Right Wing Nut House

This article originally appears in The American Thinker

On Tuesday, Barack Obama faced the glare of the cameras and tried to deal with what was rapidly becoming one of those “distractions” he so despises.

It turns out that the man he chose to head up the steering committee to help him choose a vice president, Jim Johnson, had a past that was making Obama out to be a hypocrite on the sub-prime mortgage crisis. After Obama skewered John McCain for his connections with sub-prime lenders, it appears that Mr. Johnson made McCain’s connections look positively innocent by comparison.

Johnson, Fannie Mae chief from 1991 through 1998, received more than $7 million in real estate loans from a program open only to “friends of Angelo.” The “Angelo” in question is none other than Angelo Mozilo, CEO of Countrywide Financial Corporation. Obama, who has heavily criticized Mozilo for accepting hefty bonuses despite the sub-prime crisis, evidently didn’t vet Mr. Johnson thoroughly and failed to discover the sweetheart connection.

It should also be noted that according to the Chicago Tribune, the practioner of “new politics” accepted $1.9 million from sub prime lenders which only goes to show that when it comes to a decision between engaging in the “new poltics” and old fashioned money grubbing, “new politics” gets the shaft.

The revelations about Johnson led to an incredible exchange with ABC News reporter Sunlen Miller who grilled Obama on why the information hadn’t been discovered by the campaign before he hired him. The ensuing explanation by Obama is a jaw dropper.

So without further adieu, I give you, ladies and gentlemen, Barack H. Obama - Columbia University graduate, Harvard Law Summa Cum Laude, President of the Harvard Law Review, and noted American orator:

“Now look, the, the, ah, ah, ah, I mean the uh first of all uh I, I, I am not vetting my VP search committee for their mortgages so you’re going have to uh d-direct… Well, nah I mean becomes sort of a… um… I mean this is a game that can be played everybody… It who is tangentially related to our campaign I think is going to have a whole host of relationships. I would have to hire the vetter to uh vet the vetter.”

Huh?

It gets murkier - or more bizarrely incoherent. The following was cleaned up by the ABC website and made into something printable:

“Jim Johnson has a very discrete task,” Obama continued, “as does Eric Holder, and that is simply to gather up information about potential vice presidential candidates. They are performing that job well, it’s a volunteer, unpaid position. And they are giving me information and I will then exercise judgment in terms of who I want to select as a vice presidential candidate.

“So this - you know, these aren’t folks who are working for me,” Obama said. “They’re not people you know who I have assigned to a job in a future administration and, you know, ultimately my assumption is that, you know, this is a discrete task that they’re going to performing for me over the next two months.”

Whassat? What’d he say? Johnson doesn’t really “work” for him because he’s a “volunteer” in an “unpaid position.” And after all, he hasn’t promised him a cabinet post so it’s really OK that I didn’t vet him and besides this is just a “distraction” so can we please get back to your slavish worship of my awe inspiring talents?

Well, on Wednesday, Johnson “unvolunteered” himself from the campaign:

I believe Barack Obama’s candidacy for president of the United States is the most exciting and important of my lifetime,” he said, according to a Bloomberg report. “I would not dream of being a party to distracting attention from that historic effort.”

We all know how much Obama doesn’t like “distractions.” Obama himself cried a few crocodile tears in giving him the heave ho:

“Jim did not want to distract in any way from the very important task of gathering information about my vice presidential nominee, so he has made a decision to step aside that I accept. We have a very good selection process underway, and I am confident that it will produce a number of highly qualified candidates for me to choose from in the weeks ahead. I remain grateful to Jim for his service and his efforts in this process,” Obama said in a statement.

So, another Obama associate is thrown under the bus. One might begin to wonder if there are more people riding on the Obama express or underneath it. Think of all this guy’s friends, staffers, spiritual advisors, and assorted far left radicals who have been given the equivalent of a pair of cement galoshes and thrown into the Chicago River. A partial list:

1, Samantha Powers, foreign policy advisor, who ended up being just a little bit too frank about some of Obama’s less than mainstream plans for Israel and other places if the candidate were to win office.

2. Austan Goolsbee, economic advisor, who whispered to the Canadian government sweet nothings about his boss’s NAFTA switcheroo in Ohio - Obama running around the state, breathing fire about the evils of NAFTA and how he would renegotiate the treaty while Goolsbee was telling the Canadians that the candidate was just politicking and had no intention of touching the treaty.

3. Reverend Jeremiah Wright, friend and spiritual advisor who the candidate bravely stood up for - at first - until Wright’s performance at the National Press Club caused the candidate to open the door himself and push the old man under the wheels.

4. Father Michael Pfleger, friend and spiritual advisor, whose spittle flecked rant at Trinity Church against Hillary, America, and white people forced the candidate to leave his boot print on the good father’s rear end as he too was given a swift kick under the Obama Greyhound.

5. William Ayers, terrorist and future Secretary of Education in an Obama Administration. Well, probably not. But Obama’s dismissal of his former boss and friend as “just a neighbor” no doubt hurt the terrorist’s feelings but became necessary when the press started to get curious about what a candidate for president was doing associating with someone who doesn’t regret blowing people to smithereens.

There are more - the undercarriage of that bus is bloody indeed. There’s the entire congregation of Trinity United Church who now must practice their black liberation theology and “anti-middleclassness” without the man who apparently spent many a pleasant Sunday sleeping through sermons - or so he would have us believe.

But there is a monumental difference between Obama’s previous actions in washing his hands of wayward staffers, bigots, and radicals and having to toss Jim Johnson out the window.

The others were handled when he was simply a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president. But his choice of Johnson to head up the most important job he has between now and the election - choosing a vice president - was made as the presumptive nominee.

In short, Obama’s first major decision as the nominee for president of his party was an unmitigated disaster.

Not only did he choose someone who opened him up to charges of being a rank hypocrite. But the way he handled himself in off the cuff remarks in trying to defend Johnson was shockingly incoherent and stupid. Trying to pass Johnson off as someone who didn’t work for him? That’s childish in its attempt to avoid responsibility. One might expect a 7 year old to deny breaking a dinner plate by saying something like “I didn’t drop it mom, it fell.” But when the potential next president of the United States tries to run away from his mistakes, we can ask legitimate questions on how this man will perform if he reaches the oval office.

Craig Crawford brings up another point:

Obama’s cavalier response utterly contradicted his campaign’s supposed crusade for reform. Not only did those words come across as tone deaf to the very ethical issues that he has raised in this election, but his remarks sounded like the ethical relativism we so often hear from the Washington business-as-usual crowd that Obama claims to be running against.

