Buckeye RINO

I can’t fault John McCain and Barack Obama, though.  The questions put to them were about the same topics they’ve talked about again and again and again.

The only insightful forum so far that these two presidential candidates have participated in was at Saddleback Church.  McCain got a boost from it.

Since the MSM is in the tank for Obama, when they have moderated debates, they have ensured that the questions posed are in familiar territory for Obama.  Dull.  Boring.  Same-old same-old.

It would be nice to mix things up a bit and break some new ground during these debates, wouldn’t it?  But that might showcase Obama’s lack of experience and reveal rifts between Obama and the general public on the issues.

The most glaring omission?  The issue of illegal immigration.  Americans have an opinion on the issue.  I think we’d like some elaboration from both Obama and McCain on the issue.

It would even be nice if they were asked questions about legal immigration.

Apparently, the MSM, though, doesn’t view issues through the same prism as the general public.  There’s only one debate left, and the chances are dwindling that the MSM will pose any questions about illegal immigration to these candidates before Election Day.

There are many other questions that could have been asked that weren’t, even within the realm of economics and foreign policy, that would have broken fresh ground.  For example, on economics, the candidates could have been asked about trade policy, or their views on the prospects of reviving domestic manufacturing, or probing the behavior of the insurance industry.  On foreign policy, the candidates could have been asked about foreign affairs within our own hemisphere, since there have been schisms between the USA and Bolivia, Venezuela, and of course, Cuba.  Wouldn’t it make sense to ask about Cuba?  What should the USA be doing about the most unstable nation in the western hemisphere, Haiti?  Can Canada and Mexico be counted on as partners in weaning all of North America off foreign oil?

I’m not holding my breath, though.  I can sense that the fix is in.  I don’t think the MSM wants to raise such issues for fear that more Obama vulnerabilities will be exposed.

Head over to Michelle Malkin’s blog for a story that left my eyes as big around as saucers and broke my lower jaw as it thudded on the floor.

Here is the transcript and some screen shots of a skit about the bailout that aired on Saturday Night Live this past week.  Herbert and Marion Sandler were unflatteringly portrayed in the skit.  The Sandlers were subprime mortgage lenders that sold their holdings to Wachovia, which recently failed.

Michelle Malkin points out that you can no longer watch the skit as it originally aired online because NBC pulled it down and is deleting some questions about it from it’s message boards.  She connects the dots between the Sandlers, George Soros, and left-wing political groups.  Have these powerful, politically-connected moguls expressed anger toward NBC?  Apparently so, and it appears NBC is scared.

Officially, though, NBC says it’s just reworking the skit because it “didn’t meet NBC standards,” and the revised skit will soon be available online.

So much for media freedom.  Apparently it’s not free from the tyranny of moneyed interests.

The MSM is in uproar over what’s happening on Wall Street.  Merrill Lynch ran into the arms of Bank of America while Lehman Brothers essentially went bankrupt, with parts being bought by Barclays.  AIG is on the ropes.  The MSM shows images of workers leaving their offices after having cleaned out their desks.  I suppose we’re supposed to be horrified by these images of Wall Street workers out of a job.  I don’t wish for people to lose their jobs, but those losing their jobs on Wall Street seem like a blip on the radar of many Ohioans who have seen jobs leave the state for several years on end.  Wall Street has played a role in the economic crisis in Ohio, so I don’t think Ohioans are weeping that economic woes have finally come full-circle from Main Street all the way back to Wall Street.  Actually, though we, as Ohioans, may be tempted to tell Wall Street “Welcome to our world,” the truth of the matter is, the jobs outlook on Wall Street is still healthier than the jobs outlook in Ohio.  They don’t know the meaning of the word “bleak” yet.  But I understand the hype of Wall Street’s problems in the MSM.  After all, the capital of the MSM is New York City, which is where Wall Street is, so the story hits closer to home for the journalists covering it.

Nevertheless, the woes of Wall Street could worsen, and there could be dramatic ripples through the rest of the economy, which is why I wrote a post encouraging family preparedness.

The market does need to correct itself without the Federal government bailing it out, so I implore the government to stay away from AIG.  I still think the Federal government should not have bailed out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Michelle Malkin has a story of a photographer who made a deliberate decision to cast John McCain in the worst light possible.

