When Will Bill Shut Up?

It started with a Clinton campaign worker in NH when they made a reference to Obama's drug use, something that was covered in a book that he wrote telling of his youth. It was then continue on talk shows, the reference to coke was pretty frequent. And more surrogates started injecting more and more stuff about this and his race. As you would think, the Clinton campaign waited a couple of days for the media to pick up and drive the accusations home before they would come out against such messages.

And then along came Bill. you know the 1st Black president. At least that is what he has been labeled. Bill started with the position that everyone was piling on or picking on Hil. Most of this came to a head in NH. And then Bill made damn sure that he threw a couple of race comments out there. Oh, he would never do that, he was the first black president. Did you listen to his comments, I mean really listen to his comments. Not what the media told you he said, but the real comments.

Some in the media, mostly Hil fans, have said that some were wearing their race on their sleeve and that he did not intend it that way. Most of these were said a couple of days after the comment was made, again, giving the media time to drive the point home to the voters. His comment on why Obama won SC was because he was black. That is why Jesse Jackson won their in '84 and '88. That comment could not be taken any other way than Obama was black and that is why he won.

So which way is it? OK, I live in a state where civil rights has been an issue for 50+ years, and Bill was not speaking in code, he was well aware of what he was saying. He has been in politics long enough to know what he was doing. He said what he meant and in a way that it was intended. He is a surrogate for his wife. He was well aware how the black community would see his comments.

Bill and his mouth have erased years of his statesmanship. He has now been silent, but the damage to his lagacy has been done. Time for Bill to shut up.

Another One Bites The Dust

Hunter--gone! Thompson--gone! Giuliani--gone! Kucinich--gone! Now Edwards--gone!

The media has done a helluva job picking the candidates for the public. Since their main concern was a popularity contest, a beauty contest, real messages were never allowed to be heard. Instead we get candidates that are vague at best.

The candidates were picked by the media for their ratings potential. Never for who would be best for the country and could possibly solve the problems we are facing. Look at the candidates solutions for the economy. Tax cuts and corporate incentives; these are hopes not a solution. These are vague and are something designed to get the people's attention. They will not solve the overall problem.

Back in the 1920's, an Italian theorist, said that the mass media would become the political hegemony, that is the media would control the political process. He was right! And this election illustrates it more so than those of the past. So Gramsci was a brilliant person he saw the power the media was going to have in society.

Sad that the people are ignorant enough to allow this to happen. They spend there time worrying about, what race a person is, or the gender or the party or.....use your imagination. Instead of forcing this lying ilk to give them specifics, they allow a general bullsh*t answer and then cannot understand what goes wrong. Time and time again, they fall for the crap!

Republican Debate

Reagan! Reagan! Reagan!

Last night at the Reagan Library in Californian the remaining Repub candidates squared off for the final debate before Super Tuesday. And as usual, all want to claim the ghost of Reagan. What does that mean? That is another post at a later date. Of course, they were asked the typical Reagan question--Are we better off today? And just as predictable all but Paul said yes. Apparently, they do not live in the same US that I do.

The night was spent mostly allowing McCain and Romney go after each other and their stands. Which CNN seem to want. Huckabee, when he was allowed to talk, said something cute and humorous, but nothing of substance. Paul as usual was confrontational and said all the things that make Repubs squint.

so who won? Nobody, all it was to let the people see Mitt and John go at each other. Paul and Huckabee were just there trying to get some attention. CNN did its part of not allowing them to say too much. Mitt spend all night with a smirk on his face when McCain was talking. It was irritating.

All in all it was a McCain/Romney showcase for CNN. Nothing more than that. CNN as well as a lot of media outlets have chosen the candidates from both parties. Who lost the debate? The people. Not once did the question get asked as how they would change the economy. Only vague ramblings about tax cuts and corporate incentives. Which is a hope not a solution.

All in all a throughly forgettable experience. Thank you CNN for making it so.

Edwards Gets Screwed

I have been watching this drama play out and have noticed a few things that I do not like about the way it is being reported by the media. Why do I say this? Ok Edwards is still a viable candidate, he is still getting about 15% of the vote, but yet he is seldom on TV for interviews. He is consistently doing better than Huckabee but yet gets none of the opportunities that Huck gets. look at MSNBC's Morning Joe, Huckabee is on there damn near everyday; I have seen Edwards on there twice. Why is this?

Edwards is an anti-corporation candidate--there is the best answer. He is fighting for the removal of poverty or at least most of it and he is an outspoken critic of the corporate strangle hold on Washington. Since most media outlets are owned by corporations, he is being marginalized by the networks. Only corporate friendly candidates seem to be the only ones acceptable.

Edwards stays on his message, but maybe he should pick up a bible and a bass guitar and maybe the media will be a bit more warmer to him. look at the last dem debate, Hil and Obama go after each for about 20 minutes and this after Blitzer said in the intro that the debate would be one on issues and yet he ignored Edwards and let the two duke it out. Edwards had to remind Blitzer that there were three candidates on the stage. Yet Blitzer still spent time massaging the corporate candidates. They did it with Kucinich and now they are zeroing in on Edwards. Because the voter is so lazy, this tactic will most likely work.

Edwards is being screwed by the media, please voters, DO NOT let the corporations decide who your candidate will be. If you like what Edwards has to say, then by all means, vote for the man. The control of the media is not what a democracy is all about. The people need to wake up and smell the cow pie.

Edwards is the ONLY candidate for the Dems that has a different message to deliver to the voters. I say to the Mainstream Media, Let John Edwards Be Heard! And what is it about Huckabee that makes him a more viable candidate than Edwards. Cute sayings are NOT a platform!

I know, am I an Edwards supporter? If by liking his message makes me a supporter then yes. Will I vote for him? Since my state primary is in March, it will depend on what he does between now and then.

Let edwards Be Heard!

Afterword: Never mind! a few hours after I wrote this piece it was announced that edwards was leaving the race of the Democratic nomination. He has not endorsed anyone as of this writing.

Anal-Ocity

Looks like it will be a really good year for anal statements. It is one one month into the year and already there are 4 contenders. God, I Love My Job!


This submissions comes from Rudy Giuliani's concession speech after finishing a distant 3rd in the Florida Repub Primary.

Rudy said, "return to honesty and substance in our political process...." Giuliani in Fla.



Has anyone been watching the primaries and the campaigns? Have you seen any honesty and substance on either side of the political spectrum? I have not. Maybe I missed something. NOT!

2008 Florida Primary

Well it is over in Florida--McCain wins 36% to Mitt's 31% to Rudy's 15% and Huckabee's 13%. The win gives McCain a huge lead in delegates. After all the fiery exchanges between Huck and Mc were good political theater. It has been conformed since Rudy spent 10+ months in Florida and the best he could do was a distant 3rd, he will drop out of the race and will endorse McCain. The endorsement will be made at the Republican debate on Thursday 30 Jan 08. Huckabee has vowed to stay in the race and to search for delegates that he may use for leverage at the convention. His presence will most likely help McCain to Romney's chagrin. But for now, McCain will be the front runner simply because of his lead in the delegate count.

On to the Dem side. Since the DNC has stripped Florida of its delegates, this race meant absolutely nothing! Hillary won 50% of the vote, Obama won 33% and Edwards won 14%. There was one interesting fact coming out of this race. Clinton's support and votes were before SC and Obama's was after....most likely she won on name recognition only. Hillary gets to make a victory speech and make a photo-op and grab some headlines away from Obama. That is all she accomplished by the win. She gets NO delegates, but the race was important. But she won in Mich that had its delegates stripped and she did not make a big deal out of it. Publicity is all she won.

Ok now on to Feb 5th, Super Tuesday, or Super duper Tuesday or Tsunami Tuesday, whatever you want call it, will show who is the true front runner in both parties. It will be fascinating to see what types of campaigns will be run. recently they have been negative and nasty on both sides.

Fun stuff--cannot wait!

2008 Anal-ocity

Here is another good one for consideration. It is from last nites State Of The union speech by Pres. Bush.