Chris Cillizza recognizes the danger Obama exposes himself to by latching on to people like Johnson:

For Obama, any questions in voters’ minds about whether he truly is a change agent or is legitimately committed to breaking the alleged stranglehold lobbyists and other power brokers have over the political system is potentially disastrous. Because of the peril involved, it’s not terribly surprising that Obama moved quickly to “fix the glitch” once he realized questions about Johnson weren’t going away.

Seen another way, however, this episode could forebode poorly for how Obama handles the various slings and arrows sent his way by Republicans and their famed — and effective — noise machine.

This is where the national press has done a heroic job in keeping Obama’s associations and actions in his past that would expose him as the hypocrite he is a well kept secret. No real attempt has been made to ferret out the truth of what his career was like as a Chicago politician. The Obama campaign would blow up if the press ever read some back issues of the Chicago Tribune or Sun Times.

Instead, it is as if Obama sprang fully formed into the world of national politics, unsullied by grubby special interests and lobbyists who afflict everyone else in Washington. His holy throat and golden tongue will lead a revolution that will make America a paradise of unity and happiness.

All I can say is we better snap out of it before we elect the most incompetent, the most naive, and perhaps the most dangerous man ever to run for the office of the president.

Did Michael really fly? Or did he have some help from the zebras?

Back in the 1990’s when we were innocent enough to believe that the government didn’t keep aliens on ice at Area 51 or that the military did not create the AIDS virus to kill black people, there were whispers of dark conspiracies surrounding the most popular professional game on the planet - the National Basketball Association. There were intimations from crazed fans and journalists hungry for controversy that referees, in cahoots with the league office, were fixing the outcomes of games in the playoffs so that the NBA could realize the best matchups that would guarantee the most revenue.

There were also charges that the zebras would routinely work to extend playoff series so that the most revenue could be wrung from the match-ups.

It was also alleged back then that star players got special treatment from the refs regarding a lack of technical fouls ( allowing them to get away with thuggery) and, in order to keep them in the games, not calling personal fouls on them.

This was the decade that saw the end of the Magic Johnson-Larry Bird era and the beginning of the Chicago Bulls dynastic run of 6 NBA championships in 8 years. Led by arguably the greatest basketball player in history, Michael Jordan, the Bulls slugged it out early in the decade with first the Detroit Pistons and then, their arch nemesis the New York Knicks.

Those Bulls-Knicks series’ were bloody, take no prisoners affairs that have now retreated into legend. But at the time, it seemed that each game witnessed some of the strangest foul calls in the history of the NBA.

Rebounding was the key for both teams and the battle under the boards was incredible; pushing, shoving, elbows to the face, holding uniforms - anything to gain an advantage in positioning in order to grab the rebound. This, in and of itself was not unusual. In playoff refereeing, it was generally recognized that the players would be allowed a little more leeway than was vouchsafed during the regular season.

But the scrum under the boards wasn’t the problem. It was the phantom fouls being called by referees on defenders guarding shooters that raised eyebrows. Little or no contact with the shooter would draw a whistle and send the player to the free throw line. I can recall several games in this series where players and coaches were beside themselves as a result of a foul called for some ticky tacky contact or worse, no contact at all.

Sports talk radio (just coming into its own back then) was hot with callers claiming conspiracy. The league wanted the series to go on, was the charge. The refs were in the bag, whispered the paranoid.

Or were they?

NBA referees, influenced by cozy relationships with league officials, rigged a 2002 playoff series to force it to a revenue-boosting seven games, a former referee at the center of a gambling scandal alleged Tuesday.

Without identifying anyone or naming teams, Tim Donaghy also claimed the NBA routinely encouraged refs to ring up bogus fouls to manipulate results but discouraged them from calling technical fouls on star players to keep them in games and protect ticket sales and television ratings.

Donaghy is a former ref convicted of manipulating games on which he bet. He also took money from gamblers to try and fix the point spread on games, receiving $5,000 for every game in which he was successful. At the time the scandal broke, I wondered if he was the only ref involved:

The NBA is in deep trouble. Donaghy, who will turn himself in this week, is said to have agreed to cooperate with the FBI in their investigation. If it is revealed that there are indeed other officials involved in this scandal, it could very well destroy the league. As it is now, fans will be watching NBA games with extra care next year and wondering.

Always wondering.

And now, in the midst of the most watched NBA Finals in years, Donaghy apparently confirms all the nasty rumors and conspiracies that have been swirling around the league for more than a decade.

Or is his story just too perfect, too pat?

In one of several allegations of corrupt refereeing, Donaghy said he learned in May 2002 that two referees known as “company men” were working a best-of-seven series in which “Team 5″ was leading 3-2. In the sixth game, he alleged the referees purposely ignored personal fouls and called “made-up fouls on Team 5 in order to give additional free throw opportunities for Team 6.”

“Team 6″ won the game and came back to win the series, the letter said.

Only the Los Angeles Lakers-Sacramento Kings series went to seven games during the 2002 playoffs. And the Lakers went on to win the championship.

At the time, consumer advocate Ralph Nader and the League of Fans, a sports industry watchdog group, sent a letter to Stern complaining about the officiating in Game 6 of the Western Conference finals.

The Lakers, who beat Sacramento 106-102 in that game in Los Angeles, shot 27 free throws in the final quarter and scored 16 of their last 18 points at the line.

The letter also alleged manipulation during a 2005 playoff series.

“Team 3 lost the first two games in the series and Team 3’s owner complained to NBA officials,” the letter said. “Team 3’s owner alleged that referees were letting a Team 4 player get away with illegal screens. NBA Executive Y told Referee Supervisor Z that the referees for that game were to enforce the screening rules strictly against that Team 4 player. … The referees followed the league’s instructions and Team 3 came back from behind to win the series. The NBA benefited from this because it prolonged the series, resulting in more tickets sold and more televised games.”

In that same series, the letter says “Team 3″ lost the first two games of the series and that team owner complained to NBA officials. The letter also alleges that the opposing team’s coach later was fined $100,000 after revealing an NBA official informed him of the behind-the-scenes instructions.

That would correspond with the 2005 first-round playoff series between the Houston Rockets and the Dallas Mavericks, in which Mark Cuban complained to officials and Jeff Van Gundy was fined.

