John McCain has just experienced a political Trifecta garnering the coveted conservative base that is absolutely necessary for any Republican to win an election. It is the very oxygen of the party i n much the same way liberals are the core of the Democratic Party.

The first win for Senator McCain that shook his slumbering base was the Saddleback Forum where his direct answers that revealed conviction and resolve stood in sharp contrast to Barack’s fumbled, arrogant, non-answer responses. So distraught was the left that=2 0they had to create an immediate spin that McCain had the answers before hand. Although that has totally been disproved, let’s run out that scenario and look at the idiocy of it.

First of all, you would have to be totally out of touch with reality to not think a question on abortion would be asked at a religious forum. Either get new advisors, or go into a different line of work that’s not above your pay grade. But let’s say that McCain did have knowledge that an abortion question would be asked. Advisors and handlers to politicians work diligently to make sure their candidate never answers a question directly, but handles it with obscure nuances that seem wonderful on the surface but when transcripts are read, there is no there there. If McCain’s advisors had seen that question they would have briefed him on a more eloquent answer, inste ad, he answered the question of when life begins, from his heart, when he simply said, “conception.”

So, if he had been alerted that, shock, there was going to be an abort ion question, he realized he didn’t have to spin an answer to appeal to a broad base of voters, he just had to answer it honestly and forthright, and that is what ticked the Obama people off. Heh wait, that’s not allowed . . . he didn’t do that obscure nuanced thing like our candidate does, and it gives him an unfair advantage, so we better spin it that he had the questions first. Talk about sore losers. But the real winners were not only McCain, but his base that finally saw the resolve they had been waiting for.

The second laurel wreath for McCain was the Republican platform that has in the past few election cycles, been a blood bath between the right to life group and the liberal, pro-abortion wing of the party. Always the life plank is at risk of being sawed off, and always a small remnant of determined warriors ride in to save the day. That was good news for conservatives and hope was once again in the air.

But the coup de grace, the Kentucky Derby, Wimbledon, Olympic Gold for John McCain was his selection of Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I just happened to be in the Petri dish of political experimentation with almost 300 conservative leaders from around the country who were gathered for a meeting. The speaker was interrupted to pipe in the live feed of the announcement. The discussion in the group for three days before the announcement concerned who the pick would be and what the response would be if it was x, y or z. The responses varied depending upon the possible choice from, “I refuse to vote for that ticket,” to “Is it too late to form a third party?” to, my own which was, “Let’s select a write-in candidate and do a protest vote.” If you have been reading my columns, you know that is what I have been saying.

So, imagine our surprise when not only Sarah Palin was announced as McCain’s VP candidate, but that the whole room erupted in thunderous, standing ovation support. It was as though everyone in the room had a horse in the race and that collective horse made it over the finish line as the clear winner. Women were crying, men were high-fiving, everyone was hugging and celebrating because now . . . they had a ticket they could get behind, they could believe in, and they could enthusiastically support.

Those leaders represent millions of people around the country and several, including me, have since made public announcements that they have switched from an adamant position of not supporting McCain to being excited about the race.

No wonder the trash machines were in the streets within minutes to dump on Governor Palin and declare she was not experienced enough to be Vice President, but they still can’t explain why Barack is experienced enough to be President when his resume total ly pales in comparison to hers. Even though she is not running against him, they seem more concerned about=2 0her than they are about McCain and for good reason. She is young, dynamic, effective, principled and tough. Several in that group of leaders likened her to Maggie Thatcher, which of course means the liberals, the feminists, the good ol’ boys, will do everything they can to destroy her, but the harder they try, the more entrenched her base will become because we will all see this as a unified attack on us. We will take those attacks personally and fight back in a phalanx of solidarity with a woman who could be destroyed by a hypocritical machine that pretends to want women and blacks to rise to levels of leadership . . . but only if they can be manipulated and exploited by that machine.

But, let’s look at other groups that have been sitting on the sidelines trying to decide if they should vote for Barack or McCain. There are millions and millions of people in rural America who share the same values with McCain but who are slowly being seduced b y the empty idea of change. The seduction is possible because there is nothin g substantive to hold them to the concept of status quo. What the Governor Palin nomination said in words louder than empty slogans was, “If change is what you want . . . change is who we are.”

Here is a young, hockey mom, turned PTA leader, local elected official turned mayor, turned Governor who has challenged the Democrat AND Republican status quo and brought ethics back into the equation. She is a card carrying member of the NRA and member of a union, both of which will appeal to the blue collar worker who always feels dissed by the liberal elite as they cling to their guns and Bibles. Now they can vote for someone just like them.

