Non Party Politics

Democrats are in Trouble!

O.K. North Carolina and Indiana primaries are over. To the surprise of no one, John McCain won in both states. No REALLY! The only real contest remaining in the presidential race is on the Democrat’s side. And, as expected, Barack Obama won in North Carolina, while Hillary Clinton won (by a narrow margin) in Indiana.

Since I personally am not a rabid supporter of any of the three candidates, it’s a simple matter for me to observe what is, and has been, happening. In my opinion, the Democrats are in trouble!

Obama’s win in North Carolina was no surprise. Something like half of the registered voters are black, and blacks have been voting 90%-PLUS for Obama. What is surprising is that Clinton did as well as she did in this southern state.

After originally expecting a double-digit landslide in Indiana, Clinton squeaked through with the win and has vowed to continue her campaign. I’m not surprised. By continuing her campaign through the final six primaries, it’s pretty certain that she can keep Obama from securing the required number of pledged delegates to obtain the nomination before the convention. Thus, it will be a brokered convention for the Democrats and the final selection will be left to the super-delegates.

The animosity between the two campaigns is escalating, with greater than 30% of Clinton followers stating they will vote for McCain, rather than Obama. Roughly another 15-25% (depending on who you ask) state that they won’t vote, rather than voting for Obama. According to some polls, that computes to over half of Clinton’s followers stating they will NOT VOTE, or they will VOTE FOR THE OTHER GUY. Not good for Obama.

So the super delegates will have the unenviable task of selecting a nominee. And there are so many things that need to be taken into consideration:

• If Obama comes close, and super-delegates DON’T choose him, will there be race riots?
• If Obama DOES clinch the nomination, can he beat the Republicans in November?
• Will the SDs decide that, since Hillary has taken all the BIG states, she’s a more viable candidate?
• Will the Jeremiah Wright and other unsavory connections to Obama play an important part in voter decisions in November?
• What will happen to the Michigan and Florida votes?
• Can a candidate from a brokered convention actually win?
• Would Global-warming, Nobel Peace Prize-winning, Al Gore be preferable?
• Will John Edwards ever endorse anyone?
• Who cares?

The ‘What if?’ scenarios must really be weighing heavily on the minds and hearts of Super Delegates. This run for the White House will make them either heroes, villains, or laughing-stocks, depending on the outcome in August, at the Democratic National Convention, and November, at the voting booths.

By the way, is Jimmy Carter still a Super Delegate?

The democrats are in trouble!

Choosing to be a Victim or a Hero

Today, while we wait for the results of the Democratic primaries in North Carolina and Indiana, there is much to ponder about where this next Presidential election will take us. Whether Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton come out as the big winner today, or whether it continues to be a dead-heat race, the fact remains that we have some serious issues to face in the good ole’ USA.

Can we achieve an honorable solution in Iraq? Will we ever be able to remove our troops from Baghdad? Will we win against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? Will the USA attack Iran over nuclear power? Will there EVER be stability in the Middle East?

And, here at home, are we in a Recession? Will the dollar continue to devalue globally? How much more will OPEC raise the price of a barrel of oil? How much will we have to pay for gasoline to drive ourselves to and from work? How much more expensive can food become? How much bigger will our National Deficit become? How much smaller can the GNP get? How much of our country’s land and other resources will we continue to sell to other nations? Will Social Security and Medicare go bankrupt? Will we ever be able to provide healthcare to poor and needy children?

What about illegal immigration? Will we continue to drain taxpayers to pay for benefits for illegal aliens? Do you know where Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain (remember, he’s the presumptive Republican nominee) stand on the issue of amnesty for illegals? What will their proposed policies mean to the USA and to our pocketbooks?

While there is nothing anyone living outside of Indiana or North Carolina can do to affect the outcome of today’s primaries, there is plenty of time to ponder the direction the USA is heading with these campaigns. And we all better become informed before November!

As part of my ongoing self-taught political education, I read and listen to viewpoints from both the right and the left and then I mull them over. Today, I’d like to share a viewpoint that I am pondering. The article, entitled, Random Events, was written by Thomas Sowell, a Harvard-educated economist.

