The Deep End

President tells us...we are "a little bit lazy"

2011-11-13T13:58:00.002-06:00

Yup...and he said this to an international audience.

For your information, Bush played golf 24 times in his eight years. My most recent figures are for June, after he played his 75th time since his inauguration.

Lazy american...

It's official -- President Obama is an unprecedented jerk

2010-01-27T23:01:00.002-06:00

I haven't posted on this blog in a long time, but what the president did tonight in his state of the union speech was unprecedented.

He openly attacked a Supreme Court decision in front of the world on live television.

Not only that, but he was flat out WRONG. Law professor Bradley Smith spells out his egregious error on the ruling allegedly allowing foreign corporations to get involved in our political campaigns here, but frankly the idea of attacking a Supreme Court decision you don't agree with is inconcievable, especially for a man who once taught constitutional law. I mean WTH?

Tonight, some of his words were conciliatory and an attempt to take a higher road towards the country he has bashed around the world, but in the end, it was an arrogant, petulant, divisive rant worthy of Castro's multi-hour hatefests of old.

Right now, I imagine a majority of Americans would like a re-vote.

But our system doesn't work that way. We will just have to keep up the public activism in the meantime and throw the Dems out in the fall.

I hate to say I told you so...but....read my back posting in 2008, and I DID.

God save us all...

Ruh-Roh...Obama may be losing Jay Leno...

2009-10-22T10:51:00.001-05:00

"Thomas Paine" on today's America

2009-10-18T17:20:00.001-05:00

Dr. Bob Basso continues his series as "Thomas Paine" on today's America.

The New York Times: "All the news that fits our slant"

2009-09-27T12:07:00.009-05:00

Ahhh...how the great Grey Lady has fallen. Having fully ignored the Van Jones controversy until he was ousted, the New York Times has once again showed why the "paper of record" is full of scratches and has become totally unplayable. (BTW, the AP omits that the "derogatory" comment he called Republicans was "a--holes.")

Most recently, the expose' of the corrupt ACORN organization, long known to be the political equivalent of La Cosa Nostra, (like here, here, here, here, and here) was exposed to be a fundamentally, and systemically, scam-riddled political operation. So? Well, it's even more illegal when it's done with government money. Who did this great public service of exposing this racketeering? The Times? The Washington Post of Woodward and Bernstein fame? No, they are busy sliming the 20-something messengers. The renowned CBS 60 Minutes? Nope, too busy trying to help Obama pass health care.

Nope. A 20 year-old intern and a 25-year old self-made undercover filmmaker blew the lid off this scandal when videos were released for several days on Andrew Breitbart's Big Government website showing several ACORN offices only too happy to help the pimp and his prostitute find subsidized housing and tax help for setting up there "business" of using underage illegal immigrants as sex slaves.

In the old days, when the press had at least a fig leaf of impartiality, these two would be heralded as heroes of journalism and get at least some buzz for possible Pulitzer prizes. As a side note, it's probably appropriate that the most cherished prize in journalism is named for one of the inventors of Yellow Journalism. Pulitzer and William Randolph Heart are considered by some historians to have engineered the war against Spain, considered by many of today's radical history professors as one of America's most embarrassingly imperial actions since becoming a major player on the world stage. Think of it as equivalent to the Lester Maddox Diversity Award, or the Kanye West School for Etiquette.

Today, we save this honor for those for people who go after vice-presidential nominees who we want to portray as spendthrifts even when the media knows the narrative has been a false and misleading one. Yea, who's the spendthrift now?

The NY Times ombudsman had the unenviable task of explaining yet another instance where Times readers not only didn't know about a story until much of it was pretty well-covered by talk radio and Fox News, but then had to make excuses for why they missed yet another story of corruption from Obama-related people/organizations. (Obama was an attorney for ACORN and has kept close ties to the organization)

Powerline blog has my favorite coverage of this ludicrous excuse of "insufficient tuned-in-ness"

The ombudsman, Clark Hoyt, quotes a journalism expert who says that in today's media environment, "[e]ven the suspicion of a bias is a problem all by itself.

Powerline's Scott Johnson then drops this classic line:

To say that the New York Times is suspected of liberal bias is like saying that Ted Bundy was suspected of being an unsuitable prom date.

You got that right.

In spite of mainstream media efforts to ignore, ACORN scandal goes viral

2009-09-18T11:30:00.002-05:00

Jay Leno does ACORN...the end is near for this criminal organization.

Hat Tip to Andrew Breitbart's fabulous new website that broke this story...

www.biggovernment.com

And to James O'Keefe III and Hannah Giles...who should get Pulitzers for taking them down.

I won't hold my breath...

Barack Obama: Friend of our enemies, enemy of our friends

2009-09-17T14:51:00.005-05:00

Obama in Prague in April:

So let me be clear: Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran's neighbors and our allies. The Czech Republic and Poland have been courageous in agreeing to host a defense against these missiles. As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defense system that is cost-effective and proven. (Applause.) If the Iranian threat is eliminated, we will have a stronger basis for security, and the driving force for missile defense construction in Europe will be removed. (Applause.)

In the news today:

President Obama dismayed America's allies in Europe and angered his political opponents at home today when he formally ditched plans to set up a missile defence shield in Poland and the Czech Republic.

The former Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, said: "This is not good news for the Czech state, for Czech freedom and independence. It puts us in a position wherein we are not firmly anchored in terms of partnership, security and alliance, and that's a certain threat."

Also:

Experts at the world's top atomic watchdog are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press.

And:

A spokeswoman at the Polish Ministry of Defense also said the program had been suspended.
"This is catastrophic for Poland," said the spokeswoman, who declined to be named in line with ministry policy.

I'm speechless.

Oh yea, Mr. Sensitivity announced this on the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet Invasion of Poland...which led to massacres like the Katyn Forest slaughter.

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-- George Santayana

9/12 in (of all places) Los Angeles

2009-09-14T14:39:00.002-05:00

Hat tip to Steve Vernon and RJ Thomas at Andrew Breitbart's great website Big Hollywood.

The guy is doing truly patriotic work. I will soon post about his incredible revelations regarding ACORN's rampant corruption.

Coach

Eight years later...

2009-09-12T14:56:00.006-05:00

As I have for the last several years, I showed my history classes the short documentary "Twin Towers." While the title suggests it's all about the WTC-9/11 event, it's actually not.

It was originally going to be about the people who work in the NYC Emergency Services Unit. These people take on the tougher assignments like SWAT functions, but also tasks like water and suicide-attempt rescues, building collapses, etc. As you can imagine, they were front and center on 9/11 trying to get people out of the WTC complex and lost 14 of their 34 person unit; a devastating blow to some of the Big Apple's finest.

I show it because it will easily fit inside a normal class period and because it is apolitical. It really doesn't even identify the hijackers at all. And most of the end of the film focuses on the devastating impact on the men and families of the unit, and particularly on one family, whose other son, a FDNY fireman, also died on 9/11.

The title comes from a suggestion by a reporter at the time who referred to the two brothers as "the twin towers." The film won the 2003 Oscar for documentary short, but I wonder if it would even get nominated today. We have dropped 9/11 down the memory hole. I wasn't going to show it to my senior classes but they had heard that my juniors had seen it and many of them were so young they had never seen much footage of the attacks.

Some say we avoid broadcasting the images because we don't want to whip up hatred against Muslims; others say it is because the event was used by Bush to justify a illegal war. All I can say is that those who started this war have not quit it. You don't stop until the enemy if completely defeated. I believe this government cannot wait to find a way to quit the war. Ignoring the threat allowed 9/11 to happen in the first place. Why do our leaders REFUSE to learn from history?

The attitude of some of the public, and arguably the US government, towards those who declared war on us that day is despairingly different from American determination in the years immediately after 9/11. Col. Ralph Peters article in today's New York Post is one of the best I have seen. A military man, he knows too well that many of his brothers-in-arms will pay the price for the dance we are doing with our enemies and the damage in trust this is doing to our relationship with our historic friends such as England, Israel, and Japan. It's under the surface now, but they know they are being told, "You're on your own, we are too busy trying to get our population under the control of socialism to help you anymore."

Iran has just told us to go intercourse ourselves regarding their nuclear program, indicating that the President's apology tour did not bear the fruit he had hoped for. Isn't this why Obama was reticent to criticize the Iranian government's crackdown on it's huge public protests last summer? I can see that went well...

Meanwhile, our other "buddies", like Russia and China are treating the USA with distain. And why shouldn't they? We are racking up the national credit card to prop up our labor unions and pay off campaign "community organizers". Meanwhile, on the foreign scene, our national penitence act has reaped derision, not adulation.

It does no good for those of us who stood in astonishment watching a leader painfully ignorant of history as his Appeasement Tour 2009 unfolded to simply whine about what is happening. Some of us must act before we lose our country.

I am grateful to the patriots who are in Washington today speaking up against the intentional bankrupting of the nation that the Democratic Party has instituted this year. These American citizens are using their 1st Amendment rights of peaceable assembly to put their elected representatives on notice. Congressmen and senators: ignore them at your peril; this is a MUCH bigger deal than 1994.

The policies the president is supporting will mandate a permanent dependent class reliant on government paper to keep their heads above water. After having done it to the lower classes in American society with the New Deal legislation and the Great Society socialist wealth transfer, the middle-class is now in the Statist sniperscope through "single-payer health insurance reform"; a phrase as truthful as "peaceloving government of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea". They just gave us the same finger the Iranians did.

It will be sad if Americans are unable to pressure the Democrats in Congress to reject this government theft of wealth by preventing a "reform" bill on 17% of the American economy. I suppose I will be someday telling my children what it was like before Chairman Barry "remade" America so it would work more smoothly...with none of that bothersome dissent that he finds so distasteful.

He called it "bickering"...our founders called it things like "protected speech", "dissent", and "democracy."

Today, he said this about the "bickerers":

This is when the special interests and the insurance companies and the folks who want to kill reform fight back with everything they’ve got. This is when they spread all kinds of rumors to scare and intimidate the American people. This is what they always do.

Divide and smear...divide and smear...Nice work Mr. Hope and Change. Your Alinsky methods are doomed.

Mr. Obama...it breaks my heart to have to say it, but you are a impugning an important interest group. They're called TAXPAYERS. This may work in Chicago...I pray it doesn't work for the rest of us.

It's time to stand up, America...or lose your liberties.

Coach

The Reality of "Health Insurance Reform"

2009-08-16T13:15:00.004-05:00

It's been a while since I have posted, but there has been a lot of murkiness on the socialized medicine debate.

Why is this such a contentious issue? And more importantly, where did all this sudden opposition come from? Was it ginned up, or "astroturfed"? (This is a term for phony "grassroots" organizing. Astroturfed events are supposed to look like they came from a groundswell of public outrage, but is actually manufactured by well-organized political entities. David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager proudly claimed the coining of the phrase...and admitting, after the election, that he was a very skillful user of the strategy.

So it should come as no surprise that the White House has attributed the contentious town hall meetings to astroturfing by conservative organizations, Republican operatives, or rabid talk radio personalities.

Michael Barone's latest in the NY Post truly hits the nail on the head by once again citing the reality of the numbers when it comes down to the basic ideological breakdown of the American voting public.

Read it here...and be informed.

More later,

Coach

An America Worth Keeping

2009-07-19T15:33:00.002-05:00

There have been times in recent months when I began to despair for the morale of our land and the willingness of it's people to value the cost of freedom.

I fear no more. This video comes by way of Powerline blog and is 12 minutes that every citizen should be able to spare. It's not a professional video by any stretch of the imagination, but it's powerful because of what it depicts. A notice went in a local paper in suburban Atlanta that one of it's citizens, SSgt John C. Beale, a veteran of Desert Storm who had re-upped as a National Guard member, had been killed in Afghanistan. The paper noted his route from the airport to the cemetery in the short piece.

What you see here is the America I was worried had disappeared. The musical lyrics from the songs chosen are appropriate for the moment. Please watch the entire clip to the end...and look at the people who turned out. I am sure they are of many backgrounds and political persuasions...but they are ALL AMERICANS.

Keep a kleenex handy...but trust me...it's a good thing.

Barack Obama's Hope and Change

2009-06-07T23:59:00.002-05:00

By the time I want to retire, I hope I have some change left...

Hat tip to Powerline blog

Nancy Pelosi vs. the CIA

2009-05-17T12:58:00.006-05:00

I would imagine that most of the people who follow this blog have been up on the controversy of Nancy Pelosi and the CIA. It seems the Speaker has taken the stand that she didn't know that waterboarding was part of the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT) being used by the CIA in getting the other planned attacks on the USA in the wake of 9/11.

We captured a treasure-trove of Al-Qaeda's top operatives months after the attacks and some of the highest operatives even boasted that BIGGER events were to come shortly.

Many of us forget the climate of the times. If you had asked most Americans, within the first year of the attacks, "do you think we will go into 2009 without a follow-up attack in the USA" probably 85-90% would have responded "NO!"

And there was good reason for that pessimism. In fact, there were several follow-up attempts that have escaped most American's consciousness. Richard "Shoe Bomber" Reid was stopped mid-attempt, as were other plots like a multi-plane attempt to blow up planes mid-flight coming back from the UK.

Three Gitmo prisoners, two directly involved in the 9/11 plot, and another involved in the Cole bombing (remember that Clinton era attack?) were waterboarded. That's right. At one time or another, several hundred prisoners have been held at Guantanamo Bay and only THREE were considered to have such important information that it would require coercive action.

Let's leave aside whether this was "legal" or not for now. There as many positions on that these days as we have lawyers in the country (a lot).

What has been debated lately is this question: "What did Nancy know, and when did she know it?"

Beside the obvious Howard Baker-Watergate analogy here, it is important to remember that Mrs. Pelosi was NOT Speaker of the House at the time but was a key part of the Democratic house leadership. It's even more important to realize that because she was part of the opposition, it was MOST important for people like her to be briefed because the Republican leadership knew that having the support of the minority would protect them from criticism at that critical time right after the 9/11 attacks.

Again, let's remember the mood of the times. Few were questioning things like "how rough should we be on these guys?" The times right after the attacks was more like "how did this happen and why didn't we know?" And of course, most importantly, "how can we prevent this in the future?"

The CIA's EIT regimen was strongly monitored by both the Congressional Intelligence committees and the White House. I would imagine if there had been attacks, some of those who yell "torture" would be yelling "I thought you conservatives were supposed to keep us safe!"

Regardless, Pelosi has been saying, with varying emphasis and clarifications, that she was NOT briefed about the USAGE of EIT. She put an exclamation mark on it by slandering both the Bush Administration (expected) and the CIA (foolhardy) for being serial liars.

Wow. Mark Twain once said, "Never pick a fight with a man who buys ink by the barrel" when referring to arguing with the press. Nancy has accused people who monitor conversations, take great notes, and perhaps even have her phone tapped!

Dumb.

To put an exclamation on this whole incident, Jim Geraghty at National Review Online sent a message to Gene Poteat, President of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers. Don't think that they are not keeping in "close touch" with some of their "old buddies" in government. The present officers are part of the executive branch of the US Government. The CIA exists to serve the president. That doesn't prevent some of them from selectively leaking information to suit their own agenda if it conflicts with their ultimate boss, Barack Obama. They sure did a number on Bush, leaking all sorts of doubts about the invasion of Iraq, before and after the event.

Here is what Poteat said to Geraghty, in response:

Those CIA officers chosen to brief the Congress, and especially the intelligence committees, are very senior, experienced officers, who well know the reputation and future of the CIA, as well as their own jobs, are on the line should they be perceived as not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Such restrictions, however, do not apply to members of the Congress when they then appear before the public.

As Chris Farley said famously in Tommy Boy: "That's gonna leave a mark!"

President Obama seems more inclined to insert himself in all kinds of areas that past presidents have not. Ask former GM President Rick Wagoner!

But I don't think Obama will stop the CIA from defending itself. Nancy has made life more difficult for him lately. And she has been acting like a Queen Bee. As far as Obama is concerned, there is only one royal family in Washington.

Update: Is there a revolt against the Federal Government's abuse of power?

2009-05-06T09:49:00.004-05:00

First the banks, then the auto industry, what area of American business is next? In the previous post, I talked about Obama's alleged bullying of investment firms who didn't want to go along with his strong-armed tactics to force acceptance of certain aspects of the Chrysler bankruptcy that would violate their fiduciary responsibility to their investors.

It's always easy to see the justification for the President's actions if you demonize financial people as "selfish, and not willing to sacrifice" like the rest of the investors. That's not an honest read on what is going on here. The others accepted his terms BECAUSE THEY HAD TO. THEY HAD ACCEPTED TARP MONEY. Some accepted because they needed it, others because they were told "take it, or else." But the hedge funds and other investment entities had followed the rules and bought Chrysler bonds expecting that the US Government would follow the law.

I'll say it right now. Barack Obama has violated his Constitutional oath. He is NOT following the law of the land. He is making his own. "I won" is his response to the financial people he "negotiated" with and now investors will pay the price. Because his goal all along was NOT to save GM or Chrysler, but to protect the United Auto Workers, who had worked hard to get him elected, and their pensioners. Now, you can expect more federal money to "bailout" GM and Chrysler over the next months and years. But only if those companies produce more unprofitable "green" cars and give up their profitable "ungreen" cars like SUVs and muscle cars.

Who died and made him king? He was elected president, but I don't see in http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html where he gets this kind of power over business. This story continues to percolate today, but it will get nowhere because his personal popularity remains high as does his fawning treatment from the star-struck press. The public is unaware of what the president is up to. So sad. Fixing this is going to be expensive.

At least some states are willing to take on the federal juggernaut. First, you had some governors who were willing to say, "thanks, but we don't like the strings attached" to some of the stimulus money. Now, aware that acquiescence will lead to subservience, Oklahoma's legislature has taken a position that it will not give up it's sovereignty to the US government. Tennessee has taken a similar action.

What are they talking about?

This is why it is SOOO important that Americans understand the rule book for this country that governs ALL men, including the president.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1790, and written by James Madison says this:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

As I have said often on this blog, over the last 70 years, since the American people gave unprecedented power to the federal government, FDR, and the Congress during the Great Depression, the federal government has taken powers away from the people and the states and exercised that power in the way they see fit. Here is a website formed by some who are watching this state sovereignty movement. Amity Shlaes, author of a much praised book reassessing the government's actions during the Great Depression, catalogs the jihad against those critical of Obama's power grab here.

Now you have a government in Washington completely controlled by one party. Republicans are spectators, not even allowed in certain key meetings to formulate laws, and Obama feels protected from scrutiny and criticism by the press, and thus the public. When polls ask people if they like the president, a strong majority says "yes!" When they are polled about his policies, without attaching them to him, they reject them. So why does he remain popular? BECAUSE THE MEDIA HAS KEPT THE PUBLIC IGNORANT

And you had better not attack him or them. Or they will "Palin" you...like we "Palined" Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, Governor Sanford, Governor Jindal, and Miss California. Who said the Republicans had the monopoly on McCarthyism. Or the president will sic the White House Press Corps on you, as alleged in the Chrysler case.

So, what happens next? In a truly two-party system, with a truly "watchdog" press, this would the subject of hot debate. Instead, we will be told, "hey, we are tough on Obama, look at what we said about his wife's expensive tennis shoes!"

Meanwhile, new restrictions on banks that took TARP money is designed to keep them from paying it back, thereby staying under the federal gov'ts thumb. If you pay it back, then you can't be covered by FDIC insurance. Wait a minute! These banks paid into the federal government's FDIC fund with payment of insurance premiums! Do you think any private insurance company would be allowed to get away with that kind of bait and switch? Why should the USG be allowed to do that?!

Frankly, I don't think that the Obama administration will allow even that concession to stand. THEY DON'T WANT TO LET THE BANKS GO BACK TO FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE. They would not have been able to get the Chrysler deal go forward except they had the banks in their control. And they still have to do the SAME KIND OF DEAL with GM. You watch. So, in the end, I think they won't let them off that easily.

The internet has changed things more than even the internet-savvy left-wing blogs realize.

It won't happen, because it is a political act, but abuse of power is an impeachable offense. Obama should be very careful about going forward with his war on American capitalism.

What hath Barack wrought?

2009-05-04T14:15:00.005-05:00

I have been quiet lately because I am working on several projects. I have two new classes for adult education this summer, and am in the early stages of my first book.

Each time something comes along, I see something that I want to blog about, but things come up...

But my background in the financial industry keeps coming back to my mind as we watch President Obama take this ship of state in a hard left turn.

He is killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

No one has EVER said that capitalism is perfect. Or even fair. My dad used to say that over and over, "no one said that life would be fair." We have a president who is trying to use fiscal and monetary policy to effect "fairness and justice." His concept is going to run the ship aground.

His latest move was to demonize Parella Weinberg, a financial group known as a "hedge fund." They also represent people. Imagine that. They invest for pension funds, teacher retirement funds, insurance companies...you know...humans.

Obama is trying to use the executive power of the US Government to bully them out of their proper financial position as first lien holders on Chrysler's debt.

Let me explain: Chrysler comes to you and says, "I need billions of dollars to build new cars."

You reply: "ok, I'm interested, but what happens if you fail and go out of business?"

Chrysler says: "We sell off the company, and you get the first dibs on what's left. It's a risk, but worth taking. And since you would be first in line, your risk is the least, so you get the lowest interest rate of any of our debtors."

You reply: "Ok. Since I would be first in line, I'll buy billions."

Suddenly, Chrysler may go bankrupt. Now, Obama doesn't want this to go to a bankruptcy court, because thay would invalidate the union contracts of Chrysler, and the UAW voted heavily for Obama. He's gonna protect them, so he forces most of the debtors to take @ 50 cents on the dollar. Especially the unions, who are far behind you and your pension funds in line.

YOU, you who had the first position, you get LESS on the dollar,(rumored to be more like 30%). After all, he has been demonizing banks and investment firms since he was inaugurated. And if you DON'T agree to this, his people tell you, "we will trash your reputation in the White House press corps." These are the people who worship Obama and will do his bidding. Heck, media people are one step above baby-killers and lawyers in public polling these days, this will make them popular!

I love how the White House denies this report.

"The charge is completely untrue," said White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton, "and there's obviously no evidence to suggest that this happened in any way."

emphasis mine. Get it? "Can't prove it, pal. Learn to wire yourself for sound, amateur."

Meanwhile, the president goes out and says you weren't willing to "sacrifice" like everyone else was. We elected a president, not a king. This is the US Government, not Cook County, Illinois. You can't rule by intimidation. We have laws, Mr. Obama.

If you think I am making this up, read the links above. What this president is doing is chasing capital out of the country

Even Warren Buffet, who supported and voted for Obama, has warned that inflation and dollar devaluation will be the hidden tax.

Now, there is a very interesting post of a letter from a "hedge-fund" guy to the National Review. I spent enough time in the field to know that this guy is not kidding.

Money has flowed into this country since WWII because it was treated well here. Now, things are changing. All around the world, the warning signs are there for those who pay attention, and our number 1 debtor, CHINA, is paying attention. The demonization of the financial world is the mania of Barack Obama. It's like if you decided to discipline your head by tightening the noose around your neck. The head will get "taught a lesson"...and the body...well...

Here's the note...

Hey (redacted by me) — Would you like a sound bite from one of those evil hedge fund guys for Colmes' show tonight? How's this: "As a professional investor I'd have to be out of my skull to partner with this government on anything."

This administration has made it quite clear that they can't be relied upon to honor contracts or legal precedents and if I can't know what the rules are before the game starts then I'm not going to play. Hedge funds aren't like the banks … we haven't failed. We aren't beholden to the taxpayer to make our way. We have contractual and fiduciary obligation which we will honor. People pay us to make them money not to meet a political goal. So Obama had better think long and hard before he tries to bully us like he did the banks, or try to tell us that "he's the only thing between us and the pitchforks."

Also, Geithner and Obama have been saying that they plan on balancing the budget once the crisis is past. The press may believe that twaddle about how he'll do it by "making things more efficient," but we in the hedge fund industry aren't so stupid. We've looked at the numbers and know what he's planning to do. I know dozens of people who are already putting the legal structures in place to move their companies and themselves offshore and away from the grip of the tax man. These are some of the smartest most dynamic people in the world and they'll have no trouble staying ahead of the (offensive remark removed) over at the IRS.