There are more guns in America than people and more gun owners than the total number of people who usually vote in presidential elections. They own guns for many reasons and are tired of being classified as right wing nuts by the liberal elite, when ironically, many gun owners are liberals. Protecting the Second Amendment is a key issue for many Americans and it could be the deciding factor in this election.

Millions of women who are upset with the way Hillary was treated, whether or not they would vote for her, are encouraged to see a young, articulate, attractive woman be selected by a man who could have chosen anyone to be his running mate, but chose a fellow maverick, who does what is right, not was is expedient, and pays the price for such principled decisions.

With over 55% of the population strongly in the pro-life camp, and over 90% agreeing that partial birth abortion should be illegal, it is going to be much easier for McCain to rally the troops and bring it over the finish line. But he has to keep moving forward, keeping his newly reconciled base around him at all times, and not back down or be intimida ted by the tiresome tactics of the left. It is like running a race . . . don’t look back, don’t look down . . . keep looking forward, looking ahead and moving closer to the finish line and to ultimate victory.

Within two days I had two people meet me on bicycles for appointments. It was surprising at first to think that someone would be out in this heat, riding miles on a bike to meet someone for business. After a quick trip to the restroom, they emerged fresh and ready for work. It reminded me of days before cars when it was not unusual to walk miles or ride horses to reach a destination. There was a time before gas stations and SUVs when books were read by lamplight or candles and heat was provided by hours of hard work, chopping and splitting wood.

So, America has survived without oil, foreign or domestic, before. And now as prices are rising, it is forcing everyone to make even small adjustments in their lifestyles. Some not as drastic as dragging the 10-speed out of the garage, but many are combining trips, foregoing the extra distance to their favorite restaurant, or opting to take the bus and subway to work. The rising cost of fuel is having an impact on everything from delivering mail to planning the dinner menu. This cause and effect is lost on liberals who cling to their trees as though they were guns and Bibles. They, of course will still run their air conditioners, drive their cars, fly to their national Save the Environment meetings while refusing to allow us to plunk our drills along side eleven other countries off our own shore who are sucking it right out from under us.

Politicians, unfortunately, have driven this bus, and it is heading off a cliff. They don’t seem to realize that the three major issues that are of most concern to Americans are intricately intertwined. The issues are the economy, the war on terror, and energy independence. We import 70% of our oil and have allowed ourselves to become energy dependent upon countries that have exported terrorists that have attacked and killed our citizens. Because we refuse to consider the lives of humans as being of greater value than a moose or a caribou, we are not allowed to drill in areas that could ease the pain at the pump and keep hundreds of billions of dollars in the US every year that is currently being pumped out. And all this is happening as the dollar is slipping in value, the pri ce of gas and all commodities related to it, are rising, and the people who breed contemptible adversaries are virtually terrorizing the nation into the reality that gas might continue to climb to $10 a gallon. And why shouldn’t it? If they control over 70% of what we purchase and use, why do they have to put a limit on anything they sell us? They literally, could destroy our economy as we sit back marveling at the pristine beauty of tundra moss.

The person who steps forward with a working solution to this energy crisis is the person who is best equipped to lead the country. Sadly though, that person isn’t a candidate for President, and the ones who are the selected nominees of the two major parties have not grasped the urgency in this issue.

The only person who truly is out there, putting his money where is heart is, is T. Boone Pickens who has picked up the mantel, thrown down the gauntlet and is leading a battalion of willing warriors to solve this crisis together. (Go to his website and see his plan at www.pickensplan.com/theplan.)

It is refreshing to see someone who cares about something greater than himself, is not consumed by the idea of power, and is willing to put his talents and resources behind something that will help the entire nation. It is exciting to see momentum in the stagnant political waters that are choking us with apathy and despair at the realization that we have no clear choice for leader this election. The contrast to political maneuvering and posturing is exciting as we see Picken’s true bipartisan plan to basically give us all a reprieve from partisan entrenchment, and a do-over of common sense problem solving. The solution in Washington is not how they can do the right thing, but how they can get credit for doing something that they can convince the American people is right, but it is really in their own best political interest.

They blame the oil companies for making a ten cent profit on a gallon of gas while they make almost three times that in taxes for doing what? They are the silent partner of every successful endeavor in the country but are nowhere to be seen if a venture fails. You take on that entire burden yourself, while you continue to pay them just for the right to own property and live in your own country.