This “evidence” is not as compelling as one might think. It could very well be that Donaghy was simply “confirming” what was believed by some observers in two very high profile incidents where such referee malfeasance was suspected. He has no physical proof that the league ordered the refs to rig the games. Only the word, as the league points out, of a man desperate to have his sentence reduced:

He’s a singing, cooperating witness who is trying to get as light a sentence as he can,” Stern said. “He turned on basically all of his colleagues in an attempt to demonstrate that he is not the only one who engaged in criminal activity. The U.S. attorney’s office, the FBI, have fully investigated it, and Mr. Donaghy is the only one who is guilty of a crime. And he will be sentenced for that crime regardless of the desperate attempts to implicate as many people as he can.”

All true, except…

Except the US attorney and the FBI may not have been informed of this additional information about NBA refs in a conspiracy with the league office to rig games because the letter containing the damning charges wasn’t filed until last Monday. The feds have investigated Donaghy and determined that no other refs or league officials were involved in his gambling schemes. But have they investigated these other charges?

Stern’s statement is unclear on this matter. However, nothing changes the fact that Donaghy’s letter was self-serving and totally void of proof. All we have is the word of a convicted gambler that conspiracy theories that have been the staple of sports talk radio for more than a decade may actually be true - not a lot to hang your hat on for most observers although I’m sure the lines will be hot with “I told you so’s” from the conspiracy promoters at the big sports talk radio stations today.

If the charges have not been investigated, it is paramount that the prosecutor and FBI do so. If the specific allegations have been looked at and found to be baseless, the league should make that plain to the public. As it stands now, David Stern’s statement is ambiguous about these additional charges.

Donaghy put the pro game under a cloud with his gambling. His shocking allegations could bring the NBA crashing down - if they were true. But even if they haven’t been investigated, Donaghy’s lack of proof in making these spectacular charges only reinforces the idea that he is just another con looking for a break from prosecutors.

You won’t want to miss tonight’s Rick Moran Show,, one of the most popular conservative talk shows on Blog Talk Radio. Tonight’s show will be co-hosted by American Thinker’s Political Correspondent Rich Baehr.

Tonight, I’ll have the lovely Taylor Marsh as my guest in the first half hour. We’ll talk about chances of the Democrats getting behind Obama for the fall campaign as well as some other hot topics. The second half hour, Ed Lasky of The American Thinker wll join me to discuss the race from a conservative point of view.

The show will air from 7:00 - 8:00 PM Central time. You can access the live stream here. A podcast will be available for streaming or download shortly after the end of the broadcast.

For the best in political analysis, click on the stream below and join in on what one wag called a “Wayne’s World for adults.” A podcast will be available for streaming or download around 15 minutes after the show ends.

The Chat Room will open around 15 minutes before the show opens,

Also, if you’d like to call in and put your two cents in, you can dial (718) 664-9764.

The more I read about this race the more convinced I am that John McCain should just go find a hole somewhere and hunker down until the slaughter is over. He doesn’t have a chance. It’s over. Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States and there’s nothing anyone anywhere can do to stop it.

Well…almost no one. I sent the following email to Diebold Corporation.

Dear Diebold:

It has become clear over these last few weeks that Barack Obama - a liberal Democrat - will win the presidency of the United States unless something is done to stop him. Naturally, since you guys control all the voting machines in the United States and are very adept at cheating on behalf of Republicans, I was wondering what you might be planning for this election?

Now don’t try and deny it. I can’t tell you how many liberal bloggers have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you guys hacked into voting machines and gave the race to the Bushies back in 2004. Well…maybe there’s a shadow of doubt, but really, the proof is in the pudding. What American in their right mind would have voted for Bush against a war hero like Kerry? Besides, most of the lefties say they don’t know anyone who voted for Bush so of course, the game had to be rigged.

Anyway, I am writing to beg, to plead with you, to use all of your power, all of your connections, all of your vast technical expertise to steal this election for John McCain. I realize how hard it is when the vote will probably be a landslide for Obama but, hey! I’m sure you can see your way clear to stealing a couple or three million votes for McCain - in the right states of course - so that he comes out on top. Besides, if you spread them out properly, no one will be any the wiser.

I’m not much as far as hacking is concerned but if you need any help - you know, diversions and such where I engage the judges at precincts in conversation while the numbers go click, click, click for McCain while their backs are turned - I am offering my services no matter how limited my abilities.

Waiting anxiously for a reply,

A Patriot

P.S. Where the hell were you guys in 2006?

The whole thing might be moot anyway. I’ve read comments on some lefty blogs that wonder why we just can’t dump Bush now and put Obama in there. To hell with the election. Everyone knows he’s going to win anyway so why let Bush destroy what’s left of the country?

Sound arguments there but if we’re going to do that, why bother to make him simply “president.” We can come up with a better title than that. How about “God-King?” Or my favorite, “Lightwalker” (sounds like something from Star Wars, huh?). Except “Lightwalker” doesn’t convey quite the majesty and pompous arrogance we’re looking for. Let’s call him “Pro Consul” Obama. It will fit very nicely in headlines at the New York Times and MSNBC can do a nightly show “Pro Consul News” (except they already have Olbermann and Matthews doing that already).

At any rate, whenever Obama takes office - next week or on January 20, 2009 - it’s time to start making preparations for his ascension.

First thing we need is a good supply of Dramamine since every time Obama opens his holy throat, the earth moves. I don’t know about you but I get seasick rather easily and having the ground heaving and rolling in response to Obama’s golden tongued rhetoric, it would be too much like being on a Windjammer’s Cruise during hurricane season.

Second, we have to lay in a good supply of pepto bismal if we’re going to be reading the MSM for the next 8 years. I’ve already barfed all over my monitor more than once as a result of reading some of the encomiums that have spewed forth from formerly reputable media outlets. Think how bad it’s going to be after he wins. Jesus at the second coming would have a hard time topping the slavering devotion already shown toward Obama.

Finally, we need to buy a whole lot of whiskey - perhaps I should buy a distillery. The only way a rational human being is going to survive 8 years of doe eyed, kowtowing Obamamaniacs, mindless hero worship, self congratulatory back slapping, and the constant, excruciating, feel-good, “post partisan” unity rhetoric from the once and future messiah is to get and stay rip-roarin’, falling down, three sheets to the wind drunk.

That I can manage, no problem.

You know, it’s just not fair that our enemies have had such a rough time lately.

