Landmark’s conservative crusader via email to ckden@yahoo.com)
The Clintons have never been big on playing fair
Posted 1/30/08
Bill Clinton is having a really rough week. He's almost like the kid that was really cool in high school and goes away for a few years and comes back only to drool all over the girls that are about ten years too young for him to be hitting on in the first place.
Check that, he is exactly like that. His red-faced slobbering display all over South Carolina was an absolute embarrassment and he has pretty much eliminated the once traditional "former president acting as a statesman" after leaving office.
While he has a lot in common with his peanut farmer pal Jimmy Carter, but at least Jimmy can blame it on senility and his own bigotry. Bubba's flimsy excuse is that he is just looking for his third term in the White House and really doesn't care what he has to do to get it.
Due to his failed rants Hillary Clinton's campaign will try to shift former dress-staining prez from leech back into the "positive, supportive-spouse role" he played before her loss in Iowa and that absolute humiliation over the weekend in South Carolina where Barack Obama handily defeated Hillary in the first Southern state primary.
The lopsided Obama victory was a pretty good full frontal assault on the Clinton attack machine. But can anyone really shut up the finger-wagging Bubba? Clinton is desperate to get back into the White House and run things with Hillary at the point. They both seem willing to do anything to get the Democratic nomination including playing the race card at every turn against Barack Obama. Bill Clinton has even tried to downplay the embarrassment by trying to paint Obama as nothing more than Jesse Jackson and pointed out that "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in 84 and 88," seemingly continuing to highlight the race issue. I'm not sure Hillary can control him on the campaign trail anymore than she controlled him with Monica Lewinsky. We'll see if he behaves from here on out.
Is Hillary Clinton Trying to Steal Nomination?
Hillary Clinton has issued a call to retroactively seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida that were ousted for holding their primaries earlier than allowed.
She said last week, "I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention."
That's rather convenient as she ran unopposed in Michigan - because her opponents followed the rules and took their names off the ballot and she did not - and is expected to win Florida easily as well.
The Barack Obama campaign answered with this, "No one is more disappointed that Florida Democrats will have no role in selecting delegates for the nomination of the party's standard bearer than Senator Obama. When Senator Clinton was campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, she made it clear that states like Michigan and Florida that wouldn't produce any delegates, 'don't count for anything.' Now that Senator Clinton's worried about losing the first Southern primary, she's using Florida for her own political gain by trying to assign meaning to a contest that awards zero delegates and where no campaigning has occurred. Senator Clinton's own campaign has repeatedly said that this is a 'contest for delegates', and Florida is a contest that offers zero. Whether it is Barack Obama's record, her position on Social Security, or even the meaning of the Florida Primary, it seems like Hillary Clinton will do or say anything to win an election. When he is the nominee, Barack Obama will campaign vigorously in Florida and Michigan to put them in the Democratic column in 2008.”
This is pretty simple. After Florida moved its primary up to Tuesday in an attempt to play a bigger role in choosing the presidential nominees, the Democratic National Committee said it would refuse to seat the state's delegation at the national convention in late August. Michigan also violated party rules by moving its primary to Jan. 15, and party leaders voted to strip the state of its 156 delegates as punishment.
Everyone believed that was an appropriate punishment except Hillary once she started losing. Now she wants those delegates and she doesn't really care if she has to cheat her own party to get them. All that said, I still believe she will have a monster day on February 5 and it should be noted that Barack Obama is still a heavy underdog. Expect Hillary and Bill to win the nomination and run for his third term. She really doesn't need to cheat, but the Clintons have never really understood how to play fair.
(CK Rairden has gone the distance with another column. Email him at ckden@yahoo.com)
Hillary and Obama trade some lively punches
Posted 1/23/08
Good news, I finally got to watch an amusing debate. It wasn't with the Republicans, they are still producing snoozer after snoozer, it was the Democratic debate in South Carolina on Monday night where Hillary Clinton turned fire engine red and went after Barack Obama.
