The Washington Post admits 3-to-1 Obama press coverage bias.

 

 

 

 

Deborah Powell, ombudsman for The Washington Post, admitted the newspaper’s news coverage bias in favor of Barack Obama over John McCain by a factor of 3-to-1 in a story appearing online on the Post’s Web site on Sunday. It is not so much news to anyone who has been paying attention, it is however refreshing that Ms. Powell was allowed to post such information and is apparently still alive and well as of this posting.

Powell describes in great detail how the newspaper blatantly focused on Obama time and time again in recent months. There is some defense of the actions by WP staffers but it is largely laughable and borderline insulting to readers of the newspaper who didn’t have to be told this information nor be spoon fed a milquetoast justification. The bias was as evident as a bull in a matchbox.

The article’s headline however is blatantly misleading: Obama’s edge in the coverage race. 3-to-1 is not an edge, it’s a clear and calculated effort in my opinion. But I doubt The Washington Post plans to “even up” the score anytime soon by giving Sen. McCain a 3-to-1 “edge” in coverage in the final 80+ days leading up to election day. Such things simply don’t happen–and shouldn’t–but again, they did, just ask Ms. Powell.

I wholeheartedly agree with Ms. Powell’s closing statement from the article: “Numbers aren’t everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates.”

Truer words have never been spoken. Readers do deserve better, not only from the Washington Post but from the mainstream media in general, but only time will tell if The Washington Post decides to deliver on that any time soon. Don’t count on it. Overcoming denial is the first step however.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081503100.html?sub=AR

More Obama flip-flops…available at retail.

 

 

 

 

I recently made mention of a Web site selling Obama flip-flop sandals. Turns out they are not the only folks to try and take advantage of Obama’s growing reputation as a flip-flopper. In fact, this particular site is apparently an equal opportunity retailer. They also offer a pair of similar McCain flip-flops for the same price, $30.

To order a pair of either, or for more information, visit http://www.flopyourvote.com. You are certain to be the talk of your next political gathering no matter which pair you choose.

The speculation is nearly over… Obama to announce VP choice within next 36 hours.

 

 

 

 

Barack Obama will announce his choice for VP perhaps as early as tomorrow morning (most likely) but no later than Wednesday morning. Bank on it. A conclusion I came to over the past weekend after giving the situation some serious thought. In politics, as in much of life, timing is everything.

As a long-time political observer I base this suspected announcement on news cycle timing and political strategizing, not on any “insider information.” In order for Obama’s camp to get the greatest news media coverage and “water cooler” discussion, the Tuesday-Wednesday window provides an ideal window of exposure opportunity.

It’s simple when you think about it… News reports of Michael Phelps’ magnificent Olympic performance are beginning to fade out, the Olympics are winding down and overall interest is dissipating. The Russia-Georgia situation is no longer front page news for most Americans (if it ever really was). Factor in the Democratic Party convention begins next week and you arrive at the next 36 hours as being the best projected time to deliver the decision and thus dominate the news cycle well until Friday when most people stop following the news for weekend activities.

You can almost hear MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and fellow-blatantly-biased boob Keith Olbermann salivating in anticipation. Andrea Mitchell is certainly inhaling oxygen at this very moment in an attempt to try and remain conscious. I hope she doesn’t pass out upon learning Obama’s choice of VP and render herself unable to gush ad nauseam about Obama’s perfect pick on all of her NBC “I love Obama” news reports.

I will not speculate on Obama’s ultimate choice and will certainly not be surprised at the “winner” of the Veep Stakes. What was once probably 20-30 names has most certainly been reduced to four or five in recent weeks. Obama’s decision was probably made for him late last week. (It takes time to prepare all of those placards and prepared talking points for Obama’s minions–and of course the NBC, MSNBC, and New York Times’ staffs.)

Suffice it to say that the choice will be strategic, calculated, and crafted to hopefully help Obama flip a key swing state come election day. Whoever it is will be the new media-darling of the mainstream media for the next few days and will at the same time probably feel like they’ve had a full body enema from the scrutiny and examination they will undergo from the bloggers, Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and the few remaining non-partisan news people not under the Obama spell at this point.

