Bolson on…

Within hours of Saturday’s freak fatal breakdown of Eight Belles, the lone filly entered in this year’s 134th Kentucky Derby at Churchill Downs in Louisville and aired world-wide on NBC, the attention-loving, hypocritical airheads at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), wasted no time in attempting to grab a few headlines and tug on a few heart strings by faxing a list of hysterical “demands” to the offices of the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority (KHRA). Endlessly seeking media exposure, PETA sends out numerous press releases every week.

The despicable and self-appointed do-gooders and supposed animal-lovers, who are hell-bent on denying the world meat and dairy, and who also, in essence, oppose aquariums, circuses, hunting, fishing, fur, leather, medical research using animals–and even the use of seeing-eye dogs–attempted to inflame the Eight Belles situation and prey upon the emotional reactions of those who witnessed or were upset or traumatized by the unfortunate injuries sustained by the second-place-finishing Thoroughbred. In its letter, PETA accused the horse’s jockey, Gabriel Saez, of intentional cruelty, claiming the filly was “doubtlessly injured before the finish.” PETA also asked that Saez be suspended while Eight Belles’ death is investigated.

Saezwas riding Eight Belles when she broke both front ankles while galloping out a quarter of a mile past the wire. She was immediately and humanely euthanized on the racetrack.

PETA’s letter to the KHRA also sought a ban on whipping, limits on races and the age of racehorses, and a move to softer, artificial surfaces for all courses.

But while PETA and their packs of vocal and vacuous poster-waving, fax-forwarding, partisans would have you believe that horse racing is the most horrific happening since Hitler, the truth is the PETA organization is itself a house of horrors that trumps any tragedy ever associated with racing horses.

According to a Newsweek report appearing on Newsweek.com on April 28, the PETA organization has practiced euthanasia for years. In fact, according to Newsweek, since 1998, PETA has killed more than 17,000 animals, nearly 85 percent of all those it has rescued. PETA may want to change their name to PUTA: People for the Unethical Treatment of Animals.

Attorney Nathan Winograd, quoted in the Newsweekstory, summed up PETA’s hypocrisy best, saying, ”(PETA has) become (the) leading killers of cats and dogs, and the animal-loving public unwittingly foots the bill through taxes and donations.”

No wonder PETA is constantly attacking and harassing others. The best defense is a good offense–especially when the animal carcases are piling up at your own backdoor. So pardon me if I don’t dash off my membership dues to the PETA people anytime soon. Besides I don’t own nearly enough sandals, caftans, or pitchouli to be an official plackard-carrying PETA member, and more importantly, I prefer to think for myself.

I am not saying that horse racing is without fault when it comes to the sad and shocking and sickening situation that happened moments after the running of the “most exciting two minutes in sports.” In reality, for the horse racing industry, horses breaking down is a matter that should not be easily dismissed or deflected. It is absolutely a very complex issue and deserves immediate and exhaustive investigation. But another reality is that a mainstream audience isn’t interested in hearing that or waiting for the facts to unfold. The public-at-large demands answers now or demands that horse racing be no more. A silly and knee-jerk reaction that is not unexpected, but nevertheless dangerous to the many good, honest, and caring people and horse lovers who make their living in the industry.

But when a majestic, innocent, obliging animal like Eight Belles is euthanized in front of an audience of millions, set against the backdrop of a perceived subculture of aristocracy and gentry, the reaction is going to be one of swiftness and assured outrage–regardless of why it actually happened. For the price of fame, prestige, and widespread exposure, horse owners and the horse industry as a whole now wear a very large bullseye on their collective back.  

It may be days or weeks or even months before we know the full story of what really happened to Eight Belles–and we may never know with 100% certainty–but for now, we do know this: The only filly entered in this year’s Kentucky Derby on Saturday made a magnificent showing against 19 male competitors before an adoring audience of millions and then unexpectedly, inexplicably, unbelievably, fell down after crossing the finish line in second place and suffered condylarfractures of both front ankles and ultimately and sadly she could not be saved.

I have attended numerous horse races for over two decades and until Saturday had only seen a horse break down on the track one time in all of those years. And as of this posting, I am unaware of a single person coming forward to say that they have ever seen a similar occurrence on the racetrack as what happened to Eight Belles. Horses do not finish races, gallop out another half-mile while cooling down, and then, while slowing down, suddenly and mysteriously break both front legs. It just doesn’t happen like that, except that it did on Saturday. I was there. And I pray that it never ever happens again. The horses don’t deserve that. The horse racing industry doesn’t deserve that. No matter what the people at PETA say to the contrary.

So before PETA casts the first stone at the Thoroughbred racing industry, they should look inward and be outraged over their own hypocritical practice of killing thousands of animals each and every year. After all, just because PETA doesn’t euthanize their animals before a national viewing audience and instead prefers to do it quietly out of sight in a backroom lab somewhere in Virginia, it doesn’t make it any less real or troubling.

Photo copyright Associated Press (AP). All rights reserved.

The late film actor/comedian W.C. Fields is quoted as once saying, “Anyone who hates children and dogs can’t be all bad.” Clearly Fields never dabbled in politics. In politics we love children. Politicians kissing babies can be traced all the way back to the days of United States President Andrew Jackson. And including your children in your campaign commercials is standard fare for most candidates seeking office.

In an effort to push the Rev. Wright pastor disaster controversy out of the current political news cycle and public spotlight, the Obama camp has apparently reimplemented “Operation Obama Offspring.” Obama’s wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia (ages 6 and 9) were highly visible on the campaign trail in Indiana on Saturday. It was the first time Obama’s darling daughters had been with him on the stump since the Iowa caucuses. Apparently the Obama’s don’t own a dog or goldfish, otherwise we would have been treated to them as well. The soft-sell: Who can dislike a man who has cute kids?

