Tag Archives: FOX


I love Herman Cain and have since February of this year when I heard him speak for the first time.  Hearing his vision for our country, it’ hard not to become excited.

If you caught his interview on the Don Imus show this morning, you heard a man on his game.  You also heard a man with answers and a sense of humor.

Imus asked Cain how he felt about being referred to as an Uncle Tom and an Oreo by some “Progressives” in the black community.

Cain’s answer, “I’m black on the outside and red, white, & blue on the inside!”

This is the second half of the interview. The first half can be heard here.





Memo: To the International Media

Re: Constitutional Crisis/President Elect Obama not Eligible to Serve as United States President

Date: January 14, 2009

In one week, Barack Obama will place his hand on the Lincoln bible to be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States (POTUS). When he places his hand on the Lincoln bible and swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States he may knowingly be committing fraud and usurping the most powerful office in the world.

The United States of America is faced with a Constitutional crisis of gigantic proportions; one that remains avoidable if Obama would simply release the growing list of documents that would verify that he indeed is a natural born citizen, a requirement for office of POTUS under the U.S. Constitution. Most of the people in our country and the world do not know what is happening because the mainstream media in our country has failed to do their jobs. The MSM have steadfastly refused to investigate any story that possibly reflects in a negative manner on Obama’s candidacy and his eligibility under the Constitution.

Outlets one would think would at least give the story a cursory glance like FOX News and the Drudge Report have remained conspicuously silent. The cable networks, venerable institutions like the New York Times and the Washington Post having been playing a game of “if we don’t report it, it doesn’t exist!”


Our Constitution requires that any person running for the office of president meet three qualifications; he/she must be at least 35 years of age, must live in the United States for at least 14 years and be a natural-born citizen. Mr. Obama has refused to provide any information that verifies he meets this requirement. In fact, it has been reported that Obama and his legal teams have spent close to one million dollars to keep his birth certificate and the truth hidden. A partial list of hidden Obama documents include; a vault copy of his birth certificate (under seal in Hawaii), college records, copy of his college thesis, records of his clients when practicing law in Illinois, explanation of his travel to Indonesia when Americans were not allowed to travel there, etc.

Mr. Obama’s own website states he was born with dual citizenship; that is an automatic disqualification. Actually, his citizenship was determined by his father who was Kenyon and a British citizen. Since his mother was 17 (and under age) her citizenship could not be passed to Obama at the time of his birth.

Further complicating the situation is Obama’s step-father was Indonesian. The evidence (that hasn’t been scrubbed from the Internet) shows that Obama went to school in Indonesia at a time when only Indonesian citizens were allowed this privilege and further that Obama traveled to Indonesia in the 80’s when American citizens were not allowed to travel to this country. What this means is that under this story of who Obama’s birth father was, he is not a “natural born citizen” as defined by our Constitution (born on U.S. soil of two parents both of whom are U.S. citizens) and therefore ineligible to hold the office of POTUS.

The reason why you should care should be self-evident. It has been said that when American catches a cold the rest of the world should watch out for pneumonia. The world wide financial recession is a case in point. If it is discovered that Mr. Obama was never eligible to run and hold the office of POTUS we, our country and the interconnected world, will be thrown in a state of disorder and turmoil. That is because any law, any treaty, any action taken under the Obama administration would be illegal. For a further explanation see Dr. Edwin Vieira detailed analysis.

There are (over 17) lawsuits that have already been brought across the country including several before the Supreme Court; all dismissed thus far on legal issues of standing and the like, but not on the merits of the lawsuits! See Donofrio v Wells, Berg v Obama, Kerchner v Obama & Congress for the most prominent lawsuits.

Let me point out that while the MSM in this country have abdicated its responsibility to voters here and Obama supporters abroad, the blogs on the Internet have been tracking this for months. Those blogging are not on the fringes or carry any animus towards Obama. There are thousands and thousands of us who love our country and are simply asking for the truth. We are moderates, former Obama supporters, conservatives, independents, Democrats, Republicans, and persons of every stripe who believe in placing our country before any individual man or party.

Finally, it should be noted that there have been a few stories written by sources outside the U.S. in Canada and elsewhere asking about Obama’s eligibility. The most disturbing is a recent article that appeared in Pravda RU which detailed Obama’s problems and which called him an outright fraud and which leads me to the most serious consideration. It is an embarrassment that Pravda is covering what our own media has purposely ignored.