The choice will be Obama’s first big decision and best indicator thus far for how he might govern if elected president in November. With all of his recent flip-flopping in recent months,  if I were his first choice, I would be scared to death that he might change his mind a little further down the road. You better get Obama’s decision in writing, signed, sealed, and delivered–and even that might not be enough if Obama continues to “evolve” as a candidate.

You can expect Sen. McCain’s choice to be announced promptly upon conclusion of the Democratic National Convention. Perfectly timed to step on any prospective “bounce” that Obama might enjoy coming out of a week’s worth of praise, political primping, and moments made specifically for TV and an adoring news media…leading right up to the Republican National Convention.

That’s why politics is, has been, and will always be the best blood-sport there is!

On foreign affairs and a host of other hot topics, Hollywood knows best for Barack Obama.

 

 

 

 

“Mr. President, George Clooney on Line 2… He has some thoughts and strategy for you on that escalating situation in the Middle East…”

That could be the scenario that plays out again and again if Barack Obama is elected president of the United States 84 days from now. Call it Hollywood helps their new best friend. The Daily Mail online is reporting that Hollywood hearthrob and liberal activist George Clooney and presidential hopeful Barack Obama have become best of friends and text and email each other “almost every day” and speak on the telephone a couple of times each week.

Is the lightly experienced Senator from Illinois giving Clooney advice on acting and other important topics to Clooney? Hardly. The Daily Mail reports that Clooney is advising Obama on everything from body language to Iraq. Not exactly the sort of situation that will quiet Obama’s critics who maintain that Obama lacks the experience and leadership ability to be elected to the most powerful office in the world.

Citing unnamed sources, the Daily Mail reports the handsome and popular Clooney has tried to hide the pair’s friendship for fear his Left-wing views and playboy image would hurt the Obama’s bid for the White House.

Clooney is reportedly giving Obama advice on such timely topics as presentation, public speaking, and also allegedly emails Obama ”constantly” on policy matters, especially the Middle East. Clooney is said to be helping Obama hone his image both domestically and abroad. When you only have 146 days of experience as a U.S. Senator as the main gem on your political resume, apparently dozens upon dozens of text and e-mail messages from an agenda-driven Hollywood thespian seems like a good idea to you.

Come November the voters will let Obama know if that’s the type of top advisor they want their next president to be in constant contact with in the event of world crisis, escalating emergency, or terrorist attack.

“Mr. Clooney can you hold on for a few more moments? President Obama is getting advice on the country’s financial collapse from Barbra Streisand at the moment.”

John Edwards: Lie. Deny. Stonewall. Sidestep. Repeat. Repent.

 

 

 

 

My first-ever “Dear John” letter:

Dear John:

What the hell were you thinking–then and now?

For almost a year now you have been lying, denying, stonewalling, and sidestepping about your repugant affair with Rielle Hunter and now you expect people to feel sorry for you? As bad as all that is, it pales in comparison to your despicable affair while your poor wife was struggling with breast cancer and you were running for the Democratic presidential nomination.

You don’t deserve pity. Instead you deserve to be sent to an isolated island in the South Pacific and left there to rot to your dying day. I find it amazing that your loyal and loving wife has found the courage to apparently forgive you. Ironically making you look even more like a scumbag for what you did to her and your children.

And I have my doubts that we truly know the full story at this juncture. Me thinks you doth protest too much about being the baby’s daddy. Pardon me if I don’t believe a word you utter from this point forward. You have zero credibilty but a huge pair of balls for trying to have your cake and eat it too at the expense of your family and friends and loyal campaign staff and the voters who trusted you enough to vote for you.

What were you thinking when you met this bimbo in a bar in New York in 2006, and later paid her $114,000 to follow you around, documenting your every move for campaign videos? And now you expect us to believe that you had no involvement when one of your campaign workers stepped up and took responsibility for the baby?

How convenient that one of your top donors also apparently paid “hush money” to Reille Hunter for relocation from North Carolina to a $3-million mansion in California–and extremely odd that the father’s name is not listed on the baby’s birth certificate–and that you now claim there’s no way you could be the father’s baby but earlier today your ex-mistress said she will not permit a DNA test to occur. 

