Tag Archives: Democrat Party

Presidential Prerogative

A day after President Barack Obama announced that he would support the continued use of military tribunals to dispose of some cases involving terrorists I read that Karl Rove was questioned by federal prosecutors regarding an investigation related to the firing of U.S. Attorneys during the Bush administration.

Yesterday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs danced like a boxer dodging blows. His response to questions should have started with…The President of the United States believes modified military tribunals are the best way to handle these issues. That should have been the end of the discussion. Obama was elected President and he has the prerogative to change his mind. No explanation necessary. But, Mr. Gibbs sounded like an unprepared 8th grader presenting a book report.

Presidential prerogative: Mr. Obama, if he accepted that concept, would also have to accept that the President has the right to make many decisions, including who will be prosecuting attorney for the United States. If he chooses to fire U.S. Attorneys, individuals appointed to serve at the pleasure of the President, then he can. If the President chooses to stop the release of CIA photos, he can. If the President chooses to modify the rules and continue military tribunals upon further consideration, that’s his decision.

A President exercises the right to be surrounded and supported by the people he chooses. If a President chooses to release individuals who are appointed, but not serving lifetime appointments, then why not fire them? Did anyone forget that President Clinton did the same thing? Is the U.S. Attorney investigating those firings as well?

The ingenue, Senator Obama, shifted to lead actor, President Obama, but had no idea the magnitude and impact of his earlier naive speeches. The knee-jerk liberals elected the ingenue but increasingly find disappointment in the lead actor. Grow up! The administration needs to “act like a man” in the words of Don Corlene to Johnny Fountain. Make a decision and everyone in the administration should stop APOLOGIZING for decision making. If y’all don’t want to make necessary decisions, Mr. Cheney would be happy to do it for you.


Leave a comment

Filed under Media, News, Politics, Presidents

A Bad New Year for Democrats

As we approach the beginning of a new Congress and the inauguration of the “change” president-elect Barack Obama, the Democrat Party faces old school challenges. As the tally for the U.S. Senate stands now, three Democrats seats remain unfilled.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, under the specter of indictment for offering a Senate seat to the highest bidder, appointed a Democrat with a track record and credentials to fill the Illinois Senate seat vacated by the president-elect. U.S. Senate Democrat leaders and the Illinois Secretary of State both balked at seating ANYONE appointed by Blagojevich given his recent history. Now legal authorities question whether anyone can stop the seating of Buris as the governor has unfettered discretion even though he has abused that discretion. This Democrat infighting cannot be beneficial to the president elect.

In New York, Senator Hillary Clinton, former presidential candidate, is now an appointee for the Obama cabinet. Two complications bubble up in this situation. First, will Governor Patterson appoint JFK’s daughter Caroline Kennedy to take Clinton’s seat? In face of complaints that Kennedy is untested and lacks credentials, Patterson, according to reports, continues to consider Kennedy as a candidate. Kennedy’s self-promotion tours failed based on news accounts. If nominated, can she get reelected? Is that something that Patterson should consider? Would Kennedy need to be able to campaign or will name recognition be enough?

On January 3, 2008, the New York Times reported the appearance of impropriety for Senator Clinton after reviewing the financial records of former President Bill Clinton’s foundation. A developer Robert J. Congel donated $100,000 to Bill Clinton’s foundation during the course of Hillary Clinton’s promotion and advocacy of Congel’s bid for tax breaks to expand and renovate a mall in Syracuse. Under normal circumstances, Bill Clinton’s finances would not be under such scrutiny. In consideration for a nomination of Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton agreed, as a condition of such nomination, to disclose these financial documents. Should the Senate simply ignore the coincidence?

Further consider, that Hillary Clinton’s husband received donations from countries with which she will be required to negotiate, threaten and work with if she is confirmed by the Senate. Is this complicated relationship-the Clinton marriage/financial union as viewed in light of the foundation donations-an appropriate spectacle to be considering during this already stressful and tenuous political time? Will Barack Obama caste Hillary Clinton aside to avoid the further specter of corruption? Has he read “Blood Sport”?

Finally, Al Franken. Senate Republicans vow to block Franken taking a seat in the US Senate while legal challenges are pending. Legal challenges, you ask? Yes, as the recount continued during November and December, previously uncounted votes for Franken were “discovered” in hidden places. Seriously, does this pass the sniff test? Do the people of Minnesota really want us to believe that their bureaucrats are THAT incompetent?