In 2002, during my first run for office, I was in for a rude awakening, too.  My first-ever pic in the Elyria Chronicle-Telegram had a sickly green tint to it.  My opponent’s pic was a healthy pink by comparison.

It happens.

Among the things that Sarah Palin seems to do well is that she gets better with practice.  Perhaps the “gotcha” mentality of the press isn’t so bad.  Since the MSM is so eager to capture a “gotcha” moment on videotape, Palin will be certain to have no shortage of opportunities to appear on TV.  I think she’s good for TV ratings, and I think more people will hear her message, and I think more people will accept her message.  These interviews, I believe, will do more good for the McCain-Palin ticket than paid advertising will do.  I hope there will be several more prime-time and evening news interviews in the very near future.

Have you ever seen the wrap-up for one show segue into the beginning of another show without a commercial in between?  Sometimes.  How about where minutes tick off the clock into the 2nd show, and still no “top-of-the-hour” commercial break?  Read the rest of this entry »

On September 11th, this year, Senator Barack Obama lunched with former President Bill Clinton.  What do you think they talked about?  I let my imagination run away with me, and here’s what I heard as a hypothetical fly on the wall . . .

Obama: Bill, I’m glad you invited me to lunch today.  I could use a few pointers.

Clinton:  I thought you might.

Obama:  I’ve done my best to tell that lie over and over and over again about McCain being the same thing as Bush, but I just haven’t been able to get people to buy into it the way people bought into your lie about not having sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.  The polls are headed the wrong way.

Clinton:  Listen to me, Barack, and listen well.  You don’t have to tell any lies until you have to file an affidavit under oath.  You should get the media to tell the lies for you so you can stay above the fray.

Obama: I try to get the media to work with me, but they’ve been to busy lavishing their attention on Sarah Palin.

Clinton:  Just say the word, and I’ll make sure that changes.

Obama: You can do that?

Clinton: Barack, I’ll have the media eating out of your hands.

Obama: Are you really that powerful, still?

Clinton:  Barack, there’s a lot you don’t know about me.  That’s OK.  You don’t need to know.  I just need some assurances from you.

Obama: Like what, Bill?

(Clinton leans in close to Obama’s ear and whispers very quietly while Obama’s eyes bulge and his jaw drops.)

Obama: (stammering)  Well, ah,  sure . . . Bill.  Um . . . yeah,  . . . uh . . . and you promise me the media will be  . . . uh . . . eating out of my hands?

Clinton:  You just watch.  The media will turn a blind eye to anything amiss with you and Joe Biden.  They will absolutely rip McCain and Palin to shreds.

Obama:  You’re sure about that?

Clinton:  Let’s play a simple word association game.  Ready?

Obama:  OK

Clinton: Paula Jones

Obama: Trailer park trash.

Clinton: See?  She’s the sexual harassment victim, but I’m the distinguished elder statesman while she’s just trailer park trash.  Nobody ever, ever, made the suggestion that I was the least bit sexist for using her, did they?

Obama: (eyes widening) You know something, Bill?  You’re right!  That was just masterful how you manipulated the coverage that way.

Clinton:  You came to see the right person, Barack.  I have . . . powerful . . . connections.  You just watch, Barack.  You’ll see fewer and fewer Republican pundits on the networks to present any opposing views as the news anchors just rake McCain and Palin over the coals.  When they convene panels of experts to offer political analysis, it’ll be just journalists and a few Democrats,  . . . but mostly journalists, just to increase the distance between you and the mudslinging.  If a Republican pundit is on a panel, they’ll get less than two seconds to give a sound bite before they’re cut off.  It’s going to be beautiful, Barack.  ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, they’ll all do the dirty work for you.

Obama:  And Fox News?

Clinton:  Think positive, Barack.  Fox News is living on borrowed time.  Once you’re in the White House, the Fairness Doctrine will take care of Fox News.

Obama: (with a faraway look) Yeah . . . the Fairness Doctrine.

Clinton: Is it a deal?

Obama:  Sure,  . . . um . . . how soon will this all start?

Clinton: Tomorrow, if you like.