And now you say that if she was paid off, it wasn’t with your money? Sounds oddly similar to “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” You wouldn’t be parsing your words there now John, would you? It all reeks of an elaborately-orchestrated cover-up.

How does it feel to be a habitual liar, an adulterer, to be morally-bankrupt, and a man who put his wife and children through something so repulsive when they had already been going through an emotional Hell that we can’t even start to comprehend it? There must certainly be a front row seat in Hell waiting for you, Johnny. And I bet you can’t get a $400 haircut there either.

But I admit you were right about one thing afterall. There apparently is two Americas. One where people do the right thing by their wife and their family and their friends and supporters. And a second America where putrid politicians attempt to have it all, at any cost, to satisfy their enormous ego and their sexual lust, and then have the nerve to come forward just at the moment they are about to be exposed and pretend to be taking full responsibility and seeks public forgiveness and some sort of twisted sympathy.

Enjoy living in that America Mr. Edwards, you definitely qualify to be elected as president of that one.

Oh, by the way, care to explain your 2 a.m. visit with Rielle Hunter at a Beverly Hills hotel last month? I thought you said your affair ended quite some time ago… Maybe you were just chatting about the good old days. Has Elizabeth also forgiven you for that mysterious rendezvous?

I guess we’ll find out when you appear before the cameras again to deny the other items that have yet to come out–but will. Or maybe you will eventually admit to those too. Only time will tell–and of course, the National Enquirer.

We sure can’t count on the mainstream media to report it in a timely manner.

John Edwards’ affair coverage is an embarrassment to the mainstream media.

 

 

 

 

Being exposed for what you truly are can sometimes be painful and a complete embarrassment. You can either learn from the experience and try to do better or you can take the easier way out and try to rewrite history and learn nothing from the experience. The mainstream media is apparently opting to do the latter.

The current “John Edwards Affair” news story which finally made it into mainstream media news coverage this weekend only after Edwards begrudgingly admitted to the affair, has not only exploded in the face of the former senator and two-time presidential candidate, it has also exposed the mainstream for being a bunch of unethical, spineless, biased blowhards. And it couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch.

In a not unexpected but nevertheless despicable attempt to downplay their blatant lack of journalistic ethics and even more blatant liberal bias–and laughably, a thinly-veiled attempt to somehow justify their inaction out of some sort of implied sympathy and compassion for Elizabeth Edwards–the mainstream media is now asserting that almost to an organization, they were all working on breaking the story for months now. Gee, what a shame they simply didn’t pick up the National Enquirer ten months ago when they first broke the story.

Ever since that time the National Enquirer had been leaving a trail of bread crumbs a mile wide and ten miles long for the blindly liberally loyal mainstream media mice to follow. But these mice weren’t interested in eating this particular cheese. Not if it meant exposing John Edwards for the fraud and pathological liar that he clearly is. So now, to try and wipe the egg off their collective faces, the mainstream media is moving quickly to try and convince the world that they were in fact doing their job and doing the right thing all along. Oh please… With this much cheese and egg we’re all now supposed to simply swallow this putrid media-manufactured omelet? No thanks. I’m not that hungry–or stupid.

The double-standard that is perpetually practiced by the New York Times is equally evident here. Months ago, the New York Times was only to happy to splash accusations of an alleged affair involving John McCain when it ran a “read all about it” story filled with not much more than inane innuendo from anonymous sources. Where has the Times been the past 10 months on the Edwards’ story? Their silence on reporting the Edwards’ story is slimy and sickening. Further evidence of the ever present arrogance and elitist attitude that is rampant at the Times, appearing on CNN this morning, David Carr, a media columnist for the Times, delighted in stating that he was taught, “It’s news when we say it is.” Statements like that apparently come easy when you work in a profession and for a company where your colleagues are experts at talking out of both sides of their mouth to further their own political beliefs and agenda.

For almost a year now, when asked about the affair with Rielle Hunter, John Edwards has denied, lied, stonewalled, and side-stepped, and the mainstream media has been only too happy to assist him in keeping the story silent. Call it a conspiracy of journalistic sin by omission. More over, call it what it also is: repugnant, shameful, disturbing, and damning for a profession that already enjoyed extremely low public approval and growing public distrust.

