Vice Presidential Training
Posted by admin - 29/03/08 at 12:03:47 amRepublican John McCain’s pick for 2nd in command of the United States of America
Why Obama Can’t Win…
Posted by admin - 25/03/08 at 09:03:12 am(Akiit.com) In spite of fawning media coverage, an unpopular Republican president and economic challenges, Democrat Barack Obama has not managed to build a very substantive lead over his Republican rival John McCain.
Recent polls show McCain closing the distance in key states and one national poll even had the Republican candidate with a slight lead. There are those that have of late attributed Obama’s lackluster polling to race. It happens that they are correct.
But then Barack Obama’s presidential run has always been about race. It has not, however, been about race as we most often envision it, as part and parcel of race-”ism“.
Most Americans are tired of race and are looking to move beyond it in a concrete way. Obama’s polling numbers have not stalled because he has hit the glass ceiling of white supremacy.
Barack has struggled because Americans no longer view him as a candidate that can transcend race. Many have, in fact, come to see him as ardently willing to manipulate race in order to gain a political advantage.
Rather than representing a different kind of politician, he then appears to be not so different from any number of liberal Black politicians that have graced the political stage.
The polls have not moved because he is off message.
The Democratic senator’s enormous celebrity was not achieved through any perceived brilliance in the areas of economics or foreign policy. The excitement of Obama was the potential to realize a vision of an America that finally lives up to her promise. A promise that is impossible so long as we are stratified by color and class consciousness. What Americans believed in was his ability to bring us one step closer to the embodiment of our national motto “E Pluribus Unum” - out of many one.
The irony is that Obama needs race; without it, the emperor has few clothes. For 40% of voters, his decidedly thin resume and new liberal policies are of little consequence. The trick is in convincing 11% of voters in the middle that he can indeed provide change they can believe in.
(more…)
John McCain And What to Expect Going Forward
Posted by admin - 21/03/08 at 11:03:37 pmJohn McCain is the mathematical favorite to get the Republican presidential nomination after Super Tuesday. McCain reigns in this new position of hierarchy due to several factors exclusive of the Republican conservative vote.
Two factors played a significant role in McCain’s ascension to probable nominee. His position is a product of the apocryphal liberal main stream media’s calculated adoration of him and a systematically undemocratic nominating process.
The liberal media has been fawning over McCain chiefly because of his aiding them in bashing the Republican party and his liberal position on immigration: The McCain-Kennedy Bill. The media had an extraordinary influence on his surge in the polls before Super Tuesday with its pro-McCain rhetoric and damaging critical rhetoric of his opponents.
The nominating process is fundamentally undemocratic for both the Republican and Democrat party, more so with the Democrat party with the use of Super Delegates. McCain, with the contradictory primary and caucus rules from state to state, has emerged with the support of Democrats, independents and faux Republicans before half the nation has had a chance to choose a nominee of their choice.
By the time Super Tuesday was over with, McCain was the odds on favorite because of his surge in delegate count, and the departure from the race by Mitt Romney. This left almost half the states in U.S. without representation in the full nominating process. By the time their caucuses and primaries were held they were left with only two choices: McCain and Huckabee. There is also a chance that by the time Texas and Ohio’s primaries take place in March, McCain could be the only candidate left. Not only does this process run counter to a democratic process, but would also leave an enormous cross section of Republican voters disenfranchised from the nominating process. McCain has the unenviable position of trying to energize a large section of the Republican party that, by the time their caucuses and primaries roll around, and if they were Romney supporters, their enthusiasm and significance would have yielded to apathy.
The question most traditional conservatives are asking themselves is should I, could I, would I, vote for John McCain if he is running in the general election on the Republican ticket. How energized can the base be when they feel there choices are a Democrat liberal or a Republican liberal? How energized can the base be when they feel that the stronger conservative candidates have been left at the way side by the process?
There are several influential conservative pundits who have stated they will not vote for John McCain in the general election, but would rather vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination. There was no mention of what if Obama gets the nomination–which at this point is more probable than not. The polling numbers do show a cross section of conservatives who will not support McCain in the general election regardless of who he runs against-they will not caste a vote.
McCain gave a very compelling speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week. He appealed to the conservative base, among boos during parts of the speech that touched on immigration, that his position is a fundamental conservative position. It was compelling but not many people were compelled. It did raise a few eyebrows and at best put McCain antagonists in a wait and see mode.
What can be expected going forward with the McCain nomination process?
McCain wants the conservative base to believe he can unite the Republican party. He is doing a lot of talking but is not doing a lot of doing. He is talking about uniting the Republican party but has displayed no action. McCain, if he secures the nomination, will come to a fork in the road that leads to the general election. He will either embrace the conservative base, which he needs to do if he wants to win in the general election, or he can turn left, which history dictates he will and try to win with the Hispanic and independent vote, thus freeing him from any obligation to the party he has become antithetical to.