In Iran, even milquetoast IAEA Chief ElBaradei is getting sick and tired of the regime’s evasions about their nuclear program. I mean, if there’s nothing to hide why not open up and allow the nuke inspectors in so that they can do their job unimpeded? Why not open the history of your program so that we can see how truthful and honest you’ve been with the world about never, ever (cross your heart and hope to be beheaded) wanting nuclear weapons?

But take heart President Ahmadinejad. Stay strong Supreme Leader Khamenei. Hope is on the way. America is about ready to elect a president who can’t decide whether you are just a “tiny country” with a tiny defense budget that offers no threat to the United States or whether you are - as he has “always” said - a grave threat to US security. Since Obama has been all over the map on what he truly thinks about Iran (and under it, over it, and squatting on top of it), you can rest assured that when push comes to shove, the Obamamessiah will give the matter a great deal of thought and probably sell out our friends in the region by recognizing Iran’s “historic mission” to complete the industrialization of the nuclear fuel cycle - and in the end, do absolutely nothing.

As for Syria, Bashar Assad is beside himself with joy these days, having seen his campaign of thuggish intimidation in Lebanon using his surrogates in Hizbullah to beat anyone over the head who looks sideways at Damascus (not to mention the most successful campaign of assassination in world history since Al Capone eliminated his rivals in the bootleg whiskey trade) work to near perfection. Assad’s worries over the Tribunal investigating these deaths are disappearing - the result of the prosecution dying on the vine as the UN moves at a pace that snails would envy to seat the judges and start the trials.

But Baby Assad still has his problems. Nuke inspectors are coming to call on him and there is still a chance for a reversal in Lebanon. But be of stout heart and good cheer, my gangster friend. The Holy Deal Maker is on the way to give you everything you want - and probably then some. No doubt the “realists” in any Obamamessiah administration would see that Lebanon is expendable and it really would be a very small concession to recognize your “sphere of influence” in the tiny country. Hell, you’re halfway there already so what would be the big deal if the US gave you and your mob a free hand in Lebanon?

No skin off our nose - besides, the visuals of you and Obama embracing to seal the deal would be spectacular.

And that goes double for you poor, downtrodden, abused, oppressed, Palestinian terrorists. Why, it’s getting so that you can’t make a decent suicide vest without being interrupted by the Israelis. And firing rockets at civilians can be fun (while giving the kids a good fireworks display) but it kind of spoils the party when the IAF comes calling and drops a couple of smart bombs on the Katyusha launch sites. After all, it causes property values in the neighborhood to plummet and the noise is horrible.

But I say to you my Israeli-hating friends, change is on the way! A “change” you can believe in - if you’re about 5 years old and have the moral compass of an alley cat. With a wave of his hand and a few blasts of rhetoric from his holy throat, the Obamamessiah will turn Israeli-Palestinian negotiations upside down and make sure that the onus for peace falls on the heads of those evil Jews and not on those who have yet to give up the dream of seeing every Jew in Israel pushed bodily into the Mediterranean. After all, who could blame you? Not the Obamamessiah and his cadre of advisors who have made it plain for anyone with half a brain to see that their sympathy for your “cause” outweighs any loyalty the US might have for an ally who has stood beside us for 60 years.

Finally, we come to that rather amorphous mass of bad guys who can loosely be termed “terrorists.” Your days of being hunted down and killed are, I am happy to say, numbered. Once our God-King is in office, we are promised that the United States will fight terrorism “the right way.”

We will arrest you. We will make sure that we don’t blame all Muslims for your wayward thinking about the west. We will give you dirty looks. We will give your lawyers dirty looks when you beat the rap and are freed to carry out whatever plans we so rudely interrupted with our “anti-terror” policies. We will go back to a time when occasional acts of terror are acceptable because, after all, what’s a couple of dozen civilian deaths now and again when weighed against the alternative?

And if you happen to succeed in killing a few hundred…thousand…or hundreds of thousands of us, oh well. We’ll just blame it on Bush and move on to the business of doing pretty much what you wish us to do; get out of the Middle East, stop meddling in Iraq and Afghanistan, and generally absolve ourselves of the responsibility of defending our interests. That’s because we will once again enter an era when we will only use the US military when there can be absolutely no doubt that no US interests are at stake whatsoever. Only selfless military interventions will be tolerated and only when the UN says it’s OK.

Yessiree. A new age is almost upon us - an age when our enemies can breathe a sigh of relief and get back to the business of unfettered, unrestricted actions that run contrary to American interests. They will suffer no penalty if they do - save perhaps the prospect of an American president telling the world “This is not the Iran (or Syria, or Hamas, or jihadis) that I’ve known. They gave no indication when talking to me that they would act in such a beastly manner.”

Expect a lot of that over the next 8 years.

This Obama supporter posted a long piece on “The Jewish Lobby” right on Obama’s presidential campaign website.

To say that what this “Socialist for Obama” writes is anti-Semitic, hateful, inaccurate, insulting, idiotic, paranoid tripe is a given.

But when you realize this is on Obama’s website, you really have to start wondering about not just the candidate, but people’s whose job it is to vet the site and make sure excrement like this doesn’t appear.

The fact that it is still there could mean that Obama campaign workers agree with what’s written. At the very least, it shows how incredibly tone deaf the Obama campaign is if they don’t think this is offensive.

A few choice excerpts:

NO LOBBY IS FEARED MORE or catered to by politicians than the Jewish Lobby. If a politician does not play ball with the Jewish Lobby, he will not get elected, or re-elected, and he will either be smeared or ignored by the Jewish-owned major media or catered to by politicians than the Jewish Lobby. If a politician does not play ball with the Jewish Lobby, he will not get elected, , and he will either be smeared or ignored by the Jewish-owned major media.

All Jewish lobbies and organizations are interconnected and there are hundreds upon hundreds of them. The leaders of the numerous Jewish Lobby Groups go to the same synagogues, country clubs, and share the same Jewish investment bankers. And this inter-connectedness extends to the Jews who run the Federal Reserve Bank, US Homeland Security, and the US State Department.

In other words, “Jews stick together.” Americans must know how extremely powerful the Jewish Lobby is and how it operates to undermine America’s interests both at home and abroad. At home - by corrupting America’s political system, and abroad - by dictating American Foreign Policy against America’s best interests.

Hey Kids! Let’s play pretend…

Let’s pretend that this blog post appeared on John McCain’s website. Let’s pretend it was seen by lefty bloggers. Let’s pretend that your average lefty blogger isn’t a screaming meemie of an anti-semite but rather a rational human being.