Quoting from Dr. Vieira:

Fifth, as nothing but an usurper (if he becomes one), Obama will have no conceivable authority to make Treaties, or to nominate, and appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not otherwise provided for in the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). And therefore any Treaties or nominations and appointments he purports to make will be void ab initio, no matter what the Senate does, because the Senate can neither authorize an usurper to take such actions in the first place, nor thereafter ratify them.

Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, Congress can pass no law while an usurper pretends to occupy the Office of President. The Constitution provides that every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to an usurper posturing as the President of the United States, but to the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no Bill will or can, before it become a Law, be presented to him. If no Bill is so presented, no Bill will or can become a Law. And any purported Law that the usurper approves and signs or that Congress passes over the usurper’s Objections, will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully enters office as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as President.

If Pravda RU is calling Obama a fraud before his inauguration, how long before enemies of this country figure out this can be used as a reason not to cooperate with the U.S. or sign a treaty, or do anything that moves negotiations forward on any front because an illegally elected/ineligible Obama’s actions would be null and void . . . unenforceable . . . worthless. How long before Iran, or Hamas, or Russia, for that matter, figures this out and refuses to deal with the U.S.because of the Pretend President?

All of our institutions, have let us down. We are all in peril until this has been straightened out!


Barack Hussein Obama apparently is of the belief, that simply running for the office gives him the right to interfere with ongoing US policy in Iraq. FOX NEWS is reporting that according a new article in today’s the New York Post that:

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand (emphasis mine) for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

I urge everyone to read the entire article and then ask yourselves is this man really ready for “prime time?”

Here’s another question to ask. How is it that Obama isn’t in violation of the Logan Act? If you don’t know, the Logan Act forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments.

Under whose authority was Obama acting when he approached the Iraqi leaders with this proposal? But this isn’t really new, is it?

Remember his remarks about the Canadians and free trade and NAFTA? I guess Obama’s idea of foreign relations is to tell the American people one thing, and then go behind their backs and attempt to negotiate something else.

This man is not fit to lead this country!


This couldn’t have happened to two finer fellows! Hear those cheers in that background? They are coming from:

  • Moderates and Independents from both parties, Republicans and Democrats
  • Women & men that are tired of the constant misogyny packaged as “political commentary”
  • IMUS supporters
  • PUMA’s and other supporters of democracy that no longer exists within the Democratic Party
  • Supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton and women candidates everywhere
  • Viewers of every persuasion . . . tired of the partisan politics and reporting of MSNBC

The New York Times is reporting this seismic shift in programming in a new article written today. This is must read for all of us that witnessed the complete and utter downfall of MSNBC starting with the Imus firing in April of 2007. The article reads in part:

The change — which comes in the home stretch of the long election cycle — is a direct result of tensions associated with the channel’s perceived shift to the political left.

“The most disappointing shift is to see the partisan attitude move from prime time into what’s supposed to be straight news programming,” said Davidson Goldin, formerly the editorial director of MSNBC and a co-founder of the reputation management firm DolceGoldin.

Executives at the channel’s parent company, NBC Universal, had high hopes for MSNBC’s coverage of the political conventions. Instead, the coverage frequently descended into on-air squabbles between the anchors, embarrassing some workers at NBC’s news division, and quite possibly alienating viewers. Although MSNBC nearly doubled its total audience compared with the 2004 conventions, its competitive position did not improve, as it remained in last place among the broadcast and cable news networks. (surprise, surprise, surprise… and they wonder why!) In prime time, the channel averaged 2.2 million viewers during the Democratic convention and 1.7 million viewers during the Republican convention.

The success of the Fox News Channel in the past decade along with the growth of political blogs have convinced many media companies that provocative commentary attracts viewers and lures Web browsers more than straight news delivered dispassionately.

“In a rapidly changing media environment, this is the great philosophical debate,” Phil Griffin, the president of MSNBC, said in a telephone interview Saturday. Fighting the ratings game, he added, “the bottom line is that we’re experiencing incredible success.”

But as the past two weeks have shown, that success has a downside. When the vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin lamented media bias during her speech, attendees of the Republican convention loudly chanted “NBC.”