I have always thought it was a big mistake for the national presumption of office holders to be that only politicians can ascend to the level of Commander in Chief. The title itself suggests that someone has commanded something pretty large. Aside from John McCain’s honorable leadership in the Navy, neither he nor Obama have any management experience. The role of Senator is basically one of a glorified bureaucrat who passes laws that determine how the rest of us lead our lives . . . sort of a duly elected emperor’s club.
With two of the three major issues facing our nation, being the economy and energy, it seems logical to have, as a leader, someone who has proven himself in those fields. The US government should be run more like a business and less like the mafia where it is the silent partner in every aspect of your life, and if you don’t willingly comply, there will be dire consequences. If it was run like a business, we would not have spending outpacing income, systems would be streamlined, the lumbering bureaucratic nightmare would come to an end, production would be rewarded, and children could be educated instead of indoctrinated into believing that a failed and bloated government is a success. Decisions could be made that are truly in the best interest of the entire nation, not just one political party, and the people would be considered partners in the affairs of state, not slaves to it.

For the millions of people who are totally dissatisfied with the choices this election cycle, and feel their voices are totally drowned out by the demands of those who want to tighten the harness to try and squeeze out more hard earned money to pay for their political vanities, they might have an option. Why not write in a proven leader, who does not want the position, but would be great at it? If T Boone Pickens can run the country like he has successfully run his businesses . . . the concerns we have today could be a distant memory tomorrow. But it takes courage to do the right thing . . . like riding a bicycle when everyone else is still sitting comfortably in their cars.

Originally seen at townhall.com

In the mid 1980’s I debated Gloria Steinhem on the Phil Donahue show, during the presidential campaign where Geraldine Ferraro was the first woman Vice Presidential candidate. The assumption by feminists, like Gloria, was that all women should vote for Geraldine because she was a woman. I asked her if she would be supporting Phyllis Schlafly if she were the candidate instead of Geraldine and if she would be offended if I made that same assumption.

When Allen Keyes was running for president, as probably one of the most brilliant candidates we have ever seen, he was ignored by the liberal media and the black community because, as a black Republican, he was deemed either irrelevant or out of touch. I often wondered if he had been the first black Democrat running for office if he would have been treated better, and then I had my answer in Barack Obama.

What is it about this man that has thoughtful, conservative blacks like Armstrong Williams and JC Watts saying they might vote for him? It can’t be his left of left politics that makes even Ted Kennedy look conservative. What thinking conservative could actually support a man who is going to raise taxes, increase the size of government, redistribute wealth, burden small businesses and the working class, and play nice with people who want to destroy us? It can’t just be about his skin color otherwise they would have been huge supporters of Allen Keyes when he ran for president, and as I recall, neither were.

This news should be a shot across the bow to the tone deaf McCain campaign that has adopted a fortress mentality while killing the peasants inside the walls. They still believe they can win without their base, and think their base is a handful of disgruntled Hillary voters and disillusioned moderates who are dissatisfied with the lack of leadership from both parties. Why would they vote for two candidates who represent exactly why they are disgruntled and dissatisfied with politics in general?

It is too bad that neither Armstrong nor JC saw our movie, “Emancipation Revelation Revolution”, even though Armstrong is actually in it. They would understand that this “historic” thing that they are expecting to happen was actually prevented from happening over 100 years ago by the very party that Barack so proudly hails from.

This is not a white vs. black issue that has its roots in slavery because there were too many white men and women who gave their lives trying to end the practice of slavery and Jim Crow. It is time to transcend past injustices, stop wearing counterfeit grievances on our sleeves, and work to fulfill the simplicity and sincerity of the American creed.

The battle to end slavery was fought by whites, against whites. It was not black vs. white. The battle to keep blacks from integrating fully into society, have a place at the economic and political tables were battles that pitted the racist white society against huge segments of the white population who supported equal rights, and many gave their lives in that battle. The Republican Party was actually founded by white abolitionists who were reviled and ridiculed, much like pro-life advocates are today. But thankfully they clung to their principles and ended slavery at great personal cost including for many, the loss of life.

Republicans today are clueless about their history, they don’t think it matters, or they have taken a permanent powder. Who are these people anyway? I used to think I knew. I switched parties years ago when I became ashamed to be a part of a political party that elected racist governors who would keep young black kids from attending white schools. I was ashamed of a party where all the Democrats were happy racists and to oppose them was dangerous.

I now find myself ashamed of the Republican Party for a myriad of reasons, but unlike 30 years ago, I have no party to turn to now. And neither do millions and millions of disgruntled, disenfranchised, marginalized conservatives who see two giant parties pressing in on them from both sides. The Republican Party today is “Democrat-lite,” and reminds you of the nerd in school who wants so desperately to be cool and does all the cool things that are so pitiful it actually pains you to see how ridiculous he looks. That is this party today. They want so much to be hip and cool, and with it, and tolerant and popular and generous with your money, and accommodating to every stupid, costly idea that comes down the pike. There is no leadership in the party and it is a very pale, faded image of a party that was formed to champion the cause of freedom and liberty for those enslaved.