Obama:  Just like that?

Clinton:  Just like that . .  if you just say the word.

Obama: Cool.  Deal.  It’s a deal, Bill.

Clinton:  You know, Barack, you should have never disparaged the old style of politics.  Old style politics can be a powerful ally.

Obama:  Oh, you mean that talk about change and a new kind of politics?  Do you think I meant all that?  If you thought that, then maybe I’m getting almost as slick as you, Bill.  Maybe I’m almost there, after all.

(Obama and Clinton emerge from the room to greet reporters while exhanging winks and grinning ear to ear. I wish I could have heard what Clinton whispered to Obama.)

It’s a Johnny-come-lately to group think in comparison to MSNBC, but CNN is definitely defending Barack Obama and putting Sarah Palin in the cross-hairs.  Of course, some CNN personalities were always known to be on the left, like Carl Bernstein, Fareed Zakaria, Christiane Amanpour, and Jack Cafferty.  While some “impartial” CNN personalities, like Lou Dobbs and Larry King, remain above the fray, others, that used to appear to be independent, are now showing their true colors, including Campbell Brown, Soledad O’Brien, and Anderson Cooper.

Campbell Brown takes issue with Palin’s tale of the Alaskan Governor’s jet.  Palin put it on E-Bay.  Campbell Brown pointed out that the jet had to be sold at a loss to a broker because it didn’t sell on E-Bay.  What Campbell Brown doesn’t own up to is that Palin was truthful about putting the jet up for sale on E-Bay.  In fact, three attempts were made to sell the plane on E-Bay, so the Palin story is very true.  When no one came up with the minimum bid on E-Bay, it was sold at a loss to a broker, but at least the state of Alaska recouped some of the money put into the plane, let alone putting an end to the mounting price tag for fuel, maintenance, storage, etc., that the state was footing the bill for.   Wouldn’t it be nice if CNN did a survey of all the states to see which ones possessed a luxury jet that taxpayers financed for the use of their respective governors?  Or surveying which governors in recent history divested themselves of perks?  Such investigative reporting might reveal the secret to Palin’s high approval ratings.  Fat chance.  I don’t see CNN trying to figure out why the rest of the country doesn’t support their state governors as much as Alaska supports Palin.

Soledad O’Brien has taken the lead among CNN anchors investigating Sarah Palin on the parenting front.  Odd how male candidates and Hillary Clinton have never been under the gun by Soledad on the topic of parenting.  Clearly Palin is being singled out.  Soledad O’Brien and Campbell Brown have had to backpedal on these issues.  Erica Hill, among others, has been given the task of assembling focus groups in an attempt to justify O’Brien and Brown in their wielding of the double standard.

Then there’s the “trooper-gate” story being investigated by Drew Griffin.  The sound bites from this story will be circulated throughout the CNN broadcast day.  The full interview of the trooper reveals nothing that would disqualify Palin from office or answer the question of whether Palin abused her power.  An ex-administrator alleges that Palin fired him because he resisted firing the trooper.  The ex-administrator, Walter Monegan, was first given an opportunity to transfer to another position.  Instead, he chose to accept the termination and use it as a soap box to accuse Palin of interfering in personnel matters for personal reasons.  So far, reports only give us a “he said/she said” view, but Campbell Brown suspects the worst, because she assumes, according to what she said to Drew Griffin, that Palin doesn’t want the state legislature to wind up their investigation prior to the election.  She asked Drew Griffin if Palin had contrived any ways of postponing the resolution of the investigation until after the election.  Drew Griffin said, instead, that the legislature would likely try to move up the final disclosure date to October 10th.  I find the tag “trooper-gate” problematic because it suggests strongly that Palin did wrong even though the final conclusion on the matter has not been reached.  I would like to suggest that “good old boys” who get ousted from power are likely to not go quietly, and those on the wrong side of Palin’s reforms in the state legislature may be reveling in this opportunity to assign a demerit to Palin.