So unless Obama wants to run out of "other people's money" a lot sooner than he expected, he had better keep some people around to pay the bills. And if he keeps demonizing the productive and saying that it's their responsibility to let him spend their money on the unproductive, then we'll all be gone. I'll be working my 14 hour days is Bahrain or Singapore, and Obama can go suck eggs. He needs the productive classes a lot more than the productive classes need him.

On the plus side, at least my [offspring] will be able to get a decent education.

And if the "smart money" leaves the country, who do you think is gonna be stuck with that huge debt payment long after Mr. "HopeIhavesomechangeleft" has left office?

Us...Mr. and Mrs. Dumbmoney...on the way to being Mr. and Mrs. Debtpayors.

You've been warned.

The Return of the Sons of Liberty

2009-04-15T07:14:00.004-05:00

All over the nation, Americans will be gathering to protest the US Government's "generational theft" masquerading as "stimulus" and "fighting the recession."

I hope you will choose to attend one of these exhibitions of the 1st Amendment today. You can find where they are here.

I will be at Kiener Plaza in St. Louis, Missouri. Cheers!

PS...here are some facts to consider...

• If you’re a 50-year old-with a college degree, you will pay approximately $81,000 over your working life just to pay the interest on the debt in the Obama budget.
• If you’re a 40-year-old, you’ll pay $132,000.
• And if you’re a 20-year-old, just starting out after college, you will pay a whopping $114,000 just to service the interest on the debt created by the Obama budget.

Our New Commander-in-Chief: kudos and criticism

2009-04-14T09:35:00.008-05:00

Let's get this said right away: good on you for the action against the "pirates", Mr. President.

I have been very critical of the president in this blog, so I want it clear that I will also speak out when he does something RIGHT. Taking out the pirates with the action by the Navy SEALS was the right thing to do. And yes, I would still be saying this if it had not been the unqualified success that it was; you can't appease terrorists. I hope Mr. Obama keeps this in mind as he formulates his approaches to North Korea, Iran, Al Qaida, etc., although early signs are not encouraging in Iran, or North Korea.

But there is no question that his approach to the military in the US is different from his predecessor. It's reported that huge military funding cuts are in the works for the Pentagon. This in spite of constant denials during the campaign that he would follow this path. Using the economy as an excuse won't wash, especially when you are planning to give billions to the International Monetary Fund in a strategy that even bypasses congressional approval. That may be considered to be a plus by the majority of those who voted for him, but some of his actions vis a vis the military are starting to cause dismay amongst the people he commands.

I support the Constitution of these United States over and above any person, of any ideology, so I expect and applaud the US military for keeping any misgivings about their new commander-in-chief to themselves. But at the same time, they have an obligation to give him their best advice on how to move forward in addressing some of our challenges in foreign affairs, and the importance of keeping our enemies reticent to take threatening actions against US citizens. I don't believe in random acts, so when we see that Somali pirates, who have been active for years, decide to attack a US vessel for the first time in decades within months of the ascension of a president who has been as critical of his country as some of our "friends" have been over the last several years...well, it's not a surprise. At least he now always wears his flag pin, where before he proudly didn't.

While we can all rejoice at the release of Captain Phillips, we should also be sobered by the prospect that President Obama seems intent on backing off of earlier strong statements about challenging the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran. It sends a very bad signal at the time when the action against the Somalis could have been leveraged with very little risk. This kind of precision action reminds the rest of the world's bad guys that they might think twice about messing with the USA. Perhaps that worked better coming from a Texan, but when the bullets are flying, even liberals from San Francisco want a Texan in the foxhole with them. The world is now our foxhole, and we need to make sure our "Texans" have the munitions they need to keep the bad guys in check.

The fact of the matter is that the quiet word has gone out that the president is not happy that the response of his visits to military bases has been less enthusiastic than say, German citizens in Berlin. Perhaps they continue to respect their former C-I-C because he at least recognized the need to not criticize those who have to inhabit that office. It's nice to see George W. Bush remain classy towards Obama, even if Obama isn't classy in return.
Few of us knew that in preparation for his "unannounced" visit to Baghdad, his advance people decided to ensure that the world's media saw a president beloved by the men he commands, even if it took some behind the scenes deceit to achieve a "candid" moment.

This smacks of the kind of "photo-op" worthy of North Vietnamese portrayals of "humane treatment" of "American war criminals" during their captivity in North Vietnam. John McCain has been back to Hanoi several times, and while he has forgiven, he has not forgotten the conflict between the mirage and the reality of life in captivity.

It's unfortunate that the president's people felt that it was necessary to pre-screen his "loving troops" in this way. It would have been better if he had asked himself WHY the troops were less than thrilled about their commander's visit. But then that would require taking positive lessons from Bush's example. And that would be a reversal from the Bush-bashing policy that began with his inauguration.

President Obama puts US Business on Double-Secret Probation

2009-04-08T13:12:00.008-05:00

Now here's something I have first-hand experience in: US Business. I was a private investment adviser for 9 years and did money management for a private school for another 8 years. During that time, when analyzing what makes a business successful, you tend to learn some basic principles.

1) You attract the best and brightest to come work at your organization. That usually means a good organization and top compensation.

2) You encourage them to compete and beat other organizations in the field of your business.

3) You work hard to keep distractions to a minimum.

4) You allow the people that know what they are doing to do their job. You hired them because they are the BEST, not because they are necessarily the nicest people.

5) You don't let your best people go to your main competition.

Barack Obama has revealed what we already know: He knows NOTHING about running a business and even less about running a country.

But he sure can make people swoon and he knows how to buy their votes. With taxpayer money.

That is what we have learned from his first 80 days. The Europeans are still swooning over his visit, but they didn't give him what he wanted: a more significant presence in Afghanistan, and a global stimulus package. (The trillion dollars promised was already in the works...this would have been on top of that)

His firing of GM president Rick Wagoner was intended to not only shake up GM, but ring a shot across the bow of ANY US business that has taken government money of late. Many bank executives, including some who were FORCED to take TARP money have tried to give it back lately. They have been told that they cannot. Some in a very forceful way...personally...but the new Czar of US business, Barack Obama. I'm still looking for that presidential power in Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution. But no matter...after all, Obama has said that the Constitution "represents the fundamental flaw of this country." (the link include a link to the audio from the 2001 interview. And this guy used to teach Constitutional Law? Those students should get a refund. Perhaps he will "fix" the Constitution by ignoring it. He's off to a good start.

Obama's war on US business is persuading our best and brightest to leave US corporations and seek out more friendly places with foreign institutions. Some believe that he doesn't want the economy to recover, that is part of what has been called the "Cloward/Piven" strategy for the US economy. This strategy would end the US free market economy and make us look more like European Socialism. I'm not ready to go say he is doing this...yet. But I still don't believe many of Obama's moves are what over 60 million people thought they were voting for last November.

So it is understandable that some executives would be willing to go overseas. Look for that exodus to speed up faster than you can say "Governor Patterson hates the rich people who pay New York City Taxes." What was that about? It was about a governor with approval ratings even lower than Rush Limbaugh...bashing Rush Limbaugh.

Meanwhile, the president has managed to apologize for every American offense short of the Edsel and new Coke. He also threw in a slap in the face, this time to past DEMOCRATIC president Harry S. Truman, by flagellating America over Hiroshima. Looks like he was there for more of the Reverend Wright Hate America preachings then he led us to believe in the campaign. You may remember that Wright's indignant accusations that the atomic bombs dropped on Japan were about racism against Asians, and not about ending the war. Shame on you, Mr. President.

Fortunately, the students in my US History classes know more about that event than the president of the United States, as they watch the film Hiroshima every year. It's a pretty accurate accounting of the timeline and reasonings that led to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that ended World War II. I feel fairly certain that Mr. Obama never saw it. I believe it has great credibility as an accurate portrayal of the events leading up to Truman's decision because the Japanese side of the story is portrayed by Japanese and the US side portraying generally by Canadians. And we aren't terribly popular with Canadians these days...but I feel the US view is well-represented here.

Perhaps we shouldn't be too hard on our president for his mistaken view regarding that act. Even though it probably saved half a million US lives, not to mention over a million Japanese lives, by making the invasion of Japan unnecessary, but it showed us just how bad a full-scale nuclear war would be should we lose control of world events and let loose the ultimate "dogs of war."

Obama is obviously "historically-challenged." He was taught his high school US History in Hawaii where it is portrayed as a racist act by Americans against Asians. How ironic that this be taught in the vicinity of the still-rusting hulk of the USS Arizona at the bottom of Pearl Harbor. But that is the nature of politically correct history in our educational system in the US today.

The few of us who work overtime trying to be fair while at the same time making sure that they don't get the touchy-feely gobbledegook that passes for "social studies" these days.

So, when we hear him bashing his nation in foreign cities, he is getting applause for his more "reasonable" approach to US foreign policy and wiping away the memory of his cowboy predecessor.

Like a high-schooler at prom, they are excited at the thought of an "easy" date. But they won't respect him in the morning.

UPDATE: His boyhood home state asks him not to do anything to further trash their struggling economy

God Bless Thomas Sowell

2009-03-31T11:16:00.004-05:00

I guess I'm not much of a blogger if I often just reprint something another writer has written. My thinking is that great crisis generate great thinking and writing from great people. We are very blessed to have some fantastic writers and thinkers at this point in our history, unfortunately, none of them have any political power right now. Our government is currently run by some of the worst demogogues in US History. Barney Frank, Joseph Biden, Chris Dodd, and The One are driving the US Titanic full speed towards the iceberg.

Fortunately, we have Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Steyn, Mark Levin, and the master: Thomas Sowell.

I know that there are those who simply see his skin color...hah! I read his stuff for years before I discovered his background. His latest article reflects exactly where I was during the campaign. Watching Americans elect a president like they are voting for a class president was a painful experience for a person who follows current events and contemplates their relation to the lessons history can teach us.

SO...here is his latest, A Rookie President. Read it, and don't weep, just get organized to do everything you can to stop his statist agenda.

A Rookie President
We can lose some very big games with this rookie.

By Thomas Sowell

Someone once said that, for every rookie you have on your starting team in the National Football League, you will lose a game. Somewhere, at some time during the season, a rookie will make a mistake that will cost you a game.

We now have a rookie president of the United States, and, in the dangerous world we live in, with terrorist nations going nuclear, just one rookie mistake can bring disaster down on this generation and generations yet to come.

Barack Obama is a rookie in a sense that few other presidents in American history have ever been. It is not just that he has never been president before. He has never had any position in any kind of organization where he was personally responsible for the outcome.

Other first-term presidents have been governors, generals, Cabinet members, or others in positions of personal responsibility. A few have been senators, like Barack Obama, but usually for longer than Obama, and not having spent half their few years in the Senate running for president.

What is even worse than making mistakes is having sycophants telling you that you are doing fine when you are not. In addition to all the usual hangers-on and supplicants for government favors that every president has, Barack Obama has a media that will see no evil, hear no evil, and certainly speak no evil.

They will cheer him on, no matter what he does, short of first-degree murder — and they would make excuses for that. Even Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan has gushed over President Obama, and even crusty Bill O’Reilly has been impressed by Obama’s demeanor.

There is no sign that President Obama has impressed the Russians, the Iranians, or the North Koreans, except by his rookie mistakes — and that is a dangerous way to impress dangerous people.

What did his televised overture to the Iranians accomplish, except to reassure them that he was not going to do a damn thing to stop them from getting a nuclear bomb? It is a mistake that can go ringing down the corridors of history.

Future generations who live in the shadow of that nuclear threat may wonder what we were thinking about, putting our lives — and theirs — in the hands of a rookie because we liked his style and symbolism?

In the name of “change,” Barack Obama is following policies so old that this generation has never heard of them — certainly not in most of our educational institutions, where history has been replaced by “social studies” or other politically correct courses.

Seeking deals with our adversaries, behind the backs of our allies? The French did that at Munich back in 1938. They threw Czechoslovakia to the wolves and, less than two years later, Hitler gobbled up France anyway.

This year, President Obama’s attempt to make a backdoor deal with the Russians, behind the backs of the NATO countries, was not only rejected but made public by the Russians — a sign of contempt and a warning to our allies not to put too much trust in the United States.

Barack Obama is following a long practice among those on the left of being hard on our allies and soft on our enemies. One of our few allies in the Middle East, the Shah of Iran, was a whipping boy for many in the American media, who vented their indignation at his regime — which now, in retrospect, seems almost benign compared to the hate-filled fanatics and international-terrorism sponsors who now rule that country.

However much Barack Obama has proclaimed his support for Israel, his first phone call as president of the United States was to Hamas, to which he has given hundreds of millions of dollars, which can buy a lot of rockets to fire into Israel.

Our oldest and staunchest ally, Britain, has been downgraded by President Obama’s visibly unimpressive reception of British prime minister Gordon Brown, compared to the way that previous presidents over the past two generations have received British prime ministers. President Obama’s sending the bust of Winston Churchill from the White House back to the British embassy at about the same time was either a rookie mistake or another snub.

We can lose some very big games with this rookie.

Finally, a film about our military I can recommend

2009-03-28T10:12:00.002-05:00

Please click on and watch the above trailer.

Last night, my wife and I were heading for Chicago where I am giving a talk on Abraham Lincoln to one of many clubs around the country who support the school where I teach.

I had seen that the movie "Brothers at War" was going to be shown in Decatur, Illinois, so we made plans to stop there and see it before arriving in Chicago. Little did I know that Decatur was the hometown of the family of the subjects of the film. The director of the film, Jake Rademacher, and oldest of the brothers, had decided to make the film about his two younger brothers in order to get an idea why men were signing up to return over and over again to go back to Iraq.

He showed up for the film last night, being greeted by so many old friends, and gave us a little Q & A after the film. The audience had a decidedly supportive cachet but even more of a frustration with the way the mission in Iraq has been treated by Hollywood and the US press media. It was clear this was one reason that Rademacher made the film, but it is really refreshingly free of politics and polemics. What it is truly a tribute to is the sacrifice that the men and their families make to support their highest sense of service to the United States of America and a chance to help oppressed peoples who have been bullied by dictators like Saddam Hussein.

The last 30 minutes of the film are the most rewarding because we finally get a sense of the Iraqi people, and more importantly, the nascent new Iraqi army. Most of the film was shot in two stints Jake took with his brothers, and their comrades, in Iraq.

We see many things we never see on the TV news: Iraqis telling us our troops are "the good guys", GIs saying "I'd give my life for America...without hesistation", the boredom, the good-natured four-letter word joshing, a firefight...and casualties.

It's not a whitewash...it was clear that the Iraqi army isn't going to be the US Marines anytime soon, but the looks on their faces when they get praise from their Marine advisor for running TOWARDS the gunfire, and taking on the "wahabis" as the enemy is called, is priceless. The men kiss each other on the cheek, and you can see that if we are willing to have the gonads to hang in there with the Iraqi people, and not just for a few months or years, that they just might make a difference in that insane part of the world.

I stopped wiping away the tears after the first few minutes of the film an just let the salt dry; a mark of pride in what I was viewing.

There is no word yet on when there will be a DVD of this film, but I encourage anyone to go to the website and click on either "theaters near you" or "join a task force." As you can imagine, there were plenty of theaters showing junk like "Lions and Lambs" or even "Redacted", but getting "Brothers at War" has been a real challenge. Even with the financial and connective support of Gary "Lt. Dan" Sinese and Jon Voight has not made it easy for Rademacher to get this film distributed.

Any city that can sell 1000 pre-paid tickets will get the film there, so the producers are organizing "task forces" in various states to get the film shown in their area. As you can imagine, much of the focus has been in towns with a large National Guard or military base population.

But this is a film that should be seen by all US citizens so they have a better understanding of what military families sacrifice in order to keep us safe.

I, for one, would love to be able to show it in my classroom someday. There will be issues with that, it's rated R for language and a brief shot of a pretty tough war wound, but the message to our culture needs to be heard.

Coach

Meet the new blog, not same as the old blog

2009-03-24T22:03:00.003-05:00

I wish I can say that we can "meet the new boss" and consider him "same as the old boss", but we will have to make do...

I have started a new blog and deleted two of the old ones. This is the one I am going to give most of my time and soul to. It's my intent that this blog will eventually result in some kind of writing project with an eye towards publication.

I hope to see you there! The link is over to the side...

Coach

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 8

2009-03-17T11:11:00.003-05:00

Obama during the campaign

When soldiers return from fighting, they deserve nothing but the best in medical care, he said. More needs to be done, he said, to understand the effects of post traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury on soldiers returning from war.

"We'll have to keep our sacred trust with our veterans and fully fund the (Veterans Administration). We'll have to look after our wounded warriors, whether they're suffering from wounds seen or unseen

Obama this past week...

The American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Treatment

And, in case you think the American Legion is making it up, here's a newspaper article...

What's next?

2009-03-14T13:56:00.003-05:00

Here comes the next crisis...credit cards.

This article from the Wall Street Journal online is pretty deep in jargon.

In a nutshell, look for your bankcards to cut back on their credit lines...and many who carry a balance will get cut off completely.

What happens to the buying power in the economy when that happens?

I think this one should hit sometime this summer.

Stay tuned...

Coach

a quick update

2009-03-12T07:33:00.003-05:00

I am getting ready for Spring Break, so I hope to get finished a number of drafts I am working on during that time. Meanwhile, I want to get one incredibly intelligent analysis of the current dust-up over the Obama vs. Limbaugh controversy going on right now.

It was silly enough that the President attacked a talk-show host, raising him up to the level of discourse that was unnecessary, and I think in the end, damaging, to his presidency. Many have taken on Limbaugh, Senator Harry Reid comes to mind, and ALL have been worse the wear for it. If you don't like Limbaugh, the best way to harm him is to IGNORE HIM. Obama isn't so wise in that way, and any short-term benefits he got from this ill-advised move will carry long-term baggage.

Now Newsweek has employed a former Bush speechwriter to carry their water in a piece of invective masquerading as an analysis piece. David Frum will go down as the Benedict Arnold of the conservative movement. There are plenty of both Republicans and conservatives who will blanch at Limbaugh's bombastic daily rant over culture and ideology, but few will be stupid enough to do so in a magazine who has been so busy kissing Obama's derriere that they need a year's supply of Chap-Stick every week.

Into the fray steps one of my favorites, Victor Davis Hanson. As per usual, I am overcome by envy. I would love to write like this man! Here it is:

Frum vs. Limbaugh

In the end, the controversy boils down to an argument of the moment versus one of the ages. Frum believes that conservatives have to change their message to appeal to new constituencies without which the Republican party will lose future elections. Limbaugh argues that conservatism’s message is not predicated on transitory appeals to particular groups, but rests on sound principles that, mutatis mutandis for new circumstances, don’t really change. Frum, the politico, wants to return to power and so make the necessary adjustments; Limbaugh, the talk-show host, would rather stay in the wilderness if it means forgoing principles.

I don’t see how Frum can win this argument, since he does not seem to understand the Limbaugh brief, which I think is something like the following:

Conservatism, to the degree it is failing, either has gotten off message (e.g., the mega-deficits of the irresponsible Republican Congress between 2001 and 2006, or the shamelessness of a Ted Stevens or Duke Cunningham or Larry Craig, or the inability of the Bush administration to convey to the public our aims and objectives in Iraq) or simply cannot communicate in an effective way why lower taxes, smaller government, individual freedom, muscular national defense, and traditional emphasis on the family and community are of interest to everyone, regardless of age, race, or class.

Accordingly, conservatism will return to prominence when it uses time-honored and unchanging free-market principles to address new problems, and when it finds advocates who both are adept at communication with non-traditional audiences (e.g., why it is in the interest of African-Americans to be skeptical of abortion on demand, why Hispanic small-business people need to be wary of intrusive regulations, why Asian-Americans should fear affirmative-action-driven de facto racial quotas at the University of California, why talented teachers should not have to join bureaucratic, ossified unions, why today’s young people should not have to pay off Obama’s annual $1.7 trillion deficits, etc.) and believe in their message’s resonance, without trimming[?] for the applause of the moment.

This all could be discussed in reasonable terms, but Frum unwisely chose to conflate the role of a political analyst and strategist with that of the nation’s premier talk-show host. The genre of talk radio hinges on entertainment — satire, invective, bombast, humor. A Limbaugh succeeds or fails not just by his ability to analyze politics (millions can do that), but by his acting ability, impersonations, ad hoc quips, and comedy, which hold an audience of 20 million for 15 hours a week (only a handful of people in the country can do that).

As a result of that confusion of genres, we get something incoherent like the analyst Frum, in ad hominem invective, decrying Limbaugh’s past problems with prescription drugs, three marriages, weight problems, cigar smoking, wealth, etc., as he weirdly accuses Limbaugh, the talk-show host par excellence, of resorting to ad hominem crudity in saying that Obama is using his biracial heritage to his advantage, and that it improperly shields him from normal scrutiny.

The other issues likewise weaken Frum’s case. Plenty of candidates, left and right, who are purported role models (in a way talk-show hosts need not be) have had divorces and admitted illicit drug use, smoke, and are not in top shape; the Democratic advocacy groups have had plenty of spokespeople, from the Daily Kos and Michael Moore to the Durbin/Kennedy/Murtha outbursts on Iraq, that make Limbaugh seem moderate in comparison; so far the venom that was expressed against Bush dwarfs any legitimate criticism of Obama (we haven’t yet, thank God, had novels like Checkpoint about Obama); the notion that a businessperson like Limbaugh is wrongly profiting from his criticism of Obama is far less persuasive than the suspicion that political operatives are wrongly scrambling to reinvent their message, either to regain power or to become acceptable to those now in power; and finally, the notion that a moderate D.C. insider, in this groupthink Age of Obama, should be deemed courageous for taking on Rush Limbaugh is, with all due respect, completely laughable.

Meanwhile, Obama fiddles with our capitalist system while the financial markets burn...

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 7...gov't vs. business

2009-02-26T23:23:00.004-06:00

I can't keep up with these...and I have seen so so so many these days. But on Monday February 9th he fired off this classic.

It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs."

After his faux State of the Union address the other night, he said

"Business, not government, is the engine of growth in this country"

What a great four years this is gonna be. This guy is comedy gold.

The State of the Disunion

2009-02-24T07:46:00.003-06:00

I suppose at this point, I should be embarrassed at the number of re-posts I have done on this blog lately.

I'm not.

I love writing...and have several long-term drafts that I am still working on for this blog, but when I see a great piece of writing, or seriously worthy analysis, well, I have to give a hat tip and re-post it here.

I love Andrew Breitbart's new blog, Big Hollywood. If you haven't read, and then bookmarked it, you are missing something great. This morning, preparing for The One's speech to a joint session of Congress (since he doesn't formally get a State of the Union speech until next January), Ernie Mannix, a regular blogger at Big Hollywood, does a great re-write of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address as if given by the Chairman of the People's Democratic Republic of Amerika.

Here it is...

Four to seven years ago, our fathers scored and brought forth on this continent, some new homes, conceived in stucco, and dedicated to the proposition that all men can get second mortgages.

Now we are engaged in a great economic crisis, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated to overspending -putting in built-in pools - blowing a wad in Vegas- buying way too much crap on eBay, then stepping up to a “C” class - can long endure.

We are met on a great battlefield of this credit crisis. We have come to dedicate a portion of this field, as a final resting place for those who did the right thing; paid their mortgages, lived within their means and gave of their livelihoods, so that jackasses that didn’t put ANY money down, and still spent more than they had, might walk away from their homes scott-free and punk an entire neighborhood of innocent families. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this, until it doesn’t work- and we need to do it again.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground, without Pelosi, Reid and Frank standing up and taking all the damned credit. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled to pay their mortgages, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to pork-up the stimuli.

The world will little note, nor long remember that I’m commandeering the census, but I will make sure it never forgets, when this all goes kablooey, that it’s still gonna be all Bush’s freakin’ fault.

It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work of paying through our noses and bowels, year after year, propping up those who overspent, high-tailed it, and are now running up another Capitol One credit card. It is also for us here to be dedicated to the great bailout ballooning before us — that from these toilet-less trashed foreclosures, we take increased devotion to the mighty socialistic causes that will give the short-end to the responsible ones.

That we here highly resolve that these four bedroom wrecks, shall not have foreclosed in vain — that this nation, under the Democrats, shall have a new birth of socialism– and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall never be seen again.