If journalism in America is not already completely dead, it’s certainly clinging to life-support with a dismal prognosis. This emaciated patient has been dying for quite sometime now. Failure to properly and aggressively investigate and report the Edwards’ affair story for months may be the final blip heard on the mainstream media’s heart monitor. You have to ask yourself, how much longer will it be before we hear the ear-piercing flatline sqeaul that signals death has finally occurred?

In stories like this it’s never as much about the sex as it is about the cover-up. The mainstream media should consider themselves fully complicit in this particular cover-up and should be totally ashamed for their failure to do their job (yet again) and more recently their current attempts to save face regarding how they mishandled their duties. Bottomline: The National Enquirer did what the mainstream media is supposed to do. Report news regardless of the personal and political fallout.

What rich irony it is that a “tabloid trash” publication is apparently the only place left where one can still expect to read unbiased, unfiltered, unfettered, news coverage in America.

Comedian Bernie Mac dead at age 50.

 

 

 

 

 

According to an Associated Press newswire report, comedian Bernie Mac’s publicist has confirmed that the Emmy and Golden Globe nominated actor has died in Chicago at age 50. Publicist Danica Smith said that Mac died early Saturday at a Chicago hospital due to complications involving pneumonia. It was reported earlier this week that Mac was “responding well” to treatment and hope to be released from the hospital soon.

The AP reports that the comedian suffered from sarcoidosis, an inflammatory lung disease that produces tiny lumps of cells in the body’s organs. Mac had said the condition went into remission in 2005.

Mac had starring roles in “Ocean’s Eleven,” “Bad Santa,” “Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle” and “Transformers.” Mac also drew critical and acclaim with his Fox television series “The Bernie Mac Show,” which aired from 2001 to 2006.

Mac recently made news after telling an off-color, ill-advised joke at an Obama fundraising event in early July before introducing Sen. Obama to the audience. Obama’s campaign later attempted to condemn Mac’s joke in contrast to Obama’s initial reaction to the comments while on the campaign stop, calling Mac a “great friend.”

Selling Obama Flip-Flops: How appropriate (and funny).

 

 

 

 

Why didn’t I think of that?

Marigo Holdings, LLC is selling an actual pair of wearable “Obama Flip-Flops” online in men’s and women’s sizes for $19.50. The standard shoewear bears the Obama logo and the words “OBAMA Flip-Flops.” According to the company’s Web site, Marigo Holdings, LLC is a self-described “technology company,” and was founded in 2008 as “a vehicle to explore interesting ideas and experiment with original techniques for realizing them.”

How that ultimately trickles down to selling novelty flip-flops escapes me. But the idea is funny.

As an added touch of humor the accompanying copy states, “We will ship to anywhere in the 57 states of the United States,” parodying Obama’s campaign speech gaff earlier in the campaign.

To order a pair, visit: http://www.marigoholdings.com/store/. I am guessing they might become a very popular item to wear at next month’s Republican National Convention but don’t expect to see Michelle Obama or any of the other Obama family members sporting a pair of them while vacationing in Hawaii this week.

For Barack Obama, America’s best days are behind it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Call it the ultimate political pop quiz.

Above all others, there is one simple question that seems to weigh the heaviest on the minds of most Americans who will walk into their place of voting this November to select the next president of the United States. But this time it did not come from a well-seasoned member of the White House Press Corps, it did not come from a prepared panelist during a nationally televised political debate, nor did it come from his political rival. Instead the simple yet deceivingly dangerous question came from a curious 7-year-old child in attendance at a campaign stop in middle America.

The answer to question however was enough to make any child cry and any reasonable bystander shake his/her head in disgust and disbelief.

As he appeared before a packed high school gym yesterday in Elkhart, Ind., a 7-year-old girl asked Sen. Barack Obama why he is running for the White House.

The eyebrow-raising answer from Obama–who struggled to form his words–“America is …, uh, is no longer, uh … what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”

Clearly in Obama’s mind, America’s best days are behind it. Not that surprising after Michelle Obama’s “America is a downright mean country” comment earlier this summer. Amazing what you discover about a candidate when you remove him from behind a well-scripted teleprompter and place him smack dab ad-lib in front of God and a roomful of Indiana onlookers–and thankfully a few dozen cameras and microphones. Reality. Check.