Bush said: "as long as we continue to trust the people our nation will remain strong.........."


This from the group that gave us the Patriot Act. Does it mean we do not really need it?

The Kennedy's Endorsement Of Obama

Yesterday Sen. Ted Kennedy announced that he was supporting Barak Obama in his bid to become the president of the US. His speech was very good and inspiring. Over the many years I have been watching and analyzing politics, it was one of the best.

Bill Clinton has been throwing around many accusations and innuendo's about Obama and his campaign. His has been very skillful at these attacks. After years of Washington and lying he was trying desperately to sabotage Obama's campaign. But the bright spot in Kennedy's speech was that he incorporated most of the negative attacks and basically threw down the gauntlet to say that he had Obama's back. So now when Bill tries to be cute, there will be someone to act as a surrogate for Obama and Ted is an expert at this stuff.

But will Ted's endorsement help? IMO, it will. Why? First, Ted is a big draw with Latinos in the West, because of his support and friendship with Cesar Chavez of the Immigrant worker movement. Second, Blue collar workers gave always had a love affair with the Kennedys and that could translate into support at the ballot box. Lastly, Ted brings 40 yrs of experience into the Obama campaign, so that should quieten the no experience bs.

On Sunday, Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of JFK, endorsed Obama also. She said that she did so because Obama inspired people the way her father did and that a new generation should take over the leadership of the country. that was something her father said many years ago.

Will these endorsements assist Obama? I say yes it will. The Kennedys will hit the campaign trail and talk up Obama, especially out West. we will see come Feb 5th and Super Tuesday. hopefully, the appearance of Ted, especially, will shut Bill up. He is using race and this from the man some called our first black president.

2008 State Of The Union Speech

I will be brief, for I am sorry that by now it has been analyzed to death. Bush spoke and spoke and spoke and.....still did not hear anything that was uplifting. So, here is my analysis:

YAWN
Bullsh*t
Sounds like unresolved New Year's resolutions
A basic list of admin failures
SNOOZE

The only way that this speech could have been less boring was if the Pres had fell off the stage. We can only hope that 2009 will bring true change and true democracy. I did however, get an anal-ocity out of this speech. I will post it later.

Bush's Economic Stimulus Package

Tonight is the big night.....The last state of The Union speech to be given by GW. He will dance around about how well his strategy in Iraq has worked. And then he will go to his new economic stimulation plan will benefit Americans and Corporations.

Let us begin with the tax rebates. The theory is that the taxpayer will go out and spend this money on consumer goods thus massaging the economy back to health. NO! This is an economic band-aid. Why? The normal taxpayer will use the rebate for their mortgage or their credit cards or something similar. The poor, who do not own a house in trouble or have the luxury of multiple credit cards, will probably spend this rebate on toys or electronic or such--consumer goods. So they will be the only ones using the money in the economy, but they will not be that effective in the slide of the economy.

Ok, let's move on to the REAL benefit of the package. Corporate Incentives. Corporate tax credits will help create jobs, according to the President. In what world does he live? Consumer demand creates jobs, not corporate tax breaks. Do you honestly believe that if a company has an extra $2 billion, that they will say darn we need to create more jobs? You are dreaming! If their is no demand, they will not invest it in production. It is just that simple.

The small amount of jobs that will be created will NOT be in the US. since almost all consumer goods are imported, from, India, China, Thailand and so on, any jobs created will be in those countries not here. The consumer goods that will be bought, like toys, china, clothing, are all made overseas. So where will these jobs be created in this country. Any jobs created will be low paying jobs and that too will be a drag on the economy.

The real questions that should be asked are: we have a $7 trillion deficit and this package will cost about $140 billion, where will the money come from to pay for this plan? If they print more money, then that will be yet another drag on the economy. In the past, how many high paying jobs have past corporate tax cuts created? Not enough!

IMO, Bush's plan is just a way to make the economy look good for a short period of time. until he is out of office and then when the economy tanks, someone else will be in office and will take the blame.

Do not be ignorant! This plan is a band-aid for a gunshot wound. There is no way it can be a good thing for the future. Someone will have to pay for this plan.

Professor's Classroom

With all the elections everywhere, they are everywhere...I thought that I would ask a question about an object you see everyday, if you watch TV.


The Democratic Party's donkey---who originated it and when?


See that is not so hard--since you have your finger poised for Google---Get to it!

Political Dynasties

I remember back in the day when there was news of the USSR Politburo elections and there was a 7 or 8% turn over, the media would say how predictable and how fixed the elections were. Then I remember also when like Pakistan and India when daughters or spouses of countries leaders were "elected" it was somehow fixed.

But think about it! If Clinton wins the election we will have at least 25 years of Clinton and Bush. Would that fall into the category of a political dynasty? By most definitions, it would be a political dynasty, but for some reason it will be the desire of the people for this to occur. Does that then, mean that the ones labeled in the past we also as legitimate?

Now let us look at the Congress where about 95% were re-elected to serve, but yet in the USSR it was a fixed election when 93% were re-elected. Which is it?

All I am saying is that the American people are allowing these political dynasties to exist. Is it laziness? Or possibly stupidity? Just what is it that makes the continuation of these families to rule the country so appealing? When will the people realize this is not really in their best interests?

What will the future bring with these festering dynasties? After all Jeb Bush could have a shot. How about Chelsea? We are traveling along a dangerous path in my opinion. Where are the new ideas that will bring a change in the system? Not with the Clintons. The DLC has kept the same line and they are the heart of the Democratic Party. When Bill Clinton became president and moved the Dem Party to the right, new ideas became a dirty notion.

The American people are setting themselves up for generations of the same couple of families ruling the country. This is not my idea of how a democracy should work. If you are truly a voter looking for change and Clinton wins in November, they will be sadly disappointed. But then that is what you get when popularity, race or gender are the important things in a campaign. You will just have to live with it.

Weekly News UpDate

Well this week has been absolutely full of politics and race and gender. So that did not leave much time for worthless crap, for a change. I was pleased but there still was some crap that fell to earth.

1--Another missing blonde in the Dutch Caribbean. This one is a hot 49 yr old with huge fake tits.

2--As usual more plane and car crashes, more fires, more...more....more

3--Is there really a need for a 60 yr old Rambo?

4--More really crappy weather for S. Calif. Go figure!

5--Another person freed from prison because of DNA evidence. How many people have been screwed out of a life because they were not guilty?

6--A US spy satellite is out of control and headed for a crash with the earth. What goes up must come down.

7--Oh yeah, Heath Ledger is still dead.

Worthless news
That absolutely no one can use
Makes me want to take a snooze
Take off your shoes
Grab a shot of booze
Put on some blues
Put on skin-a-max
And relax


Peace out!

The Event Horizon Draws Near

On Sat, 26 Jan 08, Obama buried Clinton in South Carolina. He got 54% of the vote, Clinton got 27 and Edwards got 18. yes he got the majority of the black vote, but he also cut across other lines as well. It was a great victory for him. His victory speech was just as aspiring as the one in Iowa. He is a helluva speaker. Edwards will continue, but for how much longer?

Now the Repubs will get their shot at immortality, on Tuesday 29 Jan 08 is the Florida primary. McCain and Romney are running neck and neck, with the winner most likely becoming the front runner. The best thing going for Romney is the crappy economy. He can use all his vague business rhetoric to help sway the voter. McCain will benefit from the amount of older retirees and the military presence in the state, it will assist him. Rudy........is.......in a coma. If he does not do well in Florida he will be hard pressed to continue. Since he is lagging McCain in NY, he may decide not to be embarrassed in his home tuff and take a powder. Florida will be interesting to us political junkies.

And now for the real story. A week later is Super Tuesday, or Super Duper Tuesday or Tsunami Tuesday, that is when as many as 20 states hold their caucuses and primaries. The winners there will be propelled into the lead and everyone else will be looking at their butts. Who will be considered the leader or fav? It depends on how you want to look at it. Across the US different candidates will be favored depending on where the vote is. Delegate count now is becoming the most important part of the campaigns, so each candidate, Dem and Repub, will put their money where they think they can get the most delegates. The fun part will be to see who targets who.