So, it seems that during this joyous time for Democrats, the party shows signs of its own fissures. Among his other duties both domestic and international, Barack Obama should add unifier of the Democrat party. No one else has stepped into that breach. If he wants to pass his stimulus/bailout/taxpayer relief bill quickly, the president elect needs to mediate these problems. Otherwise, Congress will stalemated and the Senate Democrats will be 3 votes down!


Filed under Congress, Democrat Party, Media, News, Presidents, Senator Clinton, Senator Obama

Re-establishing a Political Party

As President Elect Barack Obama speaks to the press, announces appointments and generally remains in the headlines, the media write about the revamping of the Republican party. Here’s my bit of advice for Libertarians, Republicans and Democrats: FIND A MESSAGE and STICK TO IT.

While the Libertarians do a fine job of publicizing their message, their candidates rarely reflect a majority of their platform issues. Libertarian candidates always get stymied by the media fascination with legalizing drugs. These two issues need to be clarified before that party will make any real headway in the political process. Libertarians need to siphon off the liberal Republicans increasingly disaffected by the conservative bent of that party.

Democrats and Republicans need to stop sounding like each other. A classic example of the policy meld between the two parties is an ad run by the national Democratic Senatorial Committee this weekend against Saxby Chambliss. The ad indicates that Chambliss’s vote for the bailout makes Chambliss “anti-middle class”. Really, as I recall the Democrats proposed and re-proposed (after Republicans defeated it) the bill to get it passed to rescue the AIG and their ilk. NOW the Democrats use their own bill to label Chambliss. How truly ironic! But, the bailout is a classic example of the reality of Congress. Each party seeks one thing: reelection. The candidates do not espouse ideals or philosophy, nope just put me back in office.

The Republicans and Democrats entered into a tacit agreement: MAB-mutually assured benefit. Republican members of Congress voted for the tax bailout proposed by Democrats and the Republican administration in an effort to appear active and interested in “fixing” the economy. Democrats just want to give away money. The vote: mutually assured benefit. All the politicians claim to have taken action to stave off economic destruction.

Unfortunately, neither party had an ideology or economic platform on which to rely because party platforms mean nothing. Platform is just a suggested ideology foisted upon members but rarely referred to or relied on by party members. No, the primary concern of our elected officials is to get reelected.

Until each major party determines to what ideology it subscribes and figures out that a strong engaging personality is NOT an ideology, neither party can move forward and improve what that party has to offer to voters. 

Voters however need to learn to be discriminating in their choices. Test the speeches and ideology of the smooth taking candidates. Actually read a newspaper or the internet for more than the obituaries, comics and puzzle. Realize that Brangelina and Jennifer Anniston have less impact on their lives than an Act of Congress. A change in the voting populace will necessarily catalyze change in the parties. Just pray that change occurs sooner rather than later…


Filed under Media, News, Politics

The Democrat Plague: Foot in Mouth Speech

Senator Clinton now apologizes for any insult that may have inured from her analogy to former Senator Bobby Kennedy’s campaign during which Senator Kennedy murdered. Senator Clinton and Senator Obama spend quite abit of time apologizing for or excusing misstatements. Neither candidate appears to think before speaking. Senator Clinton’s apology however rings more in the tone of “I’m sorry if I offended anyone, but I’m not sorry for the analogy.” Senator Obama also “misspoke” in San Francisco when he demeaned small town people. His explanation, “that didn’t come out the way I meant it to.” Neither apologizes for the thought or expresses a change of opinion, no they just what people to forgive their thoughtless speech without intending to change the way the candidate thinks or perceives the American public.

Senator Clinton and Senator Obama both lack a skill necessary to diplomacy: tack and timing. Neither candidate understands that the nouveau political philosophy of asking for forgiveness instead of thinking before one speaks creates rancor among voters and adversaries. What would happen if either Senator, as president, insulted a foreign leader? “Oh, I apologize, that statement didn’t come out of my mouth the way I intended.” No, that is not acceptable. Such bad manners and training could result in a war, particularily if Senator Obama had his wish to negotiate with Iran and its hard line terrorist leader.