Sigh...I wish it weren't so accurate.

Coach

Media Malpractice - How Obama Got Elected

2009-02-23T08:07:00.005-06:00

Well, it's finally out. I had a great weekend, driving to Tulsa to give a talk on the USA's first ladies, but also got to listen to Bernard Goldberg's latest book. My wife reads some of the books we both are dying to digest when we go on long trips.

Last summer, she shared Mark Steyn's fabulous "America Alone". This trip, we read and discussed Goldberg's "A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media".

It was not surprising but in many ways quite dismaying. Not because Obama won, but because one of America's few professions to enjoy explicit 1st Amendment protections failed us so miserably and INTENTIONALLY in this past election.

If the American people can't count on a free press to be fair and incisive, than what hope to do we have of an informed electorate to make wise choices when electing their government? Now, we are in the middle of several economic and world crises and we just voted for the most popular inexperienced person as "class president."

Oops.

But wait, there's more! We also took THE ONLY candidate of the four in this election with executive experience and trashed the person like a bowery bum who stumbled into the posh country club. It's eye-opening to see some of the previews for John Ziegler's new documentary "Media Malpractice: How Obama got elected and Palin got targeted."

Who knows? Maybe Obama IS the second coming of Abraham Lincoln. But again, if the system was rigged, how will we ever know if the American people were ever given a fair choice...or, as Bernie Goldberg says in his book, did the press have it's finger pulling on the scales so hard that the McCain-Palin ticket should have just phoned it in and headed off on a vacation? Perhaps the election was little more than a set-up.

I just ordered the film on DVD...I expect I'll have more to say about it later. Meanwhile, here are the links for Bernie's book and John Ziegler's film. John will be plugging the film all this week...and I'm sure he's not expecting fair treatment from the partisan media people he fingers in this travesty.

By the way, I encourage you to click on the link for John's website and watch the trailer he has embedded in his home page...it's most instructive.

Coach

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 6...Ain't no sunshine in this White House

2009-02-17T12:32:00.003-06:00

President Obama promised that, when he became president, all bills would be up on the White House website for 5 days before he signed them.

Pants on fire.

The "stimulus" bill was passed Friday. He went on vacation last weekend. He is signing it in Denver today. It's not on the White House's website.

He hasn't even been president a month.

This guy makes Clinton look like truth serum. I "hope" it "changes".

ugh.

I hate to say I told you so...

2009-02-11T05:32:00.004-06:00

Not too long ago, I said this...

Could the new president be simply using his cabinet as a committee of figureheads

in this blog post.

Guess who is finding this out first?

I wish I could feel badly for her, but she made the deal, probably in the end of the delegate hunt that guaranteed her full support during the general campaign.. It reminds me of that great cinematic moment in Animal House when Otter blames Flounder for the destruction of Flounder's brother's car by Otter and his Delta House buddies.

You ****ed up, Flounder! You trusted us!!

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 6...Hope turns to fear

2009-02-06T08:07:00.004-06:00

In his Inaugural speech, President Obama said:

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear

...that is, unless I want you all to force your congressional representatives to spend a trillion dollars without taking the time to debate what is in there and whether the next three generations of Americans should be saddled with the burden of paying back that debt for billions of payback to the interest groups that elected Democrats in November. Change, my butt.

Here is what Obama said YESTERDAY because he wants the Porkulus Bill passed TODAY.

A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe

See, it's not pork. Why, because he says so! No, I'm not kidding. He said all spending is stimulus. You think I'm kidding? Click it and weep.

Charles Krauthammer puts a fine point on it here.

The bill must be killed. Today. Call your congressperson and senators.

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 5...Shortest ever

2009-02-05T15:54:00.003-06:00

This one could only take a stopwatch to see...
Barack Obama today at a prayer breakfast...

"We know there is no God who condones the killing of an innocent human being."

Does that include his support of the Freedom of Choice Act?
How about his opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act while an Illinois state senator. Has that changed?

It was too late for this infant.

This by the man who, in one of his first executive act, ended the Mexico City Policy which was intended to prevent US foreign aid from assisting in abortion procedures or education/indoctrination.

Look...I'm not a hard-core "pro-life" person, I think there are circumstances that require people to have that choice, and I don't think the government should be involved. But I think President Present really stepped in it here, telling a faith-heavy audience what it wanted to hear. It also happened to be in direct conflict with his past words and recent actions.

I feel like our government has become one long Fellini film.

Where we are after two weeks of the Obama Administration

2009-02-04T13:06:00.006-06:00

No that's not Obama doing his version of Bush and "The Pet Goat", it's the Obama's trying to get these first two weeks behind them and restart his administration.

Leave it to Victor Davis Hanson, NRO contributor, educator, and writer extraordinaire to put the beginning of the Obama presidency into crystal clarity. I am posting Hanson's verbatim post from NRO Online with links explaining each news reference so that you see that it's not just Hanson's opinion about what happened, but for those who searched enough in the hidden news, what HAS actually happened in the Obama White House.

He calls this, "The impending Obama Meltdown." Perhaps overly melodramatic, but when you look at what has happened, you get an sense of what would happen to the presidency of men who came into office with lesser expectations.

Some of us have been warning that it was not healthy for the U.S. media to have deified rather than questioned Obama, especially given that they tore apart Bush, ridiculed Palin, and caricatured Hillary. And now we can see the results of their two years of advocacy rather than scrutiny.

We are quite literally after two weeks teetering on an Obama implosion—and with no Dick Morris to bail him out—brought on by messianic delusions of grandeur, hubris, and a strange naivete that soaring rhetoric and a multiracial profile can add requisite cover to good old-fashioned Chicago politicking.

First, there were the sermons on ethics, belied by the appointments of tax dodgers, crass lobbyists, and wheeler-dealers like Richardson—with the relish of the Blago tapes still to come. (And why does Richardson/Daschle go, but not Geithner?).

Second, was the "stimulus" (the euphemism for "borrow/print money") that was simply a way to go into debt for a generation to shower Democratic constituencies with cash.

Then third, there were the inflated lectures on historic foreign policy to be made by the clumsy political novice who trashed his own country and his predecessor in the most ungracious manner overseas to a censored Saudi-run press organ (e.g., Bush is dictatorial, the Saudi king is courageous; Obama can mend bridges that America broke to aggrieved Muslims—apparently Tehran hostages, Rushdie, serial attacks in the 1990s, 9/11, Madrid, London never apparently occurred; and neither did feeding Somalis, saving Kuwait, protesting Chechnya, Bosnia/Kosovo, billions to Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinians, help in two Afghan wars, and on and on).

Fourth, there was the campaign rhetoric of Bush shredding the Constitution—FISA, Guantánamo, the Patriot Act, Iraq, renditions, etc.—followed by "all that for now stays the same" inasmuch as we haven't been hit in over seven years and can't risk another attack.

Fifth, Gibbs as press secretary is a Scott McClellan nightmare that won't go away, given his long McClellan-like relationship with Obama (McClellan should have been fired on day hour one on the job). Blaming Fox News for Obama's calamities is McClellan to the core and doesn't work. He already reminds me of Reverend Wright's undoing at the National Press Club—and he will get worse.

Six, Biden is being Biden. Already, he's ridiculed the chief justice, trashed the former VP, bragged on himself ad nauseam in Bidenesque weird ways, and it's only been two weeks.

And the result of all this?

At home, Obama is becoming laughable and laying the groundwork for the greatest conservative populist reaction since the Reagan Revolution.

Abroad, some really creepy people are lining up to test Obama's world view of "Bush did it/but I am the world": The North Koreans are readying their missiles; the Iranians are calling us passive, bragging on nukes and satellites; Russia is declaring missile defense is over and the Euros in real need of iffy Russian gas; Pakistanis say no more drone attacks (and then our friends the Indians say "shut up" about Kashmir and the Euros order no more "buy American").

This is quite serious. I can't recall a similarly disastrous start in a half-century (far worse than Bill Clinton's initial slips). Obama immediately must lower the hope-and-change rhetoric, ignore Reid/Pelosi, drop the therapy, and accept the tragic view that the world abroad is not misunderstood but quite dangerous. And he must listen on foreign policy to his National Security Advisor, Billary, and the Secretary of Defense. If he doesn't quit the messianic style and perpetual campaign mode, and begin humbly governing, then he will devolve into Carterism—angry that the once-fawning press betrayed him while we the people, due to our American malaise, are to blame.

Victor Davis Hanson...perceptive, prescient...and all too precisely correct.

all statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 4

2009-02-01T16:29:00.003-06:00

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.

The capital flew into a bit of a tizzy when, on his first full day in the White House, President Obama was photographed in the Oval Office without his suit jacket. There was, however, a logical explanation: Mr. Obama, who hates the cold, had cranked up the thermostat.

“He’s from Hawaii, O.K.?” said Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next door to his boss. “He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there.”

I don't think I need to say a thing except, how do you think the NY Times would be reporting this if a REPUBLICAN had done this?

Hypocrites.

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...Episode 3

2009-01-31T07:00:00.011-06:00

One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I’ve won. I don’t take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won’t find a job in my White House.

---Barack Obama, November 3, 2007

nevermind.

First it was lobbyists all over his transition team, (The LA Times cited it as proof that Obama will govern as a "realist") now its lobbyists in several key positions in his White House. When even CNN, The Politico, left-wing bloggers, and the Boston Globe that take notice of these "change"ing ethics, you know it's pretty obvious that things are going to be no different, just a different ideology in the White House.

But even that isn't accurate. The Obama White House is quickly getting a reputation in Washington as being disorganized(Columbia Journalism Review), overloaded with special "czars", and set up to go around his much lauded "Team of Rivals" cabinet. Could the new president be simply using his cabinet as a committee of figureheads set up to keep the nation distracted while his most extreme agenda is stealthily put into motion by "true believers" like Carole Browner and the TRUE culprit in the Scooter Libby leak case, Richard Holbrooke?.

Meanwhile, the more dangerous promises that he IS keeping, like closing down Guantanamo Bay and setting all the terrorists free, is getting ready to open a Pandora's Box of newly energized individuals set on one goal: killing as many Americans as possible.

Yea. Change we can believe in.

Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night.

---Bette Davis in "All About Eve"

Oh, by the way, there is change in the REPUBLICAN party, who just elected their first African-American as the head of the party. Just like the Democrats...uh...nevermind. He's the first African-American head of either party. The new Chairman of the RNC, Michael Steele, former Lt. Governor of Maryland, will be able to shape the message and public perception of the Republican party over the next several election cycles.

Before you say, "Wait a minute, they chose Barack Obama to be their nominee, and thus, the first black president." Wanna bet? If the Democrat party leadership had had it's way, Hillary Clinton would be in the second week of her presidency. THE RANK AND FILE of the Democrat Party chose Obama...NOT the Democrat leadership. Even much of the Democrat black leadership was originally for Hillary, before a slate of early Obama primary victories swung them over to his camp.

And if you don't believe me, just look at the way Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrat leadership's crafting of the Porkulus Bill has gone contrary to Obama's stated goal of including Republican ideas in his legislative agenda. They are happy to have their president sign the bills they send to him...but they don't want him telling them what to put in the bills.

Over the next several months, his fight with talk radio host Rush Limbaugh aside, Obama is likely to have more fights with Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, et. al. than he is to have with the Republican leadership.

The Republicans don't have to votes to stop him or his agenda. But Pelosi and her House Democrats will be writing the bills...and they aren't asking Obama what he would like.

How will history judge our 43rd president?

2009-01-18T18:08:00.007-06:00

I suppose the picture will give away my viewpoint, but I am not alone in my belief that history will be much kinder to George W. Bush than popular culture and the mainstream media in the world have been.

I find it ironic that it sometimes takes the foreign media to give a decent defense of the soon-departed chief executive, but I suppose the epidemic of Obamamania may have intensified some of the worst of the BDS that has infected the nation for so long. (BDS= Bush Derangement Syndrome) The creator of BDS as a symptom also has a pretty decent defense of the president here.

Expect others to follow, but some are not waiting for the coronation of The One to begin to reassess #43. Some good choices are here, here, here, here, here, and here.

It will be interesting to see how #44 does when the pre-season is over.

The media will protect him as long as it can...but like in baseball, the ball always finds the nervous infielder.

President Obama had better bring more than rhetoric to the table.

Glo-bull Warming, Episode 3 Return of the Socialith

2009-01-18T17:22:00.002-06:00

The latest scientist of note to jump off the man-made Global Warming bandwagon is William Happer, Physics professor at some hack college in New Jersey...

...oops...It's only PRINCETON UNIVERSITY. What is the matter with him? Doesn't he know the science is in and the debate is over?

I suppose he will get this year's Flat Earth award.

sigh.

global warming update

2009-01-11T23:44:00.002-06:00

FLASH...as I am sure your heard all weekend, global sea ice is back to where it was in 1979...you know...when they were talking about the coming new ice age?!?

You didn't hear it?

I'm shocked and stunned...

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date, Episode 2

2009-01-10T14:14:00.002-06:00

As I said on December 21st, this will be a regular post on this blog. I got the idea from Jim Geraghty's Campaign Spot on National Review online. This is a hat tip to his blog for this example...but I expect I'll be finding plenty of my own.

Remember when Barack Obama said that lobbyists would not be working in his White House?

I guess he didn't include the Pentagon. Yup, his deputy defense secretary, the guy who will keep an eye on Bush holdover Defense Secretary Gates, is a LOBBYIST.

Just to remind you all...he's NOT the messiah...he's a Chicago politician...and a socialist.

All Barack Obama statements come with an expiration date.

The End of Civilization as we know it, Episode 2

2009-01-07T14:02:00.002-06:00

I don't really know what to say about this latest example of the state of the culture in America, but here it is...

Women are buying dolls that look like real babies so that they can enjoy having a baby without all the hassle...like college education and changing diapers.

No, seriously.

I'm not kidding.

...and that exact example is quoted in here.

Now, I got to go hang myself.

Just kidding...sorta.

Coach

Hat tip to KJ Lopez at National Review Online.

On the approach of Hopey Changemas

2009-01-06T08:53:00.003-06:00

As we prepare for the Inauguration of Barack Obama, it's instructive to look at popular culture and see where the American soul stands at this point in time. Two articles this morning caught my attention:

The first was by Jay Nordlinger, Senior Editor of National Review. He had written about a musical concert he had attended where politics were inserted into the comments of the conductor. His dismayed observation led to a flood of confirming stories from other readers, some of those who favored Obama's candidacy, and reflected a concern about politics being inserted into EVERY aspect of our lives and a coarsening of our public manners as a citizenry. I strongly urge anyone who reads this blog to read this article. I sent him an email relating similar experiences I have endured this year, so I guess I felt a little emotionally invested in the subject. You will find some of the snippets shared by the readers dismaying, but also, perhaps, a call to arms of sort. Not to fight a political battle, but perhaps to stand up and be counted.

Perhaps it is time for people to summon some moral courage and nicely, but firmly,inform the offenders that not everyone shares their viewpoint and that rudeness is unkindness; in many ways just as offensive as what the offending blabbermouth is upset with Bush/conservatives/Republicans/Americans about. It will keep happening until people start speaking out.

I know this is difficult for most of us, because we feel we would be perceived as no different than what we are criticizing. It would seem to defeat our purpose.

I happen to subscribe to the Godwin's Law: that "there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. " But it is also the most recent, and widely accepted, example of a formerly great culture that let it's moral and principles get corrupted due to fear, intimidation, and apathy. Let's not let "groupthink" prevent Americans from speaking up against thought intimidation, even if it comes in the guise of "hope and change" replacing "Bush lied, people died." Frankly, both those concepts are provably fraudulent.

Secondly, a cultural front on these issues is being opened in no less hostile ground than Hollywood itself. After meekly, and secretly, keeping their head down for fear of loss of career destruction and public humiliation, Hollywood conservatives are deciding to "come out of the closet" and go public in a big way. Andrew Breitbart is taking the lead in his organization called "Big Hollywood."

This isn't an "anti-Obama" organization, or even an "anti-liberal" interest group. They are most tired of the default Hollywood position of being "anti-American, especially if a Republican is in power."

No more.

It's about time.

Coach

Man-Made Global Warming: Is it real or not?

2009-01-03T20:50:00.004-06:00

Wow...a tough last few weeks for the anthropogenic "climate change" proponents.

First, a long time opponent of the concept of man-made global climate change, Czech President Vaclav Klaus has the EU up in arms because it is the Czech Republic's turn to have it's president be head of the EU. And since the EU is trying to get more compliance with climate change-fighting rules enforced, they are NOT happy about Klaus being the figurehead leader of the EU as they try to get the public to support restrictions on "greenhouse gases."

We also saw a significant article in the London Sunday Telegraph proclaiming that "2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved." One doesn't have to look far to see examples of those who take an opposing view regarding MMGW, in spite of the efforts to ostracize or even defrock those who disagree. Examples can be found here, here, here, here, here, and here. Where media once assumed that they had better get on board, because their readers agreed with the "climate changers", now, many publish articles debunking the concept, or questioning whether the "science is all in" as Al Gore said the other day.

Now comes an article, in the liberal Huffington Post, of all places, asking Al Gore for linking those who disagree with the conclusion of those who believe that MMGW is a hoax, or at least unproven, are "flat-earthers."

One only has to read the comments after the article to see that the most of the Post's readers disagree strongly with the conclusions of the author. But there is little doubt that polling data shows that the public may have backed off from the contention that CO2 emissions, generally considered the Number One Suspect in anthropogenic climate change, mainly from human activity, is to blame for any conceived climate change affecting the earth's climate.

I have always maintained that MMGW, if it exists, remains unproven. I sense that those who are it's most vociferous proponents have an anti-capitalist, one-world government, and anti-technology/development bias that has led them to listen to the alarmists with little regard for those who cite scientific evidence which contradicts the conclusions of those who disagree.

Science has long since lost it's mantle of dispassionate apolitical guardian of the world and referee of the material orb on which we live. So much has become part of the scientific world: government grant work, a lifetime of "progressive" bias, and anti-capitalist indoctrination at the nation's "higher learning" institutions, and now add in some heavy-duty, and well-financed, "green" organizations with sophisticated propaganda techniques (Al Gore's easily debunked "Oscar-winning 'documentary"...now required watching for young impressionable children in many an elementary and high-school science classroom).

Why don't those same classrooms watch the Channel 4, UK, counter to the Al Gore film, "The Great Global Warming Swindle?"

Good Question.

If you want to, you can always go to the You Tube here...myself, I went out and ordered a copy from Amazon. What I like about what Little Green Footballs, a conservative blog, has done, is engage in a DEBATE.

The point is this...this debate is NOT decided. The science is NOT in...and before we do the kind of massive and government-controlled surrender of rights, initiative, and lifestyle-change, we should be certain that we have covered our bases on this issue. Why the rush to judgment?

So, if you are going to show Al Gore's film, show the Channel 4 alternative.

Teachers should be fair...and show both if they are going to show one.

I won't hold my breath...

If Caroline Kennedy is qualified to be a senator...

2008-12-24T20:19:00.001-06:00

Assassins in our midst

2008-12-23T10:37:00.005-06:00

Amazing...

Almost two months have passed since Obama's landslide election, and yet Alaska governor Sarah Palin remains a topic of conversation. She was fourth on Time Magazine's Person of the Year list. WHY? The media long knives are still out for her. They want her politically DEAD.

There is no doubt that fear is part of that equation. Fear by Democrats of the way she connected with people. Fear of the inside-the-Beltway Republicans who don't like the way she cleaned up Alaska's cesspool of Republican corruption.

They see her as the most scary embodiment of "flyover country" - rural values -- coloquial expressions ("you betcha"), large family, pro-life, hunter, fisher, blue-collar background, several state universities as her education. They see her as an anti-elitist -- a close call that almost succeeded had we not been protected by her "exposure" by our "watchdog media." These are the same vigilant watchdogs who have ignored the controversy over the question of a certified birth certificate of the President-elect, his corrupt machine that gave him his birth, the AWOL school transcripts and connections (where are all the fawning reminiscences of Barack Obama and his time at Punahou, Columbia, Harvard, et. al?) The compliant acceptance that his people had no improper conversations with Illinois Governor Payoffavitch...as New York governor Patterson prepares to pay off Teddy Kennedy and his family's early backing of Obama with Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg's senate seat. But then that New York Senate seat has long been a carpetbagger seat since...well, since uncle Bobby got it in the 60's, then Hillary (at least she won an election against sacrificial lamb Rick Lazio), and now Neil Diamond's "Sweet Caroline" will be appointed.

So why the hatred for Palin? She's won more elections than Hillary has, and Caroline Kennedy has never held elective office. Well, Palin was gonna be one step away from the presidency, they said. Even Dan Quayle got more respect than Palin. But then Senator Quayle was already part of the Washington crowd. This is the crowd that CAUSED the mortgage meltdown by passing laws that in essence FORCED banks to loan money to high risk people.(Some people called this MONTHS ago...and Frank and Dodd, the chairmen of the banking committees in each house of Congress, NOW have larger majorities to do this to other areas of US industry "cough" autos "cough".) Now, those same people, will bail out the auto industry...for while. Then California...Ohio...Michigan...but not Alaska.

Governor Palin is suggesting a budget cut of 7%, and even with the decline in oil revenues still expects a SURPLUS at the end of fiscal year 2010. She hit the nail on the head with her statement, that would be well heeded in Washington, and explains her appeal to so many in the Republican Party:

"We of course are going to be prudent," Palin said. "We're going to live within our means. We don't want any Alaskans to assume that government is the answer to all of the challenges and issues and problems that any individual faces."

In a few years, America may be sorry she didn't win.

I encourage readers to read this interview with Governor Palin here. Does this sound like the chopped up interview we saw with Katie Couric? The biting New York Times piece by Dick Cavett? The hateful pieces, even by Republicans, that gave many Americans the idea that this woman was a blithering idiot with no experience that must be kept away from the White House so that the inexperienced Barack Obama, and his corrupt Chicago buddies like Chief of Staff to be Rahm Emmanuel, can keep us safe and restore international faith in the United States? (Translation: the other countries that want us weakened, but also want more of our money.)

No, that wasn't the real Sarah Palin, it was a caricature that the Lapdog Obama Media wanted us to believe.

But they won! Why are they still scared of her?

Because she still connects with people. Georgia voters know...

So, New York Times, Washington Post, etc...be afraid...be very afraid. Sarah's not going away...she will run for governor again in 2010 and win big...and then, watch out. I'm not convinced she will run for president in 2012, but in 2016, she will be in her early 50s...and a lot of successful Republican candidates for state offices will owe her for the incessant campaigning she will be doing for them over the next eight years...

Her time will come...you read it here.

PS-- Thomas Sowell remains required reading. Class dismissed.

All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date

2008-12-21T15:24:00.003-06:00

You remember it...that race speech that made the presstitutes think he was the next Lincoln...it made a tingle go up Chris Matthew's leg...the greatest speech on our biggest problem. I'm talking, of course, of Barack Obama's famous speech from Philadelphia on race.

It was ostensibly to take some of the heat off of him as people were listening to sound clips of his preacher of 20 odd years saying "God damn America" and talking about the "US of KKK".

One of the things that so impressed us about the speech was that he WROTE IT HIMSELF.

Ummm...maybe not.

Now appears a post-election revelation by the Washington Post that he actually gave a number of ideas he wanted covered in the speech to his speechwriter, Jon Favreau, and Favreau worked up a speech that Obama then spent some days tweaking to fit his style.

Is this evil, you ask? Heck no. Few politicians DON'T, have speechwriters do the work for their boss, after having been given guidance on what the boss wants to say. I'm just saying, that it was part of the "lore of Obama" that he wrote that speech by himself after two days of solid work.

I'm just saying what I had said at the time...and was contradicted on by friends and colleagues...HE DIDN'T WRITE IT. So, I get to say, I was right...

But wait...that's not the end of the story. Jon Favreau is part of the story.

Now, all we heard this year was how we needed to find new HOPE that CHANGE was gonna come. And for the most part, the only change has been throwing out most of the Bush people and replacing them with...uh...old CLINTON people. We aren't going to do business like we used to...people deserved to be treated with respect.