29 Jan 08 is the event horizon and the losers will be sucking into the black hole that it is creating. To either be politically destroyed and to lie dormant waiting for the chance to escape oblivion.

South Carolina Democrats Vote Today

Today will be historic in South Carolina, the voters have a three way choice of candidates. A woman, A black and a white guy, what more could they ask for? It will be historic no matter which way the votes fall. Then who could possibly be the loser? An interesting question.

Edwards if he does not win the votes could be in a pickle. he has vowed to carry on until the convention, but can he afford it. His message of economic populism is a noble call, but if the voter is not listening he may be out. He could try to influence the party platform at the convention, but that, IMO, is a bit of a long shot.

The real loser will be Obama. Why is that? If he wins, it will be spun that since SC is mostly black Dem voters race was the cause of his win. If he loses to Clinton, then it will be spun that he has no ears outside black voters. So the spin will be the thing to watch. Watch Bill after the primary. He will be the lead on the spin. Do not be fooled by the differences in the positions. There is little difference in their positions.

South Carolinians will choose between 2 very similar candidates or the economic populist. They could set the tone for the upcoming Tsunami Tuesday.

It Was The Best Of Tmes; It Was The Worst Of Times

After the Repubs debate on Thurs past, Mitt seems to be jumping out in front, barely. But why? It is the economy stupid! As long as the war was the focus of the media then McCain and Rudy were the men. But now they are just there trying to find a hook on the economy.

Rudy without 9/11 is doomed! Unless he can find a way to link the economy to that disaster, and that would be a stretch that even Rudy can not pull off. Then there is McCain, without the war he is struggling. He even says that he is not the sharpest pencil in the box when it involves the economy. His support for the war and surge is past news; old at best. The voter is a fraid they are about to lose everything and the war is just a fleeting memory. McCain may be screwed and tattooed after the Florida primary.

Now there is Mitt. He has got to be jerking off for all he had was a lame vague stand on the economy and now that it has gone into the toilet, he is sitting pretty. Mitt would have been an also ran without the economy and now he is 'Da Man"!

The problem is he is vague with little or no specifics. Hell, I could run on that kind of stand. Yes he ran business that were failing and made them solvent. But how? By cutting jobs, at is how. The company becomes more profitable and he gets the credit. And workers get hunger. His promises are just that promises and will not be kept.

The voter will decide who will be president, and hopefully that will not be fooled by empty promises. Who knows? We can only hope. Mitt is looking good to a lot of Repubs. IMO, he still looks like a game show host.

Worldpress.org - World in Cartoons

Worldpress.org - World in Cartoons

Political Quote Of The Week

This quote pretty much describes the Bush Legacy.



Vision without action is a daydream. Action without vision is a nightmare. Japanese proverb

Florida Republican Debate

The best I can say is that they are acted like adults. There was none of the "in your face" tactics of the last dem debate. I will say that MSNBC let Romney have the most time on the air. It was a free ad. All the candidates were polite, civil and on message. Kind of like they were on automatic pilot. They were almost introducing themselves to the people of Florida. They all seemed to be saying that the Clintons were gonna be the candidate of the Dems and they were all running against them.

Ok who won--Mitt, because he was confident and on message looking very presidential. McCain was good but lack a little something. Huckabee was his usual humorous self and defended his stands very well. Rudy was flat and did not have a whole lot of substance. and then there is Paul. What can I say? Paul was Paul!

All in all a pretty good debate. At least there were no shots to the throat of their opponents. They basically looked a lot better than the Dems did on their last debate.

The Huck And Chuck Show

First, I wish I had come up with that tag, I think it is a great title. unfortunately, I am not positive who did name the Huckabee campaign that, but I will use it. Recently Mike Huckabee has been endorsed by Chuck Norris. And throughout the campaign he has been standing behind Huckabee smiling and grinning or glaring out at the audience.

Chuck has made a couple of appearance on talk shows with Mike and made the usual campaign rhetoric, but he has not had much to say otherwise. Chuck has just seemed to be there at the Iowa win as moral support. And it has been the same for most of the other speeches.

But last week, Chuck spoke on his own. This time he was talking a bout McCain if he was elected president. Chuck basically, said that McCain was too old and that if he were elected he would most likely die in office and be replaced by the veep.

Personally, I think that was uncalled for and in very bad taste. Also huckabee was on the stage when he said it. Hopefully, they will muzzle the jock and let Huckabee do the political talking; he seems to be a bit more accustomed to it than Norris.

Huckabee seems to be afraid of McCain just as GW was in 2000. But personal attacks by surrogates should be discouraged. No candidate should need to resort to this type of crap. If the candidate has to use personal attacks, I ask if they are truly a viable candidate. This applies to both parties. Personal attacks such as this just tells me that the candidate does not have answers to real problems, so they just try to make the opponent look inept or too old or…well you get the picture.

The Clintons: Two For The Price Of One

I have said for years that the US needs a statesman as president, not a politician. The Dems started this process with an excellent field of candidates and among those were some that were statesmen. But unfortunately, those are falling by the wayside and the normal politicians are emerging as the leaders of the Dems. By that I mean it is all about ego and power and influence, nothing about the issues and the problems that Americans face everyday. Americans seem to be leaning to the experience, Hillary has the experience--not legislative experience, not legal experience, but rather political experience. You can see that by the way that the campaign is going. Hil and Bill are resorting to half truths, dirty tricks, etc. yes this is politics as usual. So much for change if she wins the nomination and the presidency.

The Clintons have turned this into a race issue, by the comments that their surrogates have issued and Hil, herself mentioning slum lord in one of her comments. Bill even goes so far as to say he has never lied about Obama and yet all pundits catch him in the lies. This is politics as usual. It is Win at All Costs, that is not the change that Hil keeps saying she wants to bring to Washington.

Obama has fallen into their trap, they are turning him into a black candidate, not the universal candidate that he wants to be. If he wins SC, it will be spun as because of the black vote. If the Clintons win this ego trip and get the nomination, then you will be giving the presidency to McCain if he is the Repub nominee. And you will have further polarization, something that Hillary has said that we need to end. With her and Bill, polarization will continue and the democratic party will stay divided. She is not the uniter, especially with Bill being her tag team partner.

Bill is quickly losing all respect that Dems have had for him over the years. Apparently it is worth it to win the presidency at any cost.

An Exciting Election Season

Recently, Joe Scarborough of MSNBC's Morning Joe has said that the American voter is extremely excited about the election season. Personally, I think he has a stand that he seems to be pushing on the viewing audience. He seems to be pushing Huckabee and/or Romney on his viewers. He gets upset when the MSM does not jump on the Romney bandwagon. That’s enough about my personal belief on this matter. As I have said, Joe thinks that the election cycle is very exciting for the voter. He says that they (voter) really want change and that if it is true then they have a wealth of candidates to choose from this time.

Choices? What choices? The voter’s choices of Washington insiders, lots of these or a wealthy business man or a Bush-esque mayor or a preacher or ……..my point is all the real choices have been eliminated either by lack of support or by the media deciding who the candidates are to be. I am sorry, but I do not see the choices that Joe seems to see.

Let’s look at Romney, is he truly the frontrunner? If you look at the delegate count, then yes. But at the same time you must take into consideration that his wins were in two states that he was running virtually unopposed and in a state that he was considered the favorite son. In states where he had to compete with the whole field of candidates he has not done so well. I say if he retains his delegate lead after Florida then I will consider him a front runner.

Is McCain the Repub Front runner? In delegates no he is in second place, but if you look at his election results running against the Repub field then he is closer to a front runner than Romney. Once again, Florida will decide who is the front runner. If you want to know for sure, then I ask that you wait until 30 Jan 08 and your question will be answered.

South Carolina Democratic Debate

Now that the media has successfully eliminated all but the three top candidates from the primaries, you would think that there would finally be a debate that focused on the issues. Think again! CNN, "the best political team on TV", their words, not mine, hosted the SC debate and they showed that they are just as disgusting as any of the other outlets. Wolf Blitzer, the debate moderator was about as worthless as tits on a boar, he was never in control of the debate.