Because the posting appeared on Townhall.com, it presents a conservative viewpoint. In fact, among other issues, it allegedly explains why Barack Obama, and further left-leaning policies, would be BAD for the USA.

Whether you are an Obama supporter or opponent, this article presents some valuable information about the differences between conservative and liberal economic policies, and is well-worth reading.

In referring to the policies of Obama and his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright (Yes, I know - Old News!), Sowell has this to say:

Both men, in their different ways, have for decades been promoting the far left vision of victimization and grievances– Wright from his pulpit and Obama as a community organizer for the radical group ACORN, as a collaborator with former Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers, and as the member of the U.S. Senate with the farthest left voting record.Later, when the ultimate political prize– the White House– loomed on the horizon, Obama did a complete makeover, now portraying himself as a healer of divisions.

The difference between Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright is that they are addressing different audiences, using different styles adapted to those audiences.

This article is obviously written from a conservative viewpoint, but it has some interesting lessons on victim vs. hero mentalities, and the widely-divergent paths open to our country for the future. There is much more included in this post, other than just Barack Obama, or Jeremiah Wright. What is the difference between a victim and a hero? Now you can find out.

I recommend reading and pondering this intelligent and common-sense article, Random Events as you prepare yourself to make an informed decision on which candidate to vote for in November as the next President of the United States.

Here Come More Primaries!

Tomorrow, we are going to continue the ongoing Democratic Presidential Primary saga. This time it’s North Carolina and Indiana that are at the center of all the hubbub.

As usual, both candidates have been saturating their markets with ads and TV appearances. Barack Obama was on “MEET THE PRESS” Sunday morning, while Hillary Clinton did the famous “TOP TEN” list on David Letterman’s late night show.

I watched part of the “MEET THE PRESS” interview with Tim Russert and then reread the transcript thoroughly. After all, Barack Obama may be the Democratic nominee, and possibly our next President (unless conservatives and anti-abortion advocates fully mobilize). Russert brought out all the bombshells and allowed Obama to diffuse them one-by-one, which he did beautifully.

First on the agenda was the featured speaking appearances and further bombastic/hateful/anti-USA remarks by Jeremiah Wright, in front of the NAACP and others. Obama started with the usual politically-correct “You’ll have to ask him” response, but he followed up with a clear and concise explanation of Wright’s possible motivations. While he says he will stay with Trinity United, he has clearly distanced himself from Wright.

He did side-step questions about Michelle Obama’s comments and acted as if the question had not been asked. So I don’t think he plans to distance himself from Michelle.

There has been a lot of theorizing about the role of the NAACP in the further adventures of Jeremiah Wright’s posturing. Seems that the NAACP and the ‘Black American Establishment’ is not that enthusiastic about Obama’s candidacy. I hadn’t given that much credence, until I read several articles explaining the behind-the-scenes machinations.

Seems the NAACP has been losing power, and it’s constituency, as African-Americans achieve more success in different venues. Apparently the election of a black president is viewed, in some circles, as an indicator that the NAACP is no longer needed. 

One article boldly stated that the ‘Black American Establishment’ withheld support from Obama and tried to stop his candidacy. Obama would not be stopped, however, and went right around the hurdles. We’ve seen how successful his campaign has been.

Whether the articles are correct or not, it does give us food for thought. Who is the NAACP trying to promote? Have they become an anacronism? The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? When was the last time you heard anyone refer to a black person as “colored”, anyway?

Well, Clinton used humor and Obama used reasoned discourse. And they BOTH used attack ads. 

Guess we’ll find out tomorrow what works best. 

Dirty Tactics?

Today I don’t want to talk about the Presidential election. There’s lots of time until the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, and all the behind-the-scenes stuff and the nasty campaigning can wait until another day.

Today I want to talk about another kind of dirty political tactics!

The New York Post and the New York Times both led with the story of  a Queens judge who acquitted three detectives Friday, after they were charged in the shooting of Sean Bell on his wedding day, in a hail of 50 police bullets.