The exchange was heated and live and actually quite entertaining. Any time two Democratic candidates are trading punches about being on the board of Wal-Mart and representing a slumlord, it's bound to be compelling viewing.
Hillary was busy accusing Barack Obama of praising Ronald Reagan (which of course is taboo among the Democrats). Obama then had enough and went after Mrs. Clinton, "Hillary, we just had the tape. You just said that I complimented the Republican ideas. That is not true…What I said and I will provide you with a quote what I said was is that Ronald Reagan was a transformative political figure because he was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interests to form a majority to push through their agenda, an agenda that I objected to. Because while I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart."
That's a one-two double whammy for the liberals as even though they shop at the big box store they complain about and say that they hate Wal-Mart and even though they work and accept benefits from large companies the left will complain and say that they hate evil corporations. The crowd went nuts cheering for Obama. Hillary was furious.
Later she would punch back saying "I was fighting against (Republican) ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago."
I'm really not certain who won the exchange but one might want to note that according to their won testimony, the Democrats will either put up an evil corporate lawyer or an attorney that worked for some slumlord as their nominee for the US President. Surely that will appeal to the working class.
***
Say Goodnight to Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson
The Rudy Giuliani strategy of a big Florida win may be ready to unravel if polling is accurate. The New York mayor has basically placed all of his eggs in the Florida basket and a Super Tuesday boost but both seemed to have come apart at the seams. The latest polling from Scott Rasmussen has him in third place trailing both Mitt Romney and John McCain.
Many are questioning the thinking of the odd strategy of skipping all of the early contests as now all of the momentum has swung to McCain and Romney. Rudy has had horrific finishes in the early primaries and caucuses, even finishing behind Fred Thompson and Ron Paul in the early state races. The one-time "national frontrunner" may be within just a few weeks of being out of the race.
He is even losing in New York State to John McCain and unless there is a huge turnaround before February 5, he is out. He has already fallen to ten percent (10%) in the latest national poll which places him dead even with Fred Thompson and barely ahead Ron Paul. He's done.
Joining him soon will be Fred Thompson. He drew a line in the sand on the beaches in South Carolina and lost there to both John McCain and Mike Huckabee. Thompson never really seemed to want this thing and certainly doesn't have the energy it takes to run for Commander in Chief. Goodnight Rudy and Fred, we hardly knew you.
***
McCain/Huckabee 2008?
Mike Huckabee doesn't much like Mitt Romney and he may be ready to surrender his support to John McCain just to eliminate the former Massachusetts governor. The way it will work is Huckabee stays in the race for as long as possible and drag social conservative support away from Romney. Huckabee is certainly familiar with the dynamic as he was in the exact same position in South Carolina, where Thompson pulled away enough conservative votes to prevent a Huckabee victory over McCain.
The McCain support is mostly from moderates and conservatives that are willing to surrender and vote for McCain because they believe that he can beat Hillary Clinton pretty handily and have a very good chance against Barack Obama. Huckabee seems to realize that his moment in the sun has passed and would much rather see John McCain get the nomination than Mitt Romney. Could Huckabee be angling for the No. 2 spot on McCain's ticket, or a cabinet position in a McCain administration?
(CK Rairden has gone the distance with another column. Email him at ckden@yahoo.com)
Many pollsters, pundits
missed on Hillary’s comeback
Posted 1/16/08
The demise of Hillary Clinton was greatly exaggerated in this column and many others that were published by pundits world wide last week right before the actual votes were counted in New Hampshire. While I never trust polls to get the numbers exactly correct I was certain they couldn't be so far off that Hillary would actually beat Barack Obama in the first presidential primary in the country. I was wrong.
The amazing thing about the pollsters missing it so poorly is that even the Clinton internal polls had her getting beat by five to eight points. Even as I was up late covering the election and editing writers' work explaining the shocking Hillary win for "The National Ledger," several exit polls still had Obama defeating Clinton by five points are more.
So, what went wrong? Listen to this spin.
