Political Salon

A quick piece on Jon Huntsman

2011-09-04T14:54:00.003-04:00

The press corp frenzy over whether Sarah Palin is going to run or not for the presidency is more embarrassing than reality TV. You couldn't ask for a more perfect example of pompous egotistical vanity. To have so-called professional journalists given no itinerary and watch them actively run after a bus is ridiculously creepy. The news media's hysteric, sweeping coverage of a non-candidacy is exactly equivalent to say, the French Salons of the 17^th and 18^th century. Insipid groups of pedestrians whip lashing themselves into thinking they're holding an intelligent conversation.

On the other side of the TV screen is a man who seeks the highest office in the land and by all judgmental accounts, is a genuine, grounded, articulate, intelligent Republican candidate who believes in evolution and actually has a viable economic plan to get people back to work and save money in their banks. He's hardly a blimp though on most radar screens and has the lowest of ratings. Is it just me scratching my head or does the media really make or break a candidacy?

Why I think the world of Jon Huntsman:

He can't stand Mitt Romney.
The Wall Street Journal and Larry Kudlow (can't get more conservative Republican than these two) love Huntsman's economic strategies to bring America back to life.
Except for being against abortion (as long as Republicans don't put to death Roe v. Wade, who isn't pro-life?) Huntsman is amazingly liberal on social issues.
When President Obama, a democrat, called on Huntsman to become Ambassador to China (2009- 2011) Huntsman showed he was a true statesman and stepped up to the plate.
Because of Huntsman's ability to speak Chinese and other Asian dialects, he is the perfect man for this time in American history.
Because of Jon Huntsman's experience with China, its diplomats and culture, his inside track knowledge about the people of China's mindset; the ways they think about themselves, their ambitions, their goals within their restricted media, literacy and pop culture environment, who better than Jon Huntsman to lead America into the future being able to speak directly to China's communist leaders, in their own tongue. (Anyone who knows what happened with fair trade agreements recently made with China over manufacturing cars knows how valuable speaking the same language can be.)
Because of Jon Huntsman's knowledge, experience and wisdom gained by living and working behind China's Great Wall, who better than Huntsman to prevent China and China's allies from taking over not only our money, our jobs, our freedoms, but our souls.

To find out more check out www.jon2012.com

A Must Read

2011-07-12T18:15:00.006-04:00

For anyone insulted by the news media's idol worship of Sarah Palin, the current Rolling Stone Magazine profile of Michelle Bachmann is a must read.

The concept that these two women represent not the far right, or the religious right, or the neoconservative right, or merely the Republican's right to free speech, but the best and the brightest women to reach the altar of campaigning for the presidency...the thought that such a privilege should be given to the likes of these two women is a slap in the face to even the smallest achievements that came out of the Women's Lib Movement.

I say that not as a feminist. Not as a card carrying liberal. I am none of those things. But I am of the age that remembers when the Nurses of America and Teachers of America were the only two after-school clubs a female high school student could enter. We'd like to think we've come such a far distance from those days. But actually all we've come is full circle. Back to being Stepford wives and lazy thinking civilians. Palin and Bachmann? Really? They're both a disgrace.

I am not a world historian or anthropologist or sociobehavioral Ph.D. but I do know stupid when I hear it. And the backstory for both these women sets the advancement of women studies back more than a century.

If only Hillary Clinton hadn't felt it necessary back in 2008 to blow smoke up everyone's ass and lie about being under attack. What is up with the women in today's political arena? Their lame brain antics and small capacity for true intelligence and common sense makes Cleopatra and Helen of Troy mental giants.

Musings

2010-05-27T00:17:00.005-04:00

I love the color palettes and attention to detail found in J Crew clothes but what is up with their catalog stylists? Why do they insist on grotesquely mismatching tops and bottoms? Why are they trying so hard to bring back material patterns that belong where they died. In the sixties.

J Crew designers are supreme masters at cutting perfect A-line dresses. But in their latest catalog, whose idea was it to pair up men's oxford shoes with evening apparel?

Only once in the past year was I tempted to purchase anything. It was a skirt. Not just a skirt. A whimsy of cream cloth worn over tights. As soon as I saw it I had to own it. But it had no item number to reference. No descriptive copy or price attended it. I called customer service anyway. After all, the thing of beauty I coveted appeared on a page all its own. There had to be an explanation behind the mystery.

When the customer service representative could not retrieve any information on the skirt and seemed just as fluxed as I was, she put me on hold to check with her supervisor. When she got back on the line she casually informed me the skirt actually belonged to the model in the photo. But it can't be! I cried into the phone. Why would J Crew send out a catalog presumably filled exclusively with their merchandise and showcase a chic piece a model happened to bring along with her to the shoot? For all we know she could have simply thrown it on before walking out the door, never thinking it would end up as property of J Crew. Surely I'm not the only customer in the entire world asking for the uncommon item.

What was J Crew thinking? "Oh, by the way, when you come in tomorrow bring a few pieces of your own because although we're known for selling well crafted fashion apparel, and we are indeed one of the mail order fashion houses strongest contenders, our own line falls short of having enough garments to fill up the required pages."
"Well, it is an odd request but if my own fashion sense is included in your catalog, how does that translate to the vision of J Crew and do I receive any residual payment?"
"No. You do not get a penny extra for lugging in your own wardrobe and why shouldn't we use your own clothes. After all, at J Crew we think of ourselves as every woman.

Politics is for Entertainment Purposes Only

2009-02-05T10:35:00.005-05:00

By law psychics must post somewhere in their ads or on their premises that the service they provide is for entertainment purposes only. If you listen to talk radio and take in a steady diet of dinner with a side of cable airheads, you should take under advisement the same laws that apply to spiritual healers apply to watching news pundits.

I strive to be an equal opportunity listener, however it hit me like a brick after several days of listening to talk show conservatives rant on and on about the evil stimulus package Obama is trying to push through congress, that these men and women who say they speak for their fellow man clearly do not care about the welfare of their fellow men.

I am not supporting the stimulus package either way here. The way it is written I do not see it as a healing agent for our economic woes, though I do want to give a shout out to Paul Krugman and his piece in last week's Rolling Stone Mag www.rollingstone.com. I thought it provided great insight in how best to handle our economic crisis. In fact Mr. Krugman had the mindful authority to personally pitch his piece directly to the president.

But to hear right wing conservatives blast the stimulus package in the same forked tongue they used to advance Bush's war monger ideology is nothing short of blasphemy! Joe Scarborough this morning was carrying on about how wrong he and all his republican cohorts were when they listened to Bush and supported invading Iraq even after the weapon inspectors found no WMD's. He then said in the same breath, so why should the republican party now follow Obama into economic purgatory. Where is the logical thread here? Where is the rationale for comparing apples to oranges? These people get paid for talking. They get paid a very lavish salary, especially in today's depressed times. Yet there is not one insightful, smart, illuminating thought among them. Stand on any line today and strike up a conversation with the person behind or in front of you, and regardless of their party allegiance, you will have a more engaging, intelligent dialogue than you will hear on any of our highly technological advanced airwaves today.

There were plenty of loud voices raised before there was ever a raised fist singing praises to 'shock & awe' but did Mr. Scarborough or any of his party members listen? NO! They did not! But to listen to Mr. Scarborough this morning you would have to assume that Bush sucked out his brain for the last eight years and only now, in the light of a new day, did he get back his cerebral skill set.

Again, I am not defending Obama's stimulus proposal. But I am in desperate search of an intelligent approach to dissecting the proposal's pros and cons. I am in agreement that the dems apparently did sneak in a whole bunch of dusty agendas they kept hidden away from Pappa Bush. But to hear Joe Scarborough scream about the monies going to food stamps and unemployment insurance as wasteful and deplorable is too much to stomach.

Moreover, where were all these Republicans screaming for President Bush to stop throwing millions of our tax dollars onto the streets of Baghdad? Why didn't they demand accounting for millions of our dollars when our soldiers over in Iraq can tell you how many times they were ordered to hand out bags of cash to people with no intentions other than to use the money to work against and harm our soldiers. Our soldiers can tell congress just how wasteful all that 'throw about cash' was, and how no good came of it. No reliable intelligence or helpful information was revealed or uncovered. Just our tax dollars hard at work at 'WHAT?'

If nothing less but for all the American families that have recently lost their incomes and have no idea how they are going to get through these very difficult times, to collect unemployment checks and buy food via food stamps, it is absolutely imperative for congress to pass some kind of emergency fund budget.

If congress wants to cut out all of the stimulus bill's so called pork and remove every Democratic Christmas wish list item, so be it. But to yell about food stamps and increased social service programs in these horrific days is the same as kicking a man when he's down!! How egregiously hard-hearted can one Republican get!

How can any Republican look himself or herself in the mirror when they know every single day that goes by now hundreds of thousands of American families and individuals have just been cut from their life lines. How they can deny food and medical services to these families and their children? Thank God the SCHIP bill finally got signed, no thanks to the republicans. At least that will help somewhat in the absence of the stimulus package getting approved.

As long as their own families are being fed and taken care of I guess Republicans on the airwaves will always be nearsighted when it comes to passing social programs for the poor.

Black is the new White

2009-02-01T14:23:00.015-05:00

Here is my 2009 February Black History Month composition:

It has become abundantly clear in the past twelve months leading up to Obama's inauguration address that we had the privilege to witness an event no one alive today ever thought they would see in their own lifetime.

Obama himself has made humorous remarks in this regard. Just last night in reference to Robert E. Lee he joked if he was with us tonight he would be 202 and very confused. But there are much larger issues at hand today that need our collective vision to venture far beyond the obvious, "Never did I think I'd see in my lifetime." refrains.

Our sights should be set on the way black children have begun to identify with the big, bold changes they see happening. Will Obama's presence in the presidency help to make big, bold changes in their lives as well?

His presence in the White House has already made radical changes happen in certain industries. You can't pick up a magazine or watch TV today and not notice that Denzel Washington and Beyonce are no longer the gold standard by which all black men and women are judged. A large majority of recent print ads and TV commercials have instantly switched from using solely beautiful white models to purposely hiring beautiful black models.

So yes, it's very apparent that Obama's contribution in the media has provided a win fall for all black models and actresses. Their profile and ability to get the part has risen overall one thousand percent. But will this cultural 'What looks good on the cover of People Magazine' transformation also mean a sweeping change in how we supply funding and teach education for our poor and underprivileged children as well?

This is where we need the positive currency of having a black president make the most difference in these children's lives. Before the drug dealer on the corner attaches an appendage to them, before the gang mentality on the corner internalizes in their psyche, before they see their neighborhood as just a kaleidoscope of mean streets and hostile vibes. Before they get a bullet in their back or one way ticket to jail.

Although it is critically important for all our children, no matter what genetic code or ethnicity they bestow, to be able to identify with the images they see in magazines and on TV, if the resources are not available, after they toss the tabloid on the floor or turn off the television set, for them to have the opportunity to attend good schools with well-equipped classrooms that receive natural light and offer clean bathrooms, with heat in the winter and a cool breeze in the summer, and most essential, caring and concerned teachers willing to tutor and not just teach, then all the glossy, perfect pictures in the world will not change the reality they wake up to and have to contend with every single day of their lives.

This momentous change in our nation's history should not and cannot be squandered and lost on ad nauseous realms regarding Obama's celebrity hype and our country's catastrophic economic downturns.

A Clear Case of Black & White

2009-01-18T12:29:00.007-05:00

Let's be fair - height does matter and it never matters more than when a man sets himself up to run for the highest office in the land. If democrats truly wanted to hold up an anti-Bush candidate they had the most eloquent active warrior in Dennis Kucinich.

No democrat candidate or congress person was more enthusiastically engaged in bringing down the horror house of Bush-Cheney than Congressman Kucinich. But Kucinich was too short to be president and standing only a foot or two away from him was a tall, black senator who could speak intelligently and had the political swag in his tongue to answer any question put forth to him in a sane, rational and reasonable manner.

Now that tall, dignified, articulate senator from Illinois is set to become our first president of color and as the country, no, the entire planet waits breathlessly for his first presidential spoken words, he has already seen his first piece of policy legislation effortlessly passed by congress. Media pundits have heralded Obama's first act as president, before even being sworn in as president, as a feat of brilliant strategy!

It's come as quite a shock to our stale and greedy-gut political system that one man can serve the interest of both political parties, but his closest advisers weren't surprised at the president-elects non-partisan political mastery. They confidently knew from the start Obama had the skill set to get both parties willing to break rank and rancor.

After all, Obama's nerve center grew up having to appease both the white and black separatists in his own genetic background, in his own family tree, in his own body!

When you break down Obama's psychological profile and take into account the unfortunate and sad events that happened to him as a child together with the real as well as perceived abandonment issues of his early childhood, concerning both his mother as well as his father, it only makes good logic to put forth Obama could either have grown up angry and hostile or overly-sensitive and too eager to please.

Fortunately for our sake and the sake of his and our children, Obama chose to ferment slowly and diplomatically. Getting only a small, brief taste of his father's African ancestry and culture, Obama grew up predominately in a white world and had to grasp early on in his social development how his own loving, affectionate grandmother could fear people who wore the same skin color as he did. Talk about mixed messages. That's hardly a paradox any young child could be expected to internalize and process without great psyche damage being done.

Yet Obama appears to have accomplished just that. Without knowing what his interior life goes through on a daily basis, except from what he has told us through his writings and countless speeches, Obama epitomizes every human virtue we would want in our president. Intelligence, warmth, empathy, compromise, as well as a penchant for truth, justice and non-violence. Buddha himself could not have asked for more.

The hardships Obama has had to endure in his life seem to custom tailor him for this moment in history. A man who walks every step in two mindsets, two colors, may be just the man destined to transcend two very polarized and paralyzed, political parties.

Dennis Kucinich A Voice of Reason

2009-01-11T13:58:00.009-05:00

Dennis Kucinich announced today that the

Federal Reserve No More "Federal" Than Federal Express!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pVV4n2lKHk

Alexander Hamilton is revered in this country for having started the concept of banking in 1791, but if you read history, esp Burr by Gore Vidal, you discover an unflattering, living, breathing account of Hamilton as a man who was very skilled at looking out first and foremost for his own best interests.