Can you imagine the hue, the cry, and the hue again that would be raised against McCain? The guy would be run out of the race on a rail.

 But the Annointed One can get away with this because 1) Lefty bloggers really don’t care about this kind of hate speech; and 2) Obamamessiah can do no wrong. 

 And here are some suggestions on how to battle the “Jewish Lobby:”

HOW CAN WE STOP THE JEWISH LOBBY?

Here are 3 options:

1) Commit suicide.
2) Write to your Senator warning him that taking bribes from Jews is a sin.
3) Never vote again.

OR:
+ Pray To The Lord Jesus Christ To Either Convert The Jews Or Conquer Them Through The Power Of His Cross!

This has been on Obama’s presidential campaign site since 9:13 Eastern time this morning. It is now after 1:30 and this offensive piece of trash is still up.*

Cause for concern? Or are we going to hear the old refrain (and getting older every day) “These are not my values blah blah blah…” Perhaps we’ll hear something like “This is not the Socialists for Obama that I know…”

Simply, remarkably, unbelievable. Welcome to “The New Politics” folks.

* My mistake. This blog has been up since 9:13 PM last night - and is still up as of 1:45 PM the next day.

This piece originally appeared in The American Thinker

If you’ve been saving old electoral college maps from the 2000 and 2004 election so you can follow the action in 2008, I would suggest you toss them on the rubbish heap of history. While both candidates will enjoy support from many of their base states - the GOP in the south and the Democrats along both coasts - the rest of the nation is literally up for grabs this time around. No less than 17 states by my count will be heavily contested by both candidates as they seek to raid each other’s territory in order to maximize their chances to hit the magic number of 270 electoral votes on election day.

It’s hard to see where one candidate or the other has an advantage in this contest but it appears by my calculations that John McCain will have to defend more of his own territory which will necessarily limit his opportunities to raid in blue states. Couple that with a probable huge disparity in cash on hand to spend vis a vis Obama and McCain would, on paper, appear to be at a decided disadvantage.

Not so. McCain’s best chances for a breakthrough blue state win are in the big states of Pennsylvania and Michigan. If McCain can take any one of those two states (while holding on to Ohio) he can afford to lose a couple of the smaller red states Obama has his heart set on and still top 270 electoral votes.

Obama, on the other hand, only need take the state of Ohio to scramble McCain’s chances for the presidency. It is hard to come up with a winning electoral college scenario for the GOP without both Ohio and Florida in the mix. That’s because Obama has a very good chance of breaking through in one or more previously Republican states like Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, Nevada, and New Mexico. With Ohio, McCain can afford to lose one or two of those states by taking Pennsylvania or Michigan. Without Ohio, even those two states put together wouldn’t be enough. The Arizona senator would probably need a breakthrough in two blue states like Minnesota and Wisconsin in order to top 270.

OBAMA’S BEST TARGETS

Most experts agree that Virginia is ripe for the plucking by a Democrat in 2008 - especially an African American Democrat like Obama.

Looking at recent statewide races for governor, it is clear that the Washington, D.C. metro area - filled as it is with federal workers and many dependent on government for their livlihood - probably holds the key to a Democratic win. The area has witnessed explosive growth in the last decade with previously rural, Republican counties like Loudon and Prince William filling up with Democratic voters. Along with the Democratic vote from Richmond, this may be enough to offset Republican strength in the Piedmont region along the border with North Carolina as well as counties bordering Tennessee where the GOP routinely hits 70%.

The loss of Virginia’s 13 electoral votes would not be a catastrophe. But Obama will have his sights set on other targets as well. And his best chance at further breakthroughs appear to me to be out west where radically changing demographics have put in play three states - Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado.

Nevada is probably ready to tip in 2008. Unheard of growth in Las Vegas (Clark County) - 600,000 new residents since 2000 or a 40% increase - will probably mean an end to long time GOP domination in Presidential elections. Consider that in 1980 Ronald Reagan won Nevada with 62% of the vote while George Bush eked out a 21,000 vote win in 2004.

The union vote in Las Vegas and Reno will probably be enough to give the state to Obama this time around. Couple Nevada’s 5 electoral votes with Virginia’s 13 and it forces McCain to win either Pennsylvania’s 21 electoral votes or Michigan’s 17 to reach 270.

But Obama has two other western states in his cross hairs. New Mexico and Colorado have both experienced rapid growth in the past decade largely made up of an influx of Hispanics. Colorado may be a little more of a long shot for Obama as growth in liberal areas as slacked off in recent years and McCain could get a larger percentage of Hispanic voters than Bush in 2004. But given Obama’s superior organization and his cash on hand, a maximum effort just might pay off in Colorado.

New Mexico would seem to be a more realistic target. George Bush won by barely 6,000 votes in 2004 and with Democratic governor Bill Richardson on board, Obama could very well flip the state blue.

If Obama were to take all four states - CO, NM, VA, and NV - he would take 32 electoral votes away from George Bush’s total of 286 in 2004. You can do the math as well as I can if you take all or a combination of 2 or three of those states away from McCain. Where does he make it up?

McCAIN’S BEST TARGETS

I pointed out earlier that McCain’s best shots appear to be in Pennsylvania and Michigan - for different reasons.

Pennsylvania is ripe for an upset. It’s hard to imagine a Democrat who is less attractive to the voters in that state than Barack Obama - at least according to the primary exit polls where he was slaughtered by Hillary Clinton. Even in a Democratic year, the state sets up nicely for McCain running against Obama. The most recent Rasmussen survey from May 21 shows only a two point lead for Obama, well within the margin for error. Among key groups like older voters and white working class voters, McCain leads comfortably. Among independents, McCain also enjoys an advantage.

This state more than most will be a turnout election: Reagan Democrats versus African Americans. The fault lines will be obvious and dramatic - appeals to race will no doubt play a part in determining Pennsylvania’s fate.

Michigan is an entirely different target of opportunity for McCain. Ordinarily a reliable Democratic state, Michigan Democrats have botched it but good in the last 4 years and as mad as people might be at the GOP in Michigan they are just as angry at the Democrats. McCain has a real chance here, running slightly ahead of Obama at this point. Will McCain have the money to compete with Obama? Will he have the organization? It will be interesting to watch as McCain commits his limited resources to either protecting states like Virginia or gambling for the much bigger prizes in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Other less likely marks for the McCain campaign would be Midwestern states like Minnesota and Wisconsin. Iowa, as always, will be in play and if McCain were to lose there, taking one of the other two Midwestern states would almost become a necessity. Bush lost Wisconsin in 2004 by only 11,000 votes and McCain is up 47-43 in the state according to the last Rasumussen poll. McCain has much broader appeal than Bush in a state chock full of Reagan Democrats and independents. Making prospects for a maximum effort even more likely on McCain’s part is that it is a relatively cheap ad buy - a bigger bang for his ad bucks.