With only 48 hours to go until Indiana voters head to the voting booth–and Obama and Clinton locked into a virtual “dead heat” in the Hoosier state–Obama is clearly manipulating his own children for political gain in his own version of a “kitchen sink” strategy. Depending upon how Tuesday’s election goes, we very well might see the Obama camp trot out Obama’s granny “Mama Sarah” and her pet chickens in the coming days as the fight grows even more intense. It’s either that or Obama is going to need to begin kissing not only babies but kittens in an effort to regain the “love” he had poured upon him by the adoring throngs of largely young white idealists, African-Americans, and the mainstream media only a few short weeks ago.

The problem is, the genie is out of the bottle now. The media as a whole is no longer swooning at the utterance of Obama’s every word and Obama isn’t exactly a shoe-in choice of working class America. So watch for more warm and fuzzy photo ops and definitely more Bush-bashing and linking of McCain to Bush as Obama attempts to get back on track and rise out of the muck and mire of the current Democrat presidential primary process. For that is what resonates best with Obama supporters.

In fact, the typical Obama supporter expects Obama to not only pull himself out of it but to also do the same for them. It would seem that many of them want Obama to follow Psalm 40:2 if elected president: “He lifted me out of the pit of despair, out of the mud and the mire. He set my feet on solid ground and steadied me as I walked along.”

Isn’t that what Obama has been promising everyone all along? That under an Obama administration the government will take care of everything?

And a little child shall lead them. Or maybe two of them if you’re on the campaign trail in Indiana this weekend.

 

 

 

Hopelessly hollow Howard Dean’s desperate distortion of Sen. John McCain’s statements continues. And why not? After all, a pig knows the mud he loves to roll in.

 

While appearing on FOX News Sunday earlier today, the failed one-time candidate for president and now head of the DNC, Dean was challenged by host Chris Wallace over Dean’s deliberate distortion of Sen. John McCain’s “USA in Iraq for one hundred years” comment, pointing out the blatant editing and omissions of McCain’s words by Dean and the DNC in recent statements and campaign commercials.

 

First Obama led the baseless bashing of McCain on the campaign trail but now he has apparently handed off the tactic and torch to head of his party. And Dean appears to be only too happy to hop right into the politically-made mud puddle.

 

As Wallace pointed out to Dean, Factcheck.org notes that what the DNC says is the exact opposite of what Sen. McCain originally said. Not surprising, Dean continued to wallow in the mud like a bloated but happy pig, attempting to justify the actions and twisting the truth beyond recognition. Does Dean really believe that voters can’t see through his thinly-veiled partisan political attack?

 

During the discussion Dean also displayed his party’s infantile and inherent attack strategy once again by accusing Republicans of “race baiting” by daring to discuss the Rev. Jeremiah Wright pastor disaster and perpetuated the Dim party’s ongoing and asinine assertion that FOX News is biased against the Democrats. (If so, why are the Democrats flocking to FOX in recent weeks like starving ants to a picnic?) Don’t look for Dean to appear on CNN anytime soon chastising that network for favoring the left.

 

Clearly, Dean’s appearance on the FOX News Channel is a sure sign of a growing concern over Obama’s near free-fall in the national polls since the Rev. Wright brush fire became a raging political inferno last weekend. Don’t be surprised to hear Dean and his demonic DNC minions attacking Sen. McCain and his record with reckless abandon in the coming days. The move to shift the focus from Obama to McCain is on and the gloves are coming off. Facts will not factor in and all civility will soon be out the window.

 

The bottom line is Obama now appears as weak as a presidential candidate more than anytime ever before during the race and Hillary Clinton is playing the situation like a Stradivarius violin. With Clinton gaining ground, Obama losing altitude like a doomed 767, The Daily Kos and Moveon.org angry at their preferred party, and the mentally dull Dean at the helm of the hopelessly adrift Democrat party, winning the White House has never seemed less likely than it does today.

 

But come the fall campaign, Sen. McCain must keep in mind the Neitzsche quotation, “that which does not kill you makes you stronger.” The Democrat party’s ultimate presidential candidate may emerge from this fascinating infighting as a formidable dragon that McCain will need a very large sword to slay.

 

 

 

Now Barack Obama is outraged.

And it only took him 20 years to get there. Talk about a learning curve.

After sitting in the Chicago church Sunday after Sunday after Sunday where senior pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright was preaching the gospel according to his own twisted thoughts, after being married by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to his wife Michelle, after having Rev. Jeremiah Wright baptize his two beautiful daughters, after admiring the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as his “spiritual mentor,” after disinviting the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to deliver the invocation at his February 10 presidential announcement, after weeks and months of dodging his relationship with the controversial and hate-filled Rev. Jeremiah Wright, after day after day after day of recently answering questions from the eventually interested mainstream media about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s divisive beliefs and inane claims about the government creating AIDs to eradicate the black man among other ridiculous and baseless assertions, now he’s outraged and saddened over the spectacle.

Now he believe’s that he may not know the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as well as he thought he did. Oh? And you want to be president with your keen judgment? Now he denounces the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Only after Wright went on his “Ego Across America” tour this past weekend, dancing and prancing and ranting and railing to anyone and everyone who would pay him any attention. Clearly Wright’s asinine antics were dragging Obama down faster than an anchor tethered to a teaspoon.

Now it’s enough? Now it’s disrespectful? Now he’s gone too far? To paraphrase the radical Reverend Wright, Obama’s chickens have come home to roost. Obama played the game of politics and he played it badly. By not doing the right thing and kicking the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his kooky commentary to the curb years ago, and by waiting until Wright went completely whacked out before a national audience again and again this past weekend, Obama is now forced to try and save the ship before his heretofore loyal followers break out the life rafts.