We did get some change...and Favreau is part of that change. As part of the inebriated celebration upon Obama's winning of the nomination, a "friend" of Favreau's was stupid enough to post a picture of Favreau and friends groping a cut-out of the Secretary of State nominee.

Fear not...his job with the Obama administration is not in jeopardy...he's not a Republican. Democrats are known to be tolerant and a friend of diversity. It's those neanderthal Republicans, especially those sexist, bigoted, homophobic, warmongering, lying conservatives, who are so unfit to serve our diverse nation.

Repeat after me: All statements by Barack Obama come with an expiration date...

Sexism is now ok. Racism is only a problem for white people. He's for gay marriage, he's against gay marriage. He wants us out of Iraq, we can't leave Iraq quite yet.

BARACK OBAMA IS SIMPLY A POLITICIAN.

I expect this theme to be a regular occurrence on this blog...sad to say.

Coach

Is "fear itself" all that's left?

2008-12-17T17:40:00.000-06:00

No question, it's a tough road ahead.

But it's not time to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Today's great article is by Jonah Goldberg and can be found here.

Based on my nearly 20 years in asset management, I think he's right on the money (pardon the pun), but will America panic and make things worse?

Mr. Obama will be closely watched...

The Legacy of December 13th

2008-12-13T10:02:00.002-06:00

This is another first for me...I am going to post another person's post. Please read this...and keep this in mind when you hear all the angry comments from our citizenry about Bush and the Iraq War.

Today marks the fifth anniversary of Saddam Hussein’s capture by U.S. forces, when he was pulled dirty, afraid, and alone from a hole in Tikrit, Iraq. Five years from that day, Iraqis continue to face a somewhat uncertain future fraught with challenges and perils. Critics of the war complain that there is no certainty that democracy can take root in Iraq, and lament the possibility that this “experiment” will fail. These cynics are correct in asserting that our achievements in Iraq remain fragile and potentially reversible, and they may be justified in their skepticism about an Iraqi democracy’s staying power. One thing is certain though: The Iraqi people, who have never had reason to, are now learning how to hope. They no longer face each day with the certainty that conditions are immutable and inevitable, as they had been forced to do for so many years under Saddam’s regime.

Saddam Hussein, his sons, and his supporters terrorized the people of Iraq and subjected them to violence and maltreatment without reason or restraint. His record of rape, torture, murder, and oppression is well documented but marginalized and deflected by critics who claim that the violence of the war overshadows Hussein’s heinous crimes. This argument does not, and cannot stand. During Saddam Hussein’s reign, Iraqis had no sense that the terror would ever end. The individual citizen had neither the right nor the ability to oppose Saddam’s henchmen, who took what they wanted, killed and raped at will, and tortured (think hooks, blowtorches, and electricity) to intimidate or eliminate potential enemies. The purpose of this evil was solely to maintain Saddam’s power and strengthen his regime by dominating the will of the people. He was held up as something more than human, above all laws and criticism and accountable to no one. Operation Desert Storm did little to give Iraqis lasting hope that Saddam would be defeated, and when he ruthlessly crushed the Shia and Kurds after the war without response from the West, they recognized it as another validation of Saddam’s invincibility.

When U.S. soldiers pulled Saddam Hussein from that hole in Tikrit, the spell that had held Iraqis captive for decades was broken. Suddenly, there was a glimmer of hope for a population who had never had the right to dream of a better life. That hope is what differentiates every day before December 13, 2003, from every day since. It is the hope that things will get better, that the individual life can mean something. That the next generation can live a better life than the current one, and that through effort and will the people can make tomorrow better than today. This hope is fundamental to meaningful human existence, but is often taken for granted by Americans who have never endured a life where its expression is denied by a cruel dictator. Some suggest that Saddam’s dictatorship, though cruel and oppressive, was the only way to effectively control the tribes, maintain order, and govern the country. Day by day the Iraqi people are proving them wrong; this is the legacy of December 13.

— Gabe Ledeen is the director of the Vets For Freedom Educational Institute. He served two tours in al Anbar, Iraq, as a Marine officer with an infantry battalion.

May we never forget people like Gabe Ledeen and his comrades...Semper Fi!

Was Bush the problem in the War on Terror

2008-12-01T10:53:00.004-06:00

We saw a lot of talk about this subject through the last few years, as well as in the recent campaign. Now we read some interesting articles about the aftermath of the Mumbai massacre. A piece of which is quoted below:

Asked what was different about the victims of the incident, another doctor said: "It was very strange. I have seen so many dead bodies in my life, and was yet traumatised. A bomb blast victim's body might have been torn apart and could be a very disturbing sight. But the bodies of the victims in this attack bore such signs about the kind of violence of urban warfare that I am still unable to put my thoughts to words," he said.

Asked specifically if he was talking of torture marks, he said: "It was apparent that most of the dead were tortured. What shocked me were the telltale signs showing clearly how the hostages were executed in cold blood," one doctor said.

The other doctor, who had also conducted the post-mortem of the victims, said: "Of all the bodies, the Israeli victims bore the maximum torture marks. It was clear that they were killed on the 26th itself. It was obvious that they were tied up and tortured before they were killed. It was so bad that I do not want to go over the details even in my head again," he said.

Corroborating the doctors' claims about torture was the information that the Intelligence Bureau had about the terror plan. "During his interrogation, Ajmal Kamal said they were specifically asked to target the foreigners, especially the Israelis," an IB source said.

It will be instructive to see how the president chooses to deal with this. Some actions portend a serious approach. Others are more worrisome. Still other issues are being cited as having put so much pressure on the new president-elect as to lead to some worrisome physical challenges. Whether we voted for him or not, all Americans should want the new president to succeed. However, as President Bush saw in his terms, facing external threats did not inoculate one from harsh criticism of one's actions.

Late Addition: 24 hour news outlets are being used by people like the Mumbai terrorists to seek out their victims. We know that the terrorists were using Blackberries to communicate with each other. It now appears they were also using CNN to track down tourists who had escaped their roundup. Hostage emptor.

Last Addition: The best summary of the attacks is here at the Wall Street Journal.

A special Thanksgiving message

2008-11-29T23:35:00.003-06:00

This placard was placed by a SEAL recovering from tough wounds in a military hospital. He was aware of some reporters that wanted to use him as an example of the challenges still going on in the War on Terror in the waning days of the Bush Administration. He decided to head them off at the pass.

Best of health to you, Navy.

PS...bet he does "fully recover."

Late Addition: A little more about this SEAL

Florida redux

2008-11-20T10:34:00.005-06:00

Those of you who remember the long Florida recount and the "hanging chad" controversy will recognize the strategy of the supporters of Democratic candidate Al Franken as the recount of his election contest with Senator Norm Coleman moves forward in Minnesota. Franken is acting as if it is only a matter of time until the seat is his and he is installed in the Senate.

It should be a long and fractious affair if initial trends hold true throughout. The above example of a ballot being challenged by Franken's people as a "dubious vote for Coleman" is liable to not only end in a victory for Franken but also cement the Democratic party as the party of election theft.

After the Gregoire-Rossi fiasco in 2004, Republicans across the country are convinced that it is only a matter of time before this contest is purloined from Senator Coleman and the mantra of "every vote must be counted" is corrected to "every one of OUR votes must be counted."

We have become a banana republic.

Going forward, most of my political posts will be at my "Chairman Barry" blog, linked to the side of this one.

Thoughts on the election

2008-11-17T06:57:00.002-06:00

Throughout the election, I tried to keep my posts on THIS blog (my two others, linked on the side, are definitely partisan) non-partisan.

I am working on some pretty heavy projects right now (new summer classes, a book, etc.) so I just want to put a link here to National Review Senior Editor Jay Nordlinger's post election comments.

I just want to say, that there is hardly a single word I would change...except I don't have the strong feeling about the abortion issue that most conservatives have.

This is a column to bookmark. I dread an Obama presidency. I think the guy is such an empty suit...in a dangerous world, it's a bad time to have an amateur who is little more than the winner of the biggest American Idol competition to date. I hope I'm wrong.

I fear I'm not.

For those of my ideology...

2008-11-06T10:03:00.001-06:00

I have a post up on Lincoln's Ghost about my ideological views on the election.

Click the link on the side of this page...only for those who want political opinion...you have been warned!

Coach

John Edwards was right

2008-11-05T12:49:00.008-06:00

That's the big lesson I learned last night.

Elections tell us a lot about the American voter. Last night I learned that there truly are two Americas.

I suspected that many Americans were ready to try European-style socialism. I was right about that.

Longtime radio commentator Paul Harvey had one of his most quoted homilies about America and creeping socialism.

He said: "In America there are people pulling the wagon and people riding on the wagon.
We've always had many more pulling than riding.
But more and more people are jumping on and riding on the wagon.
Someday, there will be so many riders, they will be able to outvote the people
who are pulling. When that happens, the America we have known will be dead."

That may seem to be an overreaction, but that is what I was thinking last night watching the voters elect Barack Obama and large Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress. Elections have consequences and the results of this one will be particularly interesting to watch. They are also very representative of our national thinking.

For many decades, the American voter has switched control of the US government from one party to another. This year was no different. John McCain, God bless him, is a real American hero, but he had a stiff wind blowing in his face, especially with the economic meltdown of a month ago.

Barack Obama promised many options for the American voter:

The chance to expunge some of the taint of slavery and Jim Crow from American history

A turn towards socialism. McCain thought this would hurt Obama in the last few weeks. Obama never fully refuted the label...because it was part of his appeal.

The antidote to Bush. Obama was much of what Bush was not: eloquent, socialist, pro-new Europe, non-interventionist, Democrat, urban, Northern, and non-white. After 8 years of media Bush-bashing, the market for this was huge.

One in 5 of Bush voters from 2004, voted for Obama. Republicans need to find out why. Only 16% of Hillary voters from the primaries voted for McCain, not nearly as many as Republican operatives had hoped.

What happens now? Will he govern by "reaching across the aisle" as he promised or as a fierce partisan. The early signs, only hours into his election, are not encouraging. Rahm Emmanuel is Dick Cheney on steroids. What will he do in his first few months?

A lot, probably. Obama has huge majorities in both houses of Congress to work with. Except for the most extreme proposals, which the Republicans COULD filibuster in the Senate (which I don't think they will), Obama will get everything passed that he wants. That's good and bad. For both sides. He now owns it. There isn't even the faintest straw man of a Republican opposition to blame for any problems now. That doesn't mean that he won't get a hugely long honeymoon from his minions in the US news media. He will get years of passes from "it's gonna take a long time to undo 8 years of damage that Bush did to the country." This may or may not last to the congressional elections in 2010. There were some Republicans who actually bucked the trend last night and had some victories, unlike the blood bath the GOP suffered in 2006. But for the most part, Obama will be given a much longer honeymoon after this election than President Bush was given after 9/11. It helps to have the US news media on your side as cheerleaders. Polls before the election showed that even the voters knew the media was in the tank for Obama.

Some of our enemies already see the opportunities out there. Russia hasn't even slept off the vodka hangover from celebrating Obama's election before throwing down the gauntlet.

Nor will the Islamic extremists wait for the new president to be inaugurated from taking steps to bring their customs and laws into the American financial system. Stunning, isn't it? And the Iranians wasted no time, either. Welcome to the majors, Mr. Obama.

And expect President-elect Obama to push for several pieces of legislation that could have a serious long-term impact on American society. How will the media report these things? If Americans don't understand their effects until they have become law, how will we ever have a public debate about them? Here is a list from a reporter on National Review Online:

* Employee Free Choice Act
* Fairness Doctrine(translation: get Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, etc off the air)
* Freedom of Choice Act
* Nationalization of health care
* Estate tax increases
* "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" (driver's licenses for illegals)
* Capital gains tax increases
* Defense cuts
* Liberal judicial appointments
* Racial and ethnic preferences
* Income tax increases
* Bans on oil drilling
* Global poverty tax/Kyoto

Jim Geraghty at NRO has a long-time mentor who goes back to the Goldwater campaign who had some helpful thoughts about last night's results for despondent Republicans. I link those here...wise observations from a wizened veteran.

So...if you are happy about Obama's win, congratulations! He will certainly have the reins of power under our system to meet most, if not all, of his campaign promises of substance. If you are upset about his election, then realize that the congressional elections of 1994 were used to rein in the lurch to the left of the Clinton Administration and brought the Republicans to power in both houses of Congress for the first time since before FDR.

Flying under the radar is the additional governorships and state legislatures captured by the Democrats in the election. This is significant because after the 2010 census, the state legislatures will have the power to redraw congressional districts to favor the party in power in that state. This is called gerrymandering, and it has a lot to do with why you always seem to have a congressman from a certain political party in your district. It's as close to job security as there is in politics. It may not be fair, but it's legal...and it's completely bi-partisan. Both sides do it when in power. So if the Republicans don't make a huge comeback on the state government level, then the Democrats will be even harder to dislodge in the 2012 election.

The Democrats also made huge inroads, over 2004, in some key demographic groups. Hispanic Americans, now the largest minority in the USA, voted heavily for the Democratic party. However, when one looks at the various ballot initiatives around the country, you seen some very strange things. Every state that voted on gay marriage in some way saw gay marriage opposed everywhere, even in California. The victory of California's initiative, called Proposition 8, is most curious...until one looks at the polling data. One would think that Californians would vote FOR gay marriage. And the white population of the Golden State did. What is most interesting is that it's narrow victory seems to be due to the 70-30% margin of AFRICAN-AMERICANS who voted for the Prop 8's ban on gay marriage. So will California African-American Obama supporters be called anti-gay? It's a strange world.

At this point, unless some huge event happens between now and 2012 to change the dynamics, Barack Obama will be a heavy favorite for re-election in 2012.

All in all, I am glad it is over. I may have a few more post-mortem posts to make on this election. I had started this blog in order to talk about all sorts of cultural issues, not just politics. But this was a most fascinating year. How could I not get heavily into it?

So I will move along with other projects, including a book, I hope, and still expect to post things on this blog from time to time.

Thanks for reading...and congratulations to President-elect Obama. When I think of my memories of traveling through the Jim Crow south as a youngster, it's one of those things that, whether one supported his candidacy or not, makes you feel proud to be an American!

God Bless America!

Coach

Who is Sarah Palin?

2008-10-23T08:26:00.007-05:00

The two examples imbedded here are amongst the few more tasteful Photoshop jobs circulating on the internet. Few persons have had a more visceral impact on the public concept of American politics than Alaska governor Sarah Palin. Back in September, if you scroll down a few blog posts, you will find this comment by me:

Palin's selection has led some Republicans to conclude that McCain is setting up the party for a conservative agenda for years to come with the Alaska governor's promotion and exposure to a national audience. Even should McCain lose this election, she has become a world-recognized figure. She will not become a trivia question like Geraldine Ferraro did after the 1984 election.

I was going to make a big post on this, but since I started this post I came across a couple of articles that express my vision much more eloquently.

The first is from my idol, Victor Davis Hanson. He says it all here.

The second is actually a pretty good assessment of what the future holds as we consider the likelihood of an Obama presidency. I don't agree with everything Mr. Taylor says here, but he asks some questions and makes some judgments that the adoring media seem incapable of addressing at this point.

I foresee a future, 20 years or so hence, where many people will wonder what were thinking...sort of like in 1976...

It is my expectation that I will post perhaps one, at most two, more posts before the election. That's about all I can emotionally deliver at this point.

I would hope that after the election (and I can't wait to get to that point), if I keep this blog going, that it will deal much more with cultural, and especially technological, issues going forward.

Thanks to all who have enjoyed this blog...it certainly has been unforgettable.

Coach

Understanding the Panic of 2008

2008-10-12T07:56:00.005-05:00

From 1982 to 1990, I worked as a retail investment broker. I have seen this movie before.

It was October 19, 1987 and we had already had a 20% decline from the highs in the 2700 range and started the day at 2247. The Dow Jones Industrials had fallen almost 4% on the previous Wednesday, and over 4% the previous Friday. I had actually seen a decline coming and had purchase put options, a way to profit on declines, a few weeks before. I was so proud of my brilliance (I was a early thirties-year old idiot know-it-all) and sold my puts late that Friday, the 16th, having tripled my money. I believed in leaving some money for "the next guy". Besides, this had to be the bottom...right?

Wrong. I made $6,000 from that trade. had I sold them late on the 19th or early on the 20th, I would have made $150,000 from that $3,000 "investment." This is a good place to note that, while I didn't lose any major money during these times, neither did I make any. I gave my profits back in other dumb ways which are too embarrassing to mention here. What it DID teach me is that playing with the big elephants is a good way to get trampled and I also learned that our financial system is being played, by some, as a big lottery.

I digress.

I am so glad I am no longer in that business. It was interesting to see that the latest "game" had the same kind of effect as the last one. The previous game was called "program trading" or also "index arbitrage." If you want to know more about THAT game, clicky on the links.

This latest game was known as "mortgage backed securities." This one was started by Congress who live by the old adage from our friend Msr. De Toqueville

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

In this case, Congress was giving incentives, and later punishing those who didn't "participate", for banks to lend money to people who were bad credit risks. Now, this goes on all the time in our world today. How many times have we seen floods of credit card solicitations come in for our high school or college aged children. They have no visible means of support and yet banks are falling over themselves to lend them money...at 19%. At that rate, you can absorb a fairly healthy default rate. BTW, I would keep my eye on this rate as the next several months go by...this is our next area of weakness. Again, I digress...

So eventually, we hit a rough spot for many cities in the economy and these bad credit risks lived up to their reputation. Now, the piper must be paid, but the taxpayer is the one with the bill.

Who do we blame? First and foremost, it's CONGRESS. They passed the bills that made this kind of lending not only attractive and possible, but in some cases, almost mandatory. Getting little notice is that organizations like ACORN, the Obama campaign-linked organization getting press for the accusations in 13 states of voter fraud, has it's tracks in the sub-prime mess as well. ACORN would often tell large banking institutions that wanted to merge within the city limits of major US urban areas that they would have the deals held up in court unless they agreed to do more lending in red-lined urban areas; areas that had been avoided by banks because of the bad credit risks of the inhabitants of those areas.

Don't expect any of this to become widely public until after the election.

The sad thing about this whole mess is that the voters seem about to give more power to the people who caused this whole mess: the Barney Franks and Chris Dodds of Congress...and a former ACORN lawyer, former "community activist"...named Barack Obama.

Remembering what's important

2008-09-23T14:03:00.004-05:00

I spend much of everyday sailing through an endless number of blogs, news articles, and forum posts that keep me informed on what's going on in the world. Obviously, much of it has been about the election. Sometimes we forget that there are US soldiers fighting in remote areas of the world, keeping us safe.

As I said a few days ago, Iraq seems to have settled down so much, that the "War on Terror" seems out of mind. I refuse to call it that any more. Terror is a tactic, not an enemy. The enemy is radical violent Islamofascism, more dangerous than Hitler, 1940s Imperial Japan, or even the old Soviet Union. That's because they are everywhere. The 19 September 11th hijackers lived here for sometime before launching their "Pearl Harbor."

Today, we have some of America's most dedicated servants of our nation in places working to fight those who plan to hit us again. Much of the worst of it is going on in Afghanistan. I came across this piece in one of my news media surfing sessions. It was eloquent, even-handed, and passionately courageous. It's from a young man who, on his third tour of the Middle East, as a National Guard member, was just killed by an IED in Afghanistan. I really want you, dear reader, to READ THIS WHOLE LETTER. I have bolded certain sections if you must skim. Men like Captain de Solenni need to remembered, thanked, defended, and given our highest mental and physical support. Now, from a letter of a few weeks ago by the late Capt. de Solenni to Crescent City, California Triplicate reporter Adam Madison:

Hi Adam, my name is Capt. Bruno de Solenni and I am writing you in regards to your article that I finally was able to read online.

I really wasn't sure what to expect, especially nowadays with some of the crap that you read in the news. I will say that I was surprised and pleased that it wasn't over-sensationalized and you kept a good theme on the topic.

I guess the main reason I am writing you is to thank you for your support and the point of view that you took on the article. I know that sometimes it is difficult to actually print something without being biased and taking just one side. But I will tell you the truth and give you an honest opinion about my life in the National Guard, about the war over here and many of the decisions leading to my third tour in the Middle East.

First off, when I first joined the National Guard, back in 1996, I had no idea that I would be here today. I do remember making the decision on Christmas Day when I was about 20 years old and felt like I was going nowhere with my life and needed to take a new direction. As my father and mother had stated earlier, I was always fascinated with history and the military, and was amazed at some of the hardships my grandfather endured in both WWI and WWII.

So the following Monday on the 26th I called a recruiter, and took the asvab test on the 27th in Eureka. Three days later I was down at the Oakland Meps station getting sworn in as a 62E (heavy equipment operator). When they asked when I wanted to go to Basic, I told them, "how about next week?" and they kind of laughed at me and explained that the soonest they could get me in was 30 days. On the 29th I boarded a plane and my life was forever changed, without me even knowing what lay ahead.

Eventually, a few years after joining, I did decided to go back to college at Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Ore., where there was a GOLD (Guard Officer Leadership Development) program that allowed me to earn a federal commission as an Army officer while I continued to work toward my degree (which the National Guard also paid for).

In a sense, I was doing exactly what the National Guard said I could do if I joined … Finally, on May 11, 2001, I received my commission as a young, immature, 2nd lieutenant full of piss and vinegar still not knowing exactly what I was getting into.

When Sept. 11 happened, it was then that I realized that things were going to be very different for me and the rest of this country. One month later our battalion received the alert order that we would mobilize the following year to fill in on the current MFO (Multi National Force and Observers) mission in Sinai, Egypt. After returning from Egypt, I was home for eight months before volunteering again to go to Iraq for OIF II. It was there I truly (became) an infantry officer and learned a lot about myself and people in general.

Upon my return from Iraq, I was positive about what was going on there but very resentful at the way the media was covering the war over there. In my own view, I personally feel that some of the media deliberately fueled that war based on their own biased political views and I still hold them accountable for their actions.

Something that still upsets me is the fact that they exploited some of the crimes soldiers committed over there as a reflective view to the rest of the world of what our armies stood for. I am not saying that we didn't make mistakes, we did make them and we have painfully corrected them.

After returning from Iraq I took a break and just stuck to the one weekend a month traditional Guard and used my experiences from Iraq to lead a recon/sniper platoon out of the Grants Pass Armory for about 2.5 years. Then I received the opportunity to come to Afghanistan and work as an Embedded Trainer with the Afghanistan Army.

Some of the biggest dilemmas that I think we have faced here are mostly the fact that Afghanistan seems to have been put on the back burner up until a few months ago when the casualties here began to exceed those in Iraq where there are four times as many soldiers. Our true problems here are definitely reflective of the Pakistani border and the lack of troops covering it, which has been an issue for years and is being exploited by the Taliban as they train freely in Pakistan, unopposed by anyone.

In my opinion, Afghanistan does need a troop surge of American soldiers as well, otherwise we will only be able to sustain combat operations with minimal effect of containing Taliban insurgents. As I speak about this, these are only my views and opinions based on my experiences.

Even though I am now recuperating in the rear and doing fine, much of my time along with other teammates has been spent in the Helmand Province working with a handful of British soldiers in small isolated FOBs conducting offensive operations with the Afghan National Army. Our task is to mentor them during combat operations and to provide both air support and indirect fire support, which seems to sometimes be a daily necessity over here.

The good days over here are when we are truly sticking it to the Taliban in a firefight that is in our favor and you just dropped 130 105mm rounds on their position. Or when a ... hot F-15 pilot flies over your head strafing the Taliban with his Vulcan cannons.

The (bad) days are when you are covering up your your sergeant major from being exposed to the dust-out of a Chinook helicopter that is landing to medivac him out. At the same time he cries because he doesn't want to leave his team as he lies there half paralyzed with shrapnel in him, while fluids are coming out of his eyes and ears signifying severe brain trauma, (meaning we cant give him morphine).

The bad days are when you put your buddy in a body bag and you don't even recognize him because his limbs are missing and there holes in him everywhere. The miracles are when his last words are, "tell my wife and kids I love them," before he dies in his best friend's arms after struggling for several agonizing minutes to get the words out because there is a fist-size hole in his head.

And last but not least, the best days are when an Afghan comes up to you thanking you for everything that you have done to help them and for making their (home) a better place now that the Taliban are gone.