That entire conflict and portion of our history is written in the blood of innocent victims, by the hand of a small group of power hungry people who are motivated by greed and control of others. They are the very same people who today, have elevated a man who talks in the grand sweeping phrases of third world dictators who rise out of the dust to throw pedals of empty platitudes at the feet of the adoring crowds. To see men of the stature of Armstrong Williams and JC Watts, fall for the con of a party using a divisive symbol to intimidate the country into following a path of virtual slavery to government is appalling and quite sad.

If more women in 1984 were as gullible and easily swayed as these two male leaders are, Geraldine Ferraro would have easily become the first woman vice president. But we resisted the temptation to indulge our fantasies of feigned oppression. She would have only been a symbolic success to those who agreed with her policies and would have been a dismal failure for everyone who opposed them. Would that have been a reflection on her ability to lead as a woman? No, no more than Margaret Thatcher was a raging success by those who approved of her every policy.

If Armstrong and JC want true leadership and pigment is that important, and like millions, are totally dissatisfied with the idea of a McCain presidency, then I challenge them to do something really courageous without selling their souls. They can write-in someone like Michael Steel as an alternative choice who, in my opinion is better than both the choices we have now. If color is what they want great . . . let’s do it. If conservative is what they claim they want, then, he’s the person for that too.

I challenge the country to stop whining and take control of this situation before it totally controls them and they wake up one day without choices. If you don’t like either candidate, settle on a write-in and just do it. That actually might be the only way to get McCain’s attention, and the only way to break this Obama spell off of people who usually have more sense than this.

Hey JC, Armstrong, and others who are being seduced by pigment; if young women, 20 years ago, could resist the feminist seduction of Gloria, Phil and Geraldine, then surely, you can resist the siren’s call to socialism.

Originally seen at townhall.com

I can still hear the James Carvell orchestrated mantra of the Clinton campaign in 1992, drilling it into all our thick heads that the economy was the only issue that mattered that year. In his own, inimitable way, he summarized the three points of that campaign as being, “change vs. more of the same,” “The economy, stupid” and “Don’t forget health care.” It is refreshing to know that with all the hyperbole about change, that some things actually never do change . . . like Democrats and elections.

It is easy to understand why Hillary would rely on those three successful points to hang her campaign on since they were prominently posted at the Clinton headquarters in 1992 as a constant reminder to employ the KISS method of political strategy . . . Keep It Simple Stupid. But, that doesn’t explain why Obama has adopted exactly the same three points, not straying off subject to even feign originality.

There are a few very interesting points about the two democratic contenders, who are using pages from the old Clinton playbook as though nothing has changed in 16 years. One is that in 1992, Clinton won with less than 43% of the vote and did just four points better in 1996, never, ever getting a full majority, or “mandate for leadership,” as they like to say. When Clinton benefited from the dot com boom, inspite of having raised taxes, the assumption was that he was doing something to stimulate the economy. That’s like taking credit for the rain just because you got wet. And when Bush came to office, not only did he inherit a recession, but less than nine months later he presided over one of the most horrific attacks on US soil in our history. He still refused to raise taxes as a result of it, and saw eight years of stable and consistent economic growth, a robust stockmarket, and a real estate bubble that was bound to burst as things always readjust to natural levels.

If you dust off the old script that was disseminated to the mainstream media in 1992, it is almost a verbatim argument for voting for the Democrats today and throwing the Republicans out. Even though, at the end of Clinton’s 8 years, with a recession, they weren’t clamoring to throw out the Democrats and elect the Republicans, so it can’t really be the “economy stupid.” And even up until election day of 1992, the talking heads were shaking theirs, so concerned that if the Democrats did not regain control of the White House, it would be certain economic disaster for the country. Sound familiar? The only problem is . . . if you go back and check the newspaper headlines the days leading up to the election, you will find the term “faltering economy” over and over. But if you look up the headlines just a few days after the election, there is not a mention of the economy. It is as though it miraculously healed itself overnight. And oddly, it did, because it was only bent, not broken, and the constant drum beat of impending economic doom was silenced because the political battle had been won.

What we are witnessing is a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you are continually told that you are going to fail, that idea begins to control your actions until you define yourself by that statement. If people hear over and over that the economy is bad, a recession is coming, the stock market is crashing, etc., then they will be waiting for the calamity that is prophesied to hit them, and change their actions to fit it. That is not to say there aren’t people who are hurting financially. I know people who have been hurting financially through six presidents from both parties. But statistics show that more people today are earning more, owning homes, starting small businesses, investing in the stock market and using their tax cuts to stimulate the economy by purchasing goods and services.

