As both the right and left engage in their favorite pastime – The Blame Game – when it comes to assigning responsibility for the mess we’re in with gas prices, I’ve been doing a slow burn about both sides’ singular avoidance of placing blame on the one group who truly deserves it.

Every red blooded American who has voted over the past 30 years – Republican and Democrat – for federal lawmakers who promised, in effect, that this day would come bears the primary responsibility for high gas prices.

We the voters made concious and deliberate choices to elect presidents, members of Congress, and state legislators who ran on a platform that condemned nuclear power and swore to oppose the building of any more plants. If, over the last 30 years, we had replaced the majority of our oil and coal burning plants with nuclear powered generators, we could have saved about half a million bbl a day or 5% of the total imports of 10 million bbl a day.

That doesn’t sound like much but the “speculation premium” added to the current price of oil – about $40 according to the Wall Street Journal – is based on a perceived tightening of the market by 2-3%. There’s a good chance that premium wouldn’t even exist with the savings realized by using safe, clean nuclear power.

We, the voters, also made conscious and deliberate choices in electing everyone from members of Congress to local selectmen who would oppose the building of new refineries. “Not in my backyard” was the refrain of the last 30 years which has seen exactly zero refineries built in this country and 50 refineries closed down. Incredibly, we import about 3.5 million bbl of finished petroleum products every day. This lack of refining capacity has put pressure on our ability to stockpile gas, deisel, and other products that would also dampen speculation and give us a much needed cushion in supply that would stabilize oil prices.

We the voters also made conscious and deliberate choices to elect members of Congress, governors, and state legislators who promised not to drill offshore of all but a handful of states. How much oil is there just waiting for the drill bit? The government estimates around 20 billion bbl which sounds like a lot but only represents the amount of oil we would use in about 3 years. But other estimates from oil companies and other energy experts puts the amount of oil offshore considerably higher. The point isn’t that it would supply ALL of our needs for just a few years. It could never be pumped out that fast anyway. But no one doubts that it could make a sizable dent in our current 10 million bbl a day fix we need from other countries.

A word about the Bakken field which has been receiving some press lately (for obvious reasons). There is a huge disparity between government estimates of how much oil is under South Dakota and Montana and how much there is according to independent energy groups. The government says 21 billion bbl. Other scientific studies put the number at 500 billion bbls. As contrast, Saudi Arabia has proven reserves of about 260 billion bbls.

What has scientists and drillers so excited about this huge field of oil is that recent advances in oil drilling technology may make a large part of that field available for exploitation. To give you an idea, as recently as 1995, the government claimed the field contained only 150 million bbls of recoverable oil. To raise that estimate to 21 billion bbl astonishing.

The key is a breakthrough in drilling technology known as “sideways drilling.” Apparently, most of the oil is unavailable unless that technology is used to exploit the find. At the moment, no one knows how much of this light, sweet crude could contribute to our stocks of oil. But they are finding ways to extract more and more of the find all the time which can only bode well for the future.

This doesn’t help our immediate pain which brings me back to where the blame should lie for this fiasco. We voters made perfectly rational and logical choices to elect politicians who refused to drill offshore, in ANWR, on federal lands – anywhere one spotted owl or caribu might be affected.

There is nothing wrong with this, I might add. There are many among us who continually pat themselves on the back for being good stewards of the land, fighting the good fight against greedy oil companies who would rape the land and coastline in the name of profit.

These same people are much less willing to pat themselves on the back for getting us into our current dilemma. Again, there is nothing basically wrong with being in favor of protecting the environment at all costs – the most obvious cost being cheap gasoline. The question is why are we not accepting responsibility for what is clearly something that is our collective fault.

It has been proven that environmental protection is a luxury that only rich nation’s can afford. We have been willing to pay this price both because it is the right thing to do and because we could afford a small loss in economic growth in exchange for cleaner air and water as well as protecting wildlife.

But times change. The world is changing. And unless we can find a way to balance legitimate concerns about the environment with our need for more oil, the present situation will continue and get worse. This means that environmentalists have to acknowledge that the policies they support are leading us to ruin while the pro-drilling crowd must acknowledge that we can’t go drilling everywhere there’s a drop of oil to be found.

And we the voter have to start electing politicians to office who are realistic about what needs to be done. Can we maintain our committment to a clean environment while increasing our domestic oil supply? I think it can be done – if the political will to do it can be found.

Watching the cable nets talk about the death of Tim Russert at age 58 – and they are all on the story – you are struck by the sheer number of journalists and on air personalities whose professional lives had been touched by this man.