If you refuse to pour water on a small flame you run the risk of getting burned when the flame eventually roars out of control…

The Hillary Clinton camp has to be beside themselves with glee at these devolpments. Obama’s campaign oceanliner, once sailing the political seas full speed ahead, is now officially adrift at sea and taking on water fast. The last time this scenario played out the ship sank with titanic results.

Obama, thought politically naive by some, and believed to be completely unprepared to be president by others, is guilty of choosing to walk through the mindfield of trying not to upset his African-American base by condeming Wright when he should have, versus trying to gradually distance himself from Wright just enough to keep prospective white voters interested in voting for him. Not unexpected, Obama has stepped where he shouldn’t–and oh boy has he stepped in it.

Obama and his strategists clearly miscalculated how to play this card. Obama, in essence, created the monster that is now the Rev. Wright and now he is paying the price. Politics is not just a game Sen. Obama, it’s a bloodsport and you’re being bloodied-up by your own pastor. Talk about irony…

And this political Frankenstein isn’t being any better received by the townfolk than was the original Frankenstein. Unlike the original Frankenstein, the Rev. Wright has an ego as big as Texas and apparently loves the attention that is now shining upon him. He has arrived on the scene and he isn’t going away. He is simply going to hound you and your harm your campaign for months to come. He is now a controversial celebrity and he’s loving the lifestyle and the limelight. Move over Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, there’s a new media-darling in town.

If Michelle Obama thinks America is downright mean, what must she be thinking right now about her own pastor torpedoing her husband’s presidential hopes?

Will today’s damage-control condemnation by Sen. Obama stem the tide of turmoil before his campaign hopes crash upon the rocks? Only time will tell. Will the Rev. Jeremiah Wright go quietly into the night anytime soon? Don’t bet on it. Is John McCain laughing his ass off with each and every passing day the ubelievably unlucky Democrats implode their chances of taking back the White House? You betcha.

 

 

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign strategists must be sucking down cases of antacids in recent days as the shine continues to come off their once-thought “above reproach” candidate.

 

First, Obama’s now infamous San Francisco “guns and religion” comments cost him major and building momentum in the race, and most certainly cost him an undetermined but assumedly significant number of valuable votes in the Pennsylvania primary.

 

Then this week, Obama’s former pastor, the controversial and divisive Rev. Jeremiah Wright, announces that he will be making more public appearances than a Miss American-pageant winner in the coming days, including a planned appearance in Washington on Monday before the National Press Club. Wright’s reputation repair mini tour will assuredly garner much attention in the media and will no doubt have the Obama political advisors fuming. They are no doubt gritting their teeth and growling, “Go Away Wright!”

 

Each time Wright pops-up in a public forum this weekend under the harsh public spotlight and intense media scrutiny, the original Obama/Wright controversy takes another major step backwards towards it becoming a back-burner matter. One might conclude that, to Wright, his reputation in retirement is far more important than Obama’s quest for history and the White House.

 

But the irritating icing on the cake for the Obama supporters may be the next potentially damaging hole in the hull of the SS Hope. Hamas, the Palestinian Sunni Islamist militant organization and political party—best known for multiple suicide bombings and other attacks directed against civilians over the years and widely described as anti-Semitic—would like to see Barack Obama as the next president of the United States of America.

 

So should we strike up the band or draw up the next list of talking points designed to distance Obama from the continuing parade of political potholes? Hint: Don’t expect to see the band take the stage anytime soon.

 

Hamas is officially listed as a terrorist organization by Canada, Israel, Japan, and the United States. So when Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef said in a radio interview with WABC earlier this month that the terrorist group supports Obama’s foreign policy vision, the rival camps of Clinton and McCain must’ve been high-fiving around their respective “war room” conference tables upon hearing the news.

 

It’s hard to tell whether that faint ticking sound is coming from the Obama headquarters or from the handiwork of Hamas’ henchmen.

 

Not surprising, the Obama team spun immediately into damage control—a skill they seem to honing more and more with each passing day—downplaying Yousef’s statement and pointing out that Obama has denounced Hamas as a terrorist group that targets civilians. No matter, Hamas clearly sees something in Obama that they like.

 

The news of Hamas’ fondness for and “endorsement” of Obama for US president, will no doubt raise more than a few eyebrows among prospective voters and possible Obama’ campaign contributors in coming days.

 

“The enemy of my enemy may be my friend” in life, but what is the fallout in politics when the enemy of my country is my new BFF? Only time will tell.

 

One thing we do know, the McCain machine wasted no time in going on record about the unfortunate endorsement of Obama, saying that the reason for Hamas’ praise of Senator Obama’s foreign policy is his commitment to meet unconditionally with Iran — a nation whose president denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, funds terrorists, and sends weapons to Iraq to kill American soldiers.

 

Between the continuing and apparently never-ending Wright controversy and now the Hamas loves Obama revelation, the Obama team must surely be wondering what other albatross might be waiting around the corner during this wild and wacky political season that is, politics in America, as usual.

 

 

As the battle royal continues along the road to the White House, a little campaign humor is welcome relief from the constant bickering and blather.

One of the latest jokes making its way around the Internet is attributed to a supposed observation about the presidential race from an outsider from Denmark. I have taken the liberty of cleaning it up just a bit, substituting the word witch in the appropriate places. Enjoy! 

 

Photo courtesy of Associated Press (AP). Copyright Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Things we learned in tonight’s ABC Obama vs. Clinton Democratic presidential primary debate at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia:

According to moderator Charlie Gibson, tonight’s debate was “Round 15 in a 10-round event.”

Barack Obama apparently believes that the best defense is a good offense: He wasted no time in taking the offense on his recent “bitter” remarks about the people of Pennsylvania during his opening remarks.