The reality of a discussion about an economic slowdown is that first of all . . . there are no experts on the subject. It is all total speculation based on several moving parts that rely mostly on human behavior. And if that behavior is driven by fear and apprehension, then not only are you able to recognize it, you can actually manipulate it. And that is what we are seeing in the 2008 elections. But the big difference is that liberals who deny that the economy really was totally broken under Carter, refuse to acknowledge normal adjustments and fluctuations that occur when several factors are in play . . . the least of which is not telling people daily, that the economic world as we know it, is coming to a screeching halt. Will someone please get a memo to Starbucks . . . . encourage your customers to save that $5 they are splurging on a latte, to put one more gallon of gas in their car.

For most people, according to polls, if you ask them if they are doing OK, they will answer in the affirmative and then tell you how they are concerned about those less fortunate. But those less fortunate are always with us, even when the economy is booming, the stock market is soaring, housing is skyrocketing and things look rosy for everyone, except those few who are forgotten in the years between elections. It is interesting to note though, that as the Democrats insist the economy is tanking. . . they have magically been able to come up with millions and millions and millions of dollars to see either Hillary or Barack win the election. And if you look at the leaders of the Democrats, especially, Bill and Hillary Clinton, you will discover that they have made over $100 million dollars in the eight years since Bush has been in office. Wow, that’s pretty cool. Even Bush and Cheney didn’t come close to making the same amount while the Clintons were in office. It is still a little confusing as to how with just one salary of about $200,000 while he was President, that they were able to buy the multi-million dollar house in New York without ever even owning a home before. I wonder if it was one of those risky sub-prime loans. And going from being a Whitehousewife for 8 years, to being a US Senator, now worth millions and millions of dollars, it is no surprise that Hillary wants to parlay those earnings into greater earnings by being president . . . again.

So, Bill and Hillary, Obama, John Edwards, Al Gore and all the other wealthy Democrats have gotten very rich under Republicans, yet they want change. That doesn’t make sense. They should want to keep Republicans in office, keep taxes down, keep the Capital Gains Tax capped . . . or even eliminate it, and consider a flat tax. That way, they can continue to get wealthy, fly around in private jets, ride in limos, buy their huge mansions that the rest of the country only dreams of, and try and convince all Americans that they are not better off than they were 8 years ago. That dog just won’t hunt any more, and the tune is getting old.

The reason people are at the malls on Monday and the gym on Tuesday and continuing to cause long lines at most restaurants, sold out screenings of movies and packed stadiums is because they wink and nod at the economic figures knowing it is that season again. It’s that time every four years when they are supposed to appear concerned, but really they just want to get their Vente Caramel Machiata, jump in their SUV and head off to play racket ball. It’s not really the economy stupid . . . it’s the stupid economy that takes on a life of its own every four years, only to readjust naturally, the day after everyone stops telling them . . . “It’s the economy stupid.”

Originally posted to TownHall.com

There was a big problem with Barack’s mea culpa speech in Philadelphia, defending his racist pastor, Jeremiah White. He failed to mention that over 300,000 white Americans gave their lives to end slavery. He didn’t mention that in 1854, abolitionists left the Democratic Party and founded the Republican Party specifically for the purpose of ending slavery and giving equal rights to all those who had been in bondage. And when he does mention the 3/5ths clause in the Constitution, he totally got it wrong, the way most Americans do. News flash . . . it was the abolitionists who insisted on it so that the slave holding states could not have their slaves counting as constituents so they could get more pro-slavery representation in congress. This is one of the most powerful battles fought by whites, to end slavery, which has been mischaracterized as being racist.

He needs to read the history of this battle for equality and realize that the party he embraces today was the party that voted against the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, while the Republicans supported them unanimously. He needs to acknowledge that the two dozen civil rights bills that were passed by the Republicans were overturned by the Democrats when they regained control of the House, Senate and White House at the end of the 19th Century.

It was at this time that the Democratic Party instituted Jim Crow laws. It was not whites that did this against blacks, it was bigoted, racist Democrats who would choose to divide a nation rather than give freedom to those they considered inferior. Had blacks been voting equally in both political parties, there never would have been literacy tests, poll taxes or other restrictions to voting. But because all blacks at this time identified with the party of Lincoln and were actually the ones starting Republican parties in southern states, and running and getting elected as Republicans, the Democrats knew that to kill a Black person was killing a Republican.