But Wisconsin is a state of ornery voters who love the reformer who challenges orthodoxy. McCain should look long and hard before committing to winning this state.

There are other states that may be in play this fall. The New York Times has a good list of them here. They add Missouri, North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana to Obama’s list of targets.

Georgia and Montana are pipe dreams for the Democrat. His thinking in Georgia is that he can win a three way race with Libertarian Bob Barr and McCain splitting the conservative vote while he sweeps the African American vote and ends up with a plurality. He should glance at the polls more often. Barr is a blip in Georgia and he would have to take more than 15% of the vote for Obama to have a chance. That scenario simply isn’t very likely.

Montana is a different story but still a very long shot for Obama. Here, Barr may do very well indeed - he might even hit the 10% threshold. But Democrats are scarce in Montana and McCain should still win easily.

Missouri and North Carolina offer a slightly better battleground for Obama. But unless he can show better with white, working class voters, Missouri is out of reach and North Carolina is a stretch. Look for less of an effort in those two states the closer we get to the election.

In the end, as it has the last two elections and as it has been true many times in the past, the entire kit and caboodle will probably come down to Ohio. Here is where McCain must make a stand and where Obama has the best chance to derail his opponent’s prospects.

All of this is assuming the economy will not get much worse than it is now. If it really goes south, all bets are off and Obama’s landslide scenario comes into play. Perhaps not so much in the popular vote. But winning 400 electoral votes is a mandate any way you look at it and the potential is there if unemployment and inflation begin to bite.

Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.
(An actual adult named Mark Morford who presumably wrote this on a weekend pass from an insane asylum)

I put it to my fellow bloggers; who would you really prefer having as president for the next four years?

An old, plodding, boring, war horse and hero John McCain whose followers are so vanilla that their idea of a wild time is deliberately jamming the ball return at the bowling alley with empty bottles of Nehi on Saturday night.

Or would you rather be able to write about Barack Obama and his fellow Lightworkers as they save the planet, protect the universe, and make America safe for snake oil salesmen once again.

Judging by Mr. Morford’s eye popping idiocy, the next 4 years are either going to be the most monumental in the history of the human race - or at least since another Lightworker trod the earth for 3 years a couple of milenia ago - or we’re all going to be so imbued with the Obama spirit that whatever the neophyte does will be seen as proof of his godlike gifts.

Seriously, now. Don’t you look forward to commenting on stuff like this?

To them I say, all right, you want to know what it is? The appeal, the pull, the ethereal and magical thing that seems to enthrall millions of people from all over the world, that keeps opening up and firing into new channels of the culture normally completely unaffected by politics?

No, it’s not merely his youthful vigor, or handsomeness, or even inspiring rhetoric. It is not fresh ideas or cool charisma or the fact that a black president will be historic and revolutionary in about a thousand different ways. It is something more. Even Bill Clinton, with all his effortless, winking charm, didn’t have what Obama has, which is a sort of powerful luminosity, a unique high-vibration integrity.

“High vibration integrity?” I always wondered why women swooned at his speeches. Turns out its not the heat or, the ambient temperature we’re talking about. Rather it’s Obama the sex toy that is getting all these women hot and bothered.

Might I suggest, ladies, sticking to your pocket rockets and resist going for “the big one” with Obama? After all, with Obama all you get is one speed not to mention a complete lack of penetrating ideas. And the guy couldn’t find the “G” - or any other kind of Spot - to save his life.

(I will be available for free consultations on “Achieving bliss without Obama” immediately following the publishing of this article.)

See how much more fun we’re having and the guy isn’t even elected yet? I challenge you to find anything sexual about John McCain at all. Listening to McCain speak does not remind anyone of “powerful luminosity” or “vibrations” of any kind - sexual or otherwise. Rather, McCain’s speeches are like a combination of Metamucil and Sominex - regular and predictable with softening agents to help everything come out okay along with a singular ability to induce drowsiness. Face it; if McCain somehow manages to win, the next four years are going to be the equivalent of playing checkers and listening to Perry Como records at your grandmother’s house.

Not so if our wunderkind wins the election.

Warning: If you are a rigid pragmatist/literalist, itchingly evangelical, a scowler, a doubter, a burned-out former ’60s radical with no hope left, or are otherwise unable or unwilling to parse alternative New Age speak, click away right now, because you ain’t gonna like this one little bit.

Ready? It goes likes this:

Barack Obama isn’t really one of us. Not in the normal way, anyway.

This is what I find myself offering up more and more in response to the whiners and the frowners and to those with broken or sadly dysfunctional karmic antennae - or no antennae at all - to all those who just don’t understand and maybe even actively recoil against all this chatter about Obama’s aura and feel and MLK/JFK-like vibe.

No parody, no satirical screed can do justice to this kind of slam bang, out of your mind stupidity. It would be hugely frightening if it weren’t so extraordinarily funny. Is this what the left has been reduced to in America? Taking a candidate with literally no experience doing anything (except getting people riled up at the “system”) - a man with no record of achievement save a run at the state senate where he used electoral tomfoolery to get his opponents kicked off the ballot and a run at the US senate where his GOP challenger self destructed over a messy divorce made public by his allies in the media?

It is because of his lack of a record, lack of accomplishments, lack of anything anyone would consider attributes even the worst president should have that the left feels the only way to get people to vote for Obama is to turn him into a secular super-prophet or demigod. It is the equivalent of a sleight-of-hand card trick. Pay no attention to the magicians hands as he deals from the bottom of the deck only to come up with ace after ace.

We are asked to suspend judgement, suspend, logic, suspend belief itself and pretend that Obama is the next step in human evolution. I don’t have a feel for how many of his supporters are swallowing this tripe but judging by the kinds of comments I get here and see on other sites, the number has to be in the millions. It is a full blown Cult of Personality that will make Bushbots seem intelligent by comparison. This is the kind of personal movement that would get serious about pushing for a constitutional amendment to remove presidential term limits.