 

Obama has been struck by the “core decency and generosity” of the people of Pennsylvania. (Editor’s note: No mention of whether or not any of those same folks are also clingy.)

 

Hillary Clinton wasted no time in plugging her web site, HillaryClinton.com and did so during her opening remarks.

 

After both candidates’ opening remarks, ABC wasted no time in making some money by going to a commercial break only 5 minutes into the debate.

 

The first commercial break included a spot for a fertilizer product…Befitting?

 

On the issue of choosing their opponent as their running mate, neither candidate jumped at the opportunity to talk about it. In fact, for the first time in memory, both candidates were momentarily speechless… But Obama is certain that the party will come together in August because they have “no choice.”

 

Barack Obama was the first to attack John McCain when he played the “John McCain is four more years of Bush” card only 9 minutes into the debate.

 

Hillary Clinton attacked the “failed Bush policies” only two minutes later.

 

Both candidates completely avoided the question of making the other their choice for VP.

 

Barack Obama will make more “mangled up” statements during the campaign.

 

Direct attacks using the name “Bush” during the evening’s debate: 5.

 

Hillary Clinton pointed out that she is the granddaughter of a Pennsylvania factory worker.

 

In Hillary’s viewpoint, people in Pennsylvania don’t cling.

 

Hillary Clinton believes that this is a caldron of a campaign. (Editor’s note: Interesting analogy from a woman who is regarded by some as being a witch.)

 

Barack Obama has large numbers of sportsmen and gun owners in his own state who have supported him. (Editor’s note: If one didn’t know better, one might assume Sen. Obama is now pandering to same people he potentially insulted only a few days earlier with his remarks in San Francisco.)

 

Barack Obama believes Hillary Clinton has beaten his “bitter” comments to death.

 

Barack Obama does not believe Hillary Clinton is an elitist.

 

Hillary Clinton believes that she has a 35-year record of “results.”

 

When speaking about the Reverend Wright controversy, Barack Obama’s words are chosen very carefully and delivered very slowly—almost like someone moving carefully through a mine field.

 

Hillary Clinton believes that you get to choose your pastor, but not your family.

 

Barack Obama’s life and campaign are about diversity.

 

Barack Obama has disowned his pastor…no, wait, he disowned the Reverend’s comments.

 

Hillary Clinton wants to overcome divisiveness and bitterness.

 

Hillary Clinton’s persistence on Barrack Obama’s relationship with Reverend Wright and Farrakhan was like watching a dog chewing on a bone. Subtle growling, teeth firmly chewing away at whatever the bone will yield, for as long as it takes…

 

Hillary Clinton believes that she may be a lot of things but she is not dumb. But she may need more sleep.

 

Barack Obama hasn’t commented on Hillary’s Bosnia comments…but his campaign has.

 

Barack Obama says that we have “income inequality.” (Editor’s note: Is that anything like economic class warfare?)

 

On wearing the American flag, Barack Obama wore it early in the campaign, later he didn’t, now he is wearing it once again after a veteran handed it to him. But he reveres the flag and this country.

 

Barack Obama once again pointed out that he was raised by a single Mom. (Editor’s note: In case anyone missed it the first few thousand times he mentioned it…)

 

On the subject of his relationship with admitted terrorist William Ayres, former member of the Weather Underground, Barack Obama explains it as he knows him, lives in the same neighborhood, served on a board with him, but doesn’t think it reflects on him personally because he was only 8-years old when the bombings in America happened.

 

Hillary Clinton wishes that the Republicans would just not run a candidate in this election and instead simply apologize for the past 8 years.

 

Barack Obama believes that he can take a punch—and that he has taken several so far from Hillary Clinton.

 

The second ABC commercial break came 46 minutes into the debate.

 

Hillary Clinton would order our troops home from Iraq within 60 days upon becoming president, even if her military advisors inform her that to do so would be a mistake, because she believes that’s the only way the Iraq government will accept responsibility for the current situation.

 

Barack Obama would set the mission as commander-in-chief and bring our troops home within 16 months. We will proceed deliberately and orderly out of Iraq and will not maintain a military presence there after our withdrawal.

 

Barack Obama is in favor of direct talks with Iran to keep nuclear weapons out of their hands and believes that we can offer them “carrots and sticks.”

 

Hillary Clinton would order a “massive retaliation” on Iran if they attacked Israel.

 

Low level diplomatic engagement with Iran, deterring other countries from acquiring nuclear weapons, and not permitting Iran to become a nuclear power is the answer to the Middle East region’s problem—in the eyes of Hillary Clinton.

 

No tax increases for anyone earning under $200,000 per year? Hillary Clinton is absolutely committed to it if she becomes president. Barack Obama feels the same and is even going to cut taxes for the middle class if he becomes president. Barack Obama’s ceiling for the middle class is somewhere between $200,000-$250,000.

 

Hillary Clinton’s second plug of her web site came at 9:06 pm ET, just slightly more than one hour after the first plug.

 

“Pain trickles up,” according to Barack Obama.

 

Even when Charlie Gibson presented historical facts that revenues actually go down when the upper class is taxed, neither Obama nor Clinton seemed to let that fact affect their plans to tax the upper class if elected.

 

Hillary Clinton believes that an economy that “lifts everyone up” is best for the country, even though she plans to tax the upper class. Apparently the upper class is not part of that same “everyone” in Hillary’s view.

 

The third ABC commercial break came just 12 minutes after the second break, at 9:18 pm ET.

 

Barack Obama believes that we need to “capture some revenue” to save the social security system. (Editor’s note: Sounds so much less painful than a “tax increase” doesn’t it?)

 

On the subject of guns, Charlie Gibson pointed out that both candidates were strong advocates against guns in the past but both have also seemingly softened that stance during the campaign. Why? Hillary Clinton countered the she respects the Second Amendment and the rights of lawful gun owners.