He seems to be positioning himself to turn left by keeping Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio on his campaign staff. These two individuals were on the wrong side of the phenomenal grass roots movement that killed the McCain-Kennedy illegal alien amnesty bill. They are still on the wrong side and so is McCain by association. By eliminating Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio from his inner circle he could prevail upon a sizable number of anti-McCain Republican voters.
Illegal immigration is the albatross around McCain’s neck. McCain has two options at this point concerning illegal immigration: First, he can actually take action and disassociate with Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio and embrace the will of the people and choose to not only close the borders with a fence but declare he will not let any piece of legislation pass his desk, as President, that grants amnesty to anyone in this country illegally. Second, he can stay on his immigration course and hope that the Hispanic vote will get him elected in the general election rather than a Democrat.
The media will start cannibalizing their creation, McCain, the moment there is a definitive Democrat nominee. His only salvation with some, not all, of the media is to revert back to bashing the Republican party and highlighting his leftist views. This still will not help him win the general election.
One scenario equally as important as McCain’s immigration policy is his vice-presidential choice. A few names floating around are some of his apostate Republican brethren: Governor Rick Perry of Texas, Governor Charlie Crist of Florida and Mike Huckabee. Also in the mix is Independent/Democrat Joe Lieberman. Any one of these potential candidates has the ability to help McCain or hurt his campaign in the general election. If he choses the right fork in the road, each and every one of them would make it difficult to energize the Republican base in the general election. But if he choses to take the left fork in the road they would be assets to his campaign.
McCain is going to have to make some hard decisions whether he is going to be who he really is or who he needs to be to get elected in the general election. At this point, either direction is truly, at its core, unacceptable but possibly palatable if you hold your nose.
Democrat growth vision stagnant
Posted by admin - 17/03/08 at 09:03:31 amMore West Elbert County Sun politics from 8/28/08:
“Thomasson added that what is needed are “a lot of small ideas that are achievable. In bringing jobs to the area, it is going to be five to 10 new ones at a time that are compatible with what we have here, not bringing in a GM-sized industry.”
“Patty Sward…added that her goal is to ensure smart growth[.]”
A patient lying on her death bed does not need an aspirin and a gaggle of government planners sucking up all of the oxygen in the room with empty platitudes. She needs serious medicine and air to breath.
Elbert County does not need jobs that are compatible with economic stagnation and poverty. Elbert County needs real industry, real manufacturing, and real capitalized enterprises that produce substantial profits. Elbert County needs a relaxed regulatory climate to encourage those economic engines with the freedom to start and grow. “Smart growth” will keep us quaint, rural, struggling to make ends meet, dependent on government handouts, purchasing our goods in Douglas County, and exporting our children to Douglas County for education.
Insult to Injury: C-section Moms Denied Insurance
Posted by admin - 15/03/08 at 09:03:49 am
The New York Times is on a roll this week. One article reports on a study linking the rising cesarean rate to the rise in “late preterm” infants — those born at 34 to 37 weeks, when they are at a higher risk of breathing problems, breastfeeding difficulties, and spending their first days of life separated from their mothers in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Another article blows the whistle on insurance companies denying individual plans to women who’ve previously given birth by cesarean. Treating the first cesarean as a pre-existing condition, the insurers argue such women are at a higher “risk” of having another surgery — which they are, because so many physicians and hospitals are discouraging, or refusing outright, women a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). The Times reports that 500,000 U.S. women anually give birth after previous cesarean, and it has previously reported that at least 300 hospitals have official VBAC bans.
The medical insurers blame physicians and women for a glut of “elective” C-sections, which cost them more; physicians blame women and their own malpractice insurers. “I think there is pressure by patients on physicians to deliver early-ish when someone’s uncomfortable,” said Sarah J. Kilpatrick, head of ACOG’s obstetric practice committee, “and there is medico-legal pressure. Obstetricians are afraid of being sued,” so they may “proceed with a Caesarean to deliver the fetus when the fetus is probably fine.” What Kilpatrick doesn’t say is that the ACOG committee she heads is responsible for the de facto VBAC ban, which plays a huge part in the rising cesarean rate — and, as the study suggests, the rising rate of preterm babies.
The losers in all this, of course, are women and their families: going through unnecessary primary cesareans, then being discouraged or flat out denied normal, physiological birth for their next pregnancy, on top of that being denied health insurance because the repeat cesarean their providers are insisting upon would cost the insurer more money, and having babies at higher risk of being born too early, not to mention the risks of repeated major abdominal surgery for mom. And we call this maternity “care”?