Perhaps before we seek to chastise Obama for his pessimistic and hate America first mindset we should applaud the Obamas for sticking around to help clean up the massive mess this country is in (in their opinion) rather than moving to Canada or France or wherever else it is the Obamas deem to be the best place on earth to live. Obviously America is not at the top of their list.

Gee, thanks Mr. and Mrs. Obama. Trust me when I say, you shouldn’t have.

Not so long ago presidents and presidential wannabees, no matter how inexperienced and inane, did their best to inspire the citizens, especially the children. Today they apparently seek to incite, indict, and intimidate and frighten us. Unfortunately that now happens to include a wide-eyed, unsuspecting 7-year-old girl in America’s heartland who just happened to ask the right question to the wrong candidate for president.

Obama’s best strategy at this point: Shut up.

 

 

 

 

Dear Savior, er, um, Senator Obama:

Two words: Shut up.

I realize it’s difficult for you to stop talking about yourself but do yourself a favor. Put a tube sock in it. It seems that the mouth that roared is fast becoming the mouth that is increasing your negatives in the minds of many potential voters–including one-third of your own party.

According to a just released poll, nearly half of participants say that they’re already tired of hearing about you. Of course it’s not entirely your fault. Clearly you like to motor that mouth and will travel half way around the world to do it to create a photo op, but a great deal of blame has to be placed rightfully so at the the fawning feet of the mainstream media. They can’t seem to stop talking about you either. They’re downright giddy about reporting your every lip movement.

With the November election still three months away, 48% of the Pew Research Center poll participants said they’re hearing too much about you. I’m sure that will be hard for you to believe and even more difficult for the mainstream media to absorb. Furthermore, only 26% said the same about your Republican rival, Sen. John McCain. Maybe that’s because somedays Sen. McCain can’t seem to catch a minute of coverage–and when he does, it’s slanted negative time after time.

Much to the delight of your hordes of handlers and hypnotized followers, you have dominated political news coverage much of this year. But apparently the backlash is brewing. Two-thirds of Republicans and about half of independents say they’ve heard too much you, Barry. As did a third of your fellow Democrats. A sizeable, if not shocking, number. The poll was conducted on the heels of your recent rockstar tour across Europe, from Aug. 1-4.

Too bad those adoring Europeans can’t vote for you. Because you seem to be struggling with convincing a lot of American voters that you’re capable of carrying out the duties of the most powerful office in the world. But as they Senator, talk is cheap. Actions (and experience) speak louder than words.

So for now, it sounds like the best thing you can do is ratchet down the rhetoric and the silver-tongued and tedious talk and talk and talk and more talk and stop talking. Just be quiet for a few minutes. In fact, take a week or two off. While that would break the hearts of so many of your mainstream media friends, it can apparently only help you with prospective voters. In this case, a little silence may prove golden for you.

Follow Michelle’s lead… Give it a rest. We haven’t heard from her in weeks.

Call me, we’ll talk about it.

Barack Obama’s “Big Mac” attack is no attack at all… If it’s Bernie Mac.

 

 

 

Barack Obama makes John Kerry look like a man of firm conviction when it comes to presidential politics. You almost need a calculator to keep up with Obama’s recent flip-flops. The biggest recent flip-flop was Barry’s about-face on accepting public financing. Not surprisingly, the milquetoast mainstream media gave him only minor rebuke for something they would have assuredly still be hounding McCain over had he done the same thing.

Obama’s most recent and less important flip-flop occurred this weekend after comedian Bernie Mac made a reported surprise appearance and told an off-color, ill-advised joke at an Obama fundraising event Friday evening, according to a CNN news report.

Mac, star of TV and the silver screen, introduced Obama at an expensive fundraising event in Chicago, delivering a 10-minute comedy routine during which he joked about sexual promiscuity and referred to women as “hos.”

Apparently Mac thought he was appearing on BET and not in front of a crowd of families and friendlies to the Obama campaign–not to mention numerous news reporters. (Does anyone involved with the Obama campaign have the ability to refrain from saying stupid things in public?)