The recent bail out package assigned to banks which resulted in absolutely no correction as far as our frozen credit markets are concerned should make obvious that two hundred and some odd years later, very little has changed.

Our sad current banking system clearly illustrates that Hamiliton's sense of entitlement and self-interest still reigns in the hallowed vaults of every bank and small print tucked inside every corporate bank lending policy.

Hot off the AP Wire

2008-12-30T12:39:00.001-05:00

WASHINGTON – Hurricane Katrina not only pulverized the Gulf Coast in 2005, it knocked the bully pulpit out from under President George W. Bush, according to two former advisers who spoke candidly about the political impact of the government's poor handling of the natural disaster.

"Katrina to me was the tipping point," said Matthew Dowd, Bush's pollster and chief strategist for the 2004 presidential campaign. "The president broke his bond with the public. Once that bond was broken, he no longer had the capacity to talk to the American public. State of the Union addresses? It didn't matter. Legislative initiatives? It didn't matter. P.R.? It didn't matter. Travel? It didn't matter."

Dan Bartlett, former White House communications director and later counselor to the president, said: "Politically, it was the final nail in the coffin."

Their comments are a part of an oral history of the Bush White House that Vanity Fair magazine compiled for its February issue, which hits newsstands in New York and Los Angeles on Wednesday, and nationally on Jan. 6. Vanity Fair published comments by current and former government officials, foreign ministers, campaign strategists and numerous others on topics that included Iraq, the anthrax attacks, the economy and immigration.

Lawrence Wilkerson, top aide and later chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, said that as a new president, Bush was like Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee whom critics said lacked knowledge about foreign affairs. When Bush first came into office, he was surrounded by experienced advisers like Vice President Dick Cheney and Powell, who Wilkerson said ended up playing damage control for the president.

"It allowed everybody to believe that this Sarah Palin-like president — because, let's face it, that's what he was — was going to be protected by this national-security elite, tested in the cauldrons of fire," Wilkerson said, adding that he considered Cheney probably the "most astute, bureaucratic entrepreneur" he'd ever met.

"He became vice president well before George Bush picked him," Wilkerson said of Cheney. "And he began to manipulate things from that point on, knowing that he was going to be able to convince this guy to pick him, knowing that he was then going to be able to wade into the vacuums that existed around George Bush — personality vacuum, character vacuum, details vacuum, experience vacuum."

The ignorance of the American public to be hoodwinked and lied to is never more than a sound bite away.

Say NO to Rick Warren

2008-12-23T09:49:00.007-05:00

If you've done your investigative homework on Pastor Rick Wareen better than Barack Obama did, then you understand better than Barack Obama does that the term inclusive does not mean that you make a decision to embrace a man who is a self-made demagogue and was lifted to the level of spiritual celebrity with the help of a free press that did not do their homework either.

Pastor Rick Warren is a man who tells his female church members to submit to their husbands in every way possible, in or outside the bedroom.

Pastor Rick Warren is a man with a purpose driven life alright. Part of his purpose apparently is to exclude gay and lesbian people from becoming members of his church, oh but you won't find that out because that line was just (conveniently) removed from his web site's mission statement yesterday

Pastor Rick Warren is a man, who in defense of his opinions regarding gay and lesbians told Ann Curry of the 'Today' Show that he holds himself back from having sex with every beautiful woman he sees. First, what does that have to do with his opinions on gays and lesbians? Second thought is, gee, he doesn't even want to get to know her a little bit first? All he wants is to have sex? If it looks like a misogynist and talks like a misogynist and thinks like misogynist, it is a flaming, bible thumping, misogynist. Clergyman or not.

Pastor Rick Warren has also said in another interview that it is this country's duty to kill the head of Iran.

Pastor Rick Warren talks a great deal about environmental issues but what exactly has he done about it? Not much unless you count setting up missionaries all over Africa to proselytize and convert as many as possible to his way of thinking attacking environmental issues?

Obama says words do matter. It's time he thought about the words Pastor Rick Warren is spewing.

It's time Obama thought about the fact that he has put Rick Warren, a misogyny pig, in a position to bless my country. My country and Obama's I thought stood for equality among all, not just who Pastor Rick Warren's Christian retail style of religion appeals to.

Who's Jimmy Stewart?

2008-12-10T14:45:00.013-05:00

I received a comment today from a reader (and thank you for reading and the kind words!) regarding my last article, It's The Press Stupid, asking who Jimmy Stewart was.

I keep forgetting that in my head I'm barely out of my twenties, but in dog years I'm really ancient. So I hereby apologize for taking for granted that everyone would get the reference because they were as old as I am.

Jimmy Stewart was an American film and stage actor. During his heyday, the thirties and forties, he was considered one of the Brad Pitts of his time. He starred in too many classic films to list here but you may have seen him in, It's A Wonderful Life, since it's shown every year around this time.

The film I was thinking of though was Mr. Smith Goes to Washington which was made in 1939. For it's in that movie he plays a man naive enough to think that politics should be an honest profession and pay an honest man an honest wage.

The point I was making in my piece was a sad lament that none of the journalists of our pop culture today has the courage or guts or maybe it's just a lack of intelligence? to stand up to a person of political authority and point a finger and say, "Now just hold on a minute sir! the way Jimmy Stewart did in that movie. Youtube has clips of the movie's critical scenes.

My piece in fact, though it was written nearly two months ago, was just crystallized last week when Charlie Gibson (there he is again missing the whole point!) interviewed President Bush and neglected to bring up Scott Ritter's name when he asked Bush if he would have done anything different if he knew there were no WMD's in Iraq before invading. Bush got away Scott free again!!! Pun intended!

Then again, this past weekend when George Stephanopoulos was speaking with Condolezza Rice on his Sunday ABC show, This Week, he also brought up invading Iraq, and would she have thought twice if she knew there were no WMD's and she practically chewed his head off! From there he went to a clip of Rice playing the piano for the Queen of England. Nice segue George.

Neither man presented the question correctly to begin with, but even so, both men either forgot or did not do their homework sufficiently before coming on the air. But on both programs, when the same question was brought up by two supposedly well respected news men, both men failed big time to follow up with the obvious lobe question. Both men failed to do their jobs as respected news journalists. Both men were paid the big bucks for doing a very poor job.

And the consequences of that ineptitude, their incompetence or downright lack of courage, only helps add to the number of families in this country as well as in Iraq who still bury their dead loved ones because our press corp lack the most basic, essential skills to do their job.

It's The Press Stupid

2008-10-26T11:36:00.018-04:00

When President Bush and his administration wanted to sneak past Congress and shock and awe Iraq, not one journalist stood up and said "Now just hold on one gosh darn Jimmy Stewart minute there sir."

When President Bush and his administration stood in front of this country, our congress, heck the entire world, and blatantly lied about the reasons they had to "liberate' Iraq' not one journalist or congress person lifted one finger to investigate further than regurgitate back to their readers and television viewership Bush's talking points. Not one journalist had the courage to question, and if need be, question again, and then question again, no matter how many times it was necessary to get under Bush's skin in order to uncover the true meaning behind Bush's doctrine definition of what 'to liberate' meant.

When President Bush and his administration wanted to get the Patriot Act passed by Congress not one journalist stood up and said "Can you explain to the American public sir exactly why you're determined to take away some of the very same rights Americans fought and died for too many times over?"

When President Bush and his administration knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction aimed at us or Israel or hidden behind any Iraqi school, hospital or industrial plant, not one journalist stood up and "Now just hold on one gosh darn minute here sir. When your own top weapon inspector, Scott Ritter, came back and swore he found nothing, absolutely nothing to support your claim that Saddam is hoarding anything, never mind weapons of mass destruction, you and Cheney turned a deaf ear to him and slammed Iraq with the stale old defense that Saddam was defying UN resolutions and no one other than your pal by default, Tony Blair, England's prime minster, backed you up, you still went ahead with your plans against everything and everyone that cried out loudly to stop! Then when our footprint was firmly planted in soil we had no business stepping onto, you hired Blackwater, a private military contractor to shadow our own Army and help you destroy any shred of decency our code of ethical conduct as a country had left to feel proud about."

Nine years ago when Bush and Gore were out on the campaign trail no journalist ever sat Bush down and sternly eyeballed him as Charlie Gibson just recently did to Sarah Palin. Not one American journalist ever tried to ridicule Bush about his glib answers to critical issues that were facing our country at that time. They never brought him to task over his corny imitation of a cowboy when he was nothing of the kind. Not one reporter, other than the comedy news outlets (see Can You Tell a Good Joke from 10/24/08) made mincemeat out of his inability to form grammatical correct sentences or speak articulately on any subject matter pertinent to someone who was running for the highest office in the land.

Not once did our press corp ever hold Bush's feet to the fire even when he ran four years later as an incumbent and his greasy, dirty, scrawny, incoherent handwriting was already plastered on every single wall.

Now fast forward to our present electorally process - you have to hold your ear very closely to the ground to hear the rumblings from the Republicans. They are seriously upset and rightly so about the press giving Obama a free pass. The same free pass the press gave to Bush over and over and over again. McCain's campaign staff are complaining that the press is giving a free pass to Joe Biden's verbal blunders. Sarah Palin herself brought it up to the press asking them to imagine what kind of media circus would have been going on right now if she had made the same sort of statement Biden made about this country being dangerously tested if Obama is elected president. Yet in the press it was immediately swept under the rug as if the words were never spoken.

Our so called free press has made it very clear they want Obama as the next president. Where is the difference between what MSNBC and CNN is doing now in comparison to what FOX News has been doing for the last decade? The world of politics is no different than the world of children at play. When the ball is in your court you're happy, but when the ball is taken away and the other side is winning you no longer feel like playing. You may complain bitterly that your opponent has the advantage but who really cares? Only the other players on your team and if no one steps up to the plate and cries unfair!! your words become just dust in the air.

The idea that we have a free press has become at this point just an urban legend. The press is no longer free nor does it want to be. It's very grateful to it's corporate sponsorship. Apart from Fareed Zakaria's GPS program on CNN, cable news is nothing more than sheer entertainment for political junkies who crave junk news without substance or investigative backbone.

PBS stations across the country are probably the last hold out for independent, intelligent news discussion, but the ridiculously easy questions lobed to the candidates at the Sept. 28th debate by PBS's Jim Lehrer's certainly do not make a strong case for that argument.

There were so many missed opportunities to ask the kind of questions that might have kept us out of Iraq and saved how many lives - the concept is just too deflating to think about. It's too late to turn back the last eight years but if the press doesn't stand up and ask the hard questions now, then no matter who is in the oval office, there will be no one looking over their shoulder, there will be no one looking out for you.

Can You Tell a Good Joke?

2008-10-24T10:08:00.019-04:00

If a great sense of humor is your strongest strength and you know how to set a joke up, have impeccable timing to tell it with perfect punch, then rather than just being known as the life of the party you can become television's newest media darling.

Yes, sorry to all the ladies that lunch, but our culture has moved on past generalized talk shows hosted by big name female entertainers such as Oprah and Ellen, Bonnie and the entire cast of The View.

For it appears that the hottest trend growing on prime time tonight is pseudo news format shows headed up by a man. But we're talking just any man. No siree. You're only marketable if you're a clever, funny and hip, in the know male comedian. It's another issue of course that your Emmy will be shared among a writing staff of at least twenty-five ivy league grads. But I digress.

Television program development honchos have placed their paychecks as well as their future employment reputations on plucking out familiar male stand-up comediennes from the comedy circuit gene pool, and giving him own prime time slot, his own set design, his own logo persona and full comedic carte blanche to interview, and even earnestly, albeit mockingly debate real issues with real political figures.

The extent to which these "comedic news anchors" are influencing today's political platforms I'll leave to political science students to thread their thesis upon.

My point is strictly on perception alone.
Ever since the most highly popular, top ad rated, comic driven politicized talk shows such as :
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher and The Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert have taken over the airwaves and are just so good at taking swipes at real news events and political figures, legitimate cable news operatives like CNN have finally taken the hint and put their together their own band of comedic merry men to deliver the news. Tune into CNN Breaking News with D.L. Hughley or CNN Chocolate News with David Alan Grier.

A phenomena that demonstrates self-evident proof that today's news really is a joke!

Wall Street - Nothing More than a Mirage

2008-09-20T10:00:00.017-04:00

Those who work on 'the street' best understand the optical illusion effect that surrounds the concrete value of buying and selling shares. To many it is a phenomena like electricity. They know it works. They just don't understand how. When the stock market is in bull time, nobody much cares how it works as long as they make money. But that intangible veil parts whenever a grizzly bear comes into view.

This week lions and tigers as well as bears paraded downtown. Wall Street reacted by suffering its very worst panic attack since The Great Depression of 1929. Lehman Brothers filed the largest bankruptcy suit since that great disaster shock this land is your land, this land is my land, and the stock market took its worst nose dive since 9/11.

But nothing develops from nothing. What led up to this debacle has been in plain sight for a very long time. For years there have been wall street analyst's predicting just such a fall out was inevitable. But who wanted to listen to whiny, fretful chicken little heads carry on about "The sky is falling, the sky is falling!" Certainly not any of the people making windfall profits from a sinking Titanic.

The immediate remedial action taken this week has shown a light on all the crevices in America's superficial prosperity. The deregulation causes behind this latest economic crisis are complex and will demand complicated solutions.

It would behoove all Americans at this time to acquaint, or re-acquaint, depending on your age, with Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal strategic policies put forth during the years following the Great Depression in order to lift America up from its knees.

In the meantime it would definitely be time worth spent reading a comprehensive piece written this week by David Lightman.

http://www.truthout.org/article/wall-street-crisis-is-culmination-28-years-deregulation

In it he simplistically examines how we got to 'here' by giving an easy to follow American economic time line that identifies economic markers and changes throughout the past decades. It's the most straightforward approach to breakdown a very complex turn of events.