After you have read this, please visit my new blog on the impact of plastics on our environment! This is a political issue that effects everyone on the planet.

Go to Say No To Plastic.


I’ve said this before, Olbermann has long since stopped being a man principle, a man whose words one could trust, a beacon of enlightened intellect and humor in the usually dull and vapid cable media spectrum.

Any pretext of objectively as it relates to Obama has long since dissipated into the night. Olbermann’s nightly pimping and whoring for Obama’s candidacy has reached a point of insufferability.  Lately, it has been great watching MSNBC self-destruct . . . couldn’t happen to a nicer group!

Demonstrating once again, that’s there’s no A-hole like a flying A-hole, we have this video curteosy of the beltway snark, one of my daily must reads.

As a companion piece for those who might have missed it, this remains one of my favorite Olbermann videos.


Can someone tell me what the Gore endorsement of Obama was all about?  The DNC’s selective nominee was chosen 2 weeks ago, and as expected (by those of us not drinking the Kool-Aid) Obama didn’t get the big bounce he was supposed to get.  Obama’s been out and about trashing McCain’s age, (because that’s what one does when running a campaign of change),  generally  living up to the low expectations Hillary’s army of supporters predicted and suddenly Al decides to endorse Barack. Why the endorsement now and who is it that was supposed to care? 

Mercifully, if you were watching FOX at the time of Gore’s endorsement speech, you saw a FOX split screen with Gore’s speech on mute while the balance of the FOX show continued.  I did surf over to MSNBC and CNN momentarily to hear what Al had to say and then flipped back ASAP.  Ten seconds was all I could tolerate . . . no one’s that strong, are they?

I’d forgotten how supremely annoying his voice and demeanor are . . . and I voted  for him  in 2000.  Ironically, Al Gore, the man cheated out of the presidency with over a 500,000 more votes than his opponent, whose presidency was stolen by the Supreme Court’s selection of G. W. Bush was endorsing a another selected candidate with fewer votes than than his opponent.   

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tags: , , , , , ,


As I mentioned in part one of Obama as Road Kill, the Stephen Marks book, Confessions of a Political Hitman, should be required reading of every Obama supporter, including Howard Dean, the Superdelegates who are jumping ship, and all those intent on bringing another Republican to the White House.

For those who missed part one, the sub title of his book is . . . My Secret Life of Scandal, Corruption, Hypocrisy, And Dirty Attacks That Decide Who Gets Elected (And Who Doesn’t.) Political junkies can attest to the fact that the Democrats have a unique ability of repeatedly snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Democratic “success” record of controlling the White House speaks for itself. In the last 40 years, the Democrats have held the White House only 12 of those years!

One of the ways this happens is the liberal media (New York Times, MSNBC, CNN. et al) and folks way over on the extreme left continually delude themselves into thinking “they know” what is important to the voting blocks that win elections in this country. They have consistently shown they are wrong. It is precisely this kind of thinking that is responsible for 28 years of Nixon/Ford, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II in the White House.

The Democrats only successful two-term Democratic president was Bill Clinton. As I remember, he had to fight the political establishment to win the nomination. Jimmy Carter was bounced out of office after 4 years. His was a failed presidency. Subsequently, the country suffered through Reagan’s “trickle down” economics ( a hideous concept) and the largest deficit recorded. When Bush II leaves office in January 2009, he will have the ignominious distinction of leaving a larger deficit than Reagan!

The RNC, McCain’s campaign, those hideous 527 groups whose raison d’être is to target, to obfuscate, to diminish, and to demean the record of the opposition, and a host of others . . . all those committed to trying to retain the White House for the Republicans are already refining their Obama playbooks for the upcoming November election.

Let’s be clear. This has been going on for quite some time. Most of what the Republicans will be throwing up against Barack will have come from the candidate himself and not from Hillary. As badly as media wants to portray Hillary as the “bad guy”, the truth is the “bitter” comments that demeaned large segments of the American population, the Rev. Wright controversy, Bill Ayres, the flap over the flag pin . . . these all belong to Barack.

Moreover, don’t think that race-baiting tactic by the Obama campaign has gone un-noticed by those of us who looked to him to be a different kind of candidate. The tactic is simple. Should anyone have the temerity to discuss issues/topics that will be viewed differently by the diverse segments of the population . . . call them a racist. Whether it is true or not, is of no consequence. The idea is to throw the Molotov cocktail and let the long term consequences be damned.