Then again, with guys like this shilling for Obama, it may be easier to paint him as the leader of some kind of nutcase brigade:

Are you rolling your eyes and scoffing? Fine by me. But you gotta wonder, why has, say, the JFK legacy lasted so long, is so vital to our national identity? Yes, the assassination canonized his legend. The Kennedy family is our version of royalty. But there’s something more. Those attuned to energies beyond the literal meanings of things, these people say JFK wasn’t assassinated for any typical reason you can name. It’s because he was just this kind of high-vibration being, a peacemaker, at odds with the war machine, the CIA, the dark side. And it killed him.

Now, Obama. The next step. Another try. And perhaps, as Bush laid waste to the land and embarrassed the country and pummeled our national spirit into disenchanted pulp and yet ironically, in so doing has helped set the stage for an even larger and more fascinating evolutionary burp, we are finally truly ready for another Lightworker to step up.

The “JFK legacy” has not lasted at all. It is gone - if it was ever there in the first place. This “peacemaker” sent 16,000 troops to Viet Nam, tried to kill Castro, threatened to annihilate the planet over Cuba, and was otherwise one of the most bellicose presidents in US history. Only the marvelous PR talents of the Kennedy family entourage - including Arthur Schlessinger and Ted Sorenson - turned a mediocre, weak president into some kind of liberal lion standing up for peace (by bombing Vietnamese) and civil rights (while allowing the Freedom Riders to get beaten bloody down south and only introduced legislation after better men than him forced it upon him).

The Kennedy legacy of tax cutting and big defense increases never seems to get mentioned by liberals when talking about him. But that’s alright - we’re headed for an “evolutionary burp” with Obama. And beyond everything else, we are promised that things like magic, the occult, and remote viewing are possible as long as you are one of “[t]hose attuned to energies beyond the literal meanings of things.” Far be it for me to stick with simply the “literal meaning of things” when so much more - like Obama’s magical evolutionary burps - can be made transparent as long as you’re in the right frame of mind - or take the required hallucinogen.

The candidate himself will be entertaining enough for any 10 bloggers to never run out of things to write.

But it is Obama’s slavish devotees and their breathless belief in his otherworldliness and out and out Deity that is going to make the next 4 years the most productive in the history of blogging.

This article first appeared on June 6, 2006

It was 62 years ago that US Rangers stormed the cliffs of Pointe Du Hoc near Omaha Beach. And as the veterans of that day grow oh so gray and bent, mere shadows of the lithe and limber youths who pulled themselves up the jagged bluffs, one hand over another, their comrades falling all about them, we are reminded that the word “courage” came alive that day.

Too often, we use that word in a base and cavalier way. A Hollywood movie star has “courage” because she revealed to the world that she’s a drug addict. A comic has “courage” because he made fun of the President of the United States to his face. A filmaker has “courage” because he made millions of dollars shooting a “documentary” which shows the US government complicit in the mass murder on 9/11.

And so instead of “courage” being a word with inexpressible significance and meaning beyond its simple definition, it has become a self congratulatory epithet, a hollowed out expression of empty promise and insincerity. Today, the purveyors of myth and shapers of opinion use the word to tell the rest of us who to admire and what to respect. No longer does courage imply sacrifice or a willingness to give all that one has for a cause greater than oneself. Instead, courage defines the selfish desires and overwrought egos of an ideology that sees more irony in the word than reverence.

All of this was in the future 62 years ago when the Rangers lived the word courage by taking the bluffs above the beach. And a short distance away at Omaha, Americans were dying, never knowing that their sacrifice was redefining the word courage for all time. For in their last bloody moments on earth, a titanic struggle was taking place between good and evil that 10,000 years from now, poets will still be singing songs and human beings will still be shaking their heads at in wonder and awestruck disbelief.

It takes genuine courage to confront evil. By its very nature, evil must defend itself by lashing out and destroying anything that attempts to get in its path, lest it perish ignominiously. Those representing good realize this which makes the confrontation between good and evil always a life threatening proposition and thus, an exercise in self-denial and sacrifice. The Rangers on the bluffs and the men in transports speeding toward bloody Omaha that terrible day 62 years ago knew full well what they were in for. They were willing to pay the price to defeat evil.

There were more than 700 war ships on the waters of Normandy that day, firepower never before seen on the open ocean. The men would be landing with tanks and guns and grenades and enough explosives to blow up a small town. But their most potent weapon by far was the courage to face their foes in open combat with the full knowledge that doing so was likely to get them killed. We ask ourselves quite properly, would I have been capable of such a feat? The answer will likely tell us much about ourselves.

Because in those last frantic minutes before hitting the beach, as grown men wept and prayed and steeled themselves for the supreme test of their young lives, they must have found something deep within themselves, something they could mentally and emotionally grasp and hold onto so real and palpable it must have been. What was it? An image of their family? A remembrance of love and closeness that wrapped itself around them and made them feel safe? Or perhaps it was the simple recognition of the here and now with a sublime faith that He that arbitrates our fate has placed me in His keeping and if these be my last moments, let them be meaningful ones.

Whatever rushed thoughts were coursing through their minds as they splashed ashore under some of the most intense combat ever experienced by American fighting men, their courage allowed them to disobey the most primal of instincts to flee for safety and walk into the teeth of the enemy’s fire. And then, the supreme test. Historian Stephen Ambrose:

They were getting butchered where they were all the sea wall because the Germans had it all zeroed in with their mortars that were coming down on top of them. And, “Over here, Captain,” “Over here, Lieutenant, over here.” A sergeant looked at this situation and said, “The hell with this. If I’m going to get killed, I’m going to take some Germans with me.” And he would call out, “Follow me,” and up he would start. Hitler didn’t believe this was ever possible. Hitler was certain that the soft, effeminate children of democracy could never become soldiers. Hitler was certain that the Nazi youth would always outfight the Boy Scouts, and Hitler was wrong.

The Boy Scouts took them on D-Day. Joe Dawson led Company G. He started off with 200 men. He got to the top of the bluff with 20 men, but he got to the top. He was the first one to get there. He’s going to be introducing President Clinton tomorrow at Omaha Beach. John Spaulding was another. He was a lieutenant. Many of them are nameless. I don’t know their names. I’ve talked to men who’ve said, “I saw this lieutenant and he tossed a grenade into the embrasure of that fortification, and out came four Germans with their hands up. I thought to myself, hell, if he can do that, I can do that.” “What was his name?” I will ask. “Geez, I don’t know. I never found out his name. I never saw him before, and I never saw him again, but he was a great man. He got me up that bluff.”