Near the conclusion of his standup routine, Mac said, “My little nephew came to me and he said, ‘Uncle, what’s the difference between a hypothetical question and a realistic question? I said, I don’t know, but I said, ‘Go upstairs and ask your mother if she’d make love to the mailman for $50,000.

“Hypothetically speaking, we should have $100,000. But realistically speaking we live with two hos,’” said Mac, delivering the joke’s intended punchline.

That joke may bring howls of laughter in a comedy club but it apparently doesn’t play well on the campaign trail. According to CNN, several attendees of the $2,300 per-person event immediately demonstrated their displeasure with Mac’s joke, and even asked that he exit the stage.

But Mac did not leave, instead he proceeded to introduce Obama to the crowd and shortly after the Senator called Mac a “great friend.” Obama also joked that Mac needs to “clean up [his] act.”

Obama then appeared to chastise Mac, saying, “We can’t afford to be divided by race. We can’t afford to be divided by region or by class and we can’t afford to be divided by gender, which by the way, that means, Bernie, you’ve got to clean up your act next time,” he said. “This is a family affair.”

But Obama was clearly not upset with Mac, concluding his remarks to Mac with, “By the way… I’m just messing with you, man.”

Inexplicably and one would think surprising to Sen. Obama, Obama’s own campaign spokesperson later issued a far more harsh and more serious rebuke of Mac and his joke shortly after the event. Obama campaign spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters, ”Senator Obama told Bernie Mac that he doesn’t condone these statements and believes what was said was inappropriate.”

So the question is, was Obama upset over Mac’s joke or not? If he was, he basically faked it face to face with Mac and thus lied to Mac with his “messing with you” comment. And if he wasn’t upset, he’s now sitting back allowing his campaign to do his dirty work and thus officially condemn Mac. Clearly the flip-flopping Senator isn’t going to get his hands dirty during this campaign unless he absolutely has to.

In fact it is hard to imagine that the ever-starched and always seemingly perfectly-presented campaigner would have ever dived into a pile of fallen leaves or dabbled in the backyard dirt as a child. I suspect that if Obama actually did roll up his sleeves, fabric softener sheets and a dry-cleaning bill would fall out.

It used to be that you could take a man at his word. That is clearly no longer the case. You must now watch his words on the news or on YouTube but then must wait for his campaign to later clarify and recraft his comments out of political convenience. Only then do you “really” know what the man meant–at least if the man is Barack Obama.

Dear Sen. Obama: If you can’t outrun an old man, perhaps you’re running in the wrong direction.

 

 

 

 

I can’t help but wonder whether or not what we are witnessing here is the modern-day political version of the children’s story, “The Tortoise and the Hare.”

The latest Rasmussen and Newsweek polls show Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain in dead-heat in the race for president. If you’re an Obama supporter you have to be shaking your head right now in utter disbelief. Obama has had every opportunity to pull ahead of McCain by double digits but instead finds himself unable to outrun a man (politically speaking) 25 years his senior.

In the beginning Obama ran to the left and made large strides. More recently he has run back towards center. Accordingly the polls reflect his side-winding. Clearly the shortest distance is a straight line so it defies common sense why Obama is running left and right when he should running ahead.

No doubt that Obama will most likely enjoy a post-Democrat convention bump in the polls later this summer but you have to believe his handlers wanted that to be the cherry on top, not a momentary neck ahead. I have questioned Sen. McCain’s handling of his campaign so far but perhaps he understands the old adage, “Slowly does it every time!”

Time will tell. But for right now, judging from the polls, Sen. McCain is running fairly well for an “old man.”

 

The Tortoise and the Hare
One of Aesop’s Fables

Once upon a time there was a hare who, boasting how he could run faster than anyone else, was forever teasing tortoise for its slowness. Then one day, the irate tortoise answered back: “Who do you think you are? There’s no denying you’re swift, but even you can be beaten!” The hare squealed with laughter.”Beaten in a race? By whom? Not you, surely! I bet there’s nobody in the world that can win against me, I’m so speedy. Now, why don’t you try?”

Annoyed by such bragging, the tortoise accepted the challenge. A course was planned, and the next day at dawn they stood at the starting line. The hare yawned sleepily as the meek tortoise trudged slowly off. When the hare saw how painfully slow his rival was, he decided, half asleep on his feet, to have a quick nap. “Take your time!” he said. “I’ll have forty winks and catch up with you in a minute.”