Several pollsters told the New Hampshire Sunday News last week that events on the ground and last-minute deciders changed the outcome. "We didn't have a polling problem," said Dick Bennett, president of American Research Group. "We ran out of time." When ARG stopped polling at 9 p.m. on the eve of the primary, Clinton's numbers, which had dropped after Obama won the Iowa caucus on Jan. 3, were heading back up, Bennett said. "We had a three-point shift in favor of her that day, and it was growing that night when we stopped."
Oh please, they blew it just like I did. Have the guts to say you were dead wrong and work a little harder to get it right next time. With spin like that the ARG pollster sounds more like a politician than a bean counter and it's easy to call that pollster "Tricky Dick" Bennett.
***
The Real Comeback Kid: John McCain
Hillary Clinton was rightly giddy after her big win and she was busy telling anyone that would listen that she was the comeback kid in New Hampshire. One month before the actual vote she had a fifteen to twenty point lead in the state and then held on to defeat Barack Obama by five points. Good spin, but few are buying it. Arizona Senator John McCain is the true comeback kid in presidential politics at this point in time. If you are looking at how far conservative pundits have fallen out of favor you need to look no farther than the McCain and Mike Huckabee jump, not in the polls, but in actual votes.
Mainstream media conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are pushing desperately to get Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson up in the polls and get them back in the race. They are desperately trying every tactic in their arsenal to boost these guys but they just can't seem to get it done. Fred Thompson showed some signs of life in a debate held in South Carolina that was hosted by Fox News last weekend, but as he spoke for around 30 minutes or so the best guess is he is now exhausted and will have to take a dozen or so naps before he finally drifts off into another Rip Van Winkle dreamland and drops out of the race.
Romney's campaign is likely the most disappointing to a whole lot of conservatives as he was considered the frontrunner for many months only to be crushed by Huckabee in Iowa and defeated handily by McCain in New Hampshire.
It was not a pretty picture and now he heads to Michigan where pollsters (remember those guys) say it is too close to call. The race is between Romney and McCain in that state and if Johnny Mac wins, he is the legitimate frontrunner for the GOP. Right now he is the true comeback kid. He was out of money and really out of hope just a few months ago and now he is the man that many in the GOP are looking at to save the White House for the Republican Party.
It's a very scary proposition. McCain is not a friend to many of the positions that conservatives hold dear. He blasted the Bush tax cuts and he authored the McCain-Feingold bill that is now law, which was one of the most brazen assaults on political speech in US history. He has lots of faults (way too many to list here) but the field is so weak for Republicans and completely void of any talent for conservatives that he is emerging as the one candidate that might be able to defeat Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
Conservatives who are holding their breath waiting for Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney to show life are turning bluer than a blue state and some have thrown up their hands and have decided that McCain is better than either one of the Democrats. I'm not certain they are correct, but unless there is a major shift soon, I fear we may find out if McCain can go the distance.
(CK Rairden has gone the distance with another column. Email him at ckden@yahoo.com)
Sing along to these hits as
you watch the candidates
Posted 1/9/08
Sing along, people.
Bill Clinton wanted us all to "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" in 1991. David Bowie sang about changes twenty years earlier in 1971 and Barack Obama has grabbed that them and has energized voters. "Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes…Time may change me - But I can't trace time…" Hillary Clinton is stuck in her very own time warp and in serious trouble and I'm not sure any song to bail her out, but she is certainly headed towards the fall of Ziggy Stardust. (Apologies for those reading that don't know Bowie.)
Hillary's new tune is a sad one. The sweet turned to sour in Iowa for Hillary Clinton. It wasn't pretty, she became angry and for a brief moment I could hear Elton John singing, "The Bitch is Back."
After the big Iowa wins by Obama and Mike Huckabee, every candidate was uttering the word “change” at every turn, and at every debate. Hillary was so far behind Barack that she went angry at the debates, turning into the shrew that many believed she would keep under wraps at least until she won the primary. It would have been sad if it weren't Hillary. She has lost the rhythm and her anointment to the White House is in serious trouble.