Sarah Palin Hotter Than Sex

2008-09-09T19:41:00.018-04:00

New York, NY (PRWEB) September 10, 2008 -- As of September 10, 2008 Sarah Palin is beating out the search term keywords porn and sex. In addition, "sarah palin nude," "sarah palin pictures" and "sarah palin bikini" are in the top 1000 searches.

Recently Cindy McCain remarked on ABC's Good Morning America that she "absolutely" believes sexism is behind critical coverage of her husband's vice presidential pick, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. "I think it's insulting," McCain told Sawyer. "I think it's outlandish. And for whatever reason, the media has decided to treat her differently, because, I believe, because she's a woman."

Questions regarding sexism being a factor in this campaign have become a real concern to women voters, and need to be addressed openly and honestly. In an effort to advance this conversation PoliticalSalon.com pulled data from a trusted source used to track daily search engine user behavior.

The top 10 searches for Sarah Palin are as follows:

1.sarah palin
2.sarah palin nude
3.sarah palin pictures
4.sarah palin photos
5.sarah palin pics
6.sarah palin bikini
7.sarah palin speech
8.sarah palin naked
9.sarah palin vogue
10.sarah palin miss alaska

– upon further investigation we found:

"sarah palin swimsuit"
"sexy sarah palin"
"sarah palin milf"
"sarah palin topless"
"sarah palin porn"
"sarah palin sex tape"

The top search terms for Joe Biden are as follows:

1.joe biden
2.joe biden biography
3.senator joe biden
4.joe biden on gay issues
5.joe biden's voting record
6.joe biden plagiarism
7.who is joe biden
8.joe biden speech
9.joe biden wife
10.joe biden net worth

Also:
"joe biden hair plugs"

We're guessing it's no surprise nobody wants to see Joe Biden naked, or even in a swimsuit.

http://www.politicalsalon.com [PoliticalSalon.com] wishes to thank all the anonymous voters who tirelessly scour the web in search of constructive information to help them choose the best candidate.

The Illusion of Progress Part III

2008-09-09T19:40:00.008-04:00

Every time the news media informs us about who Sarah Palin is and what her attitude and political philosophy is, the chance of the Supreme Court overturning Roe V Wade if McCain/Palin get into office, rapidly advance.

Both party conventions have moved into the annals of history. Left behind in its tumultuous wake is a powerful reversal of fortune, at least for the time being, in favor of the Republicans. How long McCain's good luck streak lasts may largely depend on how soon The National Enquirer splashes allegations about a past affair Palin supposedly had with a man that worked alongside her husband.

Yet even before these adultery assertions have time to start churning the waters Palin was spewing enough right wing declarative statements to set Democratic tongues wagging. Namely that Palin's zero tolerance for abortion on any grounds. Never before in this long marathon of a campaign, has the Republican Party so stridently exposed the religious right's hidden agenda in full view of everyone.

Without taking anything away from Sarah Palin’s smart brain or beautiful face, she is markedly as far right as you can get without running into the ghost of Jesse Helms. Her decision to carry her down syndrome child to full term is not just a personal choice. If left to her own ultra right devices, the right to an abortion could be relegated to the decision of each state, or in an even worse scenario, a Republican president appointing another right wing Supreme Court Justice would tip the balance enough so that the Federal Abortion Law could be stricken from the books altogether.

Writing as a woman who witnessed the women’s lib movement from the front lines, the neon lit differences between Obama’s camp and McCain’s goes far beyond the issues of economics, foreign policy, healthcare, social programs and education. If the McCain/Palin ticket wins in November, the distinctions between the two parties stand to be a chilling reminder for all women that what was gained will be at risk of having to give back.

As a cautionary tale it might help to think back to the time of WWII. It was during the height of that war that women of all ages were called upon to take over machinery production jobs left vacate by men who had to go overseas to fight. These women worked long hours under harsh factory conditions, but they were feeling mighty good about themselves. Apart from having made a huge contribution towards their country winning the war, for many women it was the first time they had an opportunity to learn new skills and earn a decent pay. But when the war ended these same women were told to go back to their homes. Their help was no longer needed. The highest expectation for women at that time was to find a GI and make babies.

What followed soon after was the emergence of America’s first real middle class and the accompanying prosperous gold calf called materialism. The progressive consumption of domestic goods meant a steady improvement in our gross national product income which brought about the need for more and more women to leave their harmonious homes in order to supplement their husband’s pay, because one salary could no longer cover America’s rapidly developing middle class lifestyle. Despite the need though to find work outside the home, the range of jobs open to women at that time were mostly kept to the fields of nursing, school teachers and secretarial.

The women’s lib movement was not an exercise to lose fat from the hips and belly. It was not a place to go to lament about your lousy boyfriend or rotten husband. At it genesis the term burning bras was not supposed to be taken literally.

The movement was initiated as a direct result of the ‘pill’ finally finding its way into the hands of the female masses. Overnight this pharmaceutical miracle removed all the usual borders that restricted women's dreams and ambitions. It changed how women saw themselves and how they might relate to others. It radically changed a woman's expectations for how far she could extend her grasp without worrying if her hand was going to get slapped back.

She was always capable. But before the pill was available, she was always burdened with the responsibilities that came with having children whether she was ready for them or not. Now she had the tool she needed to set her own clock, so to speak. Now she was freed up from unwanted pregnancies and the fear that always went along with having sex, premarital or not.

While the Vietnam War raged on and young women went on the pill, the infrastructures that had always held women back started to crumble before their very eyes. Along with the sweeping cultural changes that came directly out of the war, and the women's movement, other pressing societal modifications challenged the traditional paternal order of things in a revolutionary way.

Indeed, the women’s movement brought about a heightened sense of role reversals between men and women, husbands and wives, fathers and daughters, even mothers and daughters. The magnitude of these reverberations were so powerful they can still be felt today in American households across every kind of socioeconomic backdrop.

However, this brief explosive moment in history did not happen without breaking long-standing ethics and demoralizing cherished moral values and millions of human spirits. But it got women to where they find themselves today. Not quite yet authentically equal in terms of pay or respect, but they did acquire one vital advantage unique only to women - control over their bodies and their ability to procreate or not.

McCain’s supporters want us to believe that Sarah Palin is Hillary Clinton, just with a better body. I beseech women old enough to vote to take a good, hard look into Sarah Palin’s eyes (if you can get past the false eyelashes, heavy eye shadow and tinted eyeglasses) and try to envision your future without the right to obtain on demand abortion.

Perhaps Palin’s unmarried five month along daughter had no option but to keep the baby, but you still do. Perhaps Palin’s five month along daughter and her daughter’s boyfriend have no option but to consent to marry, so as to keep her mother, and his future mother-in-law in good standing with the religious right base, but you don’t have to worry about that ever happening to you. Not now you don’t. But after January 20, 2009, if you don't vote for a Democratic government, your future may be a thing of the past.

The Illusion of Progress Part II

2008-08-27T11:09:00.015-04:00

July 20, 2004, 2:13 p.m.
Who’s Paying for the War?

"For all that the critics rail against the war in Iraq, surprisingly little time is given to decrying the sheer cost of it." Back in 2004 when, may he rest in peace, longtime commentator and conservative leader, William F. Buckley Jr. wrote that statement, that sheer cost was 87 billion dollars. Today the debt is 4 trillion but who's counting?

Back in 2004 the Democratic candidate at that time was John Kerry, who it just so happens, ran on exactly the very same campaign promise platform Barack Obama is running on today - raise taxes to invest in healthcare, education, job creation and to rebuild America's infrastructure.

The Democrats, along with this country, cannot afford to lose another presidency election. Never before has the presidency been more accessible or handedly available to the Democrats. This time more than ever it is truly their's for the taking, but using the same political language such as (raise taxes) again, when it did not help the Democrat cause in the past, is a sure shot to alienate a cynical yet crucial segment of voters who have only agenda which is to reduce spending, period.

The most effective way to offset the base fears of those wealthy undecided voters who consistently shy away from any candidate who talks of tax and spend policies would be to reframe the conversation about raising taxes within the context of the cost of the war. The administration has never made available a public accounting of the cost of the war framed in this language.

In his campaign speeches Obama has sought to reorient the whole question of how he means to fund his dynamic agenda by telling us what we have forfeited on account of the war — more health care, education, job creation, and America-building.

But he can't affect the kinds of changes he wishes to, or redirect where our dollars are going without first doing away with the war in Iraq and its attendant implications. To talk about raising taxes on the wealthy may be powerful bait for everyone except the wealthy, but it leaves unanswered the larger question of how he expects to pay for all his elective social programs.

At this critical time in the election cycle Obama needs to dig deeper into the cerebral pockets of the rich. But not with campaign rhetoric that only works to push them further over to the other side. And not with factionary tactics that perpetually invoke Republican fears of losing personal financial gain.

In order for the wealthy to get their hands out of their pockets and into Obama's comfort zone he needs to lay out constructive, fiscally responsible measures to inform and flesh out exactly how he intends to underwrite his vision for positive change, while also maintaining our military might through military spending.

The Illusion of Progress Part I

2008-08-24T01:46:00.010-04:00

In his latest stump speeches Obama states that under his administration we will have an open government. He claims under his tutorage partisan politics will end and both parties will be more open to the suggestion to cross over party lines in order to get their job done. In accordance with his campaign slogan ‘change is a coming,’ both parties he says will be more inclined to work together to ensure necessary ‘change’ legislation will get passed in a timely and efficient fashion.

He vows his term in office will mark the end of politics as we know it. Voting strictly along party lines will no longer be tolerated. He is confident his fraternizing skills will prompt members of both parties to accept the end justifies the means, thereby removing the unworkmanlike stigma of a do nothing congress.

Of course, hidden from plain sight is the senate race next year and the obvious predictions that electing a Democratic president will help usher in sufficient Democrats after January to ensure this promise is met.

The message of change then that Obama is sending out is really pretty much dependent on certain changes having to occur in congress.

Otherwise, we can pretty much figure it will be business as usual under the Obama connection to change.

A Call to Judgment

2008-07-24T15:43:00.013-04:00

Judging by all the smiley faces on news anchors when Senator Barack Obama’s name is mentioned and judging by his ever popular poll numbers, and judging by the lack of sex appeal on Obama's opponent’s side, and judging by all the hopeful hoopla and affirmative accolades placed upon the shoulders of the yet to be confirmed Democratic candidate, it's become exceedingly apparent that apart from the swearing in oath, Obama's bid to become president is a done deal. Especially after he sunk a basket and didn't show any signs of breaking a sweat even as the whole looking glass public watched on, it’s a pretty good guess Obama pretty much has the 2008 presidential election in the bag.

And now, judging by how enthusiastically every foreign head of state has been welcoming Obama’s foot print on their respective soil, his overseas visit is turning out to be, just as his campaign managers expected, a huge success. It is embarrassing clear to the discerning eye these dignitaries are encouragingly shaking Obama’s hand in anticipation of his presidential victory run.

If past history is any judge of character Obama’s storyline is one long victory lap so winning the title of President of the United States should not come any surprise to those closest to him. When Obama sets his sights on something he wants he has only to put out his hand and it is given to him. How simplistic. How sweet. How psychologically unnerving!

Considering this country has been ruled for the last eight years solely by means of a severe case of arrogance and sense of entitlement (Of course judging by how wholly incompetent Bush has proven himself to be anyone in his place would have believed the only way they could have been elected and then reupped was through some sort of divine intervention.) and an atrophied press corps that seemingly lost all its credential backbone and duty to serve the people who read the news instead of to those who make it.

Judging by Obama’s mercurial ride from Junior Senator in 2005 to announcing his candidacy to become president in February 2007, together with judging by how quickly and affectionately the news media has embraced him, practically swooning over his every word while they glance adoringly on his face from every angle, a viewer can actually hear reporter’s hearts skip faster whenever they’re called upon to update us on what’s new in Obamaland.

So listen carefully citizens to words not being spoken and promises offhandedly made, and be very careful what you ask for, for you might just get it. For if our journalists continue to pay this amount of admiring attention to just one man who hasn’t spent barely enough time on this planet, never mind in the Senate chambers, and they continue to fail to ask him any hard questions and then come back to follow up with much more probing ones and while they subordinately accept intimidations from Obama such as “Why can’t I just eat my waffle?” when he is confronted with a tough interrogation, and instead of Karl Rove you have Robert Gibbs, Obama’s senior communication strategist gracefully avoid answering any questions posed to him, we may unassumingly just find ourselves as a country on the brink of having to go another eight year round with another severe headcase of arrogance and entitlement.

The Problem with Us Boomers

2008-06-29T07:25:00.013-04:00

Before there was a John F. Kennedy the game of politics was won by the candidate who promised the most and revealed the least. In 1960 JFK changed that streak of luck when he conquered his challenger by the sweat of his opponent's brow.

Why it happened was a matter of revolutionary technical advancement that forever changed how we viewed our world. How it happened changed the game of politics forever. And when it happened, the consciousness of the boomer generation was forever altered.

Since it was the first-ever televised presidential debate, more than 60 million Americans tuned in to watch then Republican candidate Vice-President Richard Nixon and Democratic candidate, Senator John F Kennedy present their views not just oratorically, but visually as well. Since this was the first-ever televised presidential debate and more than 60 million Americans tuned into watch, our ears became muted as our eyes became memorized. So much data to take in all at once! Because it suddenly seemed strange to hear words spoken when we could also see lips moving, relatively little was actually heard while our eyes busily scanned the candidates bodies, uh faces.

For rather than pay strict attention to what was being said, we listened much more intently to these candidate's posture, poise and facial expression. So much so that when 'The Great Debate' as it was called back then was officially over, the only thing we studied, the only truth we came to was that Kennedy was ridiculously handsome, and Nixon grievously ugly. The next day every newspaper exploited Nixon's exaggerated by TV studio lights sweaty forehead. The next morning it was the only thing an audience of more than 60 million could recall.