“Unknown but to God” and history, I suspect. In the end, whatever gave them the inner strength to keep going in the face of such murderous opposition, it was as inspirational then as it is today.

It is fitting and proper that we remember their courage today, the young men who lived and died the word courage. But we must also question ourselves about our commitment to that memory. Does it have meaning beyond the misty eyed reminisces of old men? Can we still summon forth the will to perform great deeds in a cause that reaches far beyond our narrow little corner of planet earth in which we live and love and die?

At the moment, the answer to that last question is unknown. But I daresay the fate of the nation rests upon a positive response. For unless we are willing to propel ourselves beyond our own selfish, comfortable existence and find the strength to confront the evil that seeks to destroy us, we are more likely to end up a victim of our own hubris rather than triumphant with the knowledge that we, like the men of D-Day, brought to life the word courage and made it once again something to be lived and felt in our hearts, ever mindful of the sacrifice of those who came before us.

Most of you know that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama held a secret meeting at an undisclosed location in Washington, D.C. yesterday.

What you don’t know is that The House has obtained a super secret transcript of their brief but telling conversation.

The meeting took place at a secret hideway used by Mrs. Clinton to decompress after especially tough days on the Hill or the campaign trail. The joint statement released by both sides only gives the bare bones of what was discussed:

“Senator Clinton and Senator Obama met tonight and had a productive discussion about the important work that needs to be done to succeed in November,” their campaigns said in joint statement.

Herre’s what really went on.

*******************************************************
HRC: (Opening door): Senator Obama, how nice of you to come.

BHO: My pleasure, Senator Clinton. I sincerely hope we can paper over any differences we might have and bring this party together in order to defeat the Republicans in November.

HRC: (Giggling) Um…sure Barry. Whatever you say. Won’t you sit down?

BHO:  Alright. (Glances at coffee table top) I’m not sure I appreciate the symbolism of the dueling pistols, Hillary.

HRC: (Innocently) Er, symbolism? Oh, those old things? They belonged to Andy Jackson, you know.

BHO: Jackson was a slaveowner.

HRC: And a man who knew how to settle political arguments (eyes gleaming). Shall we say dawn, in front of the Lincoln Memorial, at 20 paces?

BHO: Did you bring me over here to challenge me to a duel?

HRC: You said you wanted to settle our differences. I think we should explore all the options.

BHO: I think not.

HRC: Oh, very well. Rock, paper, scissors it is then.

BHO: What are you talking about?

HRC: Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper…are you telling me you never played that game?

BHO: Hillay, can we please get serious about this? We’re talking about the future of the country here.

HRC: So it’s serious you want to be? Very well then, I’ll cut you for the nomination - high card wins.

BHO: (Exasperated) Senator Clinton, in case you haven’t noticed, I’ve already sewn up the nomination. I’ve got the delegates. I’ve got the Superdelegates. Howard Dean loves me. The press adores me.

HRC: No.

BHO: (Smiling patiently) Now Hillary, you’ve got to face the facts.

HRC: No.

BHO: I won fair and square. You’ve got to accept that it’s over for you.

HRC: (Voice rising) Over? Who says it’s over? Nothing is over until I say it is.

(Male voice from the bedroom) You tell ‘em hon.

BHO: Who’s that. Don’t tell me it’s…

HRC: For God’s sake, Bill. You really can’t keep your mouth shut about anything, can you? C’mon out now. No use trying to hide.

WJC: (Sheepishly) I’s just takin’ a nap, is all.

BHO: You’re not even supposed to be here, Mr. President.

HRC: He’s right, Bill. Run along now.

WJC: But pumpkin, you need me.

HRC: No, Barry’s right. This is between us. You go sit at the bar across the street and I’ll meet you there when this is over.

WJC: Yes sugar.

HRC: And Bill - keep your hands off the waitresses.

(Exit a chastened WJC)

BHO: (Wryly) Any more surprises?

HRC: Perhaps we should cut to the chase. I am prepared to offer you the Ambassadorship to Senegal if you concede the nomination.

BHO: (Losing patience) Now see here, I’ve had just about enough of this nonsense. If you…

HRC: Not good enough for you, eh? Very well. How about Secretary of Commerce? We could use a bright lad like you in the cabinet.

BHO: (Incredulous) Do you live in a dreamworld? I’m it! I’m the chosen one! The party has spoken.

HRC: These kinds of temporary setbacks are common in politics. I’m still very much alive in this race.

BHO: How can you say that? Every network, every wire service, every major newspaper has annointed me as the nominee.

HRC: But only on paper, Barry. We both know that the people support me, that their hearts belong to me. Ask any white, middle class Democrat and they’ll tell you who should be the nominee.

BHO: Still playing the race card? I thought better of you once.

HRC: Not at all my half Kenyan friend. Facts are facts. And since I’m feeling especially generous today, I’ll tell you what I’ll do. If you concede the nomination, once I’m president I’ll make you Ambassador to the United Nations and back your bid for Illinois governor in 2012.

BHO: I feel like I’ve landed on another planet.

HRC: Sorry, I promised that post to Edwards.

BHO: Do I have to publicly humiliate you to get you to see reason? I didn’t want to do this but I must tell you, I have pictures…

HRC: Pictures?

BHO: Of your husband. In the bridal suite of the International Hotel in Bangkok.

HRC: What’s he doing?

BHO: Do you remember the “Miss Universe Pageant” held there a few months ago? Let’s just say that Bill was engaged in a little private judging with three of the contestants in the “out of swimsuit” category.

HRC: I see. Well, that almost tops my tape of Michelle going off about “Whitey” at Trinity United from a few years ago.

BHO: You…you actually have that tape.

HRC: Yup.

BHO: Yes, but that still doesn’t change the fact that I’m the nominee and that you appear to be prepared to wreck the party to contest that notion.

HRC: (Resigned) Oh, very well. With the press in your pocket, there really doesn’t appear to be much hope for me anyway. So when are you going to name me your Vice Presidential nominee?

BHO: (Sputtering) You can’t be serious. Why your husband alone is enough to keep you off the ticket. He’s a time bomb waiting to go off not to mention how truly nasty he was all throughout the campaign. Besides, I don’t feel like hiring a food taster every time we sit down to eat. Never - never in a million years would I even consider naming you vice president on the ticket.

HRC: Right. But when are you going to make the announcement?

BHO: I need an aspirin…

(End of transcript)