Tom Brokaw put it well with his typical understatement:

He was “one of the premier political journalists and analysts of his time,” Tom Brokaw, the former longtime anchor of “NBC Nightly News,” said in announcing Russert’s death. “This news division will not be the same without his strong, clear voice.”

In addition to his on-air duties, Russert was a Vice President of NBC News – a position in which he fought almost daily battles with the corporation over what to cover as news. He was a Bureau Chief in Washington as well which made him something of a rennaisance man in the news business handling executive, administrative, and talent duties with a practiced ease.

But Russert will be known for his combative yet polite interview techniques that had the effect of breaking down a target into a quivering hunk of jello while boring in and, with bulldog tenacity, not letting go until a particular question was answered. He would ask the same question a half dozen times until he was satisfied that he had at least a partial answer to his question.

The list of honors is impressive:

Russert’s March 2000 interview of Sen. John McCain shared the 2001 Edward R. Murrow Award for Overall Excellence in Television Journalism. He was also the recipient of the John Peter Zenger Award, the American Legion Journalism Award, the Veterans of Foreign Wars News Media Award, the Congressional Medal of Honor Society Journalism Award, the Allen H. Neuharth Award for Excellence in Journalism, the David Brinkley Award for Excellence in Communication and the Catholic Academy for Communication’s Gabriel Award. He was a member of the Broadcasting & Cable Hall of Fame.

I really feel like we are losing one of the last of a dying breed with Russert. Only in their dreams can an Olbermann or Matthews or O’Reily or Cooper be the kind of relentless searcher for truth as Russert clearly was. Despite the fact that his background was in politics rather than journalism, it seems he took to journalism like a duck takes to water.

Some may find bias in the way he interviewed conservatives compared to his interviews with liberals. But I didn’t see it. His job was to ask questions and get answers. And few in the business were so relentless in pursuit of answers be they Democrats or Republicans. There was no such thing as a softball interview where Russert was concerned.

According to people who knew him, he was extremely well informed, spending hours every morning scanning the wires and news reports so that he was up to speed with what was going on. Speaking from experience, I can tell you it is no easy task. I might spend 3-4 hours before sitting down to write anything reading MSM coverage as well as blogs. Russert spent that amount of time and more just so that he could do his job.

A life cut short – a well lived life. We mourn the passing of someone and will miss the spice he brought to political journalism.

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.

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

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)

Reading the dozens of blog posts about the apparent and imminent demise of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, you notice immediately how most writers tend to fall back on cliche infested encomiums or sometimes humorously imaginative “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead” screeds of hate-spewing bile. There doesn’t seem to be much middle ground when talking about Hillary Clinton which is the way its been since at least her crack about not staying at home and baking cookies for her man during the 1992 presidential campaign.

That utterance placed her firmly on one side of the great cultural chasm that the man who vanquished her now promises to bridge. From what I can gather, the way Barack Obama intends to do this is by showing the rest of us that we are a bunch of red state goober chewin’, tobacco spittin’, flag wavin’, gun carryin’, bible thumpin’, interbreedin’ morons who cling to religion and hate the coloreds because we have yet to have experienced the healing powers of the messiah-lite.

Gee. I can’t wait.

Hillary actually made a more spirited effort to bridge that chasm during her campaign than Obama ever imagined. Yes, she may be a born again populist in the best sense of the word in that she attempted to speak to the concerns of the vast middle of her party and much of America. And yes, she sometimes shamelessly played the class card, trying to pit one class of Americans against another. But she was actually in the process of building an entirely new Democratic party coalition – one that resembled the old FDR New Deal grouping with not urban elites as the centerpiece of the machine but rather lunch pail Democrats and seniors as her base.

She would have returned the Democrats to advocating a strong national defense, a muscular foreign policy, and a newly discovered fiscal sanity. Hillary Clinton demonstrated over the course of this campaign that she has no illusions about the nature of our enemies nor does she share Obama’s faith in the efficacy of discourse unless the ground is well and truly fertilized beforehand.

Of course, national health insurance and other programs more identified with socialism would also have come along for the ride – reason enough not to vote for her from my point of view. But at least her policies would have been grounded in reality and not the pie in the sky, feel good rhetoric of Flim Flam Man Obama.

If it sounds like I’m sorry to see her retire, you’d be half right. A Clinton-McCain race would have been a barnburner, one for the ages. Both candidates would have been trying to appeal to basically the same voters while paying lip service to their rabid base. As a result, the hard left and right would slowly become unhinged – the entertainment value of such an occurrence worth charging admission for. The spectacle of both candidates being skewered by their own while fighting tooth and nail for the great middle of the American electorate would have been good for the country.