But what is a presidential debate except a study in contrasts? Today we have two candidates running for the same White House seat who have never been more conspicuously different in ethnicity, cultural background, age, political policy reform, agenda, voting record or vision, and yet for some aberrant childhood psychologically driven reason, we insist on reverting back to the imaginary days of Camelot and fervently keep striving to superimpose the iconic remarkableness of John F Kennedy on Barack Obama and wistfully note his wife Michelle's choice of dress as symbolically Jackieish.

If it wasn't so delusional sad it would be downright embarrassing. When is our boomer consciousness ever going to grow up? When is our boomer's trauma and grief over losing our beloved knight in shining armour ever going to be healed? From the look of it, never. We continue to yearn for someone we can never get back. We still carry a juvenile ideation of being tenderly governed by a beautiful and righteous hand. If we still can't admit that a politician, any politician, even a Barack Obama, will do anything, anything at all to enhance their chances of getting elected, even if it means taking on the persona of another, then this latest game of politics has already been lost.

For where are the people, my fellow boomers, who were supposed to be listening for the sound of wrong notes during our reign of terror? Why did we subordinately allow our free press to collapse along with the twin towers? Wasn't a free press what we boomers were so in your face, ready to march into hell for back in the sixties? How did so many good people stay silent when so many journalists were captured and had their throats cut in order not to be heard? Why did we just throw our hands up in the air when Bush/Cheney/Rove made expert use of intimidation and illegal scare tactics to shoo away all that wanted to conduct unbiased investigations and probe into matters of high treason and impeachable offenses?

Boomers have to stop thumb sucking on what was once upon a time and impose their better instincts upon their offspring; like the call to arms directive they once followed to question loudly and seek genuine answers, otherwise it's profoundly apparent we've hampered every generation that has come after us to never get past our past.

I'm Sorry for Your Loss but....

2008-06-15T09:52:00.051-04:00

The three day, non-stop memorial honoring the sudden passing of Tim Russert, pieced together from archive footage and impromptu eulogies from all the many famous faces who worked with Russert over the years, is completely unjustified and unwarranted. It blacked out all other news, as if the flood waters in Iowa had suddenly receded, not one soldier was mortally wounded or dismembered in Iraq or Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia wasn't inching forward to collecting $150 per barrel this coming July 4th.

But ever since Tom Brokaw, as a former news anchor for NBC and close friend of Tim Russert, broke the tragic news on Friday of Russert's collapse at work, it seemed all three major cable news outlets, MSNBC, CNN and even FOX News had nothing else to report but to gush out a tsunami of grief and sadness upon their audience.

Naturally because Russert's demise came about so suddenly, so unexpectedly, his weeping, self-indulgent colleagues are understandably trying to cope on air with the loss of a good friend and mentor. But what is not authorized is why Russert deserves the same kind of grand gesture of a send-off befitting the statue of a president?

What did he achieve in his long career to deserve that kind of outpouring of gratitude for having lived? Did Tim Russert's interviews single handily save this country from the awful tyranny of the Bush-Cheney Administration? Where was Russert an exceptionally transcendent leader of journalism? Where in eight long years of being held hostage to a out of control regime did Russert make a profound difference.

Aside from having a spirited ability to recall dates and facts to overlap historical events, at times he appeared to be a willing partner in aiding and abetting the current administration's diabolical scheming by never wanting to step over that fine line of making a guest angry enough to dissuade them from coming back on his show ever again. But why would that have been such a bad thing? What would have been the loss? Their absence would have spoken at a much higher volume than to have to watch them squirm out of impeachment hearings by pretending gross and malicious falsehoods.

If Russert hadn't let the current administration get away with such lies and deceit it would have made for a much more compelling argument that he was our last journalism shining hope and every citizen would have remembered him for not allowing the agents of death to pilfer and ravage anymore. Then he might have gone down with the likes of Edward R Murrow, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Woodward and Bernstein, and the still great Bob Shieffer, a Washington reporter who took over for Dan Rather as anchor of The CBS Evening News. None of those men smiled when they knew they were staring into the eyes of moral corruption. In other words, when Donald Rumsfeld looked Russert directly in the eye to let him know he was mad as hell and wasn't going to answer such an impertinent question, Russert would immediately back off, withdraw the impolite, discourteous inquiry and with a big, cheery red nosed smile, come back with a lesser offense his guest could easily skirt around. There, isn't that better Mr. Mass Murderer? Let me get you a glass of warm milk to go with that soft pandering. The bottom line was Russert's prosecutorial enquiry against the thugs and rapists that run this country wasn't anymore productive than pansy Larry King.

Furthermore, under Russert's style of programming there was often no mistaking his ideological bias. Whatever happened to the expected journalist neutral stance? Who was overseeing the strict code of ethics that legitimizes journalistic standards when Russert outright yelled for Hillary to get off the stage already? Why was he allowed to be so heated against Hillary? If he had uttered an obscenity at her surely the FCC would have whipped his butt. But there was no accountability held when he overtly overstepped his journalist integrity in opposition towards her? Over the last weeks if you had been watching Meet The Press it was hard to miss the tipping point when he suddenly took over as Obama's campaign manager and gave up his position as the host of his own network news show.

Media Matters.org as well as the prestigious CJR.org (the Columbia Journalism Review) cites Meet The Press episodes that spotlight Russert's prejudiced tendencies. There you will find entire word for word read outs of statements made by both Bill and Hillary Clinton that were taken out of context to act as prompt aides for Russert's interviews. And why didn't anyone at least raise an eyebrow when right after the historic November 2006 midterm election upset, when the Dems won a major victory by gaining back control of congress for the first time in twelve years, when they took away six senate seats from Republican incumbents to win a one-seat majority in the upper house, and did not lose a single seat in either chamber, the first election in U.S. history in which any party kept all of its congressional seats, and Russert only invited three Republican players, Senator McCain being one of them, to appear on his show? What happened there? Did every Democrat up and leave the country for a big congratulate pep rally?

Still, apart from Russert's dubious journalistic intentions, it's curious as to why his colleagues were so unfathomably shocked at their captain's sudden passing, when they themselves run reports every other day on what to do to prevent heart attacks. They were all well aware that the man they adored and loved had an enlarged heart, yet stood by and apparently did nothing while he continued to eat enough of the wrong foods to gain an enormous amount of weight in recent years. Russert was a grown man and a highly intelligent one. He must have known he was committing suicide. Where is the surprise in his collapse? It was only a matter of time. Heart disease is a killer.

NBC's Andrea Mitchell repeated ad nauseum this weekend how much her beloved colleague and mentor loved his country. If he loved this country more than he loved his food - maybe he would still be here and the Bush-Cheney team would not.

Arrogance Has No Color

2008-06-11T01:45:00.046-04:00

Our country's legal obligation to dip into a political gene pool every four years and take a leap of faith on a new candidate is similar in a lot of ways to serial marriages. Every once in awhile the odds have to favor you’ll catch a good one.

Unfortunately for us though that was not the case eight years ago when we undeniably scraped the bottom of the pool, and four years after that when we discovered our fishing rods splintered and broken, we seemingly threw up our hands and settled for the same dead fish.

One primary reason for why we had a back to back disastrous fishing season was too many people thought that the sneer on George Bush’s lips was nothing more than a facial tick. Eight years later those same people finally came to realize that what they thought was a facial aberration, was a sneer alright.

How long will it take the country this time to realize that Obama’s overconfident gait and habit of avoiding a person's eyes when they lean in close to shake his hand, are overt body cues that send out signals of a condescending attitude? How long will it take for the public to catch up this time?

How long will it take for this country to collectively raise up their blood stained consciousness and demand to see substance rather than the rhetoric stamped on the back of Obama’s quest for ‘change’. Who in the press corp is even willing to stand up and question what’s behind the anemic filler of a campaign motto called ‘change?’ Certainly not our so called ‘free press.’ They are so enamored, so embarrassingly captivated by the ability of Obama's campaign strategists to slay the evil ambitious Hillary Clinton dragon, that a so called liberal journalist by the name of Tim Russet, along with the most staunch Republican pundits over at Fox News are joyfully awaiting the preordained anointment of the coming Messiah.

When John Edwards last year, while busily campaigning to make his bid for the presidency kept reporters waiting on the tarmac to get a supposedly, grossly expensive hair cut, he was criticized and lectured so bad the next day in the press, you would have thought he had committed the worst atrocity in the world. Yet last Friday, after an event ended in Northern Virginia Obama literally ditched the press people who had been waiting patiently for him to board, in order to secretly meet with his arch nemesis, Hillary Clinton. The following day the same press people, although visibly angry and feeling very betrayed, hardly made a squeak.

Wouldn't it be enormously refreshing after being stripped of our press credentials by eight years of elitist arrogance, if by some miracle the currency of all this ‘change’ could propel our terrified and muffled reporters to finally muster up their courage and find their backbone so as to get back to doing the job they get paid for, (Woodward & Bernstein ring a bell anyone?) then maybe we could be journalistically informed as to exactly who Barack Obama is, and why he clearly wants to be our next president so dam bad!

Any individual running for elected office has to own one outsized ego and one all-weather proof suit of very thick skin. If they don't, they could never survive in this fishbowl arena. But individuals who wish to run this country by and large often get to extend their prowess beyond just that meager aspiration - they can play pretend skipper for the whole planet if they so desire. Hence we’re talking not just enlarged ego, but full blown, out of proportion self-importance superiority. Just think about your own boss and then times that by one hundred million.

If ‘change’ is all that’s required to fix the ills of this war torn country than we should elect Obama on the basis of his skin color alone, since his presence in the White House as president will ultimately provide the American populace at least, if not the entire human race, with one of the most palpable dramatic 'changes' ever. Why the town I grew up in only broke its tacit color barrier in the last decade! Gosh gee willikers Aunt May, looks like these here times, they really are a-changing.

But I digress from the main point, which is, by merely casting a vote in the upcoming presidential election I’ve helped to trigger the effect of a ‘change.’ Never mind that Bush’s turn up at bat is almost officially over which loosely translated means we have no choice but to bring in a new governing team which by definition alone, signifies ‘change.’

Issues aren’t always as black and white as they look. Of course this country needs a histrionic change. No one with a pulse would argue against that. But quite frankly Senator Obama, the question that you so eloquently have yet to answer, the chief issue that you have yet to comprehensively address, even though you've now given hundreds and hundreds of speeches is, apart from changing the skin color of an American president, what are you specifically purposing to do to make the change you so fervently promise, a 'change' for the better.

What is so Wrong about Wright?

2008-04-28T21:16:00.015-04:00

As I watched fire dragon news pundits salivate all over their Armani suits and gleefully denounce Rev. Wright's latest remarks the product of an overblown, egotistical, malevalent disposition, I couldn't help but ponder who among the spiritually sane, rational, and caring folks hasn't the same sense of anger and charges of betrayal been articulated and brought up against the present administration?

We can begin right here if you like. I have addressed many columns ago the complete lack of military experience or willingness to participate in front line affairs among the entire Bush-Cheney team!!! And maybe not exactly in the Reverend's words, but certainly in the same context, I've have made countless oppositional references to the utter defiance of Bush and his henchmen who insist on waging war when so many people in this country and throughout our vast globe in possession of critical thinking skills knew deep down in their soul, that this blood spilled on the soil was absolutely wrong, stupid and a horrific and vile act against everything human civilization holds sacred and moral.

Except for those Republicans either in front of the camera, or sitting behind their desks in the White House, who despite the uneasiness in their voice as they try to convince themselves they were bringing peace to the world rather than destroying it, except for those and others who had no other choice but stand behind the presidency and act as yes men and ladies, no one in their right mind was behind Bush's bushwack.

If tearing into Afghanistan in search of tearing apart the Taliban was our military objective then no hands down, it was a mission that had to be accomplished. But the Taliban is back and stronger than ever - Iraq is more unstable than ever, our soldiers are continually being picked off like ducks in a shooting gallery, our soldiers have been abandoned by our government and its legislatures, our military families are left to care for themselves with low wages and poor healthcare services are consistently being doled out to our over-fatigued and traumatized soldiers.

As a result of exaggerated extended tours and the lethal risk our military faces every single second of every single day, more soldiers than ever before are taking their own lives. This fact isn't even a blurb in our 365/24/7 news outlets. So again in all fairness to Rev. Wright and his honest and forthright remarks, what is so wrong with Wright?

Hillary's Final Countdown to Downfall

2008-02-27T12:27:00.010-05:00

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary....., girl whatever were you thinking when you decided to stand by your man?
I know your eye was always on the prize. I know your wistful dream was to sit in the Oval Office one day and make your husband cringe while deciding if you should take his health care reform bill to congress. I know how much he hurt you as a woman, and I know that revenge served cold is the best dish, but what you didn't know, what you didn't take into consideration, what you didn't see coming straight at you at ninety miles an hour was that holding onto his hand and trying to make his heart love you, and only you, would ultimately lead to the political ruin of you both one day. And that unceremonious day is now here darling. I know dear one, it hasn't turned out the way you hoped it would. As women, we all heard your genetic pain when you cried out to every single Illiad God above, "Shame on you Obama!"

If only you had listened many years back to your head sweetness, instead of your heart. If only you respected the voice inside telling you it was now or it was never going to happen. You know the voice I speak of. It warned you. It told you to run. It knew that man was only going to bring you down. How many times did he tell you it will never happen again, only to find out once more he lied. Once more he betrayed your trust. Yet if you had listened to your inner voice then and not to his, you would have stood on the proverbial podium as an independent woman running on only one platform. One agenda. One mindset. But no, you thought you were cleverer. You thought you could outsmart all the naysayers.

This shellacking you're taking is only made worse when you think about how many times you criticized Bush for throwing away all the sentiment and support our country had right after 9/11. Don't you see blind spirit? In an ironic twist of fate baby girl you did the very same thing. When there wasn't a dry eye in the house, when the entire world would have supported your decision to walk away and begin a new journey on your own merits, you insisted on staying and playing nice. On plastering up every crack in your holy matrimonial vow. Surely you missed the broader picture then, but it's become all so clear now, hasn't it? That strategy didn't win you the hearts and minds of your intended betrothed - the voters.