Share This
Kevin Powell Hosts Brooklyn’s Hottest Pre-Labor Day Party
Posted by admin - 10/03/08 at 09:03:35 am
GOP Plot?: Comcast Pulls MSNBC From Standard Cable in Boston Area
Posted by admin - 08/03/08 at 01:03:22 pm
No Longer a Viewing Option
As a left-leaning political junkie, MSNBC constitutes my sustenance, my entertainment, and my candy, especially during election cycles. As the only network with progressive commentary (i.e. Keith Olbermann on Countdown), along with other entertaining, informative, and engaging programming, to include Joe Scarborough’s Cup of Joe, Dan Abram’s Verdict, and Chris Matthews’ Hardball, MSNBC is literally the only channel that my wife and I watch together on TV (I also watch football during season and occassionally some Comedy Central stuff before going to bed).
As parents of a two-year old, watching Chris and Keith during the primaries was not only our source of information and news, but it was also our entertainment - our little guilty pleasure that we shared together. We felt like we knew Chris Matthews (my wife did meet and interview him during the making of our documentary film, Swing State Ohio, during the Presidential Election in 2004), and watching his show, along with the others was familiar, comforting, and relaxing. We even liked MSNBC featured conservatives Tucker Carlson, Joe Scarborough, and even Pat Buchanon, because they are all charming, wildly intelligent, and provided their views in a fair and reasoned manner.
So given our affection for this network, this lonely island in a sea of mindless wing-nuttery and mediocrity, we were shocked, dismayed, and disgusted when found out that our beloved MSNBC was being moved from standard cable to the “Digital Tier” on Comcast in the Boston area.
Thanks to the “magic of the internet” I did some looking around and found that this was happening all over the country. I found the timing to be odd, considering this network is 99% dedicated to political programming (besides their disturbing late-night prison documentary series “Lock Up”), and we are fewer than 100 days away from a kinda important political event. I also found it odd that among the cable news channels, only MSNBC, the “left-leaning” channel, was tapped to move to the digital tier, forcing its customers to cough up extra cash for the extra service.
Some further digging ensued and the Monkey and I found a comment on a blog that seemed to provide some explanation from Comcast (bold added by me):
Refusing to hire smokers
Posted by admin - 01/03/08 at 10:03:05 pmAn employer in California has given his employees the ultimatum to quit smoking in 15 months or be fired. He has began refusing to hire smokers and extended the ban to employees with family members who smoke. His employees are subject to blood testing to ensure compliance with his rules.
Good for him.
That’s right. I’m outspoken on the rights of smokers, but even more adament about protecting individual and property rights. If this man doesn’t want smokers working for him, he should not be forced to hire them. If one doesn’t like his policies, don’t work for him.
No one has a right to work for this guy.
I can’t really blame him. We now live in a culture that believes it is someone else’s responsibility to pay for healthcare. If I am to be put in a position where I have to provide for your health care, I want some control over what you do about your health and how well you take care of yourself.
Whatever his motivation, it’s his property, his business, and his decision.
Of course, this is how it should be when it comes to bans on smoking in restaurants, bars, and other privately owned businesses. The owner should decide, not the government. It is intellectually dishonest to believe that, then turn around and say a employer shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions like this about whom he hires.
First of all, Shawn Feddeman is not correct about this tier not being more expensive. Many people have standard cable; digital cable costs about $40 more per month. In addition, many people (like me) also get standard cable paid for with our condo fees. In order to upgrade to digital I would have to buy my own service, an additional cost on top of my condo fees.
But I do have a question for Ms. Feddeman regarding Comcast’s motivations behind making this change: If you want to provide more HD programming, why didn’t you tap FoxNews for HD broadcast? Wouldn’t FoxNews viewers appreciate seeing their right-wing blowhards in full digital glory?
And finally, Ms. Feddeman asserts that there is no “political motivation” behind the decision to pull the left-leaning channel from the standard lineup. That would be a lot easier to believe if there wasn’t one little interesting tidbit about Ms. Feddeman’s employment prior to running the PR shop at Comcast.
Shawn Feddeman a Former GOP Operative
Former Romney Spokeswoman Feddeman
Through the “magic of the internet,” I discovered that Shawn Feddeman served as Governor Mitt Romney’s Press Secretary prior to working for Comcast. Obviously she is a Republican who was at one time actively involved in politics, working for a future Republican presidential candidate. It just doesn’t pass the sniff test that there were no political motivations in this decision. Her credentials alone indicate that certainly politics played a role in this decision to move MSNBC off basic cable.
My wife is considering poneying up for the digital tier but my intention right now is to boycott that move out of principle. I know in a way I’ll just be punishing myself, as I won’t have my favorite channel during what will be a historic and exciting Presidential campaign. I plan on writing a letter to Shawn Feddeman and will provide updates on the situation in these pages at Monkeyinmymind.com.