Almost immediately Clinton and Obama started for each others jugular. They went back and forth with he said, she said, Bill said; attacking each others integrity and voting records. Edwards had to chime in and remind Blitzer that there were three people in the debate. Very little was talked about the top 2's issues. Edwards did well by trying to inject "real" issues into the debate. The best line of the night was by Edward's when he said, "this squabbling willnot help children get health care....."

The media got what they wanted--a bullsh*t knock down argument about each other and not the issues. Nothing was said by Clinton or Obama that would have helped the voter understand their positions on issues. The dumbest question was ask to Obama if he thought Bill Clinton was truly the first black president. Obama's answer was humorous and absolutely worthless. There was too much time spent on the issue of race and not issues.

Ok so now you want to know who I think won and lost the debate. Winner was Edwards, because he was the only adult on the stage. The loser was two-fold: First it was CNN for co-sponsoring a worthless two hours of personal attacks and the voter because they learned NOTHING about the issues.

This was a good example of why the media should NOT be allowed to be involved in the debate process at any cost. Debates are for the political education of the voter, not to teach them the proper way to personally attack an opponent. CNN needs to apologize to the voter for the debate and their lack of any actual moderation.

How To Win The Debate

This analysis is from McClatchy News--I put this in so that when I rate the latest debate--to see if the advice was taken.

McClatchy Newspapers

What the three candidates will aim to accomplish in tonight's debate:

Hillary Clinton

To score points: In Clinton's strongest debates thus far she has mastered the facts, calmly disassembled criticism and attacked her opponents in just the right spots. Clinton did all of those things in a nationally televised debate in Nevada last week. Post-debate observers were near unanimous in praise of Clinton's effort, deeming her the winner. Clinton has also scored points when she injected humor or levity into these debates.

She wants to avoid: Clinton's weakest debate moments have come when she has been pressed to explain some of her positions, whether it's driver's licenses for illegal immigrants or some of her votes on the Iraq war. In those moments she has come off as overly defensive and, at times, not completely forthright. This being a Martin Luther King Jr. Day debate hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute, race matters will be a focus. Clinton wants to avoid a replay of the controversy that erupted out of New Hampshire, where she offended some black voters with comments interpreted as disparaging of King's contribution to civil rights.

She can claim victory if: She escapes inevitable attack without being hurt too badly and speaks to the women voters she needs to win South Carolina. A McClatchy-MSNBC poll released last week showed Clinton trailing Obama slightly among women.

John Edwards

To score points: Edwards, who is trailing badly in South Carolina and whose best showing so far has been his second-place finish in Iowa, needs to bloody Clinton and U.S. Sen. Barack Obama. He needs to capitalize on every opportunity to attack. If Clinton and Obama spend the night going after each other, Edwards job will be made easier.

He wants to avoid: Edwards has at times been dubbed the angry candidate since he's turned up the heat on the campaign trail. Edwards needs to debate in attack mode, but he also needs to stay balanced. Edwards has done a good job of casting himself as the candidate most attuned to the economic woes of the poor and working class. His populist messages have been fairly well received. Edwards' message is more timely than ever, given the economic news of the past three months. Edwards wants to seize on every opportunity to attack Clinton and Obama.

He can claim victory if: Post-debate commentators are talking about Edwards' consistency of message, his aggression and how he managed to zing both Clinton and Obama.

Barack Obama

To score points: Obama must sound decisive and look presidential. South Carolina is an extremely important state for Obama. South Carolina voters have to decide if he's electable before they cast a vote for him. To do that, he must match Clinton's mastery of issues, show candor and display the personality that has made him a hit on the campaign trail.

He wants to avoid: The hesitant Obama from last week, who seemed to have to search for too many answers and, at times, looked indecisive. Obama is the black candidate in a debate that will have some focus on issues that affect black America. His answers to those questions will be closely scrutinized by voters. Obama must avoid sounding too soft on civil rights issues, something that might alienate undecided black voters.

He can claim victory if: He matches Edwards on economic issues, matches Clinton on foreign policy issues and wins on domestic issues where his message of hope has been most resonant.

Kucinich--The Fix Is In!

By now I hope everyone knows about the fact that Dennis Kucinich was eliminated from the Nevada Democratic debate. First he was eliminated by MSNBC, then a judge ruled that they could not eliminate him once he had been invited, then MSNBC brought in their high powered corporate lawyers and took it to the Nevada Supreme Court, where it ruled in MSNBC's favor and that they could exclude Kucinich from the debates.

In my years as an activist I have seen this type of crap play out numerous times. There are three ways that a candidate can be marginalized by the MSM. 1--discrediting the opposition by making it look ridiculous. 2--isolate the opposition by given only isolated coverage. 3--limit the amount of exposure that the opposition is allowed to get. All three have been used against kucinich. What? In one debate the only candidate that was asked about UFOs was kucinich and his answer got him ridiculed by the msm. Second, Kucinich was NEVER given the exposure on msm as say Huckabee, thus marginalizing Dennis' message. And lastly, the candidate is given little chance to put forward his/her stands on the issues. This was used against Kucinich at the Nevada debate.

After watching the Nevada debate I can understand why MSNBC and the other democratic candidates did not want Dennis there. Yes, I said the other Democratic candidates! If they were not part of the plan, why did they not speak up to have Kucinich included in the debate? MSNBC brought up Cheney's energy bill, the War and others. All of these Dennis was opposed to and his record confirms this. However the big 3 were flip-floppers. If Dennis had been included then the corporate candidates would have been exposed as the frauds they really are.

I find this sad that the candidates would not come to the aid of Kucinich. These are the same people that are always saying that the American people are getting a raw deal from the other side of the political spectrum, yet they play the same game, by the same rules that the Repubs play by. Are these the people you really want in control of Washington? Never mind, do not answer that for the answer is obvious. Enjoy the president that the corporations pick for you.

Professor's Classroom

Once again, it is Monday and the week begins and the quiz enters. Since the US in the middle of the political wars I will stay with a political theme.


The term "pitiless publicity", what does it mean and who used it when?


This is fairly simple and should be a breeze for all my good students. See I do have a heart after all.

Chris Matthews Comments

Recently, MSNBC's Chris Matthews made a comment about Hillary Clinton that turned the media into a ravenous beast. He was crucified daily about this comment What would the outcome possible be?

Matthews made a comment about Clinton's win in NH, to the tune of, "she got support because her husband messed around". (A Paraphrase). That in itself was not the most intelligent thing he could have said and the sharks circled for the kill. The problem is, and I watched the Morning Joe segment that this quote is from, and Matthews said a lot more than that one statement--it was taken out of context, as usual. Actually, Matthews made the point that Hillary was a strong person and that she has worked hard in Congress and is a good candidate. He also made a good case that she will always get a sympathy vote because of her handling of her husband's indiscretions. That is not a criticism, but rather a fact. Everybody, but mostly women, will have her stand on that situation in the back of their minds and it could influence their vote. This does not take anything away from Hillary, for she is an excellent candidate. All Matthews did was point out a fact and the crap he had to face because of telling the truth, smacks of censorship.

Matthews went on his show, Hardball, and had to clarify what he said and attempt an apology. He seems to speak well and I think it is just his way and style of talking. IMO, I do not think he needed to apologize for anything he said. I understood what he meant and so did many others, but the politicos had to turn it into something it was not. With that said, I sincerely hope that he was not forced into making the statement and apology on his show.

Later in the week, Matthews was on the Tonite Show with Jay Leno and he was talking about the Republican party and compared it to Iraq. He said that the party was tribal, that Huckabee and Thompson were the Shi'a, the fundamentalists and that McCain and Rudy were the Sunni, the moderates and that Romney was the Kurd. IMO, an excellent analysis. You would think that with his problem with the Clinton statement, the Repubs would be all over him for this comment. But to the contrary, all is quiet on the Repub front. Maybe Coulter should play the part of a Repub Steinem...I jest..the less she says the better the country will be.