On the other hand, I can honestly say I am sick to death of the Clintons and their tactics. And the prospect of Bill Clinton slinking in and out of view during the campaign is enough for me to be grateful the Clintons will now be forced into a secondary role – even if by some miracle Obama were to offer her the Vice Presidential nomination.

Despite being imbued as he is with an elevated sense of his own abilities, Obama would be absolutely nuts to choose Hillary as a running mate. As Dick Morris has rightly pointed out, you wouldn’t just get Hillary in the deal. It would be a Menage a trois with Bill Clinton the wildest wild card who ever attached himself to any campaign in American history running loose and fancy free among the electorate.

Lock up your wives and daughters and hide the silverware if that were to happen.

But I don’t think we need worry too much about a Obamahill fusion ticket. There appears to be genuine animosity in the Obama camp directed against Clinton not only for their tactics but because she didn’t concede the race earlier despite having no chance at overtaking the frontrunner. The Obama camp was forced to spend tens of millions of dollars and maintain a schedule that concentrated on winning primaries rather than being allowed to pivot and start gearing up for the general election.

The only way a “Dream Ticket” will emerge is if Obama is absolutely convinced that he can’t win without her on the ticket. Despite some troubling numbers in blue states like Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York that show McCain very competitive against Obama, there is no proof that Obama will go down to defeat if he fails to add Hillary to the ticket. Hence, a more likely pick would be a national security Democrat or another woman.

So despite a valiant effort that has earned her the respect of some conservatives like myself, Hillary Clinton has come up short in realizing what is probably a life long dream to be President of the United States. Those of us who have had our dreams shattered can empathize with how she is feeling right about now. Some may enjoy kicking her when she’s down but that’s not for me. I will fight her hammer and tongs over what will be an effort to pass national health insurance regardless of who wins in November and her other schemes. But I will do it with a new found appreciation for her tenacity and a recognition that she is more than just an empty pantsuit.

Here’s a sample of my latest PJ Media column – a look at what’s ahead in the campaign:

 But regardless of how he achieved it, Obama’s victory is one of those “hinge” moments in American history where a door is opened and the country walks through it, leaving the past behind forever. Putting politics aside for one moment, the victory of this talented, passionate, brilliant man whose life story is perhaps even more incredible than his singular achievement in winning the nomination should be a source of enormous pride for all Americans. We should revel in it for a few moments, if only because there has been so little to truly unite us in recent years.

But once the sheen is off the novelty of the event, it’s back to business – the business of trying to figure a way to win enough states to get to 270 electoral votes. Nothing else matters from here on out and both candidates – John McCain and Obama – will mix and match the states on the electoral map, weighing every decision against how far it advances their plan for victory.

Last night saw the unveiling of the outline of those plans when both candidates gave speeches that, for all intents and purposes, kicked off the general election campaign. And for Hillary Clinton, last night was a strange and sad interlude. A campaign not suspended. A race not conceded. But a clear realization by the candidate that her consuming desire to be president would not be achieved.

Earlier in the day, she allowed her staff to mention that she would accept the Vice Presidential nomination if it was offered. But there is much more to that acknowledgment than meets the eye. One school of thought holds that she would not have put her name forward so aggressively if she thought it would be refused. Another side of the coin is that she allowed her name to be mentioned because she knew Obama would never choose her.

She doesn’t want to appear the supplicant begging for scraps from Obama’s table. But at the same time, she doesn’t want to be seen as thrusting herself forward either. It is a difficult position for her to be in, and over the next few days the two candidates and their staffs will probably feel each other out carefully, with Obama making the decision whether the “dream ticket” will become a reality.

I’ve listened to several speeches over the last year by Barack Obama and read the transcripts to a few others and what strikes me the more I read and understand what the candidate is saying is the truly revolutionary nature of his campaign and that he is dead serious about turning this country leftward – radically leftward – in all areas of government and private life.

Now Americans by tradition are a mostly centrist bunch. We are extremely wary of politicians who promise dramatic change unless the times call for it. Even then, we rarely slip too far to the right or left – befitting a mature, responsible citizenry of a republic. Reagan may have been the most ideological president of the 20th century but no one can say he didn’t compromise to get most of what he wanted. Pragmatic conservatism was the order of the day with Reagan presiding over a revolution in the way people looked and felt about government.

But Obama comes from a different planet than Reagan. And you can start noticing the differences when Obama first graduated from college and, like many young people, began searching for something to give his life meaning:

He went to socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn and started lecturing his relatives until they worried he’d become “one of those freaks you see on the streets around here.”