The hare woke with a start from a fitful sleep and gazed round, looking for the tortoise. But the creature was only a short distance away, having barely covered a third of the course. Breathing a sigh of relief, the hare decided he might as well have breakfast too, and off he went to munch some cabbages he had noticed in a nearby field. But the heavy meal and the hot sun made his eyelids droop. With a careless glance at the tortoise, now halfway along the course, he decided to have another snooze before flashing past the winning post. And smiling at the thought of the look on the tortoise’s face when it saw the hare speed by, he fell fast asleep and was soon snoring happily.

The sun started to sink, below the horizon, and the tortoise, who had been plodding towards the winning post since morning, was scarcely a yard from the finish. At that very point, the hare woke with a jolt. He could see the tortoise a speck in the distance and away he dashed. He leapt and bounded at a great rate, his tongue lolling, and gasping for breath. Just a little more and he’d be first at the finish. But the hare’s last leap was just too late, for the tortoise had beaten him to the winning post. Poor hare! Tired and in disgrace, he slumped down beside the tortoise who was silently smiling at him.

“Slowly does it every time!” he said.

Jesse Jackson on Barack Obama: There will be blood.

 

 

 

The Rev. Jesse L. Jackson is either stupid, suffering incredible and severe memory loss, or simply unable to keep his big mouth shut. It would not be difficult to make the case for all three based upon Jackson’s “private” remarks about Barack Obama earlier today.

And not unexpected–but very tiresome–was Jackson’s almost immediate (and insincere in my opinion) apology for making the remarks. Once again, a public figure says something incredibly stupid “privately,” and then nearly breaks both ankles executing an about-face over what was said.

Are we really expected to believe this ”heart-felt” apology? I am far more likely to believe what a person says in “private” over what a person is forced to go before a world audience and pretend he/she really didn’t mean.

By late evening, the not-so-smart Jackson was in full damage-control, appearing on several networks, apologizing profusely for his disparaging remarks about Obama’s “talk(ing) down” to African-American church-goers.

How dumb do you have to be to say anything that you don’t want repeated when you are seated in a news studio–the Fox News Studio–with microphones surrounding you like a flock of geese?

One could even question how “accidental” the entire situation was. Perhaps Jackson meant for his remarks to go public. Afterall, Jackon’s comments were caught on camera during a break in a Fox News interview. Jackson had to know he was seated in the lap of anti-liberalism. The phrase “Crazy like a fox” comes to mind.

During a break in a Fox News interview, Jackson “whispered” a very crude statement regarding Obama’s relationship with African-Americans after Obama recently made several speeches on morality at black churches. Jackson, caught on camera, leans over and whispers to fellow panelist Dr. Reed V. Tuckson, executive vice president and chief of medical affairs for United Health Group, “See, Barack been, um, talking down to black people on this faith-based … I want to cut his nuts off … Barack … he’s talking down to black people.”

Interesting remedy for dealing with someone you disagree with, Rev. Jackson. Who’s your spiritual advisor, O.J. Simpson?

After becoming aware that the remarks were recorded, Jackson moved quickly to apologize to Obama and explain himself to reporters. (That beeping noise you hear is Jackson’s backing up at a high-rate of speed…)

“Well, they were hurtful and wrong, that’s the whole point,” said Jackson. “And when you make mistakes you should not equivocate. You should be quick to go into offensive and not try to be evasive. And if it was said to him personally or in some public forum it would be even more hurtful. In this case, my error was responding to a question before a live mic. And so when he does hear them they will not be helpful; they will be hurtful. We have a relationship that can survive this.”

Jackson had been critical of speeches Obama made recently in black churches. Obama recently lectured that black males are ”acting like boys.”

“For any harm or hurt that this hot mic private conversation may have caused, I apologize,” Jackson said in a prepared statement. “My support for Senator Obama’s campaign is wide, deep and unequivocal. I cherish this redemptive and historical moment.”

And while Obama didn’t publicly take Jackson to task over his remarks, Jackson’s own son, U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., did, releasing a written statement in which he described his father’s statements as “ugly rhetoric.”