Weekly News UpDate

Once again, the primaries and campaigns have taken front stage in the news. Which means we, as news consumers, are actually getting more usable news than normally.


Let us look thru the refuse
Is there news
We could possibly use?


1--More people killing their kids

2--Weather, weather, everywhere!

3--Colorado inmate sues sheriff dept because he was injured trying to escape--he claims they were negligent.

4--Man robs bank on crutches in new mexico.

5--Princess Di is still dead! Regardless of what you have heard,

6--Finally, Pelosi is making change in Washington--the menu in the House cafeteria.

7--Even more plane, train and car crashes.

That is about it for last week--maybe this week will be different--but do not hold your breath.

Worldpress.org - World in Cartoons

Worldpress.org - World in Cartoons

Political Quote Of The Week

So much written by Orwell is becoming reality that it is scary. If you remember in 1984, there were large TV screens everywhere telling one how to live and what to believe. Look at the TV of today, we are told the same thing on every channel and we are installing large TV screens to help us out and we are doing it of our on free will. If that does not scare you, then you are in a coma.


Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. - George Orwell

Professor's Random Thoughts

There are times when I see or hear or read something that makes me ask WTF? I thought I would start writing them down for prosperity....tee-hee.


1-- A baptist preacher, a Mormon and a Catholic walking into a primary..........that's all I got, but there has got to be a joke in there somewhere.

2--Who do the candidates point at when they are on stage?

3--I watched an interview on morning Joe with Rudy, and when they were talking about NYC and his mayoral stint he said, "I had many crises, not just 9/11, that I had to deal with...." DAMMIT! Joe Biden was right, when Rudy talks his sentences have three things, a noun, a verb and 9/11.

4--Have you ever read Orwell's 1984? It is when big brother is watching and there are large tv screens everywhere telling you how to live, pass on propaganda, so on...thinking...thinking...you kinda like the large flat screen tv you have in your house? And yes it is telling you all the same stuff they were in 1984. Dumbass!

Are you Experienced?

Well I am.....sorry I digress. In the beginning there were those who said that an experienced candidate was what the US needed. Then it was all about the change. Not pocket change--political change. Then there is, the you need experience to make change in Washington people. So what is it? Do we voters want change or do we want experience?

Not an easy answer if you follow politics. If Americans truly want an experienced leader, then why did the most experienced of the pack fall by the way side because of lack of support from the voters? We could not have had more experienced Democratic candidates than Biden, Dodd and Richardson. Now we have Clinton--she has it! Obama does not! The experience card plays well on the stump. It plays well in the political ads. And it plays well to the voting idiotocracy.

Clinton has said that it takes experience to effect change. Think about that! A Washington insider is gonna go against the current and effect change. If that were true then Biden, Dodd and Richardson could have given the US more change than they could have stood. Experience and change are nothing more than a couple of pretty good buzz words to divide and confuse the voting public. The election is a popularity contest--plain and simple.

Even the Repubs are playing this game. Mitt has gone from I am an experienced businessman; to he is the best agent of change.

The experience thing is a mind game and you people are playing it full bore. I reiterate if you people really wanted experience, you would not have let the most experienced people slip through your fingers.

So, STOP IT! Experience has nothing to do with the election. It is a popularity contest. It is a beauty contest! When the voter starts voting on issues and not which party is en vogue, you will never have change, even with experience, change will not come!

Anal-Ocity

Yet another anal statement. This one comes from the ABC show, The View, Sherri Shepard, you remember her, she thinks the world is flat and that it did not exist before 5000 years ago. Not the sharpest pencil in the box. But I digress. She showed a pic of her with Shirley Ceasar and she said that, "Shirley Ceasar was like a black Patti LaBelle".

Apparently this Black woman does not realize that Patti LaBelle is a black singer.

I cannot make this stuff up!

Mitt Does Michigan

Mitt Does Michigan

Mitt gets his win, I mean second win, now he leads in the delegate count. Two weeks ago pundits were call him gone from the contest, but now he is back. Most are saying that his optimism on the economy of Michigan, saying that it would be good again, and the pessimistic message that McCain was putting out was what gave him the win. Most pundits are saying that his predictions of a good economic outlook were what put him over the top and gave him the win.

Pundits are saying the people of Michigan see him as a company builder and knowledgeable of the way to turn their economy around. But wait, his techniques of turning companies around came on the backs of the workers. Many were laid off, to make the company more profitable. You would think that the voters in Michigan would see through the bullsh*t. His big plan is tax incentives, tax cuts and summits. What about the tax cuts of the Bush boyz, how many jobs returned because of that fiasco? Mitt's ideas will cost the workers more than it will cost the profiteers.

Ok Mitt won the primary in Michigan, but was it because of his message as a lot of people are saying? NO! Since the Dems pulled out of Michigan there were no delegates to be awarded. Daily Kos and others had this plan for Dems to go and vote for Mitt. Why? They wanted Mitt to win; it would have put the GOP into a massive confusion on who the leader is. Now thanks to the Dems the race for the Repub nomination is more clouded than it was before.

Mitt should be thanking the Dems for his win. Please stop pretending it was your message. It was not! It was a plan by the Dems to create confusion among the Repubs. Mitt is not the answer for the Repubs. This whole plan could bite the Dems in the butt. He now has the most delegates and any win will just keep adding to the total.

The Nevada Debate

Last night the Dems held another in the list of debates. Everyone was holding their breath to see if the race issue would rear its ugly little head. Long wait--No hard crap coming.

The list of candidates was slimmed down to 3, the top 3, no one else was allow into the elite meeting. It was a coffee social--No bickering, no attacks, not nothing. I was , for lack of a better description, a love fest. Was there a winner? NO there was no clear winner. All 3 candidates made their typical points on the economy, energy, yada yada. Nothing new, same song, different town.

Nothing said would have swayed me away from my candidate of choice...So why did I bother? Killing time until the results of Michigan came in. Yawn! Better luck next time guys and gal.

Wassup With The Republicans?

Huck wins in Iowa, McCain wins NH, Mitt wins Wyoming and Michigan, Rudy could win in Florida and bolt him into the lead. Bloomberg is waiting in the wings. So what the hell is going on with the Repubs?

This could roll down to the Repub Convention and be a cat fight for delegates. Apparently, the Repub voter is so damn confused that no one has the inside track to the nomination. I have been watching and analyzing politics for a long time and this is the first time I have ever seen a party so messed up that their is no real direction.

If it stays this confusing through Tsunami Tuesday, then the door is there and wide open for other candidates to jump in the fray. The Repub faithful have got to be running scared at these results.

The Republican race is very interesting and will be more so the more the primaries continue. Who will be the nominee? Your guess is as good as mine.

Is Huckabee Really A Christian Socialist?

Recently I read an article that asked if Huckabee was a Christian Socialist. I had to think about this for a time before I had an answer. After a bit of research, I would say that he is no socialist, Christian or otherwise. A comparison of issues will be the telling part. He has this semi-populist position, but I do not see any of it as socialist. Calling him as such, would be an insult to active socialists.

I guess could be made that his espoused concern for the people could be seen as a bit socialistic. But once the positions are examined there are no similarities. I realize that in today's world the term socialist is past around freely as a means to counter an argument. To be sure I went to the Socialist Party site to research each of their positions. As I checked into their issues I found the only similar stands were that on government funding of stem cell research. That was about it, they differ on the death penalty, immigration, health care, marriage, and the list goes on.

Author Richard Viguerie said Huckabee is inclined to solve any problem by passing laws or launching another government program. "If you like President George W. Bush, you'll love Mike Huckabee," Viguerie said. "Conservatives in New Hampshire and the other early primary states had better wake up, and make certain the Huckabee victory is confined to the subsidized ethanol fields of Iowa." With that said, it appears to be a scare tactic against Huckabee, for I found no substance to the allegation.