Forget for a moment about the Obama/Winfrey ticket blowing up in your face. In the end what's really behind your fiasco was you being seen as half of a power couple. It was a bold move by this country to speculate on what it would have been like to have a male stand-in for the position of First Lady. But it became all too too much for this country to think about what it would be like to have two presidents in the White House vying for the same attention. And then thanks to Bill shooting off racial colored remarks in a lame attempt to defend your polling loss in a specific state, he provided Obama with unconditional conditions to set up a perfect storm to deflect your imperfect campaign.

Girl, if only you had taken the time to look deep in the eyes of your audience you would have spotted the problem long before it proved to be your defeat. I know you think it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. Hindsight is always the purveyor of bad tidings. But you forgot most powerful superwoman, one of the two most important rules we all have to live by. The first one is no one gets out of here alive. The second is no one gets to have their cake and eat it too. Enjoy your cake Hillary. It's all that's left.

The Artless Science of Communication

2008-02-19T10:54:00.015-05:00

A friend called me yesterday with a problem most of us have probably come across in one way or another. Her problem was that she was using email to establish a rapport with a potential date. She had been using email as a social networking tool for some time now, but after catching and then losing too many potential partners she began to see the mistakes she was making as her inability to write with a true voice.

"I think I just offended another man."
"Why?" I asked with authentic concern for my friend and her frequent online dating miles.
"Well, one minute we were having a very pleasant cyber space chat, and without any sinister motive or malicious intent, he dropped me.
"What do you mean dropped?"
"He never answered me back. Innocently I responded to his last note just as seductive and sassy as I had been trying to be up until then, but in the wink of an eye he was gone.
I was left dead in the water. Nada. Call in the pallbearers. Don't send flowers. Donate money instead to my favorite charity. Sayonara. It's over. Last guy out shut off the lights.
"You poor soul! What did you write that was so derelict?
"Well, it was he who approached my court and placed the first serve, and at first it seemed the conversation was going really well. You know, our words were flying smoothly over the net, his, then mine, then his..."
"I get the picture."
"Oh, okay, well, I felt like I was in the 'zone'. Know what I mean?"
Hello? Remember me? I write for a living so yeah, I know all about being in the 'zone.' Go ahead, keep talking."
"Alright, so I think we're having this really good volley and then I whack one back at him and at first it looks high and headed straight over the net, and, and then my heart took a nose dive as I watched it drop out of bounds. "
"And then?"
"And then I just sat back quietly and tried to wait patiently but nothing. He never sent me a ball back."
"So what was in your last note that might have set off this stink bomb?
"I told you already. The flow was so going so smooth I thought we were cool. Two peas in a pod...two minds following the same flight pattern. It's hard work trying to maintain equal levels of flirtatous banter, ancient spiritual wisdom and relevant personal information. Who knows which part of I am Woman You are Man turned him immediately off."
"Yeah, I get it. Sometimes that happens in my columns as well. I think I'm expressing my thoughts articulately and brilliantly and then, then I get a comment railing against my inability to see the injustice of everything I stood up for, so, yeah, communication can be an upstream task sometimes. Hey, look what happened to Obama - he got called into the principals' office recently for possible plagiarism, and then in a recent interview his wife, Michelle, apparently she made a controversial statement about never being more proud of this country than now. And who could forget that loud and shrill backlash Hillary received the first time Bill was campaigning for the presidency when she stated flat out you'd never catch her in the kitchen baking cookies. Boy did the Betty Crocker and Pillsbury Doughboys raise their collective voices back then.
"I hear you but I think my failure to communicate speaks to a much larger problem."
"Which is?"
"I want to know how people in previous centuries communicated so well?"
"What do you mean?"
"What do you mean what do I mean? Think about it. Pharaohs and Kings and Queens got a hell of a lot done without instant message, email, fax, cell or text. How did wars ever get going if they first had to weigh all the options, and then before actually declaring war, they first had to send out a soldier of good conscious and quick steed to travel, God knows how many hundreds of miles, to bring a message of menace to another war monger authority, and don't forget, they had to allow for time loss in case their messenger was slaughtered simply for bringing the message, because back then, 'Please don't kill me, I'm only the messenger,' was the real deal. And think about the game Telephone. You know, where you whisper something in someone's ear and then they're supposed to whisper the exact same thing in someone else's ear and so on and so on. At the end it's never what it started out as. Makes you think huh?"
"About what?"
"Well, before there was stone and an etching rock, or paper and ink, what if this forlorn messenger completely forgot the damn message before he ever got to his destination, and the undereducated, possible illiterate messenger had to put the message into his own words which are never quite as eloquent as your own. I mean what would be the point of the whole exercise if that happened? And I'm sure from time to time it did. So if your mail carrier wasn't offed, he would have to then ride back hundreds of miles with an answer!! And in the meantime you're doing what? I can't stand having to wait ten, twenty minutes to get an email back from some guy. Imagine having to wait months for a reply! It absolutely boggles my imagination to take into consideration that humanity has progressed for thousands of years on the back of a horse, and I can't even keep a chat line going because of one false word. "

Why are we still on the old Double Standard Time?

2008-02-15T22:09:00.007-05:00

Let's be real. This year's Democratic presidential race is not about issues. Registered Dems agree they have two candidates running who appear to be decent, law abiding citizens. They both seem pretty suited for the job. But one candidate is a woman and the other a man. Let's ignore for this article the part about the male candidate also being black. The gender issue alone is so layered with complexities and misogynist subtext, that to add Obama's skin color as well to the mix would just be overkill. (Which speaks more to the point I was trying to make in my previous article, If I Wrote It, You Never Would Have Believed It)

Yes America. For the first time you have a female raising her hand in Social Studies class but not to ask to go to the little girl's room. For the very first time she is asking to go to the White House as President and not as First Lady.

The right wing airwaves fill up on bird seed and water so they can pump out coo coo bird messages telling their audience to be afraid of the lady candidate, be very afraid. How can a female run a country? Her weight, clothes, cleavage, hair and make up have all become the butt of jokes made by humorless, pasty, rich white men. Rush Limbaugh in fact seriously asked his listeners to think long and hard if they could stomach watching a female president age before their very eyes! Who writes his stuff? And how does he get to maintain a gene pool of breathing people to listen to him everyday?

Talk about shock and awe!

As a member of this culture and historic time and place, I am in shock this line of non sequitur reasoning is still being bantered about - it's 2008 people! Not 1908. We've gone to the moon and back already. When is this country going to grow up and stop listening to jabbermouths that only want to distract you from using your own critical thinking cap in order to form an opinion that may differ from what's constantly spewed out of talk show hosts who couldn't handle a real job in any other industry, nevermind enlist in the military.

And I stand in awe of third world countries who have primitive domestic lifestyles and are not sophisticated in the ways of the Prada, Gucci or Louis Vuitton world, yet they're not burdened with a cultural bias or any mind numbing limitations on deciding whether or not to vote for a female to run their country on the sole basis of her governing skills and not how fat her ankles are.

If I Wrote It, You Never Would Have Believed It

2008-02-10T11:04:00.002-05:00

When people speak about a cultural revolution they typically think of the industrial revolution, or the women's lib movement, or what occurred during the sixties when flower power uprooted the then staunch Republican mental landscape. But has anyone taken a real hard look at what is actually happening before our very glassy eyes? Because what I'm perceiving when I watch and listen to the three front runners for the Oval Office seems nothing short of a cataclysmic cultural change.

Let's begin by breaking down the principle characters vying for Amerca's top job.
We have America's first viable female presidential candidate - Hillary Clinton
We have Americas' first viable male First Lady - Bill Clinton
We have Americal's first viable black presidential candidate - Barack Obama
And at 72, We have America's oldest presidential candidate - John McCain

I mean really........if I wanted to write a novel about a political campaign that had a woman, a black man and an elderly citizen all in the same presidential race, running neck to neck, who I ask, with my pen to paper, who in their literary right mind would buy the premise, nevermind the book? I mean really!

To be considered a good writer, it's important to flesh out your characters. You know, give every character in your story a meaty backstory readers can get their teeth into. Here again, the fleshing out is so overdone no reader could be expected to actually swallow the stuff. Yet, let's remember to keep in mind, we are not talking about fictional characters. Imaginary, made up people the author has conjured up. These three individuals are very much alive and supposedly the best this country can come up with to steer our national vessel back into safe, secure waters.

Let's begin with our first female candidate's backstory. Talk about backstory! It doesn't get much better than this. What better way to learn how to navigate the best route to the White House except to be married to a former president? To all the little bright eyed girls today waiting to grow up to become president, that has got to be just as inspiring as being told to go to college to marry a doctor was back in the fifties.

Nonetheless, in spite of that misstep her character is fittingly portrayed as a brilliant mother, wife, daughter and campaign strategist. And as First Lady of her country she did demonstrate great morale character and tremendous respect for the other human species - men. Or more to the point - her husband, who we learn as the story unfolds is not only a former two time president, he was also a former two timer. Hillary has been married to this same man for as long as she can remember being married and he not only cheated on her dozens of times, he is the first man in any culture's history to be impeached for it! How horny can one man get?

However when Hillary's character is finally confronted with the truth and learns her adulterous husband has indeed cheated on her behind a closed door, in her home, on her watch, she remains at his side, steadfast loyal throughout the most vile of days, even defending him when his back is violently tarred and feathered. Some critics have said this is a strong, positive, female character who should be held up as a role model for wives whose husbands have strayed. Others have sneered and remarked that the character is such a stretch, it's more comical, almost laughable, and makes for a sad commentary on marriages in the media.

Still, on the back of that ragged and torn coattail she whips her forlorn image back into shape long enough to make a congressional name for herself that may take her all the way back to the homestead she and her husband have always loved the best. And if the Hillary character does emerge as our first female commander-in-chief, her saga will widen and grow more incredulous as we watch her husband shapes what he wants from becoming this country's first male First whatever.

Here the emotional components that lent both the husband and wife characters their political astute steel and strategy is urgently torn asunder as the gender-bender juxaposition becomes absurd and even too contrived for this fan of Bill reader's taste.

Now to Obama's backstory. His character is the least fleshed out since the author provides him with a very weak political background. His whole experience doesn't add up to enough time to even find the Senate's men's room. But is there ever a lot of character plot here.

First, we all know as Americans that religious background can essentially make or break a candidate. Here the candidate has essentially none. None!!! How can that point have missed the author's flowchart notes. Oh his stepfather occasionally entered a mosque but who in America's political climate today would want to be labeled a muslim? A black muslim no less. That leaves us assessing his biological parents. There we have a father who was an atheist and a mother who did not practice any religion. Wow! What was this author thinking? I mean talk about a huge void! How can any candidate, presidential no less, expect to get any votes if he or she doesn't have a religious base to start off with.

And if that wasn't enough to throw away a candidacy, the author bestows this character with a name that will never roll off anyone's tongue as easily as Osama Bin Laden's. I mean can it get any worse for this guy?

But here again, like all the interesting twists the author throws in for Hillary's backstory, here we have not just the first viable black candidate. The character is written in as mulatto. Which if you think about it probably makes a lot more sense. Because in terms of this country possibly voting in its first black skin president, since mulatto means half black half white, this candidacy is a really clever way of gradually desensitizing America to the possibility of having a black president.

A better way perhaps of breaking in America's prejudiced populace slowly to the idea of actually electing a full blood black man. This element of surprise makes the race card for bigots a difficult hand to play. Even our character at times isn't sure which hand to play but his black and white supporters don't seem to care so long as he doesn't utter one word that could be interrupted as racist or discriminating or disturbing. The fact that there's no substance in his speeches is a non starter when the message he articulates is so clear.

Which brings us to the third candidate. A senior citizen who has a senatorial record that started flip flopping long before he ever cried into George Bush's chest asking for his father's forgiveness like a rebellious teen.

But the author keeps pumping in extraordinary backstory items and this character certainly does not disappoint. In this chapter we are swept along on a very painful yet courageous and inspiring journey as this character is held five and a half years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. Suffering horrors and mental anguish no one except other POW's could ever imagine, his story is extraordinary, plus an exceptionally difficult backstory to ignore.

But this character has one major flaw. Even though every presidential candidate wants to become president of the United States so badly they would make a pact with the devil if they thought it would do the trick. This character actually does that. For how else can a candidate who is left to die alone and bleeding at the beginning of the campaign race come back in perfect pitch to win the nomination? How else can one man live to tell the story of so many tales of courage in one lifetime?

By now I'm sure you're asking yourself how come there's no mention of which candidates are running on which ticket? Who's blue, who's red? Who's Dems or Reps? Where's all of that good ole white boy right wing left wing stuff to ruminate on?

Well believe me, that's not an oversight on my part. You'd have to ask the author of this book that question because he doesn't provide one word, sentence or paragraph to distinguish which campus, club or community these three politicians are campaigning from.

But if I had to give an opinion, personally I think the author just isn't a very good writer, so in order to make up for a lack of literary ability he just let his mind go wild and threw in everything but the kitchen sink to make a strong case for either.

This Is An Urgent Message From Your Conscious

2007-09-21T09:35:00.000-04:00

There are ten days left before the CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) expires and millions of kids lose health coverage.

Early next week, Congress will vote on legislation to renew the program and cover 4 million children who would otherwise be forced to go without it.

The President has promised to veto. It's one thing to threaten political opponents but to deny millions of children basic health care is immoral. If the President follows through on this horribly misguided threat, Congress must override it.

The veto must not stand.

We are having a national call-in day next Tuesday in order to tell Congress and the President that we’re serious about protecting our children. Please call, and urge your friends and family to do the same.

Please call Congress at 1-800-828-0498 on our national-call in day next Tuesday. If you can't call then, please call right now. Tell Congress to support children's health and fight the President's veto.

Defending his opposition to kids' coverage President Bush claimed today that "our goals should be for children who have no health insurance to be able to get private coverage."

This puts him at odds with American parents whose number one goals is a healthy child.

Tell Congress to stand strong against the President's veto threat. Join our national call-in effort next Tuesday. Please call 1-800-828-0498.

Democrats aren't the only ones taken aback by the President. Even Iowa Republican Charles Grassley has had enough: "I'm frustrated for the kids of Iowa," said Grassley. "I am disappointed."