If anything, this is probably the biggest reason why I proudly enjoy being over here. I can't explain it to anyone and there is no description of what it feels like, but it was the same feeling I got when I was in Iraq as well. And I am sure it's the same feeling that generations of American soldiers before me have gotten as they fought and sacrificed their lives for the freedoms that we enjoy today.

Perhaps the biggest thing that has made being over here much more bearable, is the amount of public support that we have received from people. Getting a care package or a letter of support when you are out in the middle of nowhere from a complete stranger, thanking you, does make the day seem a little better.

I would especially like to thank my Aunt Jan Martin, and The local Troop Support organization who have provided care packages to soldiers serving overseas and have volunteered endless hours of their time and energy making our lives easier. The British soldiers (who don't get anything) are extremely grateful as well.

Along with this, I would especially like to thank the members of the VFW who donated several hundred dollars of G.I. shirts to the company of Afghans that I have been mentoring. You have all truly made my life and my job easier. Without your support, life would not be as pleasant.

Last but not least I would truly like to thank everyone who has supported the soldiers and the efforts toward supporting these wars even when there wasn't an end in sight. Until about 6 months ago there wasn't a news outlet that was saying that the Iraq war was winnable and that this was another vietnam in the making. Had we let the politicians get ahold of this war it would have been.

Fortunately our president (who is not perfect) has stood his ground against the naysayers who deliberately exploited the death of American soldiers for their own political gain, showing no regard to their families and loved ones who are still mourning them to this day.

I can understand what it was like for Vietnam veterans who returned from the war and were spat upon for wearing their uniform and standing up for what they believed in. Unfortunately this is still all-too-true for many of the British soldiers returning home to their own country. There are even certain ethnic religious neighborhoods where they cannot even wear their uniforms because they will be beat up in their own country.

I pray to God we never come to that and thank the fact that what has changed drastically between Vietnam and now is that even if the public doesn't support the war, they still support troops which makes a huge difference. This is especially comforting if you are one of those soldiers walking through the airport wearing your uniform and coming home on leave or returning from a deployment.

Once again, I cannot thank everyone enough for their support and all that they have done …

Sincerely,

Capt. Bruno de Solenni

God speed Captain de Solenni.

"Where do we get such men?"
James Michener, Bridges at Toko-ri, 1953

What will be the deciding factors?

2008-09-20T18:24:00.014-05:00

Whew. What a week. From financial crisis, to Obama's possible violation of the Logan Act, to Sarah Palin's email getting hacked (and since he was critical of it, Bill O'Reilly's website) to McCain calling for the scalp of Chris Cox of the SEC.

What is going on here?

Besides a heated and close election, it's a critical period of deciding who is going to lead the free world during a time of financial tsunamis, culture wars, and the constant threat of Islamofascism. Where do I start?

Let's start with the war, because it actually leads to Obama's scrape with what has been considered to be a long-time tradition of not interfering with the US government's ability to negotiate agreements with foreign powers.

The war in Iraq seems to winding down. Both parties seem to be admitting that, although the Democrats remain convinced that this war was not just a mistake but an act that put the country in bigger danger than it was. I don't intend to get into that issue, having covered it before. But it did lead to a meeting that Obama had with the foreign minister of Iraq during his trip in this summer that has led to a minor firestorm. Many Americans believe that the US news media has been openly slanting the news in favor of Obama over the last several months. Go back and read my last few posts on the polling data on that. It is the opinion of a large majority of Americans, even many of Obama's own supporters.

I guarantee you that if McCain had done this, you would never have heard the end of it. But since that is true of so many things at this point in the election, let's not waste our time.

Amir Taheri of the NY Post wrote an article stating that Obama had requested that the Iraqis hold off on completing their withdrawal agreement with the United States until after our elections had chosen a new president and a new Congress. Of course, Obama was expecting that the elections would produce a more Democratic Congress and a new Democratic president: Barack Obama. The Iraqis were understandibly taken aback by this interference in the negotiations by an opposition leader; this is the kind of brazen ploy you would expect from a banana republic, not the most powerful nation on earth. In case you think I am overstating the problem, and the tradition of non-interference in US foreign policy, please read this summary article by Taheri on the events and their meaning. More than anything, it communicates to many foreign leaders that Obama is...well...different. Perhaps he should have gotten better advice, since he is new at foreign policy, but it's not like his 300 advisors couldn't have caught him before he went overseas and said to him, "This trip is to listen, not to tell them what you want."

The Logan Act goes all the way back to the John Adams administration, and while the Obama campaign has forcefully argued that Obama was misinterpreted by Taheri...well, as you can see by the article, he claims he was only going by what Obama and foreign minister Zebari said about the meeting. This issue may come up in the debate this Friday in Mississippi, when foreign policy is supposed to be the main topic.

Let's address the financial crisis. This is an area where I have had some personal experience, having been involved in retail financial management before my career change into teaching. I strong urge you to read this succinct article by Jim Manzi in NRO. Forget that it is a conservative magazine, this guy understands the credit markets. This is, in the end, NOT a partisan issue, although it may be impossible for a while because of the campaign. But it IS about our financial survival as we try to dodge the iceberg looming in front of our ocean liner. Meanwhile, you can realistically expect both candidates to blame the party or backers of the other candidate. Which one will voters trust to handle this minefield?

Who is to blame? Frankly, I think it's the one entity that ALWAYS gets away with being complicit but never held responsible in this country: CONGRESS. They decided to allow the quasi-government lending authorities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the authority to basically lend mortgage money to borrower who past experience has shown are likely to be unable to repay the money. This article shows that the first big move in this direction goes all the way back to the Clinton years. And it was all to increase home ownership of a large voting population that generally votes Democratic. But Republicans went along because who wants to vote against minorities owning homes: are you a racist or something? If not, then VOTE FOR IT!!

It's much easier to blame a single person: the president, the speaker, a majority leader, than to blame 535 elected officials. But that is who makes the laws. These are the people who are fulfilling the prophecy of Alexis de Tocqueville in 1831. The Frenchman made a statement, in his brilliant analysis of the new republic,Democracy in America, when he said

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

Of course, the New York Times suggests that President Bush is to blame. For once, the Washington Post disagrees, but then they have to find some way to be distinguishable from the Gray Lady from time to time. The blatant bias of the news media this year has been...historic. William Randolph Hearst, of "yellow journalism" fame, would be proud.

On the Palin email front...where are all the civil liberties groups and their outrage? The sound of crickets from the neighborhood of the ACLU and People for the American Way is deafening. Conservative women don't have rights...they can only be accused of violating them. Especially if they want someone fired who tasers a 11 year old child. I'm sure we'll get more breathless stories from the 30 odd muckrakers going through the Wasilla archives looking for more breaking stories about the governor's college transfers and her brother-in-law's scrapes with the law TWENTY YEARS AGO. Important information in these boring news days...

And what of McCain's call for the firing of SEC Chairman Chris Cox? Was he overreacting? Perhaps. This was not the time to put a new man in charge of the SEC when things are this tense. This faux pas rings of Obama's mistaken notion that the place to solve the Georgian crisis was the Security Council of the UN, where Russia has a veto and would certainly use it to kill any attempt to sanction Russia for it's invasion of the tiny former USSR republic. But considering that we may have only been hours away from a total financial meltdown on Thursday, perhaps his outrage that more oversight wasn't evident from the financial market's watchdog could be understandable. Senator Obama claimed that McCain "panicked", but then Obama's response on Friday was basically "I'll get back to you."

Finally, the guys who would like to kill all Americans were busy tonight. The Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan was bombed. That is the picture you see at the top. Reports say they may have been after some high level CIA or US military personnel in the attack. Of course, you have to wonder who had the information as to the name and location of said US personnel. This week has certainly been a reminder of what a dangerous world it is; dangerous to your financial, moral, political, and physical health. The nation will be choosing the man responsible for protecting Americans in just 45 days.

Edit: If you think I am wrong about the war in Iraq having turned around, read this article this morning by this stunned reporter in the New York Times, of all places.

A fundamental change in fortunes?

2008-09-13T07:01:00.011-05:00

I want to apologize for not putting up a new blog post earlier. It seems that once school starts that my focus stays on the job that I am getting paid for!

There is no question that it has been a intense few weeks since John McCain showed that the old fighter pilot still has it in him to surprise people with his selection of Alaska governor Sarah Palin. To those of us who follow politics, the governor's poise and conservative views are familiar characteristics of this 44-year old "hockey mom."

The governor was the subject of an unprecedented examination by the mainstream (and tabloid) media the likes of which we have never seen. Some will argue that she has come through that with varying degrees of success. If there are some alarming discoveries, don't expect that this would be necessarily released as soon as it is discovered. Scandals and damaging stories are most effective when they come out in a drip-drip-drip fashion. The problem for Obama has been the slew of hard questions about him AND his running mate. Biden's son resigned his position as a lobbyist because of accusations that it undermines Obama's assertion that he doesn't seek the aid of the K Street lobbysts. McCain has run a series of hard-hitting ads on Obama and his positions on education, Iraq, the economy, and the consistent questions about his readiness to lead or the consistency of his "hope and change" mantra with moments such as the "lipstick on a pig" comments. All of this has put Obama on the defensive where no candidate wants to be with 7 weeks to go in an election.

Palin agreed to a thorough grilling by ABC anchor Charlie Gibson that will be analyzed for the next several weeks but seems to have had a net neutral at the worst.

Now comes evidence that ABC edited her interview in order to make her look more extreme to the viewers. When you realize that the McCain campaign was accused of "protecting" Governor Palin from the media, and then see the way they chopped up her responses in the interview with Gibson, you can understand the McCain campaign's reluctance to have Mrs. Palin defined by the skill of the editor's knife. Disgraceful. I anticipate that one of the unintended consequences of this election will be the complete exposure of the near criminal bias of our national news media. This isn't just my opinion. Poll after poll after poll has shown that a large majority of the voters believe that the media is biased in favor of Senator Obama. When you have something as important as a presidential election in the hands of editors who can make anyone look extreme or stupid by the use of the editing room, that is unacceptable. Who do these people think they are? They are no longer the unquestioned "gatekeepers" of knowledge and opinion. The new media, led by internet bloggers and YouTube videos, are the Davids that will sink the stone in the forehead of the media Goliaths. I can't say that many will cry a river for them when it is over. There is a certain sense of schadenfreude about watching their earnings and stock price decline as well.

I will leave it to each reader to judge her qualifications (certainly there has been a wide range of persons chosen to be vice-president in our nation's history...witness Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Dan Quayle or Harry Truman...quite a diverse group). What I want to analyze in this post is the effect it has had on the race.

There is no question that it has energized McCain personally, and much of what we call "the Republican base." This means mainly conservative Republicans, who have often looked askance at McCain because of his open criticisms of President Bush and a willingness to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats rather than assail or defeat them. This "maverick" nature is a characteristic that appeals to some Democrats and many independents. Will he be able to keep both groups satisfied?

Palin's selection has led some Republicans to conclude that McCain is setting up the party for a conservative agenda for years to come with the Alaska governor's promotion and exposure to a national audience. Even should McCain lose this election, she has become a world-recognized figure. She will not become a trivia question like Geraldine Ferraro did after the 1984 election.

Already this wider question of the impact on the race is being answered with a consistent reading of the polling data. Just about every major national poll is showing the race either tied or with a slight McCain lead. See here, here, here and here. This is quite a reversal from the end of the Democratic Convention. Could this simply be a factor of McCain's "convention bounce?" Yes, perhaps. If this coming week ends with things basically unchanged, then McCain has gone from being the underdog to the front-runner.

It seems the Obama campaign's internal polling must be showing them at least the same kind of movement as they announced a major revision of their campaign strategy just the other day. This also came in the wake of Obama's two-hour meeting with the last Democrat to win the presidency: Bill Clinton. Ironically, as successful as Mr. Clinton has been in his own election fortunes, his record of helping others get elected, when he campaigns for them, is pretty poor; note that his wife is watching these events from the sidelines...except in states where she can raise money to retire her campaign debt! His emotional stability has even been called into question when he was campaigning for his wife this past year.

Some of Obama's "new strategy" ads blew up in his face immediately. He tried to use a whimsical approach accusing McCain of being out of touch because he doesn't personally read his email. The fact is, that it was widely reported, in McCain's last run for the presidency that because of his torture in a North Vietnamese prison, he CAN'T use a keyboard. But as ranking member of the Senate Subcommittee on Technology, he was one of the first in that august body to use the Web and he has always dictated his emails to his wife Cindy so that he can stay on top of things. This is an amazing goof by the Obama camp...and ironically, one that a simple Google search would have prevented. This does not inspire public confidence that Obama is careful before he opens fire on his enemies and calls into question whether his staff is "ready for prime time."

But national polls are little more than media fodder, the real fight is in the states. In this area, things are even more alarming for the Obama Camp. Suddenly, states that Gore and Kerry won against Mr. Bush are in play. Polling in "blue" states such as Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, even New Jersey, are putting McCain in striking distance. Western blue states may soon come into play, as Washington now seems to be. Look for McCain to use western Palin to appeal to those states such Nevada, Oregon, and Washington (she and her husband are dyed-in-the-wool Seattle Seahawk fans). Add in her midwestern-type of twang, and you will see a lot of Sarah in the midwest in these last few weeks.

Keep in mind what I have been saying for months now. Watch where the candidates go...this will tell you what their internal polling is showing. Also remember that Obama still has the tougher challenge: he must turn some "red" states "blue. But he must do that while holding all his blue states. It does him no good to pick off New Mexico, Colorado or Iowa if McCain captures Michigan or Pennsylvania.

Finally, Obama has to also watch his back. Hillary must appear to help him while hoping he goes down to ignominious defeat so that she can be the "I told you so" candidate in 2012. Her problem is she better watch what she wishes for as a Vice-President Palin may steal much of her appeal should a President McCain choose to only serve one term and retire at 76.

And while he has his eye on the ball, he must survive second-guessing by his party. Now polls are showing huge movements in the public at large towards the Republicans that could change the make-up of the Congress. Only 33 seats in the 100 seat Senate and even a worse-case scenario makes it likely that the Democrats should at least enlarge their slim majority in that body by a few seats. But all 435 seats come up for grabs every two years in the House of Representatives. Most of the seats that the Democrats won to retake control in 2006 were won by slight 53-47 type margins. If the public, which has given this Congress record-low approval ratings, decides to put the Republicans back in control, Nancy Pelosi's short-lived reign as Speaker of the House will come to an end. Keep your eye on whether the Democrats give in on the congressional ban on off-shore drilling. Polls continue to show that off-shore drilling remains a popular strategy with a wide-range of voters.

All in all, it continues to be one of the most fascinating election campaigns in US history...and when you consider that we started with a knockdown drag out in 1796 between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, that's saying quite a lot!

A late edit...I am working on a response to Whoopi Goldberg's widely covered comment during McCain's visit to The View yesterday about whether she should be concerned about "should I be concerned about being a slave again" to McCain's views about appointing Supreme Court justices who would simply interpret the Constitution as written by the Framers and not try to write laws from the bench. Look for that post on my other blog "Lincoln's Ghost" by clicking at the link on the sidebar. Thanks.

Important Update on Sarah Palin

2008-08-29T21:51:00.001-05:00

Check out the People Magazine article...

Meanwhile, the attacks on her have begun...go here for a pretty good response.

Alaskan Earthquake

2008-08-29T16:59:00.006-05:00

On March 27, 1964, the most powerful earthquake in modern North American history hit 75 miles east of Anchorage Alaska.

Today, August 29, 2008, a second Alaskan event hit the 2008 Presidential campaign: Governor Sarah Palin was announced as John McCain's VP pick. Is that street Barack Obama's presidential hopes?

Ok, perhaps a cheap analogy, but the biggest thing this unexpected bombshell announcement did is send the mainstream media scrounging for background information on Governor Palin, as opposed to continuous fawning praise for Obama's rock concert and acceptance speech last night. Obama's speech is now ancient history. Palin in the media's new hot property.

Wow. Just Wow. Who knew the "old man" had it in him to gamble like this.

It's certain that the media and Democrat pundits will try to paint this as a desperate move to reach out to disgruntled Hillary supporters. But this is much more. This is a way to keep the more moderate McCain as the standard bearer for the party while energizing the base that elected George Bush in the last two elections.

Everyone, Republican hierarchy included, was surprised by this move. The media were stunned and the Democrats were so speechless that their initial response was unseemly and bitter. It was quickly replaced as it became clear that this was not consistent with the theme of "hope and change."

What was the initial Obama campaign response? You won't believe it.

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same,” said Bill Burton, Obama Campaign Spokesman.

AS the Brits say, "bad form, old chap." A second "kinder and gentler" response was posted an hour or so later, and survives on the Obama website, but the damage had been done. Several pro-Hillary websites have been working and hoping that Hillary would get on the Dem ticket. When she was passed over for longtime Senator Joe Biden, they vowed to back McCain or perhaps stay home in November. Now, under the banner of PUMA (Party Unity My A**), they are strongly behind the McCain ticket, having a "filly" in the race. To quote one of the websites with the most "web hits", "Uppity Woman":

You blew it Barky. Iron our shirts.

(Barky is a term many Obama opponents use because of his clipped diction when he is in "attack mode")

What kind of impact will this have on the race? Isn't this a risky choice for McCain?

Yes, it is. I encourage you to read some articles on Governor Palin here, here, here, here, and here. Be patient with that last one...they crashed the Alaska website today! She will bring some controversy to the dance, so to speak. But she also brings some fire into the campaign. McCain seems unconcerned that she will carry some of the attention for a while. He's been there quite a lot. It shows that he cares about uniting his base; it's uncertain from the polling data if Obama's choice of Biden did much for the Democrats. It also shows that he is willing to take risks. He had drawn the race to even in the last few weeks; some polls even showed him with a slight lead.

Obama had withdrawn some advertising from some key states right before the convention, essentially conceding those states. This will also allow McCain to concentrate more on the states he feels he needs to either secure, or turn from blue to red, in order to be elected. But it does something else.

With conservatives, some of whom had grumbled about McCain's nomination, talking about staying home, they are suddenly enervated about the selection of a pro-life, hunting, fishing, and oil drilling Governor Palin. She is also young enough to have a bright future in the Republican party, after McCain's 2nd term...or even after only his first, should he choose to only serve one term. Wouldn't a race between Vice President Palin and Hillary Clinton be delicious?

Finally, it's also the kind of choice that will open some wallets for the ticket. This will have a short term benefit since McCain will not be able to spend any more of his donated money once the Republican convention is over, since he has chosen to accept public financing for his campaign. But what is MOST important for McCain is that all those volunteers who helped elect Bush but were going to "sit this one out" now will get behind this ticket.

And studies have shown that volunteers are much more effective than paid workers.

McCain's military leadership may have shown through here. One of the ways you get to be a top officer is by recognizing leadership skills in others and promoting them. We will see if the former Navy aviator has picked a rising star or gambled it all on a not-ready-for-prime-time governor...

I'm betting the former POW knows what he is doing...

Coach

A relay to Remember

2008-08-11T07:00:00.007-05:00

Well, it sure was a thrill for this "coach" to see the incredible determination and grit of the USA's 400 Free Relay last night in Beijing. It may be hard for people to imagine just what a big boost this was for the sport in this country. What? Coach, are you nuts, the USA has dominated this sport for decades!

True, there were years there where if we didn't sweep an event, we were slacking. You didn't see any "third world" countries represented in the Olympics (I doubt if Zimbabwe, for instance, even HAD any Olympic size pools until the last 20 years. Now they have one of the most dominating female swimmers in the world -- Kirsty Coventry. Coventry did her college swimming at Auburn University) Today, the US sometimes has a difficult time getting a swimmer onto the medal platform, as happened last night in the 100 breastroke, where the defending Olympic champion was shut out.

There has been plenty of speculation about the "decline" of US swimming, but most of the difference is the rise of the rest of the world and the welcome proliferation of facilities and experienced coaching. Others speculate that American swimmers are less likely to be willing to sacrifice "a life" to the incredible conditioning and mental focus required to be successful at the world level. In many countries, success in sports is a way for a family to rise above poverty. In the US, there are so many distractions that become road blocks to winning at an Olympic games. Add the fierce attention of the US media and the pressure on US athletes will quickly separate the champions from the also-rans.

But there was something about Sunday night's US freestyle relay that was written as if for a Hollywood movie. There, on the blocks, leading off, was Michael Phelps. Phelps has been touted by the television suits as the next Mark Spitz (and well on the way to living up to that moniker). The US had dominated this event for years until the hometown Aussies took it from them in Sydney in 2000 and the US team had taken a bitter pill in a bronze medal at Athens in 2004. Relay anchorman Jason Lezak had felt the disappointment of the silver medal race in Sydney and had been on that bronze medal Athens team, as had Phelps, and Lezak stated after the race that he had determined that he was NOT going through that again.

The French were the favorites going into the finals. Former 100 meter freestyle world record holder Alain Bernard had shot his mouth off about the race stating, "we are going to smash the Americans. That is what we have come here for." Don't count "le poulet" before it hatches, Alain.

As Bernard took off to complete the French triumph, Lezak seemed too far behind to catch the 6'5" Frenchman. Bernard, called Le Cheval(the Horse) by his countrymen, seemed to throw a shoe in the last 25 meters as the 32 year-old Lezak cast his walker and cane aside as he caught Bernard at the wall by 8/100s of a second.

What was Lezak thinking down the stretch? The years of frustration? The agony of the silver at Sydney and the bronze at Athens?

"I'm not going to lie," Lezak said. "When I flipped at the 50 and I still saw how far ahead he was, and he was the world-record holder 'til about two minutes before that, when Sullivan led off with the world record, I thought, it really crossed my mind for a split second, there's no way.

"Then I changed. I said, you know what, that's ridiculous. This is the Olympics. I'm here for these guys. I'm here for the United States of America. It's more than -- I don't care how bad it hurts, or whatever, I'm just going to go out there and hit it.

"Honestly, in like 5 seconds, I was thinking all these things -- you know, just got like a super charge and took it from there. It was unreal."

Yea, old man. This Perrier's for you!

Coach

The dog days of August

2008-08-07T18:46:00.003-05:00

Hi gang! I hope summer is going well for those who enjoy reading this blog. I recently finished my summer adult ed classes so I hope to be more up to date with the blog!

A quick look at the state of the presidential election...

Things have tightened up quite a bit since mid-July. Most polls have the race between a slight Obama lead and a tie. One USA Today poll of likely voters had McCain ahead but for now, we will consider that an outlier since no one else seems to have any results close to it. An outlier is when your polling data somehow falls outside of the statistical margin of error. Weird things can happen with polling, since all it is is an estimate of where public opinion stands at any point in time with a specific population.

But there is little doubt that the comfortable lead Obama once had nationally is gone an it is looking like the close contests we have had in this decade. So where does it stand right now?

On a state by state basis, Obama still looks to be ahead. This is to be expected because this is the peak of the 16 year presidential election cycle that has held true for most of the past century. The only break in that cycle was the special circumstance that led FDR to win 4 elections, followed by Truman's victory. 16 years ago...Bill Clinton...16 years earlier...Jimmy Carter...16 years previous...JFK.It's not perfect, but it certainly fits in well with the rise of the independent voter as party loyalties continue to decline.

After GW Bush benefited from the mid-cycle Republican peak in 2000, it would naturally turn to the Democrats to benefit. This is mainly resulting from the tendency of "independents" to favor one party for 8 years, and then vote differently because it's now "time for the other party to see what it can do." Independents are different kinds of voters than party loyalists; they vote based on what the candidate will most do for "me." After 8 years of Bush and the Republicans, independents would naturally turn to the Democrats to see what they will do for "them." They began this process by electing a Democratic congress in 2006. That has, however, led to a congress with the lowest national approval polling numbers ever.

With the strong national awareness of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the nation's first woman Speaker of the House, much of the unhappiness about the Congress' latest term might be laid at their feet. Will the 16 year cycle bail them out? Perhaps. But Pelosi and her Democratic party-run Congress are in big trouble with the American people.

Remember how in past posts, I have talked about watching what politicians do more than what they say? When the Democrats rammed through an adjournment for their 5 week summer break last Friday, they succeeded by only one vote and with howls from the Republican House members who wanted a vote on an energy bill that included a removal of the Congressional ban on offshore drilling for US oil companies. Pelosi's answer was that she was "trying to save the planet" but Americans are a basically fair people and they don't like the idea of preventing congressmen from at least debating and then voting on an oil drilling bill when gasoline is at $4 a gallon.