CNN is eager to use this unresolved “trooper-gate” to poke holes in McCain’s assertion that Palin is an accomplished reformer.  Uninvestigated by CNN is the whole Chicago political machine in dire need of reform that Obama would rather use as-is than shake up.  CNN is straining at gnats and swallowing camels.  Palin has clearly undertaken reforms that other politicians across the nation haven’t bothered to undertake.  CNN could reveal why voters are prone to distrust politicians in the first place by showing the prime examples of politicians who had the power to clean things up, but didn’t.  CNN shouldn’t be trying to disparage the reforms Palin has accomplished, because it sends a message to other politicians to not attempt reforms, because once one has caught the eye of the MSM for reforms, the MSM will try to tear the politician down.  Voters want politicians who will undertake reforms, and we don’t want the MSM to stand in opposition to them.

As for Campbell Brown’s much-ballyhooed interview of Tucker Bounds, McCain spokesperson, regarding Palin’s command role of the Alaska National Guard, it may be worthwhile to know the role that any state governor plays in being commander-in-chief over the National Guard.  However, Tucker Bounds is not the person who is likely to be the source of that information, and Brown (who knows that) wanted to run up the score on a spokesperson who was not thoroughly briefed on the matter.  Bounds should have anticipated the question, yes, but Brown should have shown better sportsmanship, and perhaps asked for a referral to someone who was qualified to answer the question.  Instead of locating the information by other means, CNN continues to air the same clip over again with the questions left unanswered.  I suggest that CNN isn’t interested in providing an answer.  They are interested only in a game of “gotcha,” where they managed to ask a question of a spokesperson that went unanswered.  Also, CNN ignores that Barack Obama has never had a command role over the National Guard, so they turn a blind eye to Obama’s glaring deficiencies, not acknowledging the emperor has no clothes.

MSNBC has chosen a liberal path as a way to boost their pathetic ratings.  CNN has much better ratings, and following the path of MSNBC will only erode their viewership.  CNN needs to reassess their commitment to the motto “no bias, no bull.”

The struggle to maintain “group think” on MSNBC continues.  The subject for today:  John McCain chose Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate on the Republican ticket for the U. S. Presidency.

Since the passing of Tim Russert, there has been evident strain within the on-air staff in the NBC news family.  MSNBC has positioned itself as the uber-liberal news network with Fox News as its nemesis.  Especially during the evening lineup, the network is in the tank for Obama.  Moderate, conservative and/or Republican voices are on the chopping block.  Dan Abrams has already had his program axed.  Keith Olbermann ushered Rachel Maddow into the time slot formerly occupied by Abrams.  Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough alternate between conforming to “group think” and asserting diverging views.  Pat Buchanan appears to be next on the chopping block, as Rachel Maddow, the rising star of the network, has already aired her grievances against Pat Buchanan, with Chris Matthews tag-teaming.

Tonight, Chris Matthews was playing more than “Hardball.”  I think he was trying to play “beanball,” trying to hit somebody with his hardest pitches.  He was practically unhinged, acting as if the McCain camp had played a dirty trick on him, and he was out for blood.  Chuck Todd chimed in with charges of “gimmicky” to reinforce the dirty trick notion.  Chris Matthews tried to tie Sarah Palin to Pat Buchanan’s most xenophobic cultural views in an attempt to assassinate both her character and build the case to give Buchanan the pink slip.  Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Rachel Maddow are working hard to demonize Buchanan as much as possible, perhaps hoping to make him look worse than Ayers and Rezko so that tying Palin to Buchanan appears more horrific than the ties between Ayers, Rezko and Obama.

Just like saying there’s no difference whatsoever between McCain and Bush is irresponsibly dishonest, so is equating Palin with Buchanan, and that is exactly the political hatchet job that Matthews was trying to pull off on his “Hardball” program.  Only Andrea Mitchell tried soften the bludgeoning blows that Chris Matthews was trying to land on Palin.

Matthews has also dishonestly overstated Palin’s views on homosexuality and abortion as being cruelly in violation of human rights, since that’s how Matthews was trying to characterize Buchanan.  Matthews is portraying Palin as a devout Buchanan disciple.  Unfortunately, there are no checks and balances at NBC to reign in Matthews excesses.

Olbermann is often seen as the one who really pushes the envelope for the extreme left on the network, but he softens his commentary with humor.  Matthews and Maddow have recently cut out the humor and have unveiled a downright savage demeanor.