The Christian Left holds that social justice, renunciation of power, humility, forgiveness, and private observation of prayer. But do these things make one a Christian Socialist? No, it makes them a bit of a liberal, but no socialist. Are Conservatives afraid of Mike Huckabee? IMO, I think they are. I am an ultra-liberal, for lack of a better tag, and I can say that Huckabee holds no promise in my opinion.

Professor's Classroom

OSIM! Another Monday and yet another quiz.


Today's question is on an economic theory which states,that in every historical epoch the prevailing mode of economic production and exchange determines the form of social and political organization and explains the political, intellectual, and moral history of a people. What is this theory called? There are two possible correct answers.

Good luck and good googling!

Hilla-Bama Ticket

Much has been speculated on the candidates and who they may choose as their running mate if they are lucky enough to gain the Democratic Party nomination. I say this would be an excellent democratic ticket, looking only at the votes it would garner--The Hila-Bama ticket! This ticket would appease all aspects of the Democratic Party.

Why do I say this? Both are good candidates. Obama is a great orator. Clinton is good at playing the Washington two step. Her experience is paramount to her campaign. Obama is less experienced and if he were the veep, his resume for the next election would be greatly expanded and giving him the experience most say he lacks. If they have a pretty good presidency then Obama would almost be a shoo in.

Other than the above beanies of the two running together on the same ticket there are other reasons. Both have similar stands on Iraq, foreign policy, social issues, economy, especially taxes and trade, immigration. Their biggest division seems to be over the health care proposals and that can be overcome. Okay that said, it does not hurt that one is a female and the other a person of color; two really good pluses in their favor.

Now you want to know if they can win, right? I gave up reading tea leaves with the '08 NH primary. The voter is in control. NO! I do not believe that for a minute, but it sounds good. But I digress. The Hila-Bama ticket would be a force to be reckoned with in the election. My observation in this case is that the ticket would be hard to beat, but only if the enthusiasm of the people stays high. Idealism is a wonderful thing, but unfortunately it does not win many elections. But that fact is for another post.

With all this said, Richardson is getting out of the race because of his poor showings in the first two contests. Pundits are saying that it is now a wide open race with Clinton’s win in NH. I disagree. Edwards is different in his stands, but between Clinton and Obama, the differences are more in presentation than in substance. For there to be a Hila-Bama ticket Clinton needs to win the nomination. Never forget that the DNC will have a front row seat at the picking of the Democratic ticket.

Clinton Workers Gets DUI

Please! It is being reported that a Clinton campaign worker got a DWI/DUI the day before the primary. His name was Blumenthal or something similar. OMG! The Clinton campaign is falling apart. She is surrounded by lushes. (Sarcasm intended) Why is this a story? The guy had too much to drink and tried to drive. Sorry, but this happens everyday. Just turn him over to MADD and let them castrate him and move on.

The media has a propensity to dwell on bullsh*t way too much. Just what was accomplished by this report? Trying to embarrass the Clinton campaign? If I had news that my gig was about to be over then I might have had a drink or two also. The man is human, he f*cked up, let it go at that. Move on to real news or go to work for FOX, where bullsh*t lives!

Weekly News UpDate

From now until the end of the primary season there will be little worthless news, for a change. This is the slim pickings from the past week.

Worthless News
Mississippi blues
A Quart of Booze
Onto The Ooze


1--Africa is on fire again, Kenyan politics is to blame this time.

2--Missing snowmobilers found--do these morons every watch the weather channel?

3--Yet more bad weathe, a trainwreck, a car chase, a car crash, more missing women...and a partridge in a pear tree.

4--Here is "who gives a rat's ass" report--T. Cruise may be the #2 person in scientology.

5--For all the comix geeks--Spidey is getting a divorce from MJ.

6--Jaime lynn Spears has been dumped by her boyfriend and now he wants a paternity test on the baby--Apples do not fall far from the tree, huh? Does that mean she is bumpin' ugly with everyone?

Enough is enough! time to pass on to the next day--bye!

Change--Can You Hear That?

In the last debates the word was used no less than 100+ times. But that is not the change I am referring to in this post. Not political change, but rather the change in persona.

Clinton in the past, on her stump has been methodical, distant and aloff. But yet when she is one on one with people she is warm, friendly and genuine Some pundits have been calling her "shrill". Don't know if that is the word I would use, but she definitely needs to lighten up. Protract her softer side.

Compare the two speeches she made , first in Iowa and then in New Hampshire. There has been a marked change in her style, she has indeed lightened up. She even welled up, got teary at a function. Fortunately, cameras recorded it for prosperity. Her concession speech in Iowa, on stage with her were the usual suspect from the other Clinton regime, Albright, Clark, Bill, etc. It is really hard to convince people that you stand for change when they see the past behind you rooting you on. Then look at New hampshire, she was on stage with a bunch of smiling youngsters behind her. The players from the past were noticeably absent. Some one is listening!

Clinton will be redesigned by the next primary or Caucus. Change will happen. She will be more accessible to the media, she will be softer, more likable person. Playing the gender card work well in New Hampshire. We will see how much of a remake is happening in the Nevada debate.

Political Quote Of The week

Albert Einstein has some of the most profound statements of any one person. This one is a really great one.



Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds.- Albert Einstein

The Latest Republican Debate

OMG! FOX news has a debate. were the tough questions asked? HA! Hell no! But everyone of the candidates there had to invoke the memory of Ronald Reagan. If you had a nickel for everything his name was used, you could afford to fill up you SUV with gas.

I gues you want to know what the Professor thought of the debate. (Long pause) thinking...thinking....I was so f*cking bored with pat bullsh*t answers that I wanted rip my ears off and start painting.

Mitt was Mitt--a game show host
Rudy was.......there and boring.
McCain is just f*cking tired...nothing new.
Thompson was not bad with his answers....had a shot at huck...all in all he looked pretty good.
Huckabee was sweet, likable, and totally boring.
Paul--what can I say--Paul is Paul.

Apparently, Thompson has been designated as McCain's attack dog. He needs to be a little less obvious.

The winner? My pick is those who did not watch the debate. They were the smart ones that show superior decision making process.

CHUQ
11 Jan 08

Is Recession Coming?

According to Goldman/Sachs it is and will last awhile. But this prediction comes from a company that gives a bonus of $68 million to its CEO. Just had to throw that in....for effect. The Fed will most likely cut rates again, maybe by a half a point. That should entice investors to go hog wild on the markets. Since the markets are falling like a skydiver without a chute, something will have to be done to protect the investors.

All this is just ducky, if you are investing heavily in the markets. But what about Joe Sixpack who lives on Wisteria Lane? What is being done to help them face the economic crunch? He/she is facing rising food costs, rising gas prices, jobs loss, a credit crunch, and a housing dilemma; so what is the FED doing to help the real person struggling to provide for their family?

Consumers, average working Joes and Joans, make up 66% of the economy, but yet they are totally ignored until it is advantageous to report on them.

A coming recession? If you are a worker--you are already in a massive, deep recession. Can this be changed? Hell yes, but you will have to vote for change...unfortunately, I see little change coming for the average American, no matter who or which party is elected. Buck up!

Richardson Out!

It is being reported that he will bow out of the race for the nomination because of his poor showings in the two contests. Sad, huh? When experience is being taunted as the positive trait; the candidate with the most experience is not even in the race.

Here was a candidate with an extensive resume from governor, ambassador, secretary, to congress, he has done it all. And yet he was an also ran. Sad. So it is down to a beauty contest. A popularity contest. There is the reality, the voter will be left with a choice of cuteness...not qualifications.

I am not saying that Richardson would have made the best president, just that he was the most experienced. Change is the key here. The voter is looking for something new, Bill was not it.

Can You Say, Gulf Of Tonkin?

High speed boats attack or attempt to attack US warships. Does that sound familiar? try 02 Aug 1964, Gulf of Tonkin, when the US ship Maddox was attacked by high speed NVA boats. It help lead the way for a US build up in S. Vietnam.