They had good cause to worry about Obama’s radicalism. You can trace his journey to the hard left by looking at his early employment record. Graduating from Colombia in 1983, Obama went to work for the staid, establishment capitalist concern Business International Corporation.

He didn’t stay there long. He moved on to the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) – one of a network of Ralph Nader creations that boasts a consistent anti-business record of achievement – with mixed results.

But he must have been searching for something else – something that could get him more directly involved in radically altering the system. In 1985, he found just what he was looking for; he answered a help wanted ad for a position as a community organizer for the Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) in Chicago.

There are several different takes on Obama’s experience as an organizer. This hagiagraphic piece in US News paints a saintly picture of Obama – a selfless, hard working, mainstream black man only wanting to help the poor.

The reality was a little different. Trained in the Saul Alinsky method of organizing, Obama became quite adept at bringing the resentments and rage felt by African Americans against the white establishment to the surface:

He was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation, who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards. As with the panhandler, he could be aggressive and confrontational. With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain in their lives, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling a carrot of hope that they could make things better.”

It was during these years as a community organizer that Obama apparently met and befriended (or was befriended by) a young, passionate, radical priest named Father Michael Pfleger who was making quiet a name for himself as the youngest pastor in the Archdiocese of Chicago, ministering to a mostly African American congregation at St. Sabina’s on the south side. The two struck up a friendship that continues to this day.

What is it about Pfleger that attracted the young Obama? Was it Pfeger’s attempt to bridge the black experience in the protestant tradition with that of the Roman Catholic Church? This piece on Pfleger from 1989 shows that 1) the good father hasn’t changed much; and 2) why Obama may have been drawn to the then young priest:

But St. Sabina on Chicago’s South Side is not the typical black Catholic church. Ebony wood carvings, Ashanti foot stools and kinte cloths make the altar area look more like an African art gallery. Banners of red, black and green, the colors of African liberation, hang from the rafters, along with excerpts from the Black National Anthem. A 20-foot mural of a black Jesus looms over the altar.

Mass usually lasts two and a half hours, in which Father Pfleger assails racism and intolerance.

Recently, he defended Father Stallings. ‘’The cardinals say, ‘You’re mad,’ ‘’ Father Pfleger said, his voice rising. ‘’You’re damn right I’m mad. And I need to be mad. We need to be mad. There comes a time when you can’t be satisfied waiting and waiting and being told changes come from within. You can’t change it from within if you’re not in the room that’s making the decision. If you got no power, you can’t do nothing.’‘

For a young man seeking to internalize his black identity in a white world, it is no wonder Pfleger and Obama hit it off.

But beyond what Pfleger could do for his soul, Obama recognized Pfleger as a comer in the Byzantine world of Chicago politics where preachers and moneymen hold hands with politicians and political operators to grease the wheels of commerce, charity, and corruption.

The power relationships in Chicago depend on two things; one’s ability to shake the money tree in order to get what you want and the equally important knowledge of where to go and who to see to shake that tree. There are literally dozens of foundations and community groups that dispense grants to help neighborhoods and Father Pfleger utilized this network of grant givers to slowly build something of a secular community empire that attempted to affect the lives of his parishioners and residents of his neighborhood at the most basic of levels. After school programs for kids, workshops on how to work with a landlord to fix the plumbing, a program for seniors on medicare – the list of good deeds done by Pfleger in the community – with a little help from his political friends – is nearly endless.

Pfleger’s political power base was his south side church and the network of community groups that dotted the political landscape of the nearly powerless African American ghetto in that part of town. His incendiary rhetoric had already brought him to the attention of radical preachers like Jeremiah Wright while he showed his political skills by tapping south side politicians for grants to fund his community outreach programs.

Pfleger is a very serious Christian and takes the words of Jesus Christ at their most literal. I have speculated before that one thing that attracts Obama to radicals like Pfleger, Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, and James Meeks is their utter and total certainty in the righteousness of their cause. And if you listen to Pfleger for five minutes, there is no doubting the man’s sincerity about making whitey pay for centuries of oppression.

I will have more on Pfleger in an article I am writing for another publication. But for now, we can simply ask ourselves why we should think Obama has changed his stripes from the radical community organizer, admirer of radical priests and preachers, to this supposedly centrist, non ideological creation of the presidential campaign.

I find it hard to believe he has altered his basic political beliefs from the far left idealism of his youth. And I find it equally difficult to believe that eventually, someone in the media is going to ask him to reconcile the two faces of Obama – the radical agitator and the smooth, adroit “post partisan” candidate for president.