 

Barack Obama said that he has never favored an all-out ban on handguns but believes we can make sure illegal guns don’t end up in the hands of criminals.

 

Neither candidate answered the original question and instead danced around the issue until the subject changed.

 

Both candidates claimed during the debate that they would “bridge the divide.”

 

Hillary Clinton believes that Vice-President Dick Cheney is a “fourth special branch of government all by himself.”

 

On the topic of Affirmative Action, Barack Obama believes in it but also believes that his own two children should not benefit from it, but perhaps a poor young white child should.

 

Hillary Clinton is against the current “No Child Left Behind” program.

 

Hillary Clinton believes that we have a gap between incomes in this country. (Editor’s note: Barack Obama refers to that as “income inequality.”)

 

On the subject of rising gas prices, Hillary Clinton is going to investigate the prices for “market manipulation.” She also believes that when gas prices reach $4 per gallon, people won’t be able to drive to work.

 

Barack Obama is in favor of a windfall profits tax and wants to increase fuel efficiency standards for new automobiles and would spend $50 billion over 10 years to achieve the needed efficiency.

 

Barack Obama would be more likely to seek the consult of George Herbert Walker Bush, rather than George Walker Bush if elected president.

 

The fourth ABC commercial break came at 9:41 pm ET.

 

In her closing remarks, Hillary Clinton said that she “can’t do this alone” but noted that she is ready to be commander-in-chief, going to lead us out of Iraq, and then turn this economy around.

 

In his closing remarks, Barack Obama said that he believes that our planet is in peril, the people have lost trust in our government, and that people are tired of politics. (Editor’s note: Would someone please pass the anti-depressants? For someone who repeatedly talks about hope, Sen. Obama certainly paints a picture of doom, despair, and hopelessness…)

 

The debate was officially concluded at 9:51 pm ET, just in time for ABC to take a fifth commercial break.

 

The last few minutes before the end of the broadcast were used for a very brief moment of reflection, enabling ABC to take an amazing sixth and final commercial break—much to the ire of the debate’s on-site audience who could be heard moaning and groaning in the background, clearly annoyed by the repeated commercial interruptions.

 

So what did we learn overall in tonight’s debate? That you can spend about two hours talking but not really saying very much new or enlightening—and that ABC can stuff a lot of commercial breaks in-between the chatter to make the event even more excruciating.

 

In politics, as in horse racing, it is certainly foolish and almost always calamitous to pull up your horse when you have the lead and are in striking distance of the finish line.

In the 1957 Kentucky Derby, jockey Bill Shoemaker mistook the race’s finish line, pulled up his horse Gallant Man and consequently lost the biggest race of his life. Fast-forward fifty years and you have to wonder if Sen. Barack Obama is going to do the same thing in the Democrat primary race for president.

Apparently the Rev. Wright furor wasn’t enough controversy for Sen. Barack Obama. His crass comments, not intended for public consumption, made this past Sunday in San Francisco, have now come to light and as a result he has basically jumped out of the political frying pan and right into the fire that is the white hot public scrutiny of presidential politics.  

While talking about the loss of jobs in Pennsylvania over the past 25 years, Obama noted, “And 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.”

Never underestimate the capacity of the elitist Democratic leadership to screw up a golden opportunity to win back the White House.

To think that all of this time I thought that when Obama was giving all of his fainting-inducing campaign speeches he was reading a teleprompter. I didn’t realize instead that he was simply just looking down his nose at those below him.

In one passing glance, Obama has amazingly managed to offend a sizable and significant voting block in the state of Pennsylvania, mainly, steel workers, coal miners, auto workers, gun owners, church-goers, smalltown living (and loving) middle class blue collar Americans.

And someone needs to remind Obama that this is America. A country where we do not vilify others for their lot in life. No matter how distasteful it is to those of us from Chicago who make millions annually, have a Harvard education, and then seek the power rush of becoming the most powerful person on the face of the earth.

For a man who clearly cannot bowl, Obama’s rude and ridiculous remarks demonstrate he is certainly quite capable of knocking down some very key political pins afterall. Too bad many of them will be voting for or against him in just a couple of weeks from now. He claims to be a unifier, but he is certainly quick to offer viewpoints founded in isolation.

Obama’s statements demonstrate that he is obviously disconnected with the true blue working class of this country and that he is completely insensitive to their feelings. Harrisburg must appear to be a million miles away from Harvard in Obama’s eyes. It definitely is in his words and “wisdom.”

In Sen. Obama infinite wisdom, he apparently knows why the good people of Pennsylvania misbehave and react in certain and unseemly ways–at least in the minds of Obama and his fellow elitist colleagues. Conservative business suits and power ties meet blue jeans and ball caps.

But before we condemn Obama’s repugnant and ill-timed remarks we must instead pause for a moment to reflect upon the pain that Obama must certainly harbor for the grossly improper habits of so many of the inhabitants of the Keystone state.

If only I could become president so that I could create jobs for those ignorant redneck people in Pennsylvania so that they would give up their filthy guns and their primal religious beliefs and then they would stop hating all of our precious illegal immigrants… You were right Michelle, America is just downright mean!

Many more peeks into the soul of the real Barack Obama like this one and Obama will be destined to join the elitist Democrat version of Mt. Rushmore, right alongside John Kerry and Michael Dukakis.