Bush has issued a warning to Iran over the recent incident in the straits of Hormuz. He has basically said "do not do it again". Ok, I am a skeptic! But WMD was a lie. This admin has been lying since 9/11. I know one would think I was a conspiracy theory freakizoid, but things are not always as they are portrayed by the govt. Sorry guys. I lost blood in Vietnam. The country has lost too many innocent lives. I just do not want to see history repeat itself.

All i ask is that you check the facts and then make your decision. logical thinking is not onew of the US greatest assets, but it should be.

Differences In The Candidates

There are other differences in the the two top contenders, not just in their issues, which by the way look very similar to each other, IMO. Clinton and Obama have different styles.

I look at the speeches they make...Obama when speaking to the crowds he uses phrases like we can make the difference ..we can bring change...we......

Now when Clinton speaks it is I can make difference...I can bring change....for me it is the economy.

Therre is the difference....Obama is giving the people the idea that they will be part of the process. Clinton's tone seems to be that if you vote for her then you are out of the pic altogether, that she will do all she promises.

Obama wins in the motivational speech category...now I look for a Clinton remake...she will become more human...softer...more accessible...and her speeches will change. To a format that makes the people feel they bare part of her rise.

We will see...on to Nevada and Michigan...and then SC.

Clinton Wins NH

A surprise to everyone. How did she do it? Women, seems to be the answer, especially those over 40. The youth vote does not seem to be the big lift that Obama needed.

It is on to Nevada and SC

Dr. Phil

First I want to say that I am still pissed! Yesterday, an important news day and my cable server went down, no internet, that is the pits! Second, I do not normally do too much posting on societal bullsh*t, but this story has me ranting.

Dr. Phil, you know that bald loud mouth that has a show where he supposedly helps people with their personal and emotional problems? It seems this TOAD in an attempt to boost ratings, circumvented security at the hospital where Britney was being held, to try and coerse the broad to appear on his show.

This makes him a QUACK! His desire for better ratings has shown his true colors. It is about the money not about helping people. If he was a true pro he would not need to sneek into Britney's room and try to talk the train wreck into appearing on his show.

It is about time for intervention in his tactics. He should be censured by the professional association that he is a member of and it shoul.d be a public censure

Mitt Wins One

Wyoming just held their GOP caucus and Mitt came out on top with 8 delegates. Hunter got 3 and Thompson got 1. Hurray for Mitt after all the millions he has spent and this is his win. He might want to rethink his candidacy. Why? he does not seem to be playing well in NH, mcCain is sucking up all the independents. If Mitt loses NH, he will be in the same position that Rudy is in; hoping for a really good Tsunami Tuesday. That will be another post later.

Ok I now must question the sanity of the GOP in Wyoming. Iowa and New Hampshire are traditionally the first and important of the election cycle. But the GOP in Wyoming thought they could capitialize on the cash being spent in the campaigns but sandwiching theirs between iowa and New Hampshire. Someone needs to be shot! there were 5 days between the two and the candidates were not gonna waste their time in Wyoming when New Hampshire is so dire for several of the candidates.

As it was they got very little press out of this move and were pretty much ignored by all concerned. So someone needs to lose their leadership position because of this failed move. The only one that is happy, is Mitt he finally won one!

Professor's Classroom

A new week, a new year and a new quiz. It does not get any better than this. I love my job!

This week's quiz is:

Which President's plan was called "New nationalism" and what were the planks within this platform?


Good luck and good googling! You may begin.

Professor's Weekly News UpDate

With the primaries taking center stage, there was not much time for worthless mind candy. But they did find time for a bit of it.

If it is worthless news
Then it is nothing that could be used
Break out the booze
On with the news.


1--Man in Arizona tries to ride a buffalo with a saddle--he is badly mauled--

2--And the Britney train wreck keeps on chuggin' along. Dr. Phil is now involved--that ought be got for his ratings.

3--A disaster, a weather disaster, is waiting to happen in S. Calif--so what is new?

4--There was a train wreck, a car chase, a fire, and another missing woman--nothing new from last week.

5--15th person, inmate, in Dallas county Texas was cleared by DNA--do you see a pattern here?


That is a round-up of the 1st week of 08 and the worthless news you have to look forward to in the near future. Nothing changed even with the importance of the electoral process, there is always time for worthless horseshit.

The Forgotten Caucus

Mitt Romney is chalking up his first victory. He's won today's Wyoming Republican caucuses.

Romney's attention to Wyoming paid off as he won most of the 12 presidential delegates at stake in the state's Republican county conventions.

The former Massachusetts governor gained the first four delegates and 6 of the first eight to be selected Saturday.

Fred Thompson and California Congressman Duncan Hunter, who both also visited Wyoming, won the other two that had been decided, meaning no other candidate could beat Romney.

Mitt now has his first win...let the nasties begin!

Frontrunners Issues In NH

FACTBOX: Obama and Huckabee on key issues

Sat Jan 5, 2008 1:55am EST

(Reuters) - Barack Obama won the most support from Democratic voters in Iowa on Thursday while Mike Huckabee won the Republican contest, putting both men closer to winning their parties' nomination for U.S. president.

Here are the two candidates' positions on several key issues in the campaign:

IRAQ

Huckabee: Opposes setting a timetable for troop withdrawal and says the "surge" in U.S. troops in Iraq helps foster reconciliation among Iraqis. He has criticized the Bush administration's foreign policy for an "arrogant bunker mentality".

Obama: Wants to begin immediately withdrawing one or two brigades a month and have all troops out within 16 months; would call a U.N.-led constitutional convention in Iraq that would not adjourn until reconciliation reached; aims to refocus energies on al Qaeda threat in Afghanistan and Pakistan;

IMMIGRATION

Huckabee: Opposes granting amnesty to illegal immigrants or granting driver's licenses to them; says those caught illegally entering the United States must be detained, processed and deported;

Obama: backs boosting the number of immigrants allowed in the United States; would permit undocumented workers to pay a fine, go to the end of the line for citizenship and learn English in order to stay in the country; would add personnel and technology to protect the U.S. borders.

HOUSING CRISIS

Huckabee: Has said market forces will correct the current mortgage crisis and that a government effort to help troubled homeowners could unfairly help imprudent borrowers and lenders.

Obama: Offered legislation aimed at setting a national standard for mortgage fraud and boosting penalties for such activities.

TRADE

Huckabee: Says the United States must fight unfair foreign competition that is costing American jobs, but globalization can be a "blessing" because it lowers prices of consumer goods.

Criticizes China for manipulating its currency to boost exports and discourage imports.

Obama: Pledges to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement and other U.S. trade agreements to include strong, enforceable labor and environmental provisions.

Wants to revamp fast-track trade negotiating authority to require pre-screening of potential U.S. free trade partners based on their labor and environmental standards and other factors. Promises to get tough on trade with China and pressure Beijing to stop manipulating its currency.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Huckabee: Backs an unspecified cap on carbon emissions and 35 mile-per-gallon fuel efficiency standard by 2020; favors alternative energy and energy independence.

Obama: Wants to lead an effort to impose caps on carbon emissions and prompt U.S. automakers to build cars that use less oil; aims to implement an economy-wide "cap-and-trade" program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

TAXES

Huckabee: Would replace federal income and payroll taxes with a national sales tax. Would provide a monthly rebate to poor people to offset the tax on purchases.

Obama: Wants up to $85 billion in tax breaks for 150 million Americans financed by increasing capital gains tax and dividend taxes on wealthy; would eliminate corporate tax loopholes and offshore tax havens.

2008 Election Season

In case you want to know when your state votes in the primary season the sked is below.