At one point she uttered a string of sentences so bizarre at the debate on ABC I have to quote her. "I want to make change, but I've already made change. I'm not running on a promise of change. But on 35 years of change…"
Thirty-five years of change? I'm thinking that would have meant that she would have come full circle several times and would be a rock-ribbed Republican right now, screaming for tax cuts and a strong national defense.
Big Girls Don't Cry
Someone cue Frankie Valli. It got so bad on Monday she dug into Bill Clinton's old bag of tricks and tried some tears to get some sympathy to try to stop the Obama landslide that is just about ready to crush her campaign.
The New York senator was taking questions in New Hampshire when she choked up responding to one woman's question about how she stays "upbeat and so wonderful?”
"It's not easy, and I couldn't do it if I didn't passionately believe it was the right thing to do," said Clinton, getting visibly emotional. "You know, I have so many opportunities from this country I just don't want to see us fall backwards." She continued, "You know, this is very personal for me. It's not just political, it's not just public. I see what's happening, and we have to reverse it," she added, with her voice breaking and eyes growing teary.
The trouble is that Hillary is just not charming. Immediately she was made fun of and lampooned and absolutely no one that is not on her side already felt sorry for her. And the number of people on her side is dwindling fast. Barack Obama is red hot, he is drawing huge crowds and right now he is the closest thing to a rock star politician America has witnessed since Robert Kennedy. I was certain that the Clinton attack machine could stop him, I'm not even close to certain now.
Running on Empty
Cue Jackson Brown. "Running on - running on empty. Running on - running blind - running into the sun - But I'm running behind."
I can't think of any better song to describe the GOP candidates at this state of the presidential race. They seem out of gas and are sputtering. They put forth a collective image that is absolutely clueless as to what the American voter is concerned about and aside from Mike Huckabee there is zero optimism.
Mitt Romney is programmed beyond belief and as uninspiring as any "front-runner" since Bob Dole. Rudy Giuliani is sitting out the early primaries so he is pretty much useless until Feb. 5. John McCain still doesn't understand that Americans are fed up with illegal immigration.
Fred Thompson is, well, is he even awake? Ron Paul is your typical Libertarian and has no shot at inspiring anyone besides the five percent that have crawled out of the darkest corners of the Internet and are backing him in online polls and with their parents' credit cards and cash. Mike Huckabee gets it, but his record will frighten many conservatives beyond belief. But one thing about Huck, at least he is preaching optimism and hope.
All of these candidates constantly mention Ronald Reagan, but they must have forgotten that it was the Gipper's "Shining City on a Hill" that inspired two landslide victories.
Change is in the air, and it will be hope and optimism that moves this electorate. Can any of these folks from the GOP match Obama? They had better get busy.
(Get busy every week with CK Rairden’s commentary. Reach him via email to ckden@yahoo.com)
Beating up on Ron Paul can
do a campaign some good
Posted 1/3/08
Hillary Clinton is clamming up. The former First Lady is refusing to answer questions from reporters and now during the last week before the Iowa Caucuses she won't even talk to the people in Iowa. She's been slammed for planting questions in crowds in Iowa and now that she has been caught it appears that she will just skip questions altogether. Is this a good strategy? It might be. Hillary has been doing more harm than good of late by opening her mouth.
The Los Angeles Times reports that before the brief Christmas break, the New York senator had been setting aside time after campaign speeches to hear from the audience. Now when she's done speaking, her theme songs blare from loudspeakers, preventing any kind of public Q&A. She was no more inviting when a television reporter approached her after a rally on Thursday and asked if she was “moved'' by Benazir Bhutto's assassination. Clinton turned away without answering.
Chelsea Zips Up as Well
Proving she is more like her mother than her father, Chelsea Clinton has zipped up as well, and without a trace of DNA. The Associated Press reported on Sunday that Sydney Rieckhoff, a Cedar Rapids fourth grader and "kid reporter" for Scholastic News, has posed questions to seven Republican and Democratic presidential hopefuls as they've campaigned across Iowa this year. But when she approached the 27-year-old Chelsea after a campaign event Sunday, she got a different response.