We couldn't agree more. The President and his allies are using their personal ideologies to stonewall health care for kids. This is a cruel and unacceptable tactic that puts innocent children in the crossfire of political games.

There are ten days left and we're ready to fight until the very end. We hope you will join us.

D is for Drama

2007-03-28T13:32:00.000-04:00

Yes, I admit I occasionally yell back at the TV. But only when the current president struggles to make his thoughts known to us through the use of the English language. It's also true at those particular times my soft, melodic voice raises to levels only dogs can hear, and I get so overly excited the blood rushes to my cheeks. But this happens only when I hear political pundits lying through their capped teeth. I can't help it. That's how I react when I'm confronted by stupidity and arrogance and a blatant disregard for the health and well being for this planet and all its inhabitants.

I'm sorry but I just can't stand what is going on right in front of our eyes! Every single day it's another scandal and another lie exposed. It is nothing less than abhorrent to have to witness the total disrespect this administration holds for life and the truth.

Gosh, gee wilacurs, wasn't it this president, who in atonement for the previous administration, said his was going to built on a foundation of character and honor and a sense of justice? What the heck went so terribly wrong here? Nothing that a whole lot of recent books written on the psyche of George W. Bush and his cohorts couldn't explain.

Is it only me that thinks of the cover of Mad Magazine when I see the president?

Because I can get a bit touchy when our president dismisses executive decorum and the constitution with a wave of his hand, and I go extra nuts when a vile person like Ann Coulter, who has no reason to have the right to speak to the country, and is promoted by today's media as a constitutional official is given free reign to say the most outlandish, despicable things, and what she says is presented as news, when I cannot stand to watch any news format show any longer because they have all become a delusion of reality, (would somebody pleeeeze put Wolf Blitzer out of his misery - it is really really too painful to watch him) when I cannot pretend anymore to understand what is so obviously incomprehensible, I have been banished by some to wear the scarlet letter D for - 'Drama Queen.'

Here then in my defense is my rebuttal -

D is for Drama

by Estella Ritter 3/28/07

When you say I’m a drama queen and set your teeth in that pejorative tone I’ve come to know so well, you fail to grasp you’ve just offended and demeaned God; the most brilliant dramatist of all time.

When you yearn to insult me by calling me a drama queen you discredit and degrade every man or woman who has ever authored every classic piece of cinema and literature.

When you use the phrase ‘drama queen’ to belittle me and exploit my anguish, you debase the entire culture of music. You dilute every symphony ever produced, every opera ever sung, and you unabashedly destroy the enormous power your favorite song has to lift your spirit and smooth your furrowed brow.

When you wish to condemn how I feel and how I have chosen to reveal it, you diminish the effect of suddenly witnessing a rainbow, or seeing the sun rise up against a mountainous backdrop, or watching the sun slowly dip behind the horizon of an ocean. You detract from a desert landscape and disparage a hike through forestry trails. You dishonor a hidden lake and depreciate traveling to far off places just to gaze upon an exotic bird splendidly painted in gaudy Mardi Gras colors.

When you attempt to prod me into a likeness of how you wish me to act, you violently rip from its wall every canvas hung in every museum. You question the dramatic grandeur behind every cathedral or Roman Church.

When you refer to me as a drama queen as a way to scold me into submission, you shame the collective works of Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci. You defile every mastermind God has ever infused his sublime genius talent into.

Man’s creative expression is only an attempt to emulate God’s perfect artistic eye. When you sully my name by calling me a drama queen do you also mock God’s obvious taste for the drama as an over the top production? Do you describe God’s abundant exterior stylizing as a glitzy theatrical gesture?

To call me a drama queen is to reduce every soldier or civilian who perished in a battle to nothing more than a dramatic actor. To scorn my emotive articulation is to reduce the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible and the Koran and the Torah to mere psalms of pity.

The way a word may catch your imagination, the way the light catches your eye as clouds roll over a lunar ray of moonshine. The way a beat catches your heart when an ancient drum is played. The way your breath is taken away when a loved one returns. The not knowing of how or when we each must die. The way a sick child can suddenly become well. To call me a drama queen is to despise God’s dramatic flair for how he playwrights each life.

Hail to Mr & Mrs President

2007-03-04T18:42:00.000-05:00

At this much too early juncture into the political journey to supreme power I hold absolutely no loyalty or allegiance to any one particular presidential candidate, be it Democratic or Republican, so pay no more mind to today's column than you would to a passing thought, but it does strike me that -

In the event that Hillary Clinton was elected president, not only would she become America's first female president, but her husband Bill Clinton would become America's first male 'First Lady.'

And if such a thing should happen, Hillary would most likely appoint her First Lady as our illustrious ambassador to the world, and in that capacity, her husband would travel happily around the globe. Of course Bill would welcome such a challenge, in fact, he would probably confess he was born for the job, and by all our imaginations, would perform an amazingly, outstanding job. (As long as he doesn't get caught with his fetish showing)

But isn't that what Eleanor Roosevelt did so eloquently when her husband was president? During a time of great dishevel and distress, didn't she grow into an extension of her husband's policy making and mirror the very best reflection of what America stood for? Yes. I reckon she did.

And didn't Hillary state either around the time she was running for congress, or perhaps it was when she was our first lady herself, that her role model had always been Eleanor Roosevelt? Yes she did. So I find it a bit ironic that history will have a brilliant laugh when and if Hillary is appointed the surveyor of all she sees, that she has the distinction of putting herself in the position of making her husband emulate her very own role model.

And then there's the major/minor issue of what to call Bill if he is our first lady? First Man? First Male? I'll leave the jokes to the likes of a Tucker Carlson pundit hag, but seriously, there is the question of proper etiquette that has to be addressed. Because if Hillary is elected, since our first lady/man was also a former president, he is entitled to be respectively referred to as Mr. President. Hence, may I present to you our very first Mr and Mrs President.

Sleep on that and get back to me in the morning.

How Well They Knew Him

2007-02-19T23:36:00.000-05:00

On Day Two of my stark indictment upon my useless words I've decided to draw upon some very insightful words written a long time ago but still just as timely today -

The following was lifted from a 2000 Liz Smith column -

"I have in my hand the new issue of Texas Monthly which asks, "Is George W. Smart After All? Yes, And He Can Win!" The subhead should read: "But You'll Be Sorry."

The George W. Bush story notes that the governor is running ahead of Al Gore in the polls, but the anti-Bush remarks back before even his first election is what made saving the column all these years priceless:

Jim Hightower, former agricultural commissioner: "He is going to lose for three reasons. First, the smirk. His is not a facial tick. This is from within. It reflects a spoiled brat's sense of entitlement and a mean streak we've seen flair up. Two - down deep, this guy is shallow.....Three, he is ........a loyal performer for fat cats......a hired hand for corporate interests. That's not what the general public wants its president to be."

Garry Mauro, former land commissioner and failed Texas gubernatorial candidate: "I have never met a politician with less passion for the issues.....He has no core. He flip-flops 100 percent because he doesn't care....How can you run for president when your state, with a large surplus, won't pay for health insurance for teachers?"

John Sharp, former Texas comptroller: "When the economy goes bad, you better not have that kind of governor - and you better not have that kind of president. You'd better have someone who knows how to pull the levers of government and get the state, or the country, out of trouble."

Ann Richards, former Texas governor: "George W. is a disciplined campaigner. He stays on message....he talks about faith-based this and that.....this is a shield for what is actually taking place, and that is a delivery of influence over every aspect of our lives to the Religious Right."

Ben Barnes, former lieutenant governor: "He can't distinguish between no new taxes on the one hand and surpluses on the other."

Paul Begala, political consultant: "He's lighter'n my grandma's biscuits. He has the weakest, thinnest, briefest record in public life of any major party nominee in American history......He was a businessman!? I love that......with only his family's fortune and a trust fund, he started an oil company and ran it into the ground....bailed out by his father's wealthy friends."

An Apology To all My Devoted Readers -

2007-02-19T01:59:00.000-05:00

First I wish to start this column off by thanking everyone who sent emails telling me how much I was missed. I could never express how much it meant to me to know how many of you cared enough to take the time to write.
Thank you Thank you Thank you.

Second, I have to come clean. I have been back at my desk for several weeks but find I am unable to write. And no, I did not fall and break my hand. I have not broken my back so I cannot sit in a chair. Nor have I been lying in a coma or fallen passionately in love with prince charming and hiding out in his castle.

I could not write because I have come to a terrible mindfulness and despondently realize from recent events that alas, the pen is no longer mightier than the sword. Even though I am cognizant of how slowly the political machine must grind, I truly believed back in November when the American people made their mandate reverberate loud and clear that the collective voice of a nation would stem the flow of our courageous men and women 's blood - but our administration and especially our president continues to wink at us and then turn a blind eye to our outrage and deaf ear to our voices.

This show of utter contempt for what the American public wants is what has made me stop and seriously consider asking what difference will my words, or the words of all the other billion bloggers and journalists and authors and news people embedded in Iraq accomplish when they are so boldly confronted and ignored by a despot?

Except for Chuck Hagel, the great senator from Nebraska, I don't hear any voices passionately raising hell in the senate chambers. Why is a republican telling it like it should be told? What happened to Jim Webb, the great hope from Virginia and all the other democratic voices that reassured us they were tired of it all and were not going to take it anymore?

What point to write? To activate? Activate what? To change and correct what is so terribly wrong? How can mere words help if our congress is wearing duck tape over their mouths and ear flaps over their ears? How did the words of one man set the entire world on fire? Congress did nothing four years ago to stop a madman and now a brand new set of mouthpieces have been just as muted out as their predecessors.

How can this be? How can that be happening in this once great country of check and balances? I don't have the answer except to say 9/11 happened.

Our president of scary faces and too scarce words invokes the terror of 9/11 in every single speech and every single state of the union spiel since 9/11. We lost thousands of lives and two mortar and brick icons and now it looks as if all the kings men and all the king's horses will never-ever be able to put our democracy back together again.

We need men and women with our forefather's vision and courage to emerge as a contemporary force of nature and stand up to King George all over again, demanding to take back our rights.

They must fight like their lives and our lives, and the constitution of this fine country all depend on it.

To all my fans and devoted Readers

2007-01-09T18:00:00.000-05:00

Sorry for not keeping current. Have to be out of town for a few days happily celebrating the birth of a new family member. In the meantime let's hope Bush doesn't get us into more hot water and New York City isn't invaded again by anything more foul than the usual stinky odor of urine drifting by from some neglected door way.

Keep healthy and do try to stay sane while I'm away........

The Silence of the Rational Center

2007-01-04T13:31:00.000-05:00

F iasco: The American Military Adventure In Iraq
Tom Ricks, the Pentagon reporter for the Washington Post, and now best selling author could be heard over the air waves today on The Al Franken Show. Speaking in the most knowledgeable and humble manner about exactly what is going on in Iraq today, what went wrong in Iraq three years and two months ago, and what continues to be abhorrently wrong today, he is undoubtedly the best reason this country still has hope that saner minds will prevail.

Has it occurred to you why so many books have been written about a 'war' our government and president started all on their own and have no idea how to finish? Their reckless ignorance about a region they should have known like the back of their hand (it was our government after all that kept feeding the hand of Saddam for decades before we decided to cut him off, both literally and figuratively) has started a highly profitable cottage publishing industry all on its own.

Yet in the midst of all this literary revelation, our president and his henchmen have continued to get away with lies upon lies and now, even after the magnificent midterm elections, they confidently tell us their aim is to send in more troops and further escalate our military presence in Iraq!

How can the rational center in this country keep silent any longer? How can this be happening while all these books pile up?

After our constitution, the billions of words spilling out from these pages providing concrete evidence about the horrific arrogance behind this 'war' should be the only other words we hold to be self-evident.

These self-evident books are out there in plain sight. Talking heads appear every day on TV and cable news stations expounding on how little can be done to right the wrongs, even Fox News seems at times to report the news in a somewhat fair and balanced manner. The president himself changes his views from film clip to film clip. Just listen to what he has said and then refuted to have said about his top commander in Iraq, General Casey, and still the press corp does not demand explanations or reasonable logic.

How can the president and some of our newly elected congresspeople stand up today, TODAY mind you, after all their ranting and raving to get out of Iraq, and state they're in favor of sending in more troops, escalating our military profile in Iraq as a way to end a violence they have no idea how got started in the first place?

After so many years of listening to lies and watching the body count of American troops and Iraqi people mount, how can rational, sane people continue to turn off their TV sets each night and innocently drift off to sleep.

Bush just signed a new bill allowing your mail to be strip searched whenever and wherever any person in our so called intelligence agencies feels like it. That should make us feel safe and secure while a man, without a moral authority, who will always be a recovering alcoholic and ex-coke head looks out for our children.

He and his wife can not even be held accountable to look after their own grown up daughters. Both girls reportedly thumbed their noses at their parents and their host country back in November of last year by staging their very own 'girls gone wild show' in Argentine.

We only know what the secret service guys couldn't contain. For the past six years these two women have embarrassed themselves and us by their persistent drunken and disorderly conduct. Knowing how poorly these women have controlled their impulsive behavior would you trust George and Laura to baby sit your kids? I didn't think so. Why then do we persist in leaving the fate of our children and our beloved country in their hands? Where is the rationale behind our thinking?

The Longest Day

2006-12-29T15:00:00.000-05:00

News programs are heralding the imminent execution of Saddam Hussein.

I bring this up because news anchors are suggesting that sites such as utube.com may be able to access copies of the execution video, so that all the pedestrians of this world can have an opportunity to view the dictator's extinction.

The expert talking heads though have assured the newscasters that only one copy will be taken and that copy will be securely vaulted, so that will not, and cannot happen.

But, the experts go on to say, pictures of the body will definitely be distributed and made available so that the world can be rest assured it is Saddam's body in fact that was finally annihilated.

Well, that should take a load off of Osama bin Laden's mind.

It's been a long time coming for bin Laden, but it's finally over.