 

 

It is time to add one more entry to the list of the biggest lies ever told, this one courtesy of Democrat National Committee chairman Howard “I have a Scream” Dean. The list heretofore:

The check is in the mail.
I’ll respect you in the morning.
I’m from your government, and I am here to help you.
It’s only a cold sore.
You get this one, I’ll pay next time.
My wife doesn’t understand me.
Trust me, I’ll take care of everything.
Of course I love you.
I promise I am getting a divorce soon.
Drinking? Why, no, Officer.
I never inhaled.
It’s not the money, it’s the principle of the thing.
I never watch television, except for PBS.
We can still be good friends.
She meant nothing to me.
Don’t worry, we can make it another 20 miles when the gauge says “empty.”
I gave at the office.
Don’t worry, he’s never bitten anyone.
Read my lips: no new taxes.
I’ve never done anything like this before.
Now, I’m going to tell you the truth.
It’s supposed to make that noise.
I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

…and the latest and greatest lie: Howard Dean maintaining that the Democratic Party is unlikely to invoke McCain’s age in the fall campaign.

As reported by ABCNews.go.com on Thursday, Dean stated, “I doubt we will bring it up in the election,” referring to the age issue. “There is somewhat of a higher ethical bar on what we do.”

Higher ethical bar? Did Dean actually utter that with a straight face and without busting out laughing? Does dim-chair Dean really believe that anyone anywhere actually believes that? If so, Dean must have either been drunk or delirious.

And to think I’ve been watching Comedy Central all these years to get the best laughs. Little did I know I just needed to keep up with Howard Dean’s stand-up comedy, thinly-veiled under the premise of political insight.

As the old saying goes, there are two things in life you can count on: Death and taxes. Now there’s a third thing: The Democrats absolutely, positively, without a doubt, without question, undeniably, without reservation, as sure as the sun comes up each day, will bring up McCain’s age during the fall fisticuffs.

Bet on it. Bank on it. Wait for it. Despite what inane statements Dean makes to the contrary in the meantime.

One of the more fascinating and recurring aspects of the current Democrat primary contest is when Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton occasionally stop sucker-punching each other long enough to instead punch wildly at Sen. McCain. It reminds me of a punch-drunk prize fighter punching wildly into thin air attempting to fend-off an opponent who is clearly currently out of range.

Obama and Clinton have both said repeatedly–and incorrectly–that Sen. McCain favors 100 more years of war in Iraq. (Punch. Punch. Miss… Miss…) In fact Sen. McCain never said he wanted another 100 years of war, he simply said that he felt American troops should be a long-term presence they way they are in Japan and South Korea. A fact of life for more than 50 years since the end of World War II.

In his own words, McCain has said that he would be fine with an indefinite U.S. troop presence in Iraq for 100 years or more “as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed” — he has not said that he would be fine with a continued war for that long.

So when Barack Obama cinches up his baggy boxing shorts and continues to flail away at McCain on the statement, deliberately distorting what McCain actually said, it is not only a clearly calcuated political maneuver, it is a lie and a direct reflection of Obama’s true character–or more over, lack thereof. To beat a dead cliche, is this really the “change we can believe in” should Obama dance and distort his way into the Oval Office in 2009? Let’s hope not.

As reported earlier this week by ABC News, there have been at least three times recently when Obama has twisted what McCain said to portray McCain as advocating war in Iraq for 100 years or more: As recently as the end of March in Lancaster, Penn., Obama is quoted as saying, “you know, John McCain wants to continue a war in Iraq perhaps as long as 100 years.”  At the Cleveland, Ohio, presidential debate, Obama said the U.S. is “bogged down in a war that John McCain now suggests might go on for another 100 years.” And then in Houston, Texas, on February 19, Obama said that McCain “says that he is willing to send our troops into another 100 years of war in Iraq.”

(Punch. Punch. Punch.)

As late as two days ago on NBC’s TODAY, Obama was asked by Meredith Vieira if he’s willing to admit that he has distorted McCain’s statements. Obama said: “No. That’s not accurate, Meredith. We can pull up the quotes on Youtube. What John McCain was saying was, that he was happy to have a potential long-term occupation in Iraq. Happy may be overstating it — he is willing to have a long-term occupation of Iraq, as long as 100 years, in fact he said 10,000 years, however long it took.”

(Punch.)

Keep swinging Sen. Obama, it’s certainly a pleasant breeze you’re creating. But not much more… In fact, it might even be backfiring on you. According to an Associated Press (AP)-Ipsos national poll released earlier today, Sen. McCain has erased Sen. Obama’s recent 10-point advantage in a head-to-head matchup, leaving him essentially tied with both Democratic candidates. Not exactly floating like a butterfly, stinging like a bee for Senators Obama nor Clinton.

It appears Obama’s political “Rope-a-dope” boxing strategy may be only roping himself and not his intended target, Sen. McCain.

But don’t expect either Democrat fighter’s corner to throw in the towel anytime soon. This one is going for a full fifteen rounds and then one of them will be left to try and register the “K.O.” on Senator McCain come November.

The way it stands now, I have got to believe that come Fall, the Vegas odds-makers will be giving Sen. McCain pretty good odds of walking away from the ring as the victor. Obama and Clinton are looking more and more like “amateur hour” and political lightweights hell-bent on losing.

The pattern persists. Ambiguity, vagueness, omissions, contradictions, lies, and deceit. When it comes to Bill and Hillary Clinton nothing is ever clear-cut, simple, unambiguous, or what it appears to be on the surface.

Case in point, as reported recently by The Washington Post, after earning more than $109 million over that past eight years, the Clintons took tax write-offs for $10.2 million in charitable contributions. Sounds almost commendable, doesn’t it? Until you dig a little deeper… In most of those years, the Post reports that that “charitable” money was actually donated to the Clinton Family Foundation.

Talk about charity beginning at home–or at least at the office.

The charity, based at the Clintons’ Chappaqua, N.Y., home has a familiar staff, mainly, Bill Clinton serving as its president, Hillary Clinton on duty as secretary and treasurer, and let’s not forget that dear daughter Chelsea also takes time from her busy schedule to fulfill the important duties as the charity’s director. But none of the Clinton clan reportedly takes a single penny of compensation.