"Do you think your dad would be a good 'first man' in the White House?" Sydney asked, but Chelsea brushed her question aside. "I'm sorry, I don't talk to the press and that applies to you, unfortunately. Even though I think you're cute," Chelsea told the pint-sized journalist.
Hillary and Chelsea's new Iowa motto: Don't be like Monica. keep your mouth shut.
John Edwards Cashes in on the Mutes
In response, John Edwards launched "Ask John," a new program in which Iowa voters can call or email the campaign and receive a response auspiciously from the candidate. Elizabeth Edwards and top campaign aides will also answer questions Iowa voters have.
Edwards is the only Democratic candidate to have visited, and, says his campaign, answered questions in, all of Iowa's 99 counties. His current bus tour will hit 38 counties. The campaign promises to answer each questioner, in some form or another, by caucus night.
Iowa Gets its Moment in the Sun
On Thursday the Midwest state of Iowa kicks off the 2008 US election battle. With the field wide open, the candidates are desperate to make an early impact. People really love joking about Iowa. Many believe that as an acronym Iowa stands for "Idiots Out Wandering Around." Others claim it stands for "I Owe the World an Apology." We'll see how much of an apology after Thursday. Right now, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney have very slim leads if you combine the dozens of polls that have been released. On the GOP side, Mike Huckabee has a shot to win, but his polling dominance has ended almost as quickly as it began and the star seems to be off of him a bit as the debates have ended and that is where he shines.
Still it seems like a two person race for the GOP with Huck and Mitt Romney. Romney desperately needs a win or his campaign may come apart. He won't pull a "Howard Dean Scream" but he may want to if he is upset by Huck.
Hillary is desperate as well. She was certain she had buried Barack Obama early, but he just won't go way. Add to that, even people who support Hillary don't seem to really like her. John Edwards is hanging around as well and Hillary certainly could take a win by Edwards, but she is in a dogfight if Obama pulls off the upset.
John McCain: The New Comeback Kid
John McCain turned his campaign around sometime in late November. I was convinced that the Arizona Senator was over and done and would fade away but he has bounced back. It all appears to have happened during a debate in late November when he challenged Ron Paul. Paul is the one Republican that is running against the war in Iraq and even recently said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that he believed that Abraham Lincoln was wrong for fighting the Civil War to free the slaves. He calls himself a "non-interventionist" and I guess if one weren't willing to go to war to end slavery that would be the case. McCain blasted him in late November.
McCain swung for the fence and connected big at the YouTube debate. "Congressman Paul, I've heard him now in many debates talking about bringing our troops home, and about the war in Iraq, and how it's failed. And I want to tell you that that kind of isolationism, sir, is what caused World War II...You allow Hitler to come to power with that kind of attitude of isolationism...”
Paul tried to answer with a long-winded explanation about the differences between "isolationism" and "non-intervention" but he was booed and again was used as a whipping boy.
McCain came out of the debate with a bit of momentum and he has surged ever since. He has no shot in Iowa but he is surging in New Hampshire and if he wins there he may turn his dormant campaign around. He joked with reporters on Friday, "I've been declared dead in this campaign on five or six occasions. I won't refer to a recent movie I saw, but I think I am legend," he told reporters, referring to the film in which Will Smith stars as the last man on Earth.
McCain is closing on Mitt Romney in recent New Hampshire polls. "Somehow we've had a Lazarus-like experience," McCain told supporters at his campaign headquarters. "I think it's because I've been telling the truth. I've been telling people the truth whether I thought that's what they wanted or not.”
If he actually continues he may win and he may need to thank Ron Paul for an assist. It appears that beating up on Paul can do a campaign good.
(CK Rairden’s analysis of the national scene appears only in your Landmark. Email him at ckden@yahoo.com)
For columns from 2007.