If he watched the award-winning documentary, Emancipation Revelation Revolution (ERRVideo.com), he would learn that the first Black Democrat, Barbara Jordan, was elected in the south in 1972, 100 years after Black Republicans had been running and winning for years. And it took a federal law to force redistricting in Texas to get her elected. He would be reminded that almost all the southern governors fighting integration, standing in school house doors, firing water canons at innocent people were all Democrats. And if his parents really were a part of the civil rights movement, he would realize that without whites fighting side by side to overturn laws that had been put in place by his very own party, it may have been another generation before the civil rights movement could happen.

It was not white versus black; it was racists, bigoted Democrats against blacks and whites who disagreed with them. If he saw our movie he would be reminded of three young white men who worked with CORE who were murdered, just for doing the right thing. He would see the incredible sacrifices that white men, such as Senator Charles Sumner endured for the cause of liberty for oppressed slaves. He was attacked on the Senate floor by pro-slavery Democratic congressman, Preston Brooks, who stormed the Senate side of the Capitol and tried to beat Sumner to death with his cane because he dared to introduce yet another piece of anti-slavery legislation. Brooks received hundreds of canes from adoring fans, while Senator Sumner struggled for three years to survive. When he did, the first thing he did when he returned to the Senate was to re-introduce a bill that would abolish slavery. This man was a white Republican. Preston Brooks was a white Democrat. Race had nothing to do with their individual passion to destroy or preserve slavery. It was a passion born of moral values and an understanding of good and evil. That is the discussion today that pastors are supposed to be having and preaching and encouraging their flock to understand. Rev. Wright did not get the memo and gets an “F” in Black history.

For Obama and his pastor to preach the “audacity of despair and racism” is an affront to all the people who have given their lives through the years to see racism destroyed. But that death blow has always been deflected by the Democratic Party that has had a vested interest in class and race warfare to keep their power base motivated and returning to the polls. Barack says, “I have asserted a firm conviction that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds,” yet he sits week after week listening to sermons that say just the opposite. But those days are gone as we rip off the tacky, thin veneer of elitism and bigotry that has propelled them to power.

It is ironic that in his speech he challenges the listener by saying, “We can’t accept politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism,” when he belongs to the very party that has always done that, to the point where the new liberal plantation has erected philosophical barriers around all blacks, condemning those who dare to challenge the liberal status quo and escape this manipulation and intimidation. They are called Aunt Jamima, like Condi Rice, or house Negroes like Colin Powell, or forced to endure high tech lynchings like Clarence Thomas. They have Oreo Cookies thrown at them like Michael Steele and are accused of acting white if they identify themselves as Republicans or conservatives.

That is “the racist spectacle we are not allowed to talk about.” When Blacks have to whisper at polling booths that they are Republican, for fear of reprisal from their liberal neighbors, then Barack really doesn’t get the real conflict that is alive and well in this country, and why should he? He belongs to the party of the overseer of the philosophical plantation that intimidates and marginalizes Blacks that dare support conservative values or Republican ideas.

So, if Barack was honest about his desire to “heal the nation,” he needs to learn American Black history, and take his pastor aside and tell him about it and challenge him to be more Christ-like when he preaches. If he knew real American Black history, he would not belong to the party of segregationists and bigots and would not have allowed himself to be sucked into that dark undertow of racial politics that has already robbed our nation of too many amazing blessings.

Originally Posted to TownHall.com

This title will mean nothing to those who don’t understand the world of reality TV. But, how could anyone in this election cycle not be totally familiar with the voyeur genre that has caused us to reduce every issue and every person to their basest level. Following the 2008 presidential race is a combination of watching a blow by blow of the NFL playoffs, and the final weeks of American Idol when the viewers vote on the winner.

Last season an attractive young man, Sanjaya Malakar, with little experience singing in public, somehow made it to the finals and as cute as it was when he was selected, his talent just was not cutting it, and as a result, the more gifted singers were being eliminated.

It was revealed that a rebellious segment of society, rejecting the concept of American Idol, decided to stuff the ballot box and give Sanjaya a helping hand. At first it was charming and cute, then it became annoying until a full-scale counter rebellion was mounted.

With both Obama and Clinton being Sanjayaed, switching rolls with each pulse of primary voting, it is like following the hopes of fans playing fantasy football. There are times when you place a wager on the team you hate most in the hopes that they beat the rival of your favorite team. When he is down, the crossover Sanjaya electorate decides that they should throw their votes to him to keep Hillary from gaining the lead. When he is leading as in the Texas and Ohio primaries, the opposite occurred. Even Rush Limbaugh played a part in Sanjaying the race for the specific purpose of keeping Hillary in to keep it interesting, entertaining and topical. That is pretty much what Howard Stern’s motive was when he called for his listeners to vote for Sanjaya on American Idol.