And I'm sure that he, like the rest of us, will feel much safer knowing that the worst offender to mankind will very shortly be dead and buried.

Now he can go back to doing what he does best, uninterrupted and and without any fear of reprisal.

War of the Worlds

2006-12-26T01:19:00.000-05:00

In Steven Spielberg's War of the Worlds, earth and mankind battle to survive some pretty nasty aliens. In George Bush's version of, War of the Worlds, America is caught in a quagmire.

No matter how many troops he sends in, the bad guys send in more. No matter how many bad guys he kills off, terrorist cells from all over the world immediately send in replacements.

And now a recent "L.A. Times poll" shows that only 12% of Americans support Bush's plan to send in more troops into Iraq. Another recent poll taken this month by Bloomberg - USA reports the majority of Americans want the troops to get now. His Joint Chiefs all oppose the president. His miliary advisors and generals oppose him. The intensity of this opposition is remarkable: A recent ABC News Poll records 57 percent "strongly" disapprove of Bush's handling of Iraq, 50 percent strongly feel the war was not worth fighting and a record 49 percent strongly disapprove of his job performance overall, compared with just 18 percent who strongly approve.

Even the republican platform has begun to swing just a tad slightly to its left, yet Bush continues to stand unwavering steadfast and firm in his conviction he is going to win the battle with the bad guys who want to take over the world.

So maybe it's the country that's looking at this whole thing wrong. Maybe Bush really is much more astute than we give him credit for. Maybe he is more clever than the rest of us.

Maybe he does know something we don't. Maybe his strategy all along was to use Iraq as one giant terrorist magnet to pull all the bad guys in and then mow them down one by one.

Who knows? Maybe George Bush is smarter than Steven Spielberg. I mean, who knew?

Look Ma! The Emperor isn't Wearing any Clothes!

2006-12-21T14:03:00.000-05:00

In ancient as well as modern times, December has been a time for celebrating. This is mostly due to the fact that winter solstice occurs during this month and is apparently the origins behind the rumor that Jesus Christ was born on Christmas Day.

How can people be rushing all about buying gifts for their loved ones, waging their financial balance against how much they’re hoping to get back in return, singing along to the lyrics of Sleigh Bells Are Ringing all in the name of a religious holiday that in truth, isn’t religious in the sense that Christians think it is.

It’s a delusion.

Just like commercial eating plans that claim you can eat everything you want and still lose weight is a delusion.

Watching Fox Five News before going to bed and thinking you know all you need to know about current events is a delusion.

Watching any news format show on TV or cable, except for NewsHour Jim Lehrer or whenever Bob Schieffer is on the air is a delusion.

When George Bush told this country that we needed to go to war with Iraq it was a delusion.

When George Bush declared to this country ‘mission accomplished.’ It was a delusion.

Believing anything that comes out of our president’s mouth, except for coughing up phlegm once in awhile, is a delusion.

All of his military generals have cut and run. Why are we, the American People, simply going about our business as if nothing is wrong. Only 12% of our people trust he is on the right course. The man behind the curtain is not the Wizard of Oz. He is nothing more than a man who appears to be mentally delusional and is in need of professional help. But if 300 million Americans continue to act like the three monkeys and do nothing, say nothing and hear nothing, then this country is no better than Nazi Germany was in the thirties.

Where I ask is our spiritual
humanity during this ‘Holiday Season?’

2006-12-13T09:10:00.000-05:00

You've Got To Read This Book:

The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth From 9/11 to Katrina
by Frank Rich Anyone who takes the time to read this book probably already knows the truth, it's just that Mr. Rich says it so much better.

"Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War"
by Michael Isikoff & David Corn
What's left to say? The title pretty much says it all.

"The Conservative Nanny State" by Dean Baker, the director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. beatthepress.blogspot.com
Mr. Baker makes even the hardest law of economics easy to grasp, comprehend and apply to our everyday business of living. In today's world of global businesses and unfair trade policies his book is a definite must read for every middle class citizen that still clings to the notion of free market values.

"Moral Minority: Our Skeptical Founding Fathers" by Brooke Allen.
Finally - a book that reveals the truth about our founding father's spiritual beliefs. You have to read this book if you want to speak articulately and accurately about the religious right's hijacking of America. These guys were so ahead of the curve they even fought over stamping our currency with "In God We Trust."
Come on! These guys were rocking! Imagine if our founding fathers had the mindset of George Bush and Cheney and Rove. In order too protect us from British terrorists there never would have been constitutional laws protecting the citizenry. Look at Bagdad and what's been happening to our Alienable Rights and what just went down with Habea Corpus. Even if you don't believe in God you've got to suspect there was some kind of spiritual energy protecting this country in 1776. Otherwise there would have been no way we would have made it this far - Amen!

"The Treatment of Anxiety and Panic with Bach Flower Remedies"
by yours truly.
My book will provide the perfect elixir to neutralize the high anxiety you're going to feel after reading the four books ahead of me.

The Power of a Word

2006-11-24T01:05:00.000-05:00

A word is so powerful that one word can change a life or destroy the lives of millions of people. Some years ago a man in Germany, by the use of a word, manipulated a whole country with some of the most intelligent people. He led them into a world war with just the power of his word. He convinced others to commit the most atrocious acts of violence. He activated people's fear with the word, and like a big explosion, there was killing and war all around the world. All over the world humans destroyed other humans because they were afraid of each other. Hitler's word, based on fear-generated beliefs and agreements, will be remembered for centuries.

The human mind is like a fertile ground where seeds are continually being planted. The seeds are opinions, ideas, and concepts. You plant a seed, a thought, and it grows. The word is like a seed, and the human mind is so fertile! The only problem is that too often it is fertile for the seeds of fear.

Karl Rove knows this universal truth only too well. So does Dick Cheney. And they told George Bush and now he knows it too. The seed they plant is always fear based. They told the nation that if they elected a Democratic president back in 2004 there would be hell fire to pay. They told the nation again before the recent midterm elections if you elect a Democratic congress terror will reign.

So the nation was manipulated by the power of a word and the nation elected a Republican president in 2004 and terror still reigns. Terror rules our sky and our hearts and our minds every day and a mission that was supposed to be accomplished in Iraq 3 years and 7 months ago proved to be an outright lie. Just as the reasons put forth to the entire world congress citing why we had to invade Iraq was an outright lie.

Our current administration understands the impact of a single word, and what it means to plant a seed of fear and then water it and care for it so that the seed develops and grows sturdy, deep roots with branches that expand out all over. Our current administration understands what any mobster mentality does. The only way to rule is by utilizing fear based tactics. Since they cannot literally hit each and every citizen of this country over the head, they do break each and every one's mental kneecaps by constantly reminding them that if the Republicans aren't in power, there will be no one to protect them.

The newly elected Democratic majority has an enormous mandate to carry out. They have to prove to us that they are more powerful than the bogey men. They have to prove that they have the courage and the means to protect us. Otherwise there will be another Republican president elected in 2008 to remind us that their club is bigger than the other guys'.

Ref: Video of Bush Giving You the Finger

Ding Dong The Witch is Dead

2006-11-21T15:02:00.000-05:00

Okay class, who can explain to me the difference between pulling down that huge statue of Saddam Hussein over in Iraq and what happened here after the midterm elections went democratic?

" Yes Harold, I see you've got your hand up, what do you see as the main distinction?"

"Well Saddam Hussein was a vicious, cruel dictator and our country is a place where freedom rings."

"Thank you Harold for that illuminating insight, but I'm sorry, that is not the correct answer here. You see, you've failed to see the much larger picture that's emerged."

The answer class is there is no difference. Yes Iraq was under the thumb of a violent despot but why did it take this election for the democrats and our news reporters and our media and all the honest common folk of this great country to finally find the nerve to stand up and say what's been on their minds all along.

We have been and continue to be under the thumb of one of our most damaging, dictatorial presidents ever to roam the Oval Office, and no one before now, after six scary, scary years, has had the statesmen temerity to stand up to Bush and his Senator McCarthy like tactics.

Now that our country is back supposedly in the hands of sane, rational men and women who aren't sexually inhibited to the point they turn into Dr. Jekyll by day and Mr. Hyde by night, and can walk and chew gum at the same time, and understand the mandate put forth by our forefathers about keeping church and state s-e-p-a-r-a-t-e.... NOW, all of a sudden everyone has discovered they have their own mind and a mouth to speak what is on their mind and not what they think they have to say to stay in the good graces of King George.

Where were all these cowards before the election? I'll tell you - hiding behind their false tongues, afraid of being beat up after class by the school bully. As much as I wanted to see our congress blueagain, I am ashamed for these people - who are now first coming forward - and proudly facing the cameras and readily speaking what should have been said a very long time ago.

The juxtaposition of watching Saddam Hussein's statue come tumbling down as a symbol to the people of Iraq urging them to finally come of their hiding places and see for themselves there's no longer any reason to be afraid or scared, and recently watching all the house and senate Dem's gingerly walking over to a reporter's microphone and standing up straight and saying what he or she really wants to say to this country is at the very least, quite jarring to my sense of what is all wrong and all right about our government's system.

2006-11-16T18:29:00.000-05:00

As I was saying yesterday... not one good exit strategy proposal has come out as yet from the government, military, defense department, or think tank. But a news journalist asked a man on the street in Iraq the other day what he thought should be done. Ibiza responded by saying that it is no good for the Americans to stay in Iraq and it is no good if the Americans decide to leave Iraq. Exactly! I couldn't have said it better. Thank you Ibiza for articulating the problem at hand so clearly and concisely.

The Legend of Pandora's Box

2006-11-15T14:25:00.000-05:00

Gen. John Abizaid, together with Ambassador David Satterfield, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State and Coordinator for Iraq appeared before the Senate today and warned the Democratic Senators today not to hamper the military. Imagine what level of brass ball cockiness is being shown here when this comes directly on the heels of Rumsfield's firing last week.

Their mission clearly was to turn the heads of the dem 'defeatists turncoats' around to the old guard Republicans way of thinking. Although they agreed with Senator Clinton that "hope is not a strategy", Gen. Abizaid suggested that "despair wasn't a strategy either."

Great. So while the Iraqi people continue to get mugged, murdered, slaughtered, blown up, and most recently, kidnapped, a 'intervention' more commonly known as the Iraq War has come down to a tit for tat tea party. People are dying, children are being used as target practice, families are being destroyed and literally threatened to the point they have to abandon their homes, and our administration sends in the clowns to say to a newly energized, confident Congress, now just hold on a minute here, there's no need to go crazy and bail out while we're just getting started there. Simmer down you all. If you just approve sending more money and more troops I know we can lick them. You can see we have them on the run now, just be patient, they'll come around to our way of thinking, I'm absolutely sure of it.

It was positively scary listening to the two of them address Senator Clinton's questions that way. And poor Hillary, purposely hiding her disdain from the camera's eye by keeping one hand over her cheek, had no option except to make nice and listen to their stale and utterly shameful manifesto to stay the course. How could they show up at congress with nothing better than let's just keep on keeping on. It's preposterous in light of the botched job we've spectacularly accomplished over there.

Our defense department has no idea how to end the savagery that is occurring in Iraq. Our government had no right to go in in the first place and never had an exit plan ever, our congress had no backbone when they should have to stop what was going down from every happening, and now four years later not one person in our government or military has a clue as to what to do. And the country tunes into the news everyday with the intent that somebody somewhere has to have the answer and yet....nothing.

At the very same time the congressional hearing was going on, Al Franken at Air America was talking with Michael O'Hanion, who is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution where he heads up the Iraq Index Project. He was suggesting along the same lines of Senator Joe Biden's proposed planforIraq in which Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds can decentralize to pursue their own interests, which goes against everything Abizaid and Satterfield were pushing down the throats of congress today.

For a whole lot of historical sociopolitical reasons there may not be a workable plan to end the inhumanity that exists in that region right now. When Bush's shock and awe bombing first went down that awful night back on March 21, 2003 he violently ripped opened Pandora's Box. From the minute our boots touched down on Iraqi soil we have done nothing but cause immeasurable suffering and atrocities to both our troops and the Iraqi people.

Taken from The Legend of Prometheus and Pandora's Box -
No sooner had the gods spoken, than the elements obeyed: the winds blew; the rain fell in torrents; lakes, seas, rivers, and oceans broke their bonds; and terrified mortals, forgetting their petty quarrels in a common impulse to flee from the death which threatened them, climbed the highest mountains, clung to uprooted trees, and even took refuge in the light skiffs they had constructed in happier days.

Their efforts were all in vain, however; for the waters rose higher and higher, overtook them one after another in their ineffectual efforts to escape, closed over the homes where they might have been so happy, and drowned their last despairing cries in their seething depths.

And The Race Is On .....

2006-11-14T09:27:00.000-05:00

The midterm elections are history now and Democratic presidential wannabes were caught this past weekend officially enrolling in the electoral system, a process better known in certain high places as 'attending a fundraiser.' There they were, all dressed up in their Sunday best doing the down home meet and greet.

Even though in this point in campaign forecast time, it looks like Hillary Clinton may be the big, ole elephant in the room and Bill the fly on her back, American voters still tend to have this thing for conceptualizing how a candidate looks bellying up to the bar, or wearing their favorite team's cap, or simpy sitting in a football stadium.

It just seems wrong then, since women in so many other parts of the world have long been elected heads of state soley on their political merits, that Hillary will have a lot of male oriented posing to make up for in order for her to be taken seriously by middle America ticket punchers, and invited on board the next presidential express.

Who's Minding the Store?

2006-11-13T12:18:00.000-05:00

Who within our current administration is actually the one driving the wheel? Does anyone really know? Or more to the point - does anymore even care? During previous administrations the country had a pretty good hunch who was calling the shots, and if they were wrong, well we were certainly the last ones to know. With no around the clock cable news outlets, and no slobbery - get a life hyena lurking about in his basement - always ready to suddenly swoop down and pounce on every crooked eyebrow raised, the country had no way of knowing what went on behind sealed doors except for what a handful of news people reported back to them.