The judge said he didn’t buy the stories of Bell’s friends who were called as witnesses. Seems they kept changing their stories to suit the questions. And the fact that Bell was drunk and tried to run over one of the detectives with a car, striking the officer in the leg as he attempted to flee the scene, was apparently viewed as mitigating circumstances.

There’s a whole lot of other background information, including the fact that the Feds will now investigate, but something was fishy with the “totally innocent bridegroom, slaughtered mercilessly on his wedding day” story presented by the prosecution.  He was driving his “fiancee’s” car at the time, the same “fiancee” who is the mother of his two children and uses Bell as her last name.

I’m not happy to see two children left without a father, but marriage rules and rituals sure have changed since I was young. It seems that the “fiancee” label no longer means what it used to.

There was shock and silence when the judge announced his verdict. But Al Sharpton is REAL unhappy. Yep! In fact, in spite of the fact that two of the three police officers were black, Sharpton (a spokesman for the Bell family, of course) called for street protests and said people should get themselves arrested, “whether it is on Wall Street, the judge’s house or at 1 Police Plaza.”  

Yeah, Al’s at it again, drumming up publicity for himself by creating discord anywhere there’s a news story. Sound familiar?

A young man is dead. That is tragic. Two children are left fatherless. That is also tragic! But the real victims here are two helpless children, the police officers who responded to deadly attack with deadly force and are now being prosecuted for it, and the people who are being duped by Al Sharpton’s self-promoting publicity gimmicks.

Guess the rules for being a “Reverend” have changed since I was young also.

Hillary Clinton Wins Pennsylvania!

The Polls closed in Pennsylvania and Hillary Clinton was projected as the winner within less than an hour.

Hillary won in almost every category of voter, except African Americans, 92% of whom voted for Obama.

So the former front-runner, now “come-from-behind” candidate has done it again, winning four of the last five primaries, even though the media and Democratic honchos keep telling her to quit.

In studying voter and media response across the internet this morning, I came across the following comment, by someone with the username of jamie. I thought I’d share it with you.

“I’d like to vote for Obama, but the job that I have and hate, has made me so “bitter”, that I might have to start “clinging to guns and religion” now, as a result. I agree with Hillary, enough with the talk and the grandiose speechs, now’s the time for “Action”. Not to get off the beaten track, but Obama wasn’t even a Senator at the time of the vote for the Iraq war and he most certainly didn’t vote for it or against it…he wasn’t even there…although he sure makes it sound like he was there though, doesn’t he? Is this the “New Politics” that he’s been talking about? This is the same guy who while in Chicago had more “Undecided” votes as a local politician, than any other politician in Illinois at that time. Not “Yes” or “No”, but…”Undecided”…189 “Undecided” votes on a variety of issues, I might add. That coupled with the fact that he never even voted against the Iraq war in the Senate, while leading the rest of America to believe as though he had, well, that’s not “New Politics” that’s just what we call the “oldest form of politics” lying that you were there, when you weren’t. Kind of puts Hillary’s 15 year old Bosnia flap in it’s proper light now, doesn’t it? By the way, can anyone here remember the car that they took to their high school prom or does anyone else here remember what color the bridesmaids dresses were at their wedding, or how many kids were in your childs graduating class? If you say you “don’t remember” than I think everyone should cut Hillary some slack for forgetting about parts of an event that took place 15 years ago in one of the 400 countries she’s visited 1000’s of times, over a nearly ten year period. But don’t forget this, Hillary has actaully been to Iraq herself to see the land and our troops in it, Obama…to his discredit…has yet to even be there once.”

WOW! I couldn’t have said it better myself!

It would be interesting to see how the previous primary voters would have voted if the primaries had occurred after the Rev. Wright revelations, the “bitter” gun and religion comments by Barack Obama, his association with William Ayers coming to light and his negative voting record on fighting gang warfare, and on and on and on. . . Would Obama have had the lead he now has? And why can he not get enough voters (except African-American) to accept him in large enough numbers to clinch the nomination? Hmmm!