The irony in the entire manipulative maneuver is that Hillary always stands the chance of winning a primary, which causes almost every heart in America to stop beating. They immediately shift reality shows to the first “Apprentice” with the insufferable, self-absorbed, egotistical, inexperienced and over-confident Omarosa who reminds the electorate of Hillary . . . or vice versa. She was the rubbernecking fiasco that caused network TV to slow down and take a closer look. Even Donald Trump had her reappear in the final version only to verify, that yes, we were all correct in our first impression of her.

So as Hillary gives us jaw-dropping performances that go well beyond the boundary of shrill and catty, we have Barak who actually begins his speeches on a losing night with the word “change.” In the first five minutes of his speech he worked the word in at least 5352 times until it almost became a therapeutic mantra. “If I say this enough, even I will believe it, or come up with something else because I am so sick of this same speech, I could really use a change.”

It is only fair that John McCain, now the Republican candidate, be compared to some figure in reality TV since that is the theme here. It is tough since he floats between the “diplomatic” Simon Cowel and the very gracious Donald Trump who issues the edict of unemployment with the same charisma and ceremony that John McCain would.

So the United States of America, rumored to be the greatest nation in the world, and recently even making Michele Obama proud for the first time in her life, is reduced to having reality TV characters running for president. They all at least have one thing in common: They all serve in the senate, passing really bad laws that make people who really live in real America have to really deal with real reality. The rest of the country doesn’t have the luxury of fantasizing about being president after just being married to one. Or thinking because they served a couple of years in the US Senate they should actually be seriously considered as a serious, real reality candidate for the job. John McCain is a little different in that he got the senate seat himself without a presidential wife. He has served for more than 20 years, and no one . . . not even Gloria Steinhem can say a word about his service to this country. I really hope everyone is in agreement that serving as a prisoner of war, enduring torture and abuse totally redefines “reality”. But, there have been thousands of incredible men and women who have honorably served this nation, and we would all still ask them what they believe in, how they would lead, and why we should vote for them.

So here we are, sitting by our phones, ready to dial in our favorite candidate based on that last debate, that last speech, that faux pas that one liner, great quip, good comeback, or amazing nose blow. But the fingers are not dialing, other than to play games with the primaries and create a Sanjaya who will be the Omarosa and give Donald a run for his money. Other than that . . . what do we have and what does that say about us as a nation? We have asked presidents, on camera, what type of underwear they wear, while hearing under oath the color of tawdry dresses they helped stain. We see presidential candidates pandering in comedic lairs, groveling for laughs to prove they are hip and cool. We see them whack a sax, pluck a guitar and dance with Ellen to demonstrate their relevance to what . . . a shallow, self-absorbed electorate that is not trusted with a serious discussion of issues of consequence?

Well if they are one of us, then pick one of us to be president. There is no difference between them and the rest o the electorate, which says the distinction of mediocrity, is just not enough to lead this nation. Where are the people who will rise to the occasion, show maturity, humility, integrity and a foundation of standards? Are we reduced to choosing the best reality show candidate running for president and immediately begin vetting the contestants for the next show to air in 2012?

What makes this very interesting though is that because the qualifications to run for president have been so reduced to allow 95% of the population to be considered worthy candidates, John McCain is perfectly situated to bring his base back home by picking the most unlikely of VP candidates. He should look beyond the political backbench and pull in someone who has actually run a successful company and sees life from the other side of the glass. Because it has always been assumed, until now, that only infants raised by a political wet nurse, never actually having a “real” job in the only reality show that counts . . . life . . . are qualified to be president. We have never even entertained the idea that just a regular businessman could be considered as a serious candidate although the job they are seeking is the top CEO of the world. Since John McCain is considered stronger on national defense than the other two candidates, he could balance that appeal with a running mate who understands the workings of the economy, and how to run a country like a successful business where stockholders expect a profit, reject deficit spending, and like to invest in products with integrity that they can support with pride.

If Hillary wins, her running mate will be irrelevant, bland, lifeless and impotent. If Obama wins he would be wise to balance his ticket to gain a broader appeal and give the “good old boys” in his party a reason to go to the polls on Election Day.

The only way for any of these candidates to be taken seriously and win this election is for them to rise above the competition for mindless mediocrity and demonstrate that they are a real leader, operating in real time, not in the entertainment variety of reality TV.