• January 3: Iowa (caucuses)
• January 5: Wyoming (GOP caucuses)
• January 8: New Hampshire (primary)
• January 15: Michigan
• January 19: Nevada (precinct caucuses), South Carolina (R primary)
• January 26: South Carolina (D primary)
• January 29: Florida

FEBRUARY 2008

• February 1: Maine (R)
• February 5: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado (caucuses), Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho (D), Illinois, Kansas (D), Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico (D), New York, North Dakota (caucuses), Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah
• February 9: Louisiana, Kansas (R)
• February 10: Maine (D caucuses)
• February 12: District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia
• February 19: Hawaii (D), Washington, Wisconsin

MARCH 2008

• March 4: Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont
• March 8: Wyoming (D)
• March 11: Mississippi

APRIL 2008

• April 22: Pennsylvania

MAY 2008

• May 6: Indiana, North Carolina
• May 13: Nebraska (primary), West Virginia
• May 20: Kentucky, Oregon
• May 27: Idaho (R)

JUNE 2008

• June 3: Montana, New Mexico (R), South Dakota

AUGUST 2008

• August 25-28: Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado

SEPTEMBER 2008

• September 1-4: Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota

2008 Anal-ocity

I have found the first anal-ocity of the New Year.


It is something that Jonas Prising, of Manpower Inc said about the dismal economic report just days ago.

"The economy is strong from a historical perspective".


How stupid, we can find a justification for anything in a historic perspective.

Good luck, Jonas, may you become a finalist for the most anal statement of the year and win the coveted "Assie" award.

Professor's Poll Watch

The latest Dem poll out of NH.

Poll Date Sample Clinton Obama Edwards Richardson Biden Spread RCP Average 12/27 - 01/03 - 33.8 27.3 17.8 6.0 2.5 Clinton +6.5 Suffolk/WHDH 01/02 - 01/03 500 LV 37 25 15 4 2 Clinton +12.0 Zogby Tracking 12/31 - 01/03 960 LV 32 26 20 7 2 Clinton +6.0 Franklin Pierce 12/27 - 12/31 403 LV 32 28 19 8 3 Clinton +4.0 CNN/WMUR/UNH 12/27 - 12/30 521 LV 34 30 17 5 3 Clinton +4.0

And now the repubs.

Poll Date McCain Romney Giuliani Huckabee Paul Thompson Spread RCP Average 12/27 - 01/03 31.3 29.8 10.0 9.5 7.0 2.0 McCain +1.5 Suffolk/WHDH 01/02 - 01/03 25 29 9 13 8 2 Romney +4.0 Zogby Tracking 12/31 - 01/03 34 30 9 10 7 2 McCain +4.0 Franklin Pierce 12/27 - 12/31 37 31 10 5 6 2 McCain +6.0 CNN/WMUR/UNH 12/27 - 12/30 29 29 12 10 7 2 Tie

Political Quote Of The week

During this election cycle there is much said about taxes and tax cuts on both sides of the political island. This quote is very telling, IMO. Taxes can be raised without your knowledge.



Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation. - Milton Friedman

Obama/Huckabee Win Iowa

Finally, it is over and as the smoke clears it is Huckabee, Mitt, and Thompson on the Repub side. And it is Obama, Edwards and Clinton on the Dem side.

What does it all mean, Professor? Well, if McCain can win in NH, Mitt will have to tap dance faster to retain his front runner status. The early votes, I would say that Mich looks like his best bet. Look for a couple of candidates to drop out.

Ohy Yeah, the Dems--Obama has gotten a boost--Edwards got a small boost and Clinton will start playing really nasty in NH. She needs NH to keep the interest in her campaign. She will most likely lose SC, so she needs a win to keep her going through the states that she cannot hold. She is looking to Fla as the best way to stop Obama.

I look for Biden and Dodd, both with poor showings to drop out of the race. It will be interesting to see whered they will put their support.

On to New Hampshire and the fur will fly, probably on both sides of the election. If you like nasty, hang on to your butt......you will enjoy the rest of the season.

What Is A Caucus?

Some questions and answers about the Iowa caucuses this Thursday:

Q: What is a caucus?

A: A party meeting at the precinct level at which citizens express their candidate preferences and pick delegates to their county conventions. It's the lowest level of party politics -- the real grassroots. These meetings, held in each of the state's nearly 1,800 precincts, typically draw anywhere from a handful of people in rural areas to hundreds in suburban areas.

Q: Who takes part?

A: Anyone who is old enough to vote in the November general election and is a member of the party is eligible, but traditionally only a small number of Iowans show up. This year, about 120,000 to 150,000 people are expected to vote in the Democratic caucuses, while 80,000 to 90,000 are likely to participate in the GOP contest.

Q: Why is it politically significant?

A: Persuading a group of average citizens to show up in support of a candidate is considered a sign of organizational strength. Each candidate courts politicians and activists at the state and local level in hopes of getting strong numbers of supporters to show up and participate. At the same time, the caucus system allows candidates to develop and hone their message before relatively small groups.

Q: What happens at a caucus?

A: Participants, led by a chairman or chairwoman, indicate their preferences for their party's presidential nomination, pick delegates to their county conventions and discuss party business, including their party platforms.

Q: What happens next?

A: Delegates chosen at the caucuses go to the county convention later in the year. There, the field is winnowed and delegates are chosen for the district convention. This happens again at district meetings and again at the state convention, where delegates are named to attend the party's national convention.

Q: Why are the numbers different?

A: The Republicans essentially hold a straw poll -- a head count -- at their precinct caucuses, reporting real numbers. One head, one vote.

The Democrats do not report straight numbers, but use a mathematical formula to determine support for a presidential candidate in percentages. A candidate must have the support of 15 percent of those present at any meeting, precinct caucuses through the state convention, to remain "viable." This is meant to ensure greater consistency throughout the process.

Q: Will there be exit polls in Iowa?

A: Yes. The Associated Press and the television networks will survey voters as they enter the caucus sites. Those surveys will help readers understand what issues and qualities motivated Iowans to vote for a specific candidate.

Q: How did the Iowa caucuses get started?

A: A commission appointed after the riots disrupted the 1968 Democratic National Convention recommended proportionate representation and affirmative action. Iowa Democrats decided to use new rules in 1972, adopting a regulation that there must be a month between events -- the caucuses, county, district, state and national conventions. The caucuses wound up being held as early as January.

What About Worker Inflation?

Most reports one see or reads in the media has a better than average outlook for the economy, but those outlooks are geared toward investors, not humans.

Let us look at realities for the average working stiff in the US.

Food costs are up
Gas prices are up
housing is sagging
unemployment is up
retail sales flat
plant closings
jobs lost

These are all things that effect the workers of this country and yet we are told constantly that all is well and the economy is looking good. Who decides that for the average worker? Ask anyone, other than some hot shot investor and you will get the answer that all is not well. And the prospects of improvement are not looking good. The average working family is basically living on credit and eventually that is gonna bite everybody in the butt.

I know reality bites!

Professor's Congressional Scorecard

It is the end of the year and I along with my sister blog, The Oracle Of Inkwell, have scored our Congress. The total results can be viewed by clicking on the link on this blog.

Here is the breakdown from month to month:

1--Aug--a step backwards

2--Sept--a step backwards

3--Oct--a step backwards

4--Nov--no step--basicall a stand still

5--Dec--2 steps backwards

The total for the year is 5 steps backwards. Hopefully, '08 will be a better year, but do not hold your breath.

And The Nominees Are!

Since this blog was started, I have been posting some of the most anal statements made by people in the news. I call it an anal-ocity and now I want to award an "Assie" to the most anal of them all. I will post the nominees here and on a couple of discussion forums and hopeful people will vote on the most anal statement.

And the nominees are!

1--When ordered abck to jail this summer Paris said:

"It's Not Fair"

2--Gen. George Casey said:

"We are not doing nation building in Iraq"

3--Miss South Carolina, when she said"

"I think it is because some in the US do not have access to maps" a youtube moment.

4--On MSNBC an anthropology professor said while analyzing Sen Craig behavior in an airport restroom said:

"First it is not about gay sex. It is about two men approaching each for man on man sex."

5--Fred Thompson's take on why the Sunni tribes turned on Al-Qaeda:

"AQ put into effect an anti-smoking ban".

6--The last is a statement by Pres Bush. when analyzing the healthcare proposals of the democratic candidates. He said:

"they are trying to FEDERALIZE the health care system". I believe the word he was looking for was "socialize".

These are the nominees, please look them over and vote for you fav.