After the adjournment, the Republican house members took to the floor to speak out against these strong-arm tactics, as the Speaker's office mandated the cutoff of CSPAN cameras and the microphones and lights were turned off. This was a major publicity coup for the demoralized Republican members of the house who believe that they have been handed a popular issue that cuts across party lines: gas prices.

What has happened since then? The Republicans continue to show up there every day in the House and speak, even though the mikes and cameras remain off. It's great theater for the large crowds of American vacationers who had expected nothing but empty chambers in the nation's Capitol. What good does this do them?

1) It builds their image of "the party looking out for YOU", and presents the Democrats as the party out playing golf, raising money, and riding in limos, and trying to hype a poorly selling book that has been getting more than it's fair share of spoofing here and here.. It doesn't matter if that is true or not, it plays well. The lack of media coverage is less of a problem in the day of the "new media". Cell phone movies of Republicans calling for congress to come back in session and vote on the drilling bill have been shown on Fox News Channel, web sites, and will continue for the summer. Expect to have those emailed to you all summer.

2) The Republicans must be seeing polling data showing it has hit a chord with the nation, or they would have stopped after the weekend. They are energized as they see the Speaker has put her party in a difficult bind. The longer gas prices stay high, the greater the effect this could have in polling data and in fund raising for a party that has been getting told "NO" by a lot of the donors who helped Bush win re-election. They may not like McCain that much but they would LOVE to return Pelosi to Minority leader. This is still unlikely...but if trends stay strong for a while, it's not unthinkable.

3)The Democrats won their "landslide" congressional victory in 2006 with a number of 53-47 wins. Not many "independents" will have to switch their votes in order for the House up for grabs once again. This would be the Democrats worst nightmare.

Add to that the challenge facing Obama lately, and you can see why the Democrats are getting more nervous every day as we approach the time for the party convention in Denver. Obama is heading to Hawaii for some R & R, but in reality, this is the perfect time to do this as Americans start to tune out politics for a short while and focus on the Summer Olympics in Beijing. Both candidates have bought $5-6 million in advertising in the games. Watch what each choose to show in this prime visibility offering. If they stay with the same theme...or, more importantly, take a different direction, that will be significant.

Obama has much to be worried about of late. Remember that it is a 51 state election, and some very important states are either falling out of his reach or suddenly in play. For example, check out these latest polls from Massachusetts, Oregon, Florida, and Wisconsin(which should be an Obama runaway), just for a few. He is accusing McCain of being in the pocket of Big Oil, but actual campaign contributions paint a very different picture of just who is getting money from "Big Oil." MoveOn.org is planning a number of ads attacking Republicans on the oil issue but even top Obama supporters are concerned that they may backfire on the presumptive nominee.

And Hillary Clinton is waiting in the wings. He is NOT the nominee yet. If just 120 odd superdelegates decide to either switch or abstain on the first ballot, then all bets are off because most committed delegates are free to vote their conscience after the first ballot. Hillary is quietly letting them know that she is still there and can BEAT McCain. She is being very demure about perhaps wanting her name placed in nomination. And Obama has shown his overconfidence by doing what I said he would do someday: argued that all the delegates from Florida and Michigan to have their full representation. She's has to be THRILLED at that...it makes the number needed to cause a second ballot even smaller. Bad move, Barack...fair, but you are up against the Clintons.

And what did Bill mean the other day, when asked about supporting Obama for the nomination that he was "I think everybody's got a right to run for President who qualifies under the Constitution." For the man who wanted to be sure everyone agreed on what the definition of "'is' is", this is a curious statement. Many bloggers are digging into Obama's past wondering why they have been unable to find his birth certificate. Some suspect it's just an "embarrassing" name change, (Indonesian stepfather Lolo Soetolo?) but some question if he was born in the USA. Personally, I think this is garbage, but on the other hand, it's just the kind of thing the Clintons have been known to release as we get close to a big decision in order to "muddy the waters." If a major news outlet deals with this kind of story right before Denver...well, think about "cui bono"...who benefits.

To be sure, with the 16 year presidential cycle at his back, he is still the favorite, even though I would personally not bet on him at this point (Dukakis was ahead of GHW Bush by 13 at this point). A certain amount of "Obama fatigue" is setting in as it seems obvious to many Americans that the press favors him. People are starting to speculate about his short resume...and finding it wanting. He needs to stop making off-hand stumbles like this, this, this, and the symbol at the start of this blogpost.

Meanwhile, Old Tortoise McCain gets the right kind of "regular guy" visibility that are making Joe Six-Pack think about voting Republican for the first time in his life.

McCain survived the Hanoi Hilton...he can certainly take on Barack Obama.

It's the end of civilization as we know it...

2008-07-16T14:33:00.004-05:00

Yes, for once, this is not about politics.

This needs no real comment. Just get out your magnifying glass and read the title of the articles. Sigh.

What I said earlier...

2008-07-12T18:42:00.004-05:00

If you doubted my contention about the public polls not fully reflective of Obama's real standing in the presidential horse race, the public polls are being forced to be "more accurate. Rasmussen and Newsweek in particular are reflecting this today.

Obama's latest Hail Mary is an attempt to be JFK with a speech in Berlin.

Europeans cannot vote in our elections.

For those who like my other blog, Lincoln's Ghost, an unvarnished politically biased blog, I have some new cartoons up. I expect to put editorial cartoons reflecting my views on the issues up on a weekly basis.

Coach

You only change positions when you are in trouble

2008-07-11T06:31:00.008-05:00

Obama is in trouble; he knows it, McCain knows it, why doesn't the media know it?

As Victor Davis Hanson points out in a recent article, Obama has created more flip-flops than a Hawaiian footwear manufacturer over the last few weeks. It has resulted in some bitter unhappiness in some of the liberal blogosphere that only a few weeks ago was ready to wash his feet with the hairs of their head. Critical photoshop pieces like above have sprung up on those websites.

Let's think this through. If he were truly ahead across the nation, like we are being told, would he change his position? If he were winning Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, etc. like polls reported in the news say, would he need to change his message? If McCain was running behind him, would McCain or Obama be more likely to completely change his position and run more to "the middle"? If Obama was likely to be the next president if the election were held today, would he be casting aside his positions on Iraq, oil drilling, NAFTA, military force, Iran, gun rights, taxes, immigration, faith-based programs, public campaign financing, the FISA wiretaps, North Korea, Cuba, Afghanistan, the Palestinians and Israel? Will he soon be wearing a ten-gallon hat and attending NASCAR races?

Why is he doing this?

Because he is LOSING the election. When you are losing, as I have said a nauseatingly large number of times on this blog, you change your position to reflect where the voters are, hoping that will change your numbers in states where you must win. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. What it counts on is a) voters don't know it's a change and like your position and will support your candidacy now, or b) voters feel better about you now and will NOW support you based on your NEW stance. If your old stance was fine with the voters, and you felt where you stood would eventually result in your election, YOU CHANGE LITTLE TO NOTHING. And as master strategist Karl Rove notes in this excellent analysis, people WILL notice you have changed your views.

McCain has done his own changing, but nothing like Obama has. He has emphasized oil drilling and gone silent on his opposition to drilling in (the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve) He may end up supporting drilling in ANWR if it ever comes up for a vote again. But it is unlikely that he will ever volunteer to bring up his support for a ban on drilling there because the public is for it in increasing numbers as $4 a gallon gas bites hard on the public wallet. McCain is actually finding that the public is coming more in line with his views: on Iraq and the success of the surge, taxes, oil drilling, and other key election issues. That's why Obama has to keep hitting the only issue that will always put McCain on the defensive: his party's leader is George W. Bush. And this is why McCain will always take opportunities to highlight his differences with the unpopular president and indicate how those stances remain unchanged...unlike the stances of his opponent, Obama.

What about all that money Obama has raised? What about it? If money were the decider, Romney would be running against Howard Dean's attempt at a second term! Money, as I have said, can hurt if you lack it, or hurt if you overuse it and turn voters off with overkill. I have just spent a few days in Pennsylvania. Obama's ads are constant here...watching in the hotel lobby, I noticed the local custodial help watch 5 secs of it and walk away to keep changing the linen. They already know what he represents. Or are they wondering...?

Here's a little secret...VERY SELDOM DO VOTERS CHANGE THEIR MINDS ONCE THEY HAVE DECIDED THEY LIKE OR DISLIKE A CANDIDATE. This is bad news for Obama in those midwestern battleground states. These are the ones where Hillary, the candidate that the media told us should drop out because she couldn't win, defeated him time and time again; sometimes in massive margins. Other than his home state of Illinois, he couldn't win late midwestern battleground state primaries. Do you think that was because people loved Hillary and didn't believe the delegate totals that showed she had almost no chance of winning, or because they wanted to cast a vote AGAINST OBAMA. Many of those longtime Democrats in those states didn't like having a candidate as the leader of their party who listened to a preacher who shouted, in their view, hateful sermons about America. They dislike Bush, but the also were very uncomfortable with Obama as the party standard-bearer. Where do they go now?

Obama may have to let the dust settle in those states and hope that his NEW positions play better there. That's why Obama is taking his pot full of money and going to red states like Montana and North Dakota. What chance does he have there? None. But then things aren't moving his way in Ohio or Michigan either. You have the money, try showing up in Red State Land and see if the polls move. If they do, you can tout how you are doing well in a strong red state and perhaps that will move people in your direction in other states in a bandwagon fashion. It can't hurt, and it may help. But this is not the strategy of a person who is on a roll. If you are strong, you keep pounding your message in those big midwestern battleground states. You need them to win, and you don't want your opponent to make any progress there. And why waste money in small red states that don't have many electoral voters.

I know I risk sounding like a broken record here, especially if the dynamic doesn't change in the next several months. And if Obama wins a huge landslide, as his cheering section in the media would have us believe, then I doubt if anyone except a handful of friends and family will ever log onto this blog again. (as if that wasn't most of the audience for this blog to begin with!)

But I don't think I'm wrong. To be honest, do any of us ever think we are? If we do, then we change. Could that be what is happening to Candidate Obama? ;)

Coach

I'm not dead yet...

2008-07-05T08:17:00.011-05:00

Fans of Monty Python will recognize this quote from their scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. A small village is trying to get through the latest run of the Black Death and as the cart goes through the lanes, a local asks the man running the body cart if he can put someone on who is "not dead yet, but will be soon." Even though the person in question avers that he is "feeling much better" and begins to sing, the cart man helps his friend out by clubbing the old man and putting him on the cart because, after all the cart won't be back for several days.

Our national media is trying to portray the Republican Party as "dead man walking" and Senator Obama simply passing the time until he becomes President Obama. These are the same know-it-alls who were selling tickets to Hillary Clinton's inauguration in December. Their track record is not so good.

Where does the race stand today?

I told you to keep your eyes on where the candidates go. I also have talked before about watching what they say, and if it represents a change from their past positions. To a great extent, candidates must appeal to their party's base in a primary and to the great middle in the general election.

McCain was a bit unorthodox. He did NOT go after his party base in the primary. He largely was trying to appeal to independents and disgruntled Democrats and got enough cross-over votes to win the nomination in a relatively unexpectedly easy finish to the campaign.

Obama had to go a much more traditional route and had a much tougher go of it. Let's face it, it's harder to defeat the Clintons than it is to defeat Mitt Romney. Especially when you have Mike Huckabee running interference for you down south!

Now Obama is in the position of having to "modify" some of his stances. His attempts to morph his Iraq stance is the most obvious one. Fortunately, his legions of admirers will permit him to make these verbal changes if it helps him win the White House. It is earning him criticism even from staunch supporters like the editorial board of the New York Times.

Will it hurt his chances to win?

Those last Democratic primaries continue to haunt the Obama campaign. Can he win back the blue-collar Democrat voters in the Midwest? Some data suggests many of those votes were not for Hillary but more against Obama. How many fit this category? We don't know. But that will be key in November.

Polling data continues to suggest that the Midwest will be the deciding region, once again, in November. Keep an eye on Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Where are the candidates traveling? Recently, Obama has been in Missouri, Ohio, Colorado, North Dakota, Montana, and then back to DC. These are Red States. If he cannot make good progress in the polls there, after the convention, he will go back to the battleground states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.

He has to try to take some of these smaller Red states if he is going to offset potential losses in Ohio and Florida. The problem is, it takes a LOT of those tiny Red states to offset the electoral votes lost if you have to concede Florida and Ohio.

He'd better keep his eye on Pennsylvania...that would make it near impossible.

McCain has been reestablishing his "conservative" bona fides in Red and "purple" states like Nevada, Ohio, and Indiana, but then he does some strange things. He goes to California (not a chance) Pennsylvania (should worry Obama) and then this strange little episode in Mexico. That is a pure play for the Latino vote, and after the hard feelings from the campaign with Hillary (who dominated the Latino vote) Obama should worry about that. Obama's response was to have a fundraiser in Miami. Not quite the same demographic, Barack. Most of those former Cubans are hard-core Republicans who still hate Fidel.

Keep an eye on these guys. Remember, the media created polls are worthless. The campaign polls are very good, and probably tell each other the same things. It is also driving their visits. If the visits result in better polling in that state, they will go back there over and over. Until the results stop improving; then they will go somewhere else. At the end of the campaign, it may simply be the result of "well if we don't win this state, it's over." That why John Kerry spent almost all of the month of October in Ohio, and outspent Bush 3-1 there. It didn't work.

Which brings up the subject of money. Is it the difference maker? Can be. It can also backfire. Obama outspent Hillary in Pennsylvania 3-1. She beat him solidly when polls showed him with a slight lead. Many feel that if he had put more of that money towards "walking around money" in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh's heavily black inner city boroughs that he could have made it much closer. He chose not to. Big mistake.

He also heavily outspent her in West Virginia and lost by 40 points. In that state, there is reason to believe that the overkill from too many media buys made the loss worse. So money is not the cure for negative voter attitudes, but it can kill a campaign if you don't have enough. Consider campaign money to be like oxygen: you need it to stay alive but you don't want to hyperventilate!

I will be traveling next week, a little history vacation in preparation for my summer adult education courses on both Benjamin Franklin and the US Civil War. I am looking forward to revisiting Gettysburg, Philadelphia, and Mount Vernon. And I will be seeing Williamsburg and the Antietam battlefield for the first time. I will try to post at some point.

Have some great summer fun and a belated happy Fourth of July!

On that note, I strongly encourage you to read Victor Davis Hanson's latest post on what makes America so incredible. You who read this little blog know how much I treasure Professor Hanson's thoughts. This one is a real keeper.

Coach

Food for thought

2008-06-19T07:29:00.002-05:00

After my post on polls the Quinnapiac company came out with several polls showing Obama leading in places that he lost badly in the primaries. I was rather doubtful of the accuracy of the polls, but was wary about my possible prejudice based on my investment of my authorship of a recent blog post on this subject.

I looked back in some archives and came up with this interesting brief but instructive information.

ABC/Washington Post polls:

June 2004: Bush 42, Kerry 48

June 2008: McCain 42, Obama 48

Anyone wanna take a guess on who had lower favorability ratings in June of those years, Bush or McCain? I rest my case. Keep your eyes on the candidates and their reactions.

Coach

How do you get to 270?

2008-06-17T07:48:00.005-05:00

The challenge for Barack Obama this election is very simple: How do you take away enough "red" states from the Republicans (and hold onto the same "blue" states) to get 270 electoral votes and win the election. It's not likely to end up with that different a result from the last two elections.

The polling this year has made this kind of planning even more difficult. You have to realize that there are two kind of polls these days. You have the media made polls that are usually a combination of a newspaper and a TV network: NBC/WSJ, CNN/USA Today, etc. Those are usually made to have something to write about. The media companies will order a poll of a certain size (bigger is more expensive) and there is not a lot of pressure for accuracy until the weeks previous to the election.

You also have the advertisement poll: polling organizations run polls so that later they can brag that they "got it right...or 'righter' than everyone else." This is the kind reported in the press as "a new Gallup poll says", etc. Polling organizations like Survey USA, Zogby international, Rasmussen Reports, etc. constantly poll. "National" polls are worthless. Why?

It's important that you understand this fact: There is NO SUCH THING AS A NATIONAL ELECTION IN THE USA. What we will have this fall are regional and state elections. What about the presidential election? It's a 51 state election. 51? Yes, the Electoral College is the method we use to choose our presidents. And the District of Columbia, not a state, gets 3 electoral votes as designated in the Twenty-Third Amendment to the US Constitution.

So...the ONLY polls that mean ANYTHING are state polls. Here is where the SECOND type of polling comes into play. Internal polls. One of the activities that costs the MOST amount of money in a presidential campaign is internal polling. These are polls that are done by the campaigns themselves. They are highly accurate with the kind of data that can be gathered using modern methodology. They are also highly confidential. Campaigns use them to make the important decisions regarding what issues to pound home...and which ones to avoid or remain silent on.

Notice that McCain pounds home national security, gasoline issues, taxes, and judges. Obama began loudly proclaiming his opposition to Iraq but has now backed off that and addressed Iran much more lately. McCain can't be heard saying much of anything about abortion. Obama gave a "sermon" in a church on Father's Day about black males becoming more responsible about parenting. All of these talks are not made out of chance, but in response to focus groups and polling data in the states that are key to each candidate. It's also targeted at groups that are most needed by the candidate. Obama's message about black male responsibility will play well with the blue-collar vote he so badly needs. McCain's comments on judges, security, oil, and taxes may bring the conservative Republicans, who he has real problems with, to grudgingly go to the polls in November and hold their noses and pull the lever for him.

Most importantly, you can tell what the internal polling data is telling the candidates by watching WHERE THEY GO TO CAMPAIGN. Obama,for instance, has spent a LOT of time in the usually blue state of Michigan. McCain is also plying the midwest. The dirty little secret is that Obama knows he is in big trouble in the Motor City state. One of the interesting little stories recently has been the resolution of the Michigan delegation to the convention. Obama has played up the fact that he "obeyed the rules" and even took his name off the ballot for the Michigan Primary in the wake of the DNC's disciplinary action against the Democratic party there for it's early primary (a violation of the Democratic National Committee's edict on primary timing).

The fact is that he was relieved at the ruling because he was going to lose badly there. He took his name off the ballot because it allowed him to let Hillary win there without it being a "loss" for him. When he lost Florida badly, it proved the wisdom of that strategy. It also explains the howls from the Hillary camp during the rules committee fight at the end of May over the DNC decision to allocate some of Michigan's reduced delegation to Obama even though he had removed his name from the ballot there. That's when the Hillary people knew the fix was final, and their fate was sealed.

Now, he is in big trouble with Michiganders. You can tell by the number of times he has been there in just the last few weeks. He needs those Hillary supporters to come in line before the convention, otherwise, many of them will work for McCain. It's too late. The horse is out of the barn.

As if to show that his tin ear is at least as good as George W. Bush's, he then gets the endorsement of global warming prize-winner Al Gore in DETROIT of all places. How do you think that went over with the blue-collar community in Michigan as they ponder the mental and federal assault on the industry that produces "greenhouse gases" for the nation? What were his people thinking? This is the same tin ear that unites a labor union with a well-known anti-war organization to attack war hero McCain as a warmonger. This is supposed to win over the "pry it from my cold dead hands" bunch? Are you kidding me?

He's also in trouble in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Remember that he generally underperforms his polling data by about 6-10%. He was supposed to win New Hampshire, California, and was almost tied in Pennsylvania. He narrowly lost NH, but was solidly defeated in California and Pennsylvania. The fact is, if it were not for the caucus system in the Democratic primary system, Hillary would have won the nomination easily. Obama's people out-hustled the hustling Clintons. But caucus organization will not help them in the general election. In fact, most of the caucus states he won were states that the Obama people know they have little chance of defeating McCain in this fall.

His problems in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida is why you see his advisors trying to convince big donors that they have another way to get 270 electoral votes without some key battleground states.

This is probably whistling past the graveyard.

The fact of the matter is that Obama, as the most liberal senator in the US Senate, who has made it a campaign mantra to "bring us together", is going to have a hard time finding a winning electoral strategy. He is up against an opponent who can point to dozens of pieces of major legislation that he has crafted with Democrats in the Senate. It's less about race than it is about class.

The biggest giveaway that the Democrat Party is very uneasy about what the top of the ticket may do to the rest of the Democrat Party candidates is the complaints about the faults in the Democrat primary system from the Democrat Senate Majority leader: Harry Reid.

Reid is from a battleground state: Nevada. He knows that Obama causes unique problems, along with his historic diversity benefit, and he is worried about massive defections to the Republican from the neighboring state of Arizona. His complaints about a "flawed system" the other day were another clue that the DNC's internal polling suggests serious problems from the Obama candidacy. Why complain about the system unless you don't like the result!?!

The above examples of the "tin ear" also reveal a certain arrogance about the Obama campaign. In my years as a competitive swimmer, the coaches used to have little sayings on big cards posted on the bulletin board in the locker room. One I have never forgotten was "He can't beat you with his press clippings."

Words to the wise...you can bet John McCain knows that one...

Welcome to the world, Gillian

2008-06-16T15:16:00.003-05:00

Coach just became a grandpa! Little Gillian has entered our wonderful world and another proud US citizen is added to our fabulous population.

Mother and daughter are well, and grandpa is raising a glass welcoming his son and daughter-in-law to the wonderful world of parenting!

Coach

He's baaaaaack!

2008-06-10T10:45:00.002-05:00

For those of you who have enjoyed this blog so far, I'm sorry. It's been a crazy time with finals, and then another big change in my life.

We are moving! So, my family has been busy packing and toting things 40 miles away to our new full-time abode. I'm not sure how often I will be posting in the immediate future. I still haven't decided on how to acquire internet access there, but it will happen.
is in must be of concern to him. Again, those white auto-workers may
Of course, a lot has happened since my last post. Hillary has suspended, repeat, suspended her campaign. That's a big difference from conceding.

What this means is two-fold: 1) she holds onto her delegates, keeps raising money to pay debts, and remains a threat behind the scenes should Obama stumble badly or something about his past raises it's ugly head. 2) She will give a speech at the convention, have her delegates vote on the ballot, be involved in platform/committee work at the convention, and perhaps keep alive any veep consideration.

In reality, she probably knew this was where her campaign was going to wind up after Super Tuesday. She is now playing the game for 2012. She does NOT want Obama to win this year, but she has to behave like she is doing everything to help him beat John McCain. Why? Because then she would have to wait till 2016 to run! Margaret Thatcher aside, 68-year old women have a tough time winning elections for top-management positions.

She has to worry about what will happen if he loses. She will get blamed for it by many in the party. Bill has damaged her future position with some of the divisive commments he has made in this campaign. The Clintons have come across as "we are entitled to this and how dare you give this to some freshman untried senator over us!"

The fact of the matter is, I repeat, McCain has had the luck of the Irish this year. He won against a weak set of opponents. The Democrats should have had a lock on the White House this year, and yet the Democrat-led Congress has even lower approval ratings than the outgoing Republican president. Amazing.

As for the president's approval ratings, the Senate Intelligence Committee tried to pile on him with a report that stated the old "Bush lied/people died" rhetoric. They never tell you that the Senate Committee had EXACTLY THE SAME INTELLIGENCE that he did and the Senate voted to give him the authorization to go into Iraq. What even MORE interesting is the editorial in today's Washington Post, no fan of President Bush, defending the president on those accusations! This is one of the few links in my piece today, so I highly recommend reading the entirety of this short editorial. You have to read the reports from the government during election time. Many times, like this report, the report's facts don't agree with the summary handed out for the media to devour for the nightly news.

Meanwhile, the Democrats have chosen a nominee that got slaughtered in battleground states, that Democrats can usually count on (Michigan, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, even Massachusetts) by a woman whose "brand" has been severely hurt by the comments and baggage she and her husband have brought to the dance this election. In the last several primaries, it became clear that Mrs. Clinton was earning many votes as a "stop Obama" candidate.

So, what happens next? Watch what the candidates do. Obama has been in Michigan three times in the last several days. This means that he needs shoring up there and the problems that Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick be a problem demographic group for him. He MUST have Michigan and its 17 electoral votes if he is going to have a chance. And he has been to North Carolina a few times. It is one of the few southern states where he hopes to win (looking for a coalition of liberal whites on the college campuses with a large African-American community).