We all misspeak but when your every word is being heard and tracked by media and foreign leaders, shouldn’t you be held to a higher standard? Voters should consider who and what they want in a President based on criteria other than race, gender or one SPECIFIC political issue.


Filed under 2008 Election, Democrat Party, Media, News, Politics, Presidents, Senator Clinton, Senator Obama

Guam: Today’s Battleground Vote

Today, the people of Guam vote in their Democrat primary. Apparently, Guam has 4 regular delegates and 5 superdelegates. Neither candidate (Clinton or Obama) jetted to Guam for any last minute campaigning, but the pair continue to spar over even these few delegates.

How is it that a State with only 4 regular delegates has MORE super delegates than regular one? That disparity exhibits the inherent oddity of the entire process set up by the Democrat Party. Guam’s super delegates receive a larger say in the outcome of the primaries than the voters of Guam.

Why even have primary anyway? Why not just let the DNC make the decision? That’s what Howard Dean would do if he could. He just doesn’t have the credentials within the party for that kind of call. The Democrat Party needs to find a way to make this primary system of theirs just and fair. Right now, the primaries are a waste of time and money for tax payers when in reality the party big-whigs (yes, that’s how I want it spelled) make the decision just like in the old smoke filled backrooms.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Media, News, Politics

What’s the Point of A Convention?

Democrat Party Chairman Howard Dean declared that one candidate Senator Obama or Senator Clinton must drop out by June so that the party can unify. The Democrat Party convention scheduled for August should be the deciding factor, NOT the party chair, isn’t that the point of the convention? The Convention, not the party leadership cadre, decides who the party’s candidate will be. Mr. Dean should remember his place as leader NOT dictator.

Dean acknowledged that party rules do not require many delegates to make a decision before the August Convention. So, why is Dean continuing to press for one candidate? Because this brouhaha between Clinton and Obama will only deteriorate. To date mud slinging has been the weapon of choice, what if they pull out the big guns and destroy the party? So be it.

Perhaps it’s time for a new party and a new ideology. Not since Lincoln has this country seen a great ideological shift based on a different confederation of ideas. Honestly, the ideas and actions of BOTH parties (Democrat and Republican) in this campaign to date are not that different.

For change in this country, we need people who understand change. These candidates know no change. Status quo will be the result.

What do we as a country need? A new party of individuals with ideas and grassroots energy. The Founders provided us with both a benefit and curse in this respect: checks and balances. Checks and balances prevented FDR from packing the Supreme Court, prevents the rabble in Congress from making law without some oversight from the President and the Supreme Court.

We need all of the disgruntled BUT concerned voters, the interested but feed up citizens to come together and change government at all levels of government. Changing the President will bring only grid lock (which might not be a bad thing).

Just think about it.

1 Comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Media, News, Politics

Good Fences Make Bad Leadership

The cadre of people running the Democrat Party and the left leaning media wield Religion and Guns as weapons against the Republican Party, not each other. To the great surprise of the tunnel-visioned elitist left leadership and its mouthpieces, voters hold wide and differing opinions on Religion and Guns, and just about every other issue that can be contrived.

The law-abiding citizens of the United States are blessed with all the fundamental rights bestowed on every human at birth. Most particularly at issue today: Guns and Religion. The Editoral Page of the New York Times opines on April 16, 2008, that Guns rights and Religion are not Democrat issues.

Simply erecting a fence between Republicans and Democrats to contain an issue does not prevent voters, real live human beings, from jumping the fence on that particular issue. The leadership of the Democrat Party and its mouthpieces should ask Regular Janes and Joes how they feel about the issues. These Janes and Joes vote for the person they feel would best represent their interests NOT the person who carries a particular party tag.

Senator Clinton discovered the fence jumpers following Senator Obama’s insult of Regular Folks while speaking in San Francisco. The media likely do not comprehend the hubbub about the issue. Regular people hold opinions. Just ask. Senator Clinton exploits the issue now because she has little else new to offer. Senator Obama’s lack of communication with Regular People left him WIDE OPEN for attack.

In order to have a substantive conversation with these Regular Folks, the Democrat Party would be required to acknowledge that Regular Folks, not the high end, money-gushing liberals, provide the votes that decide an election. And that, sadly, will never happen.


Filed under 2008 Election, Media, Politics