Not exactly a quintessential “Father/Son moment.”

Rev. Jackson’s comments about Obama are not the first time Jackson has had to apologize after believing he was off the record. In 1984, he called New York City “Hymietown,” referring to the city’s large Jewish population. He later acknowledged it was the wrong to use the term, but said he did so in private to a reporter.

Reverend, you’ve been involved in public life and politics for far too long to expect anything you say to be “private.” But for now, rather than call you crazy, I’ll just call you crazy like a fox.

Obama’s children: Precious political pawns?

Barack and Michelle Obama apparently aren’t kidding around…when it comes to shamelessly using their own children as political pawns.

Obama and his wanna-be first-family sat for an extensive, exclusive interview with the American television show Access Hollywood earlier this week. AH is airing the interview in four segments, the final segment airs tomorrow. The mainstream media has generally had access to Obama throughout the campaign, but for the first time, Obama, his wife Michelle and daughters 10-year-old Malia and 7-year-old Sasha appeared together for an interview.

But now, amidst increasing criticism over including his daughters in the interview, Obama is reportedly unhappy with how the interview ended up being aired on numerous cable stations.

Really Senator? You didn’t realize that would happen? Perhaps then your reference to ‘57 states’ earlier this year wasn’t just a simple misstatement after all… How could you not see that one coming?

On Wednesday morning, NBC’s Matt Lauer took Obama to task over the Access Hollywood interview on the “Today” show.

“I was a little surprised by the attention this got this week,” Lauer remarked to Obama. “Did you make the right call on that?”

“I think we got carried away in the moment. We were having a birthday party and everybody was laughing and suddenly this thing cropped up. I didn’t catch it quickly enough and I was surprised by the attention as well,” Obama responded.

Really Sen. Obama? “Suddenly this thing cropped up”? Did the Access Hollywood camera crew and equipment just materialize out of thin-air before you and begin recording you and your family without your permission? What exactly were you smoking at the party? I’ve been involved with several television interviews in my time. It takes quite some time to prepare and set-up for an interview of this nature. Pardon me if I don’t buy your backtracking and blatant lie that “this thing cropped up.” Just how ignorant do you think the American people are?

What’s that you said, Senator? You “didn’t catch it quickly enough”? Well that certainly gives one a shudder down the spine to think that this country might face nuclear and/or terrorist attack some day with you in the White House… I pray to God that you would be a little more astute in that situation. “Didn’t catch it quickly enough” isn’t acceptable for the man holding the most powerful job in the world…

Lauer continued the interview, asking, “If you had the chance to do it over again?”

“We wouldn’t do it again and we won’t be doing it again,” Obama answered.

Time will tell whether or not that statement is truthful.

Perhaps the Obama’s are guilty of nothing more than being proud parents and of using poor judgment. Each voter must decide for him or herself. When it comes to politics, I’m comfortable with the adage, “Children should be seen but not heard.” And I am not 100% OK with even exposing your children in this manner. For my money, his daughters are beautiful young ladies and best served to remain out of the public eye.

But the underlying signal that Obama continues to send during this campaign is his disturbing lack of judgment on small matters. A reasonable person has the right to ask, “If Obama can’t handle simple, every day, common sense situations with sound judgment, how on earth can he be expected to carry out the wide-ranging and extraordinary responsibilities that he would face as president?”

With the numerous important issues facing the next occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, this is no time for child’s-play.

The Obama campaign is in trouble: Cue the kids.

 

 

 

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.

If Howard Dean was a farm animal he would definitely be a pig.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Obama’s Chickens Come Home to Roost.

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.

 

Should Obama be terrified of an endorsement from terrorists?

 

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.

 

 

On Obama, Clinton, and McCain: Is there a contest here?

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! 

“We in Denmark cannot figure out why you are bothering to hold an election. On one side, you have a witch who is a lawyer, married to a lawyer, and a lawyer who is married to a witch who is a lawyer.
 
On the other side, you have a war hero who is married to a woman with a very nice figure who owns a beer distributorship. 
 
Is there a contest here?”

 

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

Tonight’s ABC Obama vs. Clinton debate: What we learned.

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.