Well, this was just a quick summary of where we stand. I will try to sit down and do a longer analytical piece with more links in the next few days. Meanwhile, if you are of the mind to read my more partisan reaction to events, don't forget to click the link at the side and read my "Lincoln's Ghost" blog...!

Later,

Coach

Quite a day...

2008-05-31T21:53:00.004-05:00

The DNC's Rules and Bylaws committee has issued it's decision.
1) Florida will have half it's delegates restored.
2) So will Michigan.

Hillary's people have accepted #1 and strongly opposed #2. Why? Because OBAMA WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT IN MICHIGAN. Also, they have taken 4 of the delegates she would have won in Michigan and given them to Obama. This is a HUGE mistake. This was a state Obama must have in November. It will only hurt them more with those blue-collar voters. Add on top of that the announcement that Ford is building a giant new $3 billion dollar "global car" plant in Mexico (read NON-UAW workers) and the Obama campaign is really behind the 8-ball in the automobile manufacturing state and it's 17 electoral votes. Why attach that to the Obama campaign? Because Michiganers will remember the story about the Obama people secretly telling the Canadians that they weren't serious about renegotiating NAFTA. Another trust issue for him and white blue-collar voters.

Hillary's spokesman, Harold Ickes, said she reserves the right to challenge this at the credentials committee...which doesn't meet until the Denver convention. While rumors swirl that she is ready to exit gracefully after next week's final primaries, this bone-headed slap at the Clinton candidacy was a bad move. She could have stepped down gracefully...will she now?

Finally, the Obamas chose today to announce their resignation from membership at Trinity United Church. They blamed some of this on press hounding of shut-in members of the church. He's been getting such good press up to now, why bite the hand that fed him? Not smart. This invalidates much of his defense of them in his race speech last March in Philadelphia. Frankly, this is what most political wags would have recommended to him...months ago.

When you consider that he has been selling himself as "change", and he acts like a typical politician, it raises questions in the undecided voter's mind. Obama's people have often characterized the Clintons as people who would do whatever it takes to get elected. So far, those thrown under the Obama bus, have been Rev. Wright, his grandmother, and now the church itself. He's now saying that "I’m confident we’ll be able to find a church that we’re comfortable with,” he said. “We probably won’t make any firm decision on this until January, when we know what our lives are going to be like." So he will now decide on his faith like he's looking for a new place to live closer to work? I don't even know where to go with this.

How are the Obamas any different from the Clintons now?

Coach

Iceberg, dead ahead!

2008-05-29T15:34:00.002-05:00

What a dangerous weekend ahead for the Democratic National Committee.

The Rules Committee meets on Saturday to go over proposed solutions to the denial of seating delegations for Florida and Michigan. Boy, two states the party needs to take in order for it's nominee, whoever it might be, to have a chance to win the White House.

The committee will be made up of 40% of it's members chosen by Obama's people, 40% by Hillary's folks, and 20% from the DNC itself. If 20% of the members don't like whatever is decided, then they have the right to issue a minority report. The minority report would then have to be considered by the convention committee right as the convention is starting. What does this all mean?

It means that the convention could begin with either some, or none, of the state delegations from those two important states still not seated and ready to vote.

Meanwhile, a poll by the highly respected Pew Center shows Obama's approval rating with white women taking a nose-dive since February. At that time, his approval rating was 56 positive, 36 negative. Today, it's 43 positive, 49 negative. That's not good...especially in places like...well...Florida and Michigan!

What should the Obama people do? They should agree to seat both delegations and expect that the superdelegates will continue to come Obama's way. That way the two states will feel they got a fair deal and can fully support Obama this November.

If the Democrats don't do this, it will play to all the "what happened to 'every vote should count" calls from the Clinton supporters. Obama can't afford to give away so many Clinton supporters this fall. Polls already show McCain ahead in Michigan right now.

We will see what kind of confidence Obama and his people have in the superdelegates by how they play things this weekend.

Know this...even if the committee ends up recommending only a partial seating of delegates, this would almost guarantee that the Michigan and Florida delegation issues would be quite alive when the delegates show up in Denver this August.

Bad idea.

Coach

A historian looks at the Iraq war

2008-05-27T20:36:00.004-05:00

I admit it...I have a soft spot for historians. Especially those who use the classical historians as their model.

Victor Davis Hanson's most recent book was on the Peloponnesian War. Those who liked talking about "Sparta" can find out the real thing, not the Hollywood nonsense, by reading his book.

Recently, he sat down with Bill Steigerwald of Townhall.com. I can't recommend this short interview enough for those who want to put the Iraq conflict in context. He refers to the past several wars we are familiar with (WW I & II) and looks at how our handling of the war went...and how things will perhaps be seen 50 years hence.

Please click here.

Coach

An outstanding example of American exceptionalism

2008-05-25T23:08:00.005-05:00

I have just finished my yearly history course with my high school students. We never get any farther than Watergate and the Nixon resignation, but something interesting happened this year.

As we begin the Nixon Adminstration, I have a picture of Buzz Aldrin standing on the moon with with the American flag. The kids yawn, and I move on. I tell them that we haven't been there since 1972 and we will be going back in the next several years.

This year, one of the kids said "Why". It reminded me of what a jaded generation this is. I always considered the exciting people in history to be the ones who took chances, who had dreams, and who lived with a passion and ambition for enlarging our knowledge of the world...not just providing gov't checks or expounding on diversity and tolerance...someone has to push the edge of the envelope.

Tonight, we were reminded that one reason the American soul is so attractive to other peoples of other nations is exemplified by what NASA and JPL achieved tonight with the successful landing of the Phoenix Mars Polar lander. I am listening to Mike Griffin, NASA Administrator telling us regular humans what was achieved with this difficult mission. In order to successfully land at such an extreme angle onto the Martian North Pole, they had to send a vehicle 650 million kilometers over 10 months and have it enter the Martian atmosphere at an exactness of within a 20 meter window in order to not skip off the surface or crash land on the surface. Amazing.

Also, we are seeing initial pictures just to let us see that the craft is ok and operating. This from an agency that landed two roving craft on the surface in 2004. Those two craft, Spirit and Opportunity, had a design lifespan of 6 mos. They are both still operating some 4 years later, the only serious threat to their existence being a cutoff of their funding from Congress so that we can keep farm subsidies or study the sex of the fruit fly or some other stupid congressional earmark.

It reminds you of the dynamism of this country. It's people continually pushes forward, stays on the cutting edge, and welcomes the contributions of it's friends. Canada has designed a $37 million weather station that should give us great forecasting information. Hopefully, it will still be operating for that day when man finally sets foot there...if the nation keeps it's focus on the road ahead, not just the white stripes next to the wheels.

It's a good day to be a proud American. Let's all contemplate and thank those who made the supreme sacrifice this Memorial Day. I am of course referring to those men and women who served so that our brilliant scientists and workers can have the vision and freedom to conceive of and execute such an exciting mission. Phoenix is going to examine the frosted environment on Mars' North Pole...looking for past evidence of the building blocks of life on the Red Planet.

As Yakov Smirnov used to say, "What a country!"

Coach

What was she thinking?

2008-05-24T11:14:00.005-05:00

I am in the midst of finals, so this will have to be a short one. But one has to ask...

WHAT WAS HILLARY THINKING?

I find it hard to believe that a woman who has been around politics as long as she has couldn't possibly been thinking that "if he gets shot, I get the nomination." Ok, ok...it's the Clintons, so maybe she was. But why would she SAY IT OUT LOUD?????

One of the things that happens in a long campaign, is that people who are inexperienced say so many things, under such pressure, with so little sleep, that dumb things come out. Perhaps this is what happened to Hillary. Lord knows, Obama has committed his share of gaffes lately, but the press will always give him a pass because they want the Democrats to win. But Hillary is keeping that from happening and every little cough and belch right now is under scrutiny.

She likely won't get a single superdelegate now, but I still look for her to win the Puerto Rico primary.

Meanwhile, John McCain addressed two areas that the press was hammering him on: his wife's tax returns and his health. In the words of one press wag, "It looks like McCain has been swimming with cocoons", a reference to this wonderful film from the 80s. The former Navy pilot has obviously been keeping up the PT and runs a schedule that keeps those junk-food eating press weenies tired. He also has a few buddies at his place this weekend, eating brats, downing some of his wife's source of income, and having his ring kissed as they seek the Veep nod. Must be fun.

More later, after finals next week.

Coach

Laying the groundwork for 2012?

2008-05-18T23:36:00.003-05:00

Just about everyone recognizes that Hillary Clinton is probably a dead candidate walking...except the Clintons. Tuesday promises to be another split day. She should win big in Kentucky. She will once again get tons of white working class Democrats who fear what Obama represents to them...and I am not even going to try to interpret that. I lived in Kentucky for a while and married into a Kentucky family. There are all types there, and the media portrayal of whites who DON'T vote for Obama as racist is as untrue as it is, in it's own way, racist. But that is the culture we live in right now.

In Portland Oregon, where the other primary will take place on Tuesday, an estimated 75,000 came out to hear Obama speak. It certainly is a phenomenon. If you want to know what I think, you can go check out my first opinion piece at my new companion blog, Lincoln's Ghost. That blog will have the opinion that I strive to keep out of this one!

Where do we stand? Nothing has changed except we are another week closer to the reality of this campaign: Obama will be the Democrat Party nominee. What are his chances? Try as they might to downplay it, the problem he has with blue-collar Democrats is serious...and I'm not sure how he can fix it. His latest screed against some of their sacred cow lifestyle choices(SUVs, food, energy usage) will not help. I wonder if he hasn't decided to ignore that part of his base the same way McCain is ignoring part of his. It will be interesting to see if two candidates can realistically realign their parties by themselves. I doubt it.

In other news, Obama reacted to a Bush speech in the Israeli Knesset the other day. Bush was criticizing those who appease dictators and made the comparison to the appeasement of Hitler in 1939. Bush quoted the misguided statement of Republican Senator Borah who, in 1939, said, in response to Hitler's invasion of Poland: "Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided."

Obama instantly criticized Bush for inserting domestic politics into a speech in a foreign country. This has traditionally been a no-no in American politics. The Bush peoples response was "I understand when you’re running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you — that is not always true and it is not true in this case," said Bush press secretary Dana Perino. Ouch. Methinks Senator Obama doth protest too much. Why did he think that comment was aimed at him? Further background from the Bush White House pointed out that the comments were actually aimed at former President Carter who was recently on his tour of Israel-hating representatives and a comment on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visits to Syria and comments on "dialoguing" with Iran's Achmadinejad. Obama was criticized for being thin-skinned by many of his supporters in the media and seems to often have a hard time letting critical comments go, revisiting the offenses over and over. Over the next 5 months, that might not be the best strategy.

McCain jumped on the comment as well, trying to also remind their his base that he contends that he is a conservative. More grist for the mill, as he also took time Saturday to appear on Saturday Night Live in a week that included another guest appearance on Jon Stewart's The Daily Show. It seems that he may have a career in television if the Oval Office thing doesn't work out. His two skits included the obligatory jokes about his age and an encouraging word to Clinton and Obama to keep the fight going for a while longer.

Will Tuesday make any difference? No. There are already rumors that the Clintons have some tape of a talk given by Michelle Obama that will "change the race for the nomination" but that sounds more like fantasy than anything else.

Look for each to have huge victories, and corresponding parties, in their victories state, and look for Obama to officially announce the race over. The intent is to justify his ignoring of Clinton from Tuesday on and into full-attack mode on Senator McCain.

Should be fun.

Coach

What does a girl have to do to get noticed?

2008-05-14T01:31:00.004-05:00

Poor Hillary. All you have to do is read this article from the Politico to see her problem. She wins West Virginia by 41% and the media yawns.

Ok, so it's only a few delegates.

And it's heavy in that demographic group that I have been talking about for weeks that Obama has a real problem with.

But seriously folks...Obama only beat John Edwards by 20% and Edwards quit in February.

I still expect superdelegates to choose Obama, and I still expect him to be the nominee in spite of this ominous warning from an important Democratic group.

There is no joy in Elephantland either. They got whacked again in a special election in a conservative southern congressional district, this one in Mississippi. While it was close, the fact is that the Republican base is mad as he** and is taking their ball (and their significant $$ donations) and are staying home.

This could be a real wild one this November.

More later,

Coach

Country roads, take me home

2008-05-13T06:02:00.006-05:00

Is this the last trail for the Hillary White House express?

West Virginia casts its votes in the Democratic Presidential Primary marathon today. Of course, it may be easier to find an African-American in Iceland than in the Mountaineer state (only 3.3% of the population) so Hillary should have one last big night as this thing winds down towards it's inevitable conclusion. It's sad that race keeps coming up as a deciding factor in this contest. I suppose this years election will be dissected for years on that subject alone. I would expect that Obama has some big time superdelegates set to announce in the wake of this big victory in order to give the mainstream media a chance to stay focused on his inevitability as the Democrat Party nominee.

This is coming at a time when we once again see that the electorate is disgruntled with the current administration and there is little doubt that the war in Iraq and the price at the pump has a lot to do with that.

Once you factor all that in, it is not only amazing but instructive that most polling data still shows John McCain either competitive or the front-runner for the fall election. How can this be?

Perhaps it is because of the actual choices: a generic Democrat would win heavily, but given the two alternatives to McCain, he remains preferable to many who would otherwise pull the lever for a Democrat.

What happens next? It's likely that next Tuesday's contests in Kentucky and Oregon are a split decision like last weeks contests in Indiana and North Carolina. At this point, Hillary may be doing little more than negotiating for the DNC or the Obama donors to pay off her sizable campaign debt.

Otherwise, she may be simply waiting and hoping for some fortuitous Reverend Wright-type of revelation or an Obama campaign fluff to cast further doubt on his viability in the minds of superdelegates.

But all you have to do is quietly talk to Democrat party operatives in places like Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Michigan to know that Obama has a formidable challenge ahead of him to win that oft-cited white working class vote. And he won't be able to win them by whining about Republicans "trying to use the same distractions" as in the past. That may play well with his current voters; not with the ones he needs to win over for November.

In that vein, consider this: No Democrat has won the general election without also winning the West Virginia primary since Woodrow Wilson in 1912. Can Obama break that streak?

Coach

More on Lake County

2008-05-08T10:15:00.001-05:00

A follow up article on the problems in Lake County.

Hillary's people suspect the same thing that many were implying...that vote manufacturing was the reason for the delay.

Coach

Force Quit

2008-05-07T09:51:00.007-05:00

Every once in a while, my computer freezes up. My techie son long ago showed me how to go into Windows task manager to try to shut down the offending program. When that little piece of strong persuasion doesn't work, then I do a force quit: I turn off the power. I know I shouldn't...that kind of "termination with extreme prejudice" can have dire consequences down the road, but I get impatient for the program to shut down and kind of take a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" attitude and pray it doesn't give me the "blue screen of death" someday when I try to reboot my computer.

That's what happened to Hillary Clinton last night.

It was clear for sometime that Obama would win North Carolina big. Over 33% of the Democrat party vote in the state was African-American and it is becoming a crusade for that powerful demographic group to both vote for Obama and put the Clintons in their place. Barack got almost 94% of the black vote in the Tarheel state. He also did almost 2-1 over Hillary in the Research Triangle amongst white educated voters and the college group put their studying for finals on hold to go cast their votes for Obama.

What happened in Indiana was different, though. The Clintons have risen to the heights of American politics using old-style smash mouth Democratic party tactics. Last night, the party put a force quit on them. I suppose I began to suspect something when certain counties were slow coming in, particularly Lake County, which holds Gary. Gary is a de facto suburb of Chicago, and Chicago..well, Chicago is Obama country. The mayor of Gary promised a surprise, and since he is also the county Democratic Party chairman, he was able to "deliver". There is no surprise that you would see that area go heavily for Obama, but it's the way it happened that raised many eyebrows last night, and the silence from the DNC on last night's events is deafening.

Here's the way it works:

The precinct captain knows how many people have voted and how many have not. His precinct is almost all Democrat, you can't even find a Republican who would be willing to serve as a poll-watcher in many of those inner city polling stations. When the Democratic state officials calls in to the precinct to find out how the voting is going, the precinct captain asks "how many do you need?" With the new "early voting" that goes on in most states these days, it's no problem, and not unusual, when suddenly a new batch of "absentee ballots" is dumped on the table to be tabulated. Of course, they are almost all for the Democratic candidate, (in this case, the RIGHT Democratic candidate) and they must be carefully counted...and this takes time.

All last night, the results from Lake County dribble in...and were overwhelmingly for Obama, gradually drawing down Hillary's margin of victory so that it became so small that Obama will probably end up with as many delegates from Indiana as she will. This could not have happened without the acquiescence of DNC higher-ups. This is how Richard Daley secured Illinois for JFK. It's one of those dirty little secrets in Midwestern politics. Someone with longtime experience in these matters in this area writes on it here. If you are dubious about my conjecture here, I encourage you to click on some of the links I have put in this text. There is little fear that this will be exposed because it is a primary, and most people in the political chattering class will consider it an "internal matter" relating to Democrat party machinations. It's actually kind of alarming to see this so clearly exposed in this matter because it's the kind of tactic you hold back for something important...like the general election.

Many speculate that this was a tactic that the Democrat party was going to unleash on George W. Bush in Ohio in 2004. The Bush people (read Karl Rove) were aware of this little midwestern tradition and had dispatched dozens of RNC paid lawyers, particularly to Cuyahoga County. This inner city section of Cleveland was where Democrats had always looked for big margins to offset Republican strength in the outlying areas of Ohio. No one went to bed before Cuyahoga was counted. But in 2004 those RNC lawyers were ready to challenge any curiously discovered ballots. The Bush people had seen this tactic in Dade and Broward County in 2000. Without some "late" found ballots there, the Florida recount would not have been necessary: Bush was ready to declare victory and Gore was ready to concede. Until Gore was advised to seek a recount...by his Mayor Daley's son, Richie Daley. Nobody on the Republican side missed the irony of Daley's statement, made that night, that "every Florida vote should be counted." A former GOP Ohio official I have gotten to know posts more about this tactic here.

Bush fought back at what he saw as a naked attempt to steal Florida by the old "sudden" batch method of voter fraud. Most books recounting that election accuse the Bush people of stealing 2000 through the court system, or that the Electoral College is unfair because it gave the victory to a man who lost the popular vote. Little has been said about the "irregularities" in the votes leading up to the great Recount Drama. When investigations of the areas with questionable matching up of votes with voter records over and over showed that the suspect areas were in the inner cities, the civil rights leadership yelled about prejudice and disenfranchisement of black voters. Bush has paid the price with Democrat voters to this very day: it was a costly victory in terms of his perception by the voting public, that he was somehow an illegitimate victor when the truth was that he believed he was trying to keep the other side from stealing it away. How ironic.

More ironic is that the tactic was now used on the Democrat president who he succeeded. The DNC decided weeks ago that the ongoing Democrat civil war was caustic to it's chances in the fall general election. The Clintons refused to go quietly so a "force quit" was the only choice left. Now, the party will be brutal to it's former fair-haired boy and his wife. Superdelegates will declared for Obama every day for the next several weeks. It will be choreographed like a funeral dirge for the Clintons. Her money will dry up (she is already loaning herself more). Even those she should win the next few primaries in West Virginia and Kentucky by large margins, she is a dead candidate walking. She will be told by the DNC Borg that "resistance is futile", and that if there is a McCain victory, she will get NO help from the DNC or it's money machine in 2012.

You will now see a ton of media death pronouncements of the Hillary campaign like here, here, and here.

What this does NOT fix is the racial makeup of the Obama support in the Democrat party and the number of white voters who vow that they will either vote McCain in the fall or sit this one out. In the past, the party has unified to support the candidate in spite of the bitterness of the primary contests. Will this happen this year? The DNC is nervous about this one and you can bet that there will be HEAVY pressure on union leaders to bring their rank and file around by November. Time will tell, but there are media concerns about what the numbers show about this problem here, here, here, here, and here.

What's also amazing, is the number of media outlets who have suddenly discovered Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" attempt to keep her in the race to beat up on Obama now that the Obama campaign has raised it as the only reason Barack did not win Indiana as well. Even Germany picked up on this story. You can read those here, here, here, and here.

The DNC got what it wanted, and now can go back to it's full time occupation, along with an Obama-adoring media: beating up on the Republicans. The Republicans are finally waking up to what kind of a dire future they face in November. The sacrifice of the former Democrat standard bearer was worth what the Democrats could reap in the fall election.

In a way, it's kind of sad to see the Clintons go out this way. But as the old saying goes, "live by the sword, die by the sword." Right now, the Clintons are looking at so many of their former administration and DNC friends, saying "Et tu, Brute?"

Coach

PS...The Clinton campaign is claiming it will fight on, and Hillary is loaning herself more money...Good thing she can, I think her outside funding is about to dry up.

Midday report

2008-05-06T14:17:00.004-05:00

While we are waiting for the first exit polls (BTW, with few exceptions, they have ended up exaggerating Obama's strength by 6-10%; they had Obama up in PA by 2%--he lost by 10)

I think this analysis by Jim Geraghty happens to reflect my views...with a lot more experience that he brings with it...

Schizophrenic Tuesday

2008-05-05T06:42:00.003-05:00

Another Tuesday, another big primary for the Democrats. Indiana and North Carolina hold their time in the spotlight tomorrow in two very different demographic groups for the two candidates.

North Carolina would normally have promised to be another repeat of past southern stompings administered to Hillary by Obama. Mostly because of the heavy African-American makeup of the Democratic party primary voters in the south, Obama has swept to big double-digit victories in Dixie. Will that repeat itself tomorrow?

Since the last victory, Mississippi, we have had the Reverend Wright connection addressed in two major Obama speeches, the "bitter and gun-clinging" episode in San Francisco, and Obama's off-hand remark about "typical white person" referring to his grandmother. Will this motivate southern whites to back Hillary by bigger numbers and offset some of Obama's votes in the black community? Will it encourage Republicans to take this chance to affect the Democratic nominating process as they seem to have done in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania?

In the Hoosier state, it should have been a solid win for the Clintons. Home state senator Evan Bayh, a member of one of Indiana's most storied political families, is working hard for Mrs. Clinton. Whispers continue that, if she is successful in the winning the nomination, he is on her short list to be her veep nominee. Obama has made Indiana's outcome uncertain because of the strength of the black vote in Indianapolis and the northwestern corner of the state; a de facto suburb of Chicago and Obama's home state of Illinois.

The most likely scenario is that tomorrow's contests will be a split decision. And if so, not much would change. But what path is it that would "remain unchanged?" A brokered convention? Howard Dean forcing a June ending to the blood-letting? Clinton Inc.'s scorched earth pursuit of the nomination?

Most experts seem agreed that if Obama were to win both primaries, the pressure on Hillary to withdraw could be unbearable. But what if she were to win both, or, more likely, win Indiana and come very close in North Carolina?

John McCain campaigned in New Orleans last week, continuing his "I'm not George Bush" tour of places where Bush dare not go. While there, he met with one of the few bright future stars of the Republican party. And, perhaps, his vice-presidential nominee?

I still believe that the Democrat party hierarchy have decided that Obama must be chosen in order to preserve the New Deal coalition that has kept the Democrats in control of Congress for most years since the Great Depression. They know that only the near unanimous support for the party's candidates over the last 40 years by African-American voters has kept them from being in the wilderness during the Nixon-Reagan presidencies. Without their support, they could never have regained control of Congress in 2006...and seem destined to enlarge those majorities this year...

...unless black voters were to stay home because Obama had been "cheated" out of the nomination by Clinton machinations. And the Clintons could only pull this fat out of the fire if the party higher-ups acquiesced.

But what do the voters think?

We are about to find out...

Coach

Holy Cow

2008-04-30T01:32:00.002-05:00

"So little to do, so much time...strike that...reverse it."

-- Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory"

The press conference that Barack Obama held today was an incredible piece of political drama. Rumor has it that Hillary is polling within 5 points of him in North Carolina.

Panic is in the air.

I will work on a much fuller post sometime on Wednesday...but for now...Obama must be in BIG trouble to throw his old mentor under the bus like this(some wags are asking if his grandma can come up now). His internal polling must be brutal.