Yet today we have every kind of communication skill possible to help get us information from nearly every point in this entire globe, and still we have no real sense of what is happening. This speaks to all the creme de la creme leaders in our country. Not just the president and his personal henchmen provided by daddy. This speaks to all the senate and house people as well. No matter how much you may listen to a Chris Matthew or a Ted Russert, and watch them as they strive to get a real pulse from the people they're interviewing, at best all you'll hear back is another stale rendition of their party's finest talking points.

Sure this belt loosened slightly last week when all the townspeople of this great nation finally got together on the same page (and praise the Lord that they did!) but in a few more hours that fine bravado will change back to superficial speak. We constantly want to forget that underneath all that rhetoric and smooth sound bites there beats the heart of a politician. And the end game of any politician is to be re-elected, and if any man or woman wants to run for president you know that their ego matter is not cut from the same cloth as your average Joe or Josephine. Their ambition and drive is so much more superior to yours or mine they can easily spin out of control. And the friction from all that metal hitting metal spontaneously combusts them - think Al Gore dramatically kissing his wife in front of the entire world, or John Kerry when he stood back and said absolutely nothing to refute those disgusting swift boat ads. What were these guys thinking??? Answer: they weren't. Their campaign managers and handlers were doing all the thinking for them and they were just as much out of touch with reality as the candidates themselves were for hiring and listening to them in the first place.

Our forefathers did not live in an ivory tower when they were busting their behinds to bring this country together. They led very hard lives and so did their families. They actually rolled back their sweaty sleeves and did scarifice to be where they were. Their souls were not with the lobbyists or their next campaign fund raisers. They were fastly connected to the moment and they had to push themselves to their endurance to do what they thought was right at the time, and obviously they didn't all that bad because we're still a country and our country's constitution, not counting Ann Coulters' perverse influence, is more or less still intact

Maybe it would help all politicians, regardless of rank, to stay grounded more if it was required that once a month they had to privately view the 1972 movie The Candidate with Robert Redford. Oh for the good old days of bird flu and mad cow disease. I'll even take the cuban missle crisis over what is happening today. At least there are photos and footage of JFK and his brother Bobby in real angst while they deliberated over how to manage that dire situation. Now we have Armageddon again waiting in the wings and footage of Bush flaming the flames.

Our Finest Citizens

2006-11-12T00:15:00.000-05:00

In honor of our fallen heros and to pay tribute to our current servicemen, President Bush in his Veteran Day speech yesterday praised our brave soldiers serving all over the world as 'our finest citizens.' Certainly no one would argue with his commendation. The armed forces are asked to pay the highest price, and their moral principles and courageous actions exemplify the very best part that humanity has to offer. When a soldier is brought into a combat hospital he or she wants nothing more than to be patched up as quickly as possible so they can be sent back to be with their company. Senior officers have been known to collaspe after collecting the fragmented appendages and brain matter of one of their men. But to have our most valient and trusted men and women praised by a president and by an administration that has so carelessly and recklessly sent our sons and daughters, husbands, wives, sisters and brothers into harm's way is a travesty to our nation's conscious.

As an American citizen I cannot be more proud of the men and women who serve overseas. Knowing how dangerous their job is and recognizing the horrific fact that their lives are being threatened every single second, of every single minute, of every single hour, of every single day they serve in Iraq and Afganistan is more frightening to imagine that anything else I can conjure up in my anxiety ridden mind. Every step they take could be their end. Every person that comes into their radius could be their executor. Every road trip they take could be their last. Their heart thumping guard can never be down. The stress level these men and women live with is constantly held at the highest alert. If they survive their tour of duty their mindset in civilian life will never be the same again. The numbers of returning veterans who have lost limbs and eyes, faces and hands have reached staggering proportions and as I write these words I know the number climbs.

Evidence has shown that our president's national reserve duty was no hardship by any stretch of republican fantasy. And as for our war hawk VP, apart from his short tours of hunting duty, and his 'friendly fire' event, Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot and injured a man during a weekend quail hunting trip in Texas. Cheney sprayed Whittington, 78, with shotgun pellets on Saturday at the Armstrong Ranch in south Texas, said property owner Katharine Armstrong. he should be humiliated for how many times he managed to escape serving in the military at all. And yet these men show no remorse or regret for taking away lives and loved ones for an unjustified 'war'. Right after 9-11 our troops belonged in Afganistan. Had they sent in enough troops and stayed the course there, the course of our country's history might have been better served, plus the military morale code of our Department of Defense might have been preserved.

But everyone says it is too late to change what has happened. It is too late to correct what was done wrong. And unfortunately they are right. All we can do at this most unforgiving point is to move forward and plan what our next step should be. Well, while we are speculating on what strategy will best serve our fighting forces, the ravaged country of Iraq, and the people left behind to fight there are highby serving only one purpose - they act as a gold mine for corporate greed and capitalistic theives. Real blood is being shed to bring in those dollars to feed Haliburton. Real people are terrified to leave their homes and go about their business in Iraq. Real people are suffering with the loss of their home, their livelihood and their family members.

The terror that Bush has wrought upon Iraq has turned into a debacle of enormous proportions for both our country as well as Iraq, and Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter and all the rest of the media savvy, bleached blonde bitch bimbos who have steadfastly supported the war in Iraq from day one, and continue to support it even when the man behind the curtain has been shown to be a man without a country behind him, should finally enlist in whatever branch of the military they see fit to serve in. How dare these nazi feminist bullys (colloquial credit goes to Rush Limbaugh) demand someone else perform the ultimate scarifice if they don't have the courage and the guts to do it themselves.

Doesn't anyone else question why the Republican presidential candidate who was a coke head and alcoholic and got regularly wasted got voted in, not once but twice, and gets to salute the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at the same time his closest staff members have ridiculed and demeaned the service of Congressman John Murtha and Senator Max Cleland, as well as the last two Democratic presidential candidates who both volunteered for active duty during a time of war? I understand and accept the merits of advertising and marketing and hype and spin, but I will never understand or accept how the kind and gentle people of this great nation permitted Republican myth to trump Democratic might.

Bush's New World Order

2006-11-09T22:02:00.000-05:00

Who would have thought even twenty four hours ago that Nancy Pelosi would be holding a press conference with Bush congratulating her as the new Speaker of the House. Better yet - who would have thought even fourteen hours ago that Bush would appear calm , cool and genuinely gracious in his remarks as he warmly greeted Nancy into her new post. Of course Nancy made it easy for Bush to be so gallant. As always, she looked supremely elegant, she spoke supremely eloquent and had a confident, controlled air about her. This in complete contrast to a president who cannot stand behind the podium without one of his legs always moving, who cannot string a grammatically correct sentence together without his head writer drafting it for him first, and who cannot govern a country without his fanatical sidekicks and hardnoses behind the scenes orchestrating all of his decisions and directives for him.

Yes America, Bush has given us a new world order. For the first time in six years he can appear serene and confident because the fate of the world has been removed from his hands. The dems have taken over that responsiblity from him and his republican cohorts and he can now sit back, put his feet up, watch football and forget about saving the world from burning itself down. The problems of running this vast, unscripted country has finally been removed from his agenda. Albeit prematurely, but Bush knows that as long as he plays ball with the dems and lets them fall on their faces on their own terms he's out of trouble. The dems promised him they wouldn't drag his sorry ass into any impeachment trail as long as he plays nice with them. That was all Bush wanted at this point in time. He pulled the rug from under his fan base. He cut and ran as soon as the final vote was announced. He instantly knew as soon as the final vote was announced which side to stand on. When the dust settled there was only one person Bush was concerned about and that was himself. As long as he was protected he didn't care how many bodies had to be carried out of the senate and the house. Bush didn't even throw a bone to his dog, Barney.

Bush at his Best

2006-11-09T01:02:00.000-05:00

It was difficult to watch Bush squirm his way through yesterday's press conference. In light of last night's tumultuous turnover you couldn't help but hear the deafening crowd screaming out their mandate. The uproar though provided the press corp with the mental fortitude and confidence they needed to press the nervous president to answer their petulant questions. When? they demanded, when did Bush first decide to give Rummy the heave ho. They wanted to know, they wanted to understand what was going on the president's head. Everything was happening so fast. But the president told them it was this way, and then he told them it was that way and he kept contradicting himself so much that the reporters became dizzy from the speed and just sat back down and took notes. And it was frightening as well to watch Bush's nose grow longer and longer the longer he remained at the podium. Whether or not Bush gave Rummy the thumbs down before or after the election will probably never be known before Woodward writes the last book in his Bush trilogy, but as far as the public was concerned it was enough that the SOD was leaving.

But the reporters were still not up to the task of pinning Bush down. When Bush made sure to point out to the press that the dems were now the ones to head up all the committees and push through legislation, it should have become instantly evident that Bush had finally come up with his exit plan for getting out of Iraq.

By holding off on announcing that Rummy was gone he deliberatly allowed his republican candidates to hang themselves. By holding off on announcing that Rummy was gone he hung all his cronies out to dry. It became obvious in that moment that he had wanted all along for the dems to win both houses. This way it would be the dems who would take over the reins, it would be the dems who would take over control of America's direction. It would be the dems who would now take all the flake. Let the dems screw up and then worm their way out of it. Let the dems come up with a strategy plan and hope they fall flat on their face when they try to execute it. Bush will let the dems take the lead and when they fail to accomplish the impossible, hip hip hooray!! Bush will be able to say with his arrogant smirk spread all over his pompous face, hey, don't look at me! It wasn't me at the helm of this big old ship. It was the dems, off with their heads! I'll just sit back and let history write itself the way I call it. Generations from now will not be able to remember what happened to my plan. I had no exit plan. But that fact will get swept up in all the dirt that's going to be cleaned up by this election. It will be the dems exit plan that gets graded. It will be the dem's exit plan that will have to take all the heat. I'm damn smart. Possibly too smart for my own country's good.

Let Them Eat Cake

2006-11-07T23:45:00.000-05:00

Karl Rove had to personally call Bush last night to inform him that the new Speaker of the House of Representatives would indeed be ordering new drapes for her office. This obscure statement made by a white house reporter for CNN last night made it painfully clear what the country suspected all along - Bush is not the one running our country. He isn't even able to grasp the significance of the electoral returns by himself. Someone else had to do that for him. In this case it was Rove who had to carefully spoon feed him the bad news.

Bush has been telling us for the past two years that being president is 'hard work'. I can only guess that he told Rove last night that he would work harder tomorrow.

Even beyond Bush's catastrophic decision to invade Iraq and proclaim victory after the first five minutes, a disaster by the name of Katrina should haunt Bush for the rest of his life. As the entire world could only stand by and watch in horror as hundreds of lives were swept away, his let them eat cake demeanor set a storm upon his dynasty the likes of which he has never recovered from. Nor have the people of New Orleans.

Theatre of the Absurd

2006-11-06T21:12:00.000-05:00

This is a moment in American history that demands honest, revolutionary thinking. We've all been witnesses to the enormous damage six years of Bush's administration has done to this country. It is certainly not for the faint of heart to try and imagine what another two years is going to bring.

Liz Smith ran a column back in 2000, way before Bush was put into office by our fair minded Supreme Court Justices. In it she reported from an article ran in the Texas Monthly which asked, "Is George W. Smart After All?" and then answered, Yes. And He Can Win! But You'll Be Sorry. The George W. Bush story which noted that Bush was running ahead of Al Gore in the polls rounded up some very timely quotes that still ring true today.

From John Sharp, the former Texas comptroller: "When the economy goes bad, you better not have that kind of a governor - and you better not have that kind of president. You'd better have someone who knows how to pull the levers of government and get the state, or the country, out of trouble."
From Ann Richards, the former governor of Texas: "George W. is a disciplined campaigner. He stays on message...he talks about faith-based this and that...this is a shield for what is actually taking place, and that is a delivery of influence over every aspect of our lives to the Religious Right."
From Garry Mauro, former land commissioner and failed Texas gubernatorial candidate: "I have never met a politician with less passion for the issues...He has no core. He flip-flops 100 percent because he doesn't care...How can you run for president when your state, with a large surplus, won't pay for health insurance for teachers?"
From Jim Hightower, former agricultural commissioner: "First, the smirk. His is not a facial tick. This is from within. It reflects a spoiled brat's sense of entitlement and a mean streak we've seen flair up. Two-down deep, this guy is shallow...Three, he is ...a loyal performer for fat cats...a hired hand for corporate interests. That's not what the general public wants its president to be."
From Ben Barnes, former lieutenant governor: "He can't distinguish between no new taxes on the one hand and surpluses on the other.
From Paul Begala, political consultant: "He's lighter'n than my grandma's biscuits. He has the weakest, thinnest, briefest record in public life of any major party nominee in American history...He was a businessman!? I love that...with only his family's fortune and a trust fund, he started an oil company and ran it into the ground...bailed out by his father's wealthy friends."

This thin, weak facade of a nominee, who has by some utter Karl Rove miracle, won not one, but two presidential races, still casts a dark, ominous shadow in print each time the press exposes just how smart Bush really is. I say smart because how hard would it have been for any sub list political consultant of Kerry's to check out the following facts so that it could have been included in every single campaign speech. Forget about a good horse. How about my kingdom for a good fact checker.

First, six dates: February 1962; March 20, 1963; July 23, 1963; October 14, 1964; November 1, 1965, and January 19, 1966. The first of those dates is when Richard Cheney, then 21 and a student about to leave Yale because of poor grades received his 1-A classification; the next five are the dates of application for continuing deferment. Yet, it was John Ashcroft who was the king of all deferments, topping out at seven.

Second, when Bush's first chief of the postwar operation, the retired general Jay Garner, was replaced by Paul Bremer and recalled from Iraq in May 2003, he was taken by Rumsfield to the White House for a farewell meeting with Bush. Garner held a forty-five conversation with Bush with Cheney and Rice sitting in for second half, yet the president never asked Garner any pointed questions about what it was really like in Iraq or what problems lay ahead. Juxtapose that to 1991, when Garner, returning from northern Iraq, was made to answer questions for almost five days about the efforts he led to save Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War. I guess that shows that sometimes the apple can fall very, very far away from its tree.