Originally seen at townhall.com

There is an elephant in the room that everyone is trying to tiptoe around. Oddly though, it is not a large elephant, stomping around or dropping big elephant surprises . . . until now. Most people know that the past Iraqi Dictator’s name was Saddam Hussein, and ironically, Hussein is Barak Obama’s middle name. If Obama’s first name was Osama, would he be where he is politically, or would he have chosen to use his middle name instead? The fact is though, his name is Barak Hussein Obama. When he was given that name he was a few hours old, had never heard of Mohamed or Islam and was only interested in two things, eating and having his diapers changed.

That elephant was suddenly slapped on the rear by John McCain when he chastised a surrogate for using Barak’s full name, apologizing for the implications, while those inclined to possibly vote for him were reminded of why they won’t. Everyone is missing the obvious point of that entire discussion. If we as a nation are off limits as far as mentioning a possible president’s middle name because it might offend him, and others who have that name and possible evil intent against the nation, then it is a no-brainer that Obama should never be close to that office. If we are censoring ourselves, and implying that to mention his middle name is offensive, inflammatory, derogatory or degrading, then how in the world is he to stand in front of the world and answer the question, “ I Barak Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”? Will he interrupt and make the announcement that we are never allowed to mention his middle name?

But, perhaps it was Machiavellian on McCain’s part to apologize and have us discuss the outrage of chastising someone for speaking the truth, because then it serves to remind people that Barak was raised as a Muslim and spent his young years in a Muslim school. In an interview with the New York Times in 2007, Barak Hussein Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth.” He recited, “with a first-class [Arabic] accent,” the opening lines of this prayer: “Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! I witness that there is no god but Allah. I witness that there is no god but Allah. I witness that Muhammad is his prophet… ”

So, if Barak Hussein Obama is not embarrassed to recite the Muslim prayer in an interview with the New York Times, and identify himself that way, why should John McCain apologize for a surrogate saying his middle name? What is it about politicians and their middle names? The edict went out after Hillary became first lady that the press was commanded to use her middle name, Rodham. Then when she realized there was more currency in the Clinton name, she unceremoniously dropped her middle name and clung to Bill’s. But I am sure McCain would not chastise a surrogate if they happened to refer to her as Hillary Rodham Clinton. So what is it about Barak’s middle name that bothers him so much?

If it was not a strategic move on his part to subconsciously draw attention to the “discomfort” some find with Barak’s middle name, risking the exodus of those who despise political correctness at its core . . .. then what was it? Was it an honest display of the type of leader he would be, reminding us of dangerous appeasers such as Neville Chamberlain who wanted to play nice with blood thirsty dictators, only to find these guys never got the same rule book? Was he trying to show the world that he really is not a grumpy old man but does have a soft fuzzy side? One of his advisors should suggest that this was not the hill to die on for that cause. He could, instead, talk about continuing Bush’s work on fighting AIDs in Africa, or another cause that would make everyone pause, breath a sigh of relief and feel comforted by the fact that he has a heart.

In a post 911 world, America cannot afford to have a president whose name is forbidden to be spoken for fear of reprisal from those who are reminded of his early religious training. And it cannot have a president who is reluctant to utter the name of a fellow candidate because he doesn’t want to appear to be drawing a negative connection between that man and a mad dictator who put people feet first through plastic shredders and gassed thousands of others. And by every rational standard of judgment, Hillary is absolutely not a viable option in any scenario.

So, as we move further and further down this road of infinite twists and turns, it really does seem that the conservative base of the electorate can play the final hand in this game of Machiavellian politics and truly determine the entire election . . . if they can only decide what their ultimate goal and candidate would be. But there is plenty of time. Overnight, millions of people could decide they have nothing to lose by writing in an agreed upon candidate. There would be no fundraisers, no TV ads, no advisors or political hacks salivating at the idea of earning big bucks to run a campaign. And it would give all those millions of people who basically had no voice in the selection of the candidate in the primary, since that decision was made by a handful of states, by crossover voters who analyzed the mathematical probabilities, the low turnouts, and the numbers needed to get the opposition candidate elected.

The majority of the American people, with the stroke of a pen, could change the course of history and totally sweep all the pundits, politicians and power hungry potentates, out the door. It could be refreshing, inspiring and could send a strong message to the world that you can’t predict what and who Americans are. And no matter how much you manipulate the primaries by registering independent, or crossing party lines to influence the other party’s outcome, the vast majority of Americans will fight back. We refuse to be reduced to polls and focus groups that are sliced and diced into an inaccurate reflection of who we really are as a nation. We have a mind, we have a soul, and we have a choice. But do we have the courage to make that choice.

As Seen at Townhall.com