The Washington Post also reports that between 2001 and 2006, the years for which Clinton tax records are now available for public perusal, the family poured nearly $6 million into their own foundation. Pardon me if I don’t nominate the Clintons for a “Good Citizen” award anytime soon.

It comes as no surprise to most Americans that habitual Hillary and her husband are millionaires many times over. But the good people of Pennsylvania may not exactly feel like kindred spirits to the Clintons come primary election day in a couple of weeks. After all, according to the Los Angeles Times, recent census data for Pennsylvania lists the median income as about $44,000. Less than what the Clintons claimed in “cleaning and maintenance” expenses on their homes. $44,000? One has to ask, what on earth are they cleaning with, Evian? Cristal…?

Also not surprising, the pace of the Clinton’s charitable giving picked up last year, the Times noted, when Hillary Clinton began her presidential run. In a summary of income and contributions expected for 2007, the Clintons are listed as making more than $3 million in charitable donations, double the charitable donations the Clintons made just one year earlier. (Did they really think no one would notice?)

You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to detect what’s actually going on here. The Clintons are once again hoping that American voters won’t bother to dig any deeper into the never-ending shallow sham the Clintons are experts at shoveling. For the Clintons, manipulating the public perception to distort the rank reality is job #1.

When you cast a light on a cockroach it scurries for the nearest darkness. When you shine light on the most famous couple from Arkansas, they peer into the light, look you square in the eye, bite their lip, and try to convince you that they love the resulting warmth.

Cockroaches have managed to survive for nearly 300 million years–outlasting dinosaurs by 150 million years. I don’t know that the Clintons will stick around that long, but for the Obama campaign, it certainly must seem that way.

 

 

 

“Make money your god and it will plague you like the devil.”

–Henry Fielding (1707-1754)

In politics, especially presidential politics, it’s money not votes that is god. If you have enough money, and are willing to spend it, you will assuredly end up with enough votes. Money makes the world go ’round—especially in the not-for-the-weak world of modern day politics.

In the current race to become the presidental nominee for the Democrat party, one candidate has the money and the momentum, while the other just seems to have the increasingly heavy money monkey on her back. No doubt about it, Hillary Clinton is currently being plagued by the devil and the devil is about to deal her the campaign “death card.”

She has the desire to continue. But she does not have the delegates nor the deep pockets of denero that it would take to actually execute a “come from behind” victory play. Game over. We’re now simply waiting for the final ticks of the clock to tick down on the Democrat scoreboard.

According to the Associated Press (AP), Senator Clinton began March with $11.5 million to spend in the primary compared to almost three times that amount, $30.5 million, for her opponent, Senator Obama. But the most eye-catching aspect of Clinton’s campaign checkbook is that she owed a whopping $8.7 million to several campaign vendors at the end of February. Not to mention the $5 million she lent her own campaign several weeks ago in order to stay afloat.

The reality is that if she were to drop out of the race tomorrow, she would either have to pay the nearly $9 million debt out of her own purse, or simply stiff everyone she owes. Caterers… Ad agencies… Hotels… and a long and growing list of other vulnerable vendors. 

Unless she is ready to completely drop out of politics, she can ill afford to do the latter–not if she still wants to run for re-election for the senate should her presidential dreams be dashed.

It wasn’t all that long ago that Hillary had suddenly “found her voice,” more recently she has basically been reduced to searching the couch cushions for loose change.

Politics as usual, in this case, is no more than a case of “Show me the money.” The longer Hillary Clinton remains in the race, the greater her chances are of reducing her debt. She can’t drop out because she can’t afford to drop out. Forget the “fighter” propoganda and all of the falderal, follow the money.

If you want to eliminate Hillary from the race, you have to help her effectively eliminate her list of campaign-related “I.O.U.’s.” One thing is for certain, for Barack Obama to find himself the “last man standing” in the Democrat primary any time soon, it is going to cost him—about $13.7 million by my estimate.

On the other hand, if Clinton remains in the race all the way to the Democrat convention, fussing and fighting tooth and nail, it could ultimately cost Obama the election come November.

It’s 3 a.m… again… Apparently it’s always 3 a.m. in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s fantasy world as president. At least if you watch her campaign’s just released “Hillary is ready on day one and especially in the middle of the night” spot, Part Deux.

The Clinton campaign has unveiled a follow-up 30-second television commercial to the previous controversial “Red Phone” ad that ran in Ohio and Texas. The voice-over begins, “It’s 3 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep…but there’s a phone ringing in the White House…” But while the first ad played on fears of a world crisis (a direct dig at Barack Obama’s perceived inexperience), the second ad focuses on a domestic financial fiasco…and attacks John McCain. An odd target when you think about it when she hasn’t even bothered to beat Barack Obama thus far.

An element of the spot’s audio is the somewhat torturous sound of a telephone ringing incessantly throughout the spot until Hillary answers and apparently saves the day. Ring… ring…. ring… Like a maddening moment from a Jerry Lewis Labor Day telethon phone room. After watching only a few seconds of the spot, one is tempted to scream, “Will someone please answer that damn phone?” And someone of course does—and that someone is Hillary Rodham Clinton–dressed exactly the same in both ads.

But is Hillary really ready to serve as our nation’s next leader? Fending off financial meltdowns and international emergencies and God knows what else? Apparently her campaign wants us to believe so. Is America really ready for a sleep-deprived, habitually lying, always dressed and ready—even at 3 a.m.—Hillary, to answer that rudely ringing telephone with such vim and vigor?