There have to be some nervous superdelegates out there tonight...

Coach

Thanks for nothing

2008-04-29T06:08:00.007-05:00

Poor Barack Obama. He's trying to recover from yet another loss of a large population state replete with blue-collar white Democrat majorities and lo and behold, Reverend Wright pops up on his "15 minutes of fame" tour to torpedo Obama's attempts to reconcile with this critical demographic group.

After working hard to convince Democrat primary voters, and more importantly superdelegates, that Wright's most inflammatory views were "sound bites taken out of context", the Reverend has been in a spate of public appearances that not only put them in a context that reinforced the public "misperceptions" but took them to another level. He even went to great lengths to explain that blacks and whites think differently, brain-wise, and thus the black affinity for memorizing hip-hop lyrics. If a white person made these observations, they would be castigated like they were Jimmy the Greek.

Most unfortunate, for Obama at least, was Wright's strange scattershot appearance at the National Press Club yesterday. He now has political observers, on both sides of the ideological spectrum, opening wondering if he is trying to sabotage Obama's campaign and elect John McCain. Newt Gingrich thinks Wright is doing this to hurt Obama. This is gonna keep Democrats in so much chaos that I would buy stock in Maalox and Pepto-Bismol if I were an investing wizard.

When he started with a calm appearance on Bill Moyer's show on PBS, it seemed logical for Wright, knowing that he continues to be an issue, to put a calm face with the frenzied voice on the pulpit clips. But black liberation theology is no more reasonable to white voters when spoken in quiet but passionate explanations on one of the most liberal programs on TV. Wright's follow-up appearances at the NAACP Detroit branch's dinner and the Press Club meeting will only serve to confirm the worst fear of the working class blue collar worker: an Obama presidency will constitute black retribution for hundreds of years of white oppression in America. This is not a "post-racial" candidate's message if one expect to woo old-style New Deal Democrats.

For the first time, I am changing my view that Obama's candidacy could lead to a McGovern-style loss: it could be worse. Many New Deal-coalition Democrats could see this as time to send a message to their party. They might want to send it by casting aside many congressional Democrats, especially those who bought into Obama's "new message" campaign and endorsed the Illinois senator.

We have seen over the last several weeks that polling data and even the exit polls have not properly represented this demographic group's rejection of the Obama candidacy once their ballots are tabulated. What happens when this opposition to Obama becomes more publicly acceptable?

We are starting to see this show up in polling data in Indiana. If he takes a shellacking there, this theme will become an open concern for the superdelegates. He had better hold his double-digit lead in heavily black North Carolina.

As it becomes increasingly clear that they will have to choose the nominee, that neither candidate will be able to claim the nod based on the pledged delegates, the party will have it's choice between death by discredited Clinton or death by a black liberation theology amateur who thinks we simply need to sit down and talk with our enemies. This is the advice he is accepting which has serious risks for the world, not just the United States. What should party leaders do? I don't envy them.

I realize that to some reading this blog this will seem a harsh characterization of the two candidates but this is how disgruntled Democrats are starting to perceive their choices.

John McCain must feel like he is truly experiencing the "luck of the Irish."

PS...it gets stranger...it seems the good reverend's appearance at the National Press Club was organized by a hardcore black Hillary supporter. Wow, isn't politics fascinating?

PPS...once again, one of my favorite writers has weighed in on these matters. I urge, nay, PLEAD, with my readers to ready Victor Davis Hanson's blog post on Wright and the effect on the Obama candidacy. Whether you agree with it or not, Professor Hanson has the perspective of a well-respected historian...

Nuclear Mideast update

2008-04-24T15:54:00.003-05:00

Sometime ago, I posted about Iran's nuclear program. Some readers may remember an Israeli raid on a Syrian site in Sept.

It appears US Intel is now briefing Congress on the attack...and YES, plutonium was present.

Here's the latest from NRO online about this developing story.

I have just finished the unit, in my US History class, about Hiroshima and we talked a lot about the fears of nuclear weapons. It's still amazing to me that in the almost 63 years since Nagasaki, that a nuclear weapon has not been used in anger.

I'm not so sure that the trio of Iran, Syria, and North Korea can be trusted to keep that streak going...

The night after...

2008-04-23T22:41:00.004-05:00

So...what was settled?

1) No matter what happens from here on out, Hillary is in through the convention. She will never drop out now, and is looking to put more pressure on the freshman senator, perhaps hoping for another major gaffe or revelation.

2) She has won the primaries in most of the large population states. Only the ones without an asterisk were won by Obama. Illinois is, of course, his home state. And the margin there represents most of his popular vote edge over her. He will probably win North Carolina, which is #12...but both Georgia and North Carolina are red states. McCain should win them handily.

Pennsylvania *
California *
Texas *
Ohio *
Illinois
New York *
Florida *
Massachusetts *
Wisconsin
New Jersey *
Georgia
Michigan *

Remember that presently the rules of the convention are to deny any representation from Michigan and Florida. Regardless of how they do it, the Democrats will have to allow some kind of delegation from those states. They will have to have her delegates in majority, especially Florida where she won in a huge landslide. It won't give her the nomination, but it will make things more interesting.

3) Indiana and North Carolina are up on May 6. Obama should win with the heavy black population in the Democratic party in North Carolina, and the heavy numbers of academia and college youth in the universities will boost his margin. Indiana is more problematic for him.

Indianapolis should go for Obama, but the margin there, and in Gary (a near suburb of Chicago) may not offset the small towns and cities of Indiana. There, the blue collar workers of the auto parts and assembly industries should favor Clinton as they did in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

In the end, I would expect the same kind of result in Indiana as we saw in those two states, in the neighborhood of a 6-10% Clinton win.

The problem for the Democrats is that Obama has won a large part of his delegates in states that McCain will probably win in November. Hillary has won the contests in the states that a Democrat MUST win in order to be elected.

What happens now? It goes on...Hillary will win a big victory in West Virginia on May 13th. They will split Kentucky and Oregon on May 20th; Hillary will win KY big, Obama comfortably in Oregon. Puerto Rico should go for Hillary on June 1 and Obama should take both South Dakota and Montana on June 3...but again, those are both red states...and Puerto Rico can't even vote in the US general election. What a mess.

You couldn't pay me enough to be Howard Dean.

How are things going on the Republican side? All McCain has to do is stay clean and keep defining who he is...while they are distracted, the Democrats can't spend much time trying to define him as "McSame" or "Bush III". He won't raise as much money as the two Democrats over the next few months...but then, he doesn't need to. He's done. This is an excellent analysis of the situation as it is now, and the author, Ed Morrissey, cites Karl Rove's perceptive analysis of the race. Even if you think you hate Karl Rove, I suggest you click that link. He may be partisan, but he's also a good political analyst. Ignore him at your own peril. By the way, I would say that about people like James Carville or Pat Caddell (former managers of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter) as well.

Obama and Clinton are still raising money like crazy. Hillary claims to have raised $10 million in the 24 hours after Tuesday. They both are still spending like drunken sailors. Obama outspent Hillary 3-1 to lose in Pennsylvania. He spent $10 million there but it seems his earlier mentioned reticence to pay "walking around money" cut down his margin in Philadelphia and cost him at least a close loss.

The superdelegates are in a real crunch. What do they do? THEY WILL be determining this nomination. IF they choose her, the African-American vote may decide to riot in Denver (Sharpton is already promising this) and stay home in the fall. If they stay home, they may make any Hillary loss even worse...but, more disastrously, that lack of straight ticket Democrat voting from the inner city black voter could cost the party several close elections in the House and Senate. This is a nightmare for Pelosi and Reid.

If they choose Obama, you may not only continue to lose Ohio and Florida, as you did in 2000 and 2004, but you may lose Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Minnesota...heck, polls show it may even put liberal bastion Massachusetts in play.

McCain has played this right going back to 2000. He has kept his eye on two strategies...stay left of Bush(it remains to see how well that holds up over the campaign)...and court Latino voters with his stance on immigration. Except for the war, McCain has taken stances more moderate than the conservative base of the Republican party.

With the continuing civil war going on in the Democratic party, he may have himself right where he wants to be.

A lot can happen in just a few months...a few months ago, Hillary was the nominee waiting to be coronated...Mitt Romney's money was going to buy him the nomination...St. Rudy of 9/11 was the leader in all the polls...and Iraq was going to guarantee a Republican loss as Congress waited for the testimony of "General Betrayus". Iraq could actually end up being a plus for McCain.

A lot can still happen with six months to go...Events could swing towards the Democrats and lead to the landslide that everyone thought was inevitable last year...but at this point...I would rather be John McCain than either of the two Democrats.

Whoda thunk?

Barack and the bird

2008-04-22T07:19:00.003-05:00

I have been aware of a controversy over the last few days that I have hesitated to address in this blog: Did Obama give Hillary a "stealth 'finger'" in a speech shortly after the Pennsylvania debate?

This is one of those things that would, on the surface, reflect what many refer to as "silly season" in campaigns in the world of the 24 hour new cycle.

But an article on the American Thinker website raises an important question both ethically and politically. I recommend that you click on the links inside the article and watch the YouTube videos for yourself. If this was Obama's intent, and I repeat if, then it poses two big questions:

Will this help him get the loyalty of Hillary supporters after the convention?

Is this behavior appropriate for a president of the United States?

I am not unbiased as an observer of this election, so I can't say for certain where I stand on whether or not he intended to send this "message" to Hillary. But the question would not even be asked if there weren't already some concerns about Obama's thin skin in the early stages of this campaign. We have a long way to go and I am becoming persuaded that our election process is so long so that a candidate cannot hide who he truly is. Over time, the pressures and fatigue set in and you react in ways that drop the veil of the "public" person, and we get glimpses of who these people are, minus the manufactured slogans and managed image.

McCain has been through this for a long time and may be able to put up a better public front...or he may be who we think he is. Read that article from last night's post about the "Why can't I just eat my waffle" comment. I found it interesting because the background story is Obama's changed position on meetings with the press, now that the open adulation phase is over.

McCain is still...being McCain...answering questions until the reporters run out. He continues to woo the press and maintain complete press access.

Which attitude is more likely to serve the office of the president of the United States well?

The night before...

2008-04-21T23:02:00.003-05:00

It's 11 PM...do you know where your white ethnic blue collar voter is?

This is when the campaigns will be checking their lists of volunteers and who is getting their identified voters to the polls for the big Pennsylvania primary tomorrow. There has been some big brouhahas today.

First, Matt Drudge came out with a shout about 11 am claiming that Hillary's internal polling showed her up by 11. If true, it's significant. Internal polling is almost always very reliable. You live or die by it's accuracy and with the money they get paid by campaigns, you aren't in the business very long if you aren't good. It's completely different from the media polls we see in newspapers and TV. The Clinton campaign denied the report, but they had better. The last thing they want is complacency from their voters...they need them motivated to go to the polls.

Secondly, both came out with last minute ads...here is the YouTube for Hillary's, which almost immediately got a response from Obama here.

Finally, Hillary will spend tomorrow night in Indiana...the next battleground. This analysis by John McIntyre of RealClearPolitics.com gives the conventional wisdom and a good scorecard of expectations at the end that will help the casual viewer to judge how the candidates did.

If Hillary wins this in Ohio fashion(she won by 10 points), Obama is in more trouble than the media lets on. He must have those white ethnic voters in Rust Belt states if he wins the nomination and goes up against McCain in the fall. Without them...he can stop worrying about his middle name being Hussein...it will be McGovern instead.

Coach

PS...yet another example of how he had better get a thicker skin...quickly...

The Thrilla for Vanilla

2008-04-20T22:45:00.006-05:00

It's finally here...the long awaited Pennsylvania primary. And it will actually come down to the colored vote...what do I mean by that? I mean BLUE collared WHITE voters. Who woulda thunk...

Will it be the suburban upper middle-class, college-educated voter who gives Obama a surprisingly strong showing? Or will Hillary do another Bela Lugosi, returning from her lair like the famous undead vampire who always seems to have another way to survive.

The general consensus of polling data seems to be that she needs a high single-to-low double digit win to realistically keep this going beyond simply a "refusal to face reality" chance of being the nominee.

Not a lot has changed since the last post except perhaps some questions about John McCain, just so the media can say he didn't get a free pass. Today's shot was an article in the Washingon Post recycling some oft disproven anecdotal stories about McCain's "out of control" temper. If I had lived through what he experienced in a Vietnamese prison for almost 6 years, I would be unusual if I DIDN'T have a temper.

But when you are talking about someone who will have their finger on "the button", it's a fair question. There is, however, some concern about the integrity of the sourcing of the story. Why should that be unusual in this campaign? Every candidate seems to have suffered from that malady. McCain's manager answered the charges in an email to an editor at National Review (a friendly publication to be sure) and I suppose time will tell if others come forward to contradict or support the contention.

On the Democrat front, the barnstorming continues as if it were the last few weeks before the general election. Obama has outspent Hillary 5-1 in this state and it will be interesting to see if he gets a good return on this investment. Hillary is beginning to see some poll movement and we will soon see if the "bitter" statement hurt Obama in the Keystone state. I highly recommend the most serious political junkies read this excellent analysis of the poll numbers and compare them with Ohio's numbers right before that state's primary. This time, there was a huge change in registrations in Pennsylvania before the cutoff date. Were these Obamacans or participants in Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos?

Tuesday night should tell us a lot...

Fallout?

2008-04-16T15:33:00.003-05:00

This will be a quickie.

A lot going on in the election...is there fallout from the "bitter" comments? Here are some polling results from Pennsylvania.

There is a debate tonight between Hillary and Obama in the Keystone state. Will there be any fireworks? Probably not. But I will work on a quick post if there is. Obama picked up a key endorsement from New Jerseyan Bruce Springsteen...perhaps the working-class musician's endorsement will help him with "bitter" blue-collar workers.

McCain is quietly going out and building a more solid image of himself with speeches on the economy, including a gas tax cut, and continuing to draw a picture of Senator Obama as elitist and out of touch with most Americans. At the same time, he maintains that he will run a respectful campaign, which is fairly easy considering how nasty things are getting to be between the two Democratic candidates. Look for some kind of new slime to be dropped on Obama by the Clintons, through an untraceable source in the next few days before the Pennsylvania primary.

Cheers,

Coach

10 days to go...

2008-04-12T11:02:00.006-05:00

On April 22nd, Pennsylvania will hold it's Democratic Party primary. Things sure have gotten wilder since Ohio and Texas. Obama has dropped the ball more times than a basketball player in a four corners offense. No, that's not as mixed a metaphor as you might think.

From "typical white person", to "Bowling for gutters", to "bitter folks" comments (when speaking to San Franciscans about Pennsylvanians no less!) Obama is beginning to show his inexperience on a national level. Right about now, you have to wonder if some superdelegates are unsure that he is "ready for prime time." He is also suffering from an examination of the company he keeps, and some interesting thoughts on his approach to race and how he sees white culture in America. Shelby Steele has written a fascinating book and a recent interview with Steele has some interesting insights here. (Steele is mixed race like Obama)

Luckily for him, the Clintons have been even worse. Bill continues to suffer from "foot in mouth" disease, bringing up the whole Bosnia issue again. Again, people ask, does he want her to lose? Even longtime Democrats have begun to realize what many Republicans said in the 90s...the Clintons appear to be congenital liars. You wonder if they even know when they say things...

Hillary needs a big win. For a while, her gaffe-a-day plan was bringing Obama within reach. Now, she seems to be widening the gap again, and Obama's "bitter people" quip seems to add fuel to the fire.

Meanwhile, the polling data in Pennsylvania looks good for Hillary in the primary, but even better for McCain in the general election.

The Republican base may have taken the opportunity in the last several weeks to re-register for the Democrat primary and affect the outcome. If a well-known talk show host has his way, it will lead to a big Hillary win, and a continuing bleeding of internal wounds for the party of the donkey.

Republicans sees this as fair game, since they attribute McCain's win of the nomination to the votes of independents and Democrats for him in their primaries early on in the season.

Elephants never forget.

Coach

Iran

2008-04-08T15:07:00.009-05:00

President Ahmadinijad has announced that in spite of UN demands that the Iranians stop processing weapons grade uranium, they are going full speed ahead. So much for the CIA assessment that Iran had ceased it's weapons program, something the Democrats controlling Congress had pointed to in accusing the Bush Administration of uncalled for saber-rattling regarding the belligerent Islamic Republic of Iran. This morning, the London Times reports that missile sites have been discovered. The picture above Mr. Chamberlain is the site.

These are the missiles that could reach Europe. Why does this feel like October 1962 all over again? Or do I mean 1938? "peace in our time..."

The most generous statement I can make about Obama's approach (Let's sit down and talk) is that it is naive. In fact, the Neville Chamberlain-like comparisons to the pre-WW II appeasement of Hitler is unfair...to Chamberlain. Hitler had not been proven to be a liar yet. Ahmadinijad has already given us plenty of grist, as shown by his flaunting of his new centrifuges; in direct violation of UN mandates. This sounds like Iraq, but in this case, we KNOW where his WMDs are...and he's in our face about it. Not gas, not just missiles...but NUKES. Once again, the politicians and the media in the past have let Bush know that if he acts against Iran, the impeachment proceedings will start the next morning.

I am working on a much more in depth post on Iran, but this news is so timely that I wanted to post it right away.

More later,

Coach

Deja Vu, all over again

2008-04-07T09:18:00.007-05:00

The title of this latest post is one of those fun malapropisms attributed to New York Yankee catcher Yogi Berra. Who knows if he really said it, but it sounds plausible.

And so is the ongoing struggle for the Democrat party presidential nomination. It's deja vu, all over again. Is it 1972 or 1912? In 1972, the Democrat party picked the most liberal presidential candidate, one who was in favor of immediate withdrawal from an unpopular war, and lost in a massive landslide. The difference is that he was running against an incumbent president. In 1912, a bitter fight for the Republican nomination went down to a fight over credentials for delegates that came from a former president wanting to recapture the mantle of his party. Teddy Roosevelt had been one of the most popular presidents in US history and he wasn't pleased with how his hand-picked successor, William Howard Taft, had purged many of his ideas and supporters. TR caused a civil war within the party and after Taft's people had shut out most of Roosevelt's delegates, the bombastic former president went across the street and started his own third party: The Progressive Party. Asked if he was healthy enough to handle the brutal campaign ahead, Teddy announced confidently, "I feel as strong as a bull moose." Today, we know the most successful third party campaign as the time of the Bull Moose party. Roosevelt got second in the election, but he split the Republican vote and gave the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

Will the current civil war within the Democrat party give the White House to John McCain? It's hard to say at this moment, but it appears that the longer this goes on, the more repair work that will need to be done in the fall. It seems every day we see articles like this from former defenders of the Clintons who are now deriding her for staying in the race. "Kamikaze?" Ouch. Meanwhile, Hillary is doing her best to scuttle her own chances in the last several days. Most are aware of the Bosnian phantom sniper fire snafu, but when you fire your main campaign advisor, or your husband, the former president, is reported to have blown a gasket in front of uncommitted superdelegates...well...it makes the "more experienced" candidate look like she is crumbling under pressure. None of this inspires confidence in the party as they look at a process which seems to be permitting the unlikely...a return of a Republican to the White House in the wake of an unpopular Republican incumbent.

Some analysts suggest that the process is faulty, and some suggest that if it were run like our general election, Hillary would already be the nominee. Not all Republicans think this scenario will help McCain. Some see President Obama in the future, but others realize that the Rev. Wright affair is likely to have a long-term effect on Obama's appeal to white voters; not because of racial problems, but patriotism questions. Expect that flag lapel pin issue and national anthem photos to revive in millions of emails.

So many areas are still to play out for an American electorate that is more focused on a possible recession than the November election. It's we political junkies who focus on all this minutiae in April.

On the actual issues front, high drama is coming into the campaign as General Petraeus returns for his next congressionally-mandated report to Congress on the progress of the surge. In spite of the recent flare-up in Basra, he is expected to have pretty good news.
In some ways, Basra makes the case for rejecting the Clinton/Obama calls for prompt withdrawal after the election. Many argue that Britain's premature withdrawal from Iraq's second largest city encouraged Sadr's power play there and that while Iraqi military prowess is improving, US military help to keep the local militias under control is still necessary. The Maliki government continues to get low marks from Democrats for it's slow political reform progress, but can we really say that the Democrat congress should be a model for the Iraqis? Recent approval numbers for the Pelosi/Reid congress might suggest otherwise. Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham give a bi-partisan response to Democrat leadership statements on the situation in Iraq. Look for McCain to lead the way in allowing Petraeus to make the case for improvement in Iraq; his success in the election may depend on it.

Finally, what do we make of speculation surrounding McCain's possible Veep nominee. McCain's age will continue to be a subject of concern for voters this fall, so his selection will have more of an impact than the Democrat nominee. The latest trial balloon seems to be Condi Rice. While it's possible that is true, I think it would be a mistake. Not that Condi wouldn't make a good veep...or even president, for that matter. I am really not sure. But it drags down the McCain campaign in two ways: She is a major player in an unpopular administration that the Democrats will try to tie McCain to...don't help them. Also, it will look like racial/gender pandering. It's bad enough to get an overdose of identity politics from the Democrats. This will look like a weak "we like women and black too" ploy by McCain. I hope he doesn't do it. It's too bad; I think Condi is good, but the timing is not right.

Finally, keep your eye on the main states. Remember that we do not truly have a national election: we have 51. (Don't forget DC gets 3 electoral votes) McCain is doing better than Obama in the major states, mainly because of the white vote and the Rev. Wright damage. This may get worse unless peace breaks out in the Democrat party soon.

Who could have foreseen this four months ago? Who knows what we will be talking about in 6 months!

Coach

A marathon, not a sprint

2008-03-30T19:34:00.003-05:00

It's been a long weekend for political junkies like me. Lots to talk about. Let's get started.

This time, we shall start with the Republicans. Many are very upset with John McCain's latest speech, sounding like he is distancing himself from President Bush. No one should be surprised, once he is focused on a Democrat opponent a McCain presidency will be portrayed as the Bush 3rd term. McCain will get increasingly harsh press treatment over the next several months as the mainstream media fears that he could actually win. Look for them to focus on the Keating 5 investigation of the early 1990s, Cindy McCain's bout with prescription drug addiction and her stealing of some of those drugs from her own medical charity. And of course there is McCain's divorce of his disabled wife after his return from a North Vietnamese prison. Finally, there will be the out of context quote that "we could be in Iraq for another 100 years", knowing full well that he meant bases. After all, we still have bases in Japan and Germany...and WWII has been over for over 60 years now.

Meanwhile, two Democrat candidates continue to poke and push at each other. Hillary has filed to allow the delegates from Florida and Michigan to be seated. She's beginning to hurt from money problems again and insists on staying in it through the Denver convention. Either she is in denial, bent on the destruction of her party, incapable of doing the math...or she knows there are yet other shoes to be dropped on Obama. Will her people be doing the dropping? Obama is trying to remain magnanimous and says she has the right to stay in. Or perhaps, he's just realistic. Party insiders are beginning to wonder if perhaps Al Gore can be drafted in Denver. Stay tuned.

Finally, Obama, after his short vacation in the Caribbean, is touring Pennsylvania. Will working-class whites give him the vote? Has the Reverend Wright issue dissolved? It's interesting to see him reach for the center. He gave an interview to Maria Bartaromo of the CNBC financial network and scared investors by suggesting that he would raise capital gains rates. His wife has become a very popular figure on the campaign trail, but how will she play with independents? And Obama himself is suggesting that he will handle foreign affairs...like those two great "Democrat" presidents...Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. HUH? Not sure how to read that one.

A side note...the passing of Dith Pran reminded us all of the nature of despotic regimes and the reality of genocide in today's world and how only a nation like the US can truly get involved in stopping atrocities like the Cambodian killing fields. An outstanding film was made about Pran's life and escape from Cambodia that is worth a rental but only for those who can handle such an overwhelmingly realistic portrayal of the evil of those who would kill people who had committed the sin of becoming educated and thinking for themselves. This was the strongest example of why worldwide communism had to be defeated. With the shutdown of a website hosting a Dutch film on the horrors of modern Islamic Jihad, the song sounds disturbingly familiar. Is Islamic fundamentalism the new "Evil Empire?"

Coach