When on earth does this women sleep? When she does will she hang upside down from the ceiling of the Oval Office during the day? Is she nocturnal? She must be. She’s always up at 3 a.m. We certainly know that her husband apparently is comfortable operating at night. Perhaps that is why she is up, dressed, and ready for confrontation in the wee hours of the morning. Waiting for the roaming Gnome that is known as the former president to drift back from an evening’s escapades to his beloved Hillary who is on-duty at home base, A.K.A. 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Even more disturbing…does she own more than one outfit of clothing? If so, why is she wearing the same attire in both spots? Can’t she run down the hallway to Chelsea’s room and borrow a change of clothing? A T-shirt? A sweatshirt? Something? Or send one of her mindless minions over to the nearest Wal-Mart to fetch a fitting new set of duds? After all, she lived in Arkansas for a number of year, headquarters to Wal-Mart, she must have shopped there once or twice for something “pretty.”

Or is the fearful world in Hillary’s commercial just having one hell of an exceptionally bad evening and everything is coming unraveled at the same time—at 3 a.m.? If that’s the case, I don’t want to see just Hillary on that phone, I want to see the entire cabinet huddled around Hillary’s broad shoulders, offering expert advice and endless experience. If she can’t correctly remember whether or not she was shot at in Bosnia, how can she be trusted to remember all of the important details being given to her from the person on the other end of that phone line?

“Worldwide panic on line one, Mrs. Clinton.” “And don’t forget you’ve got an economic eruption on line two…” “Plus you still have that taxi driver waiting on line three who wants to know who is going to pay him for dropping Mr. Clinton off at the front gate a few minutes ago?”

It’s all enough to make you want to unplug that overworked telephone, shut off your brain, and instead watch a rerun of The West Wing. Which should be easy when we’re all wide-awake at 3 a.m. worrying about that damn ringing phone and wondering what’s going to happen when she hangs it up?

First he wasn’t in attendance and he didn’t know about Reverend Wright’s hate-filled sermons. Later, he was there for some of the sermons but not for the truly controversial sermons. Most recently, he says that he was there and he did hear what Reverend Wright said and that he wouldn’t have felt comfortable staying at that church if the Reverend Wright hadn’t retired…

Then a couple of days ago, Politico.com announced evidence that during Barack Obama’s first run for political office, Obama played a far greater role than his protective aides now acknowledge in crafting definitely liberal stands on “third rail” campaign topics such as gun control, the death penalty, and abortion — positions that clearly appear at odds with the more moderate (and for some, more palatable and politically advantageous) image Obama has perpetually projected during his current presidential campaign.

People’s Exhibit #1 according to Politico.com: An amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under Obama’s name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.

According to the potentially politically damaging story, late last year, in response to a previous Politico.com story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, Obama’s aides alleged that he “never saw or approved” the questionnaire. They asserted the responses were instead filled out by an Obama campaign aide who “unintentionally mischaracterize[d] his position.”

End of story? Hardly… A subsequent Politico.com examination has determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago nonprofit group that issued it, and found that Obama — the day after sitting for the interview — filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.
In the words of Betsy Ross, I think I see a pattern here… (And a disturbing one at that…)

The Obama camp has since sought to again dismiss the situation, offering the far-fetched explanation that while Obama’s handwriting appears on the document–along with Obama’s own handwritten edit on one question answer–Obama still did not actually read or complete the survey.

Pardon me? Are we really expected to swallow yet another heaping spoonful of systemic political posturing from a candidate who has obviously inherited John Kerry’s copy of “Flip-Flopping for Dummies”? The dancing about and dashing from the truth by Barack Obama in recent weeks is beginning to become dizzying.

Apparently Hillary Clinton isn’t the only Democrat candidate running for president who is suffering from false memory syndrome on the current campaign trail. A pathetic political predicament that speaks volumes towards the true character of the Democrat party’s most notable shining stars.

Why is it that politicans always seem to run for office by running away from reality and their record? At this point, it would appear these two are Olympic-quality track stars.

Democrats, like kittens, are apparently born with their eyes closed. On average, a newborn kitten’s eyes will open in 8 to 14 days. Based on recent observations, some Democrats clearly take far longer to open their eyes to the world—years longer.

In recents weeks and month, you didn’t have to be an Indian with your ear to the ground to detect the ever-increasing stampede of former Clinton supporters—Bill and Hillary—fleeing the Clinton dynasty camp with wide-eyed disillusionment.

“I used to like Bill, but no more.” “I can’t believe I actually liked them at one time.” “I’m a woman and a Democrat and a former Clinton supporter, but I won’t vote for her…” “I voted for him in the past but he has turned me off voting for her this election.”

So what has changed with the Clintons to cause such a air-sucking dash for the door among heretofore loyal supporters? Nothing actually. This is exactly the same politically calculating, cunning, and clever power-mad couple who once occupied the famous residence found at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for eight years during the ’90s—and now wants to move back in before enough voters come to their senses.

To my knowledge, space aliens have not somehow switched out evil-minded replicants for the real Clintons in an attempt to take over our planet. Nor has Bill or Hillary undergone any type of mind-altering shock therapy since this election campaign began. He is still the same ol’ “Slick Willie” and she remains the repugnantly resolute “Habitual Hillary”—and both retain their inherent political talent for doing or saying whatever it takes to win. Nothing new here.

But for some, what they see today, is not what they thought they saw B.O. (before Obama). Only now has a surprising segment of Democrat and Independent voters managed to shed their rose-colored glasses and begun to see the light. And they are a tad bit uneasy and dismayed and oddly becoming oh so eager to eradicate the Clintons from the political scene as soon as possible.

Apparently, with enlightenment, comes the ability to forget the lessons learned from the past and the desire to delve back into unbridled loyalty for the next smooth-talking, politically pandering politican to step onto the presidential primary stage.

Otherwise, one would ha