On the face of things, capturing and regaining the White House should be a “cake walk” given the last 7 years of Bush, his cronies, the collapse of the Republican revolution & subsequent loss of control in the Congress, the economy, the war, etc. The list of reasons why the Republicans should loose the White House is endless, yet here we are, and McCain is holding his own against Obama.

If the election were held today, McCain would win narrowly beat Obama! The only question is by how large a margin. The most recent polls show Hillary beating McCain by an even bigger margin. Until recently, the conventional wisdom was the conservatives wanted to go up against Hillary. Then a funny thing happened . . . she turned out to be one hell of a good candidate.

Imagine, the polls show Hillary beating McCain with Obama losing, and hosts of fools keep insisting she should drop out for the good of the party! Say, what? Surely, this is a sign of political insanity!

What will the Republicans do to defeat Obama? To begin with, for all you “youngins” out there and those new to the political process get ready for a slime fest. Here’s how Obama will be portrayed. He will be shown to be:

  • Radical – a radical liberal with views that are so extreme that comparisons (already being voiced) will demonstrate his political views are simpatico with extremists the world had to contend with during the 30’s, 40’s, and 50’s. Read Ann Coulter’s column, on Obama’s book entitled Obama’s Dimestore Mein Kampf at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25831.
  • Un-American – not because he doesn’t wear a flag pin but because when this is combined with pictures of Obama standing with his hands below his waist while the national anthem is being played, and Michelle Obama’s comments of only being proud to be an American since Barak began running for president. Obama’s links to Bill Ayres will support this view. The picture of Ayres stomping of the American flag will be a favorite.
  • Lacking Courage – a man capable of giving inspiring speeches without a voting record to support his words. Let’s face it his political resume is slim. Worse still, this man voted “present” over a 100 times in his career. I’ve asked this question before, how much courage does it take to vote “yes” or “no”? Here’s another question; can anyone give me the name of any politician voting in a similar manner? The Republicans won’t let this one slide.
  • Unseemly past whatever sexual or drug related peccadilloes Obama’s past may contain will be exposed. Countless websites and Youtube videos have focused on these topics for months. Most of the MSM have avoided these topics because they are “in the bag” for Obama. The Republicans, focused on retaining the White House, could care less about how these revelations could affect Obama, his family, or the country.
  • Racist and Elitist – he’s already thrown his white granny under the bus. He admitted not marrying a white woman he was in love with for fear of gravitating towards “her world” in his book. Gun owners and those persons of faith who don’t vote for him are judged “bitter” and uninformed. We know he thinks “typical white people” are out there.
  • Lacking International Experience – this one is easy because its true. Can anyone point to a single thing Obama has accomplished on the international stage that has positively influenced this country? Let’s face it; Obama has been too busy (running for president) to conduct hearings on the sub-committee he heads up, a group that is supposed to be investigating the Iraq war. Hello! This should be an easy one if for no other reason than you’ve cameras and the national spot light on you. Maybe that was the whole point; why take a change of people seeing how you really behave under pressure or when a job has to be carried out.

If you want to hear a continual recitation of these points, simply listen to Sean Hannity either on the FOX show, Hannity & Colmes or on his radio show. In fact, seek out the conservative talk shows and listen to what is being talked about. You will hear the points I’ve just listed and more.

Early in Stephen Marks book, Hitman, he mentions how much he hated Bill Clinton and how (over time) this changed to admiration for what he was able to accomplish during his administration. He states, “I now believe that he was a true visionary who was the first major politician of his time to truly understand that America was a country of passionate centrists deeply distrusting of both political extremes. Clinton was articulating this vision of what we know as “triangulation,” which was not only good politics, but good policy as well.”

As we go forward into November, does anyone question that Hillary isn’t the candidate that is best suited to bring the American people together and get American moving in the right direction, again? Who better to use the art of triangulation to the country’s benefit?


In a little more than 24 hours we will all know how Hillary did in Indiana and in North Carolina. Most of the mainstream media continues with its anointing Obama narrative, fearful that Hillary will pull another rabbit out of her hat.

What the country is witnessing is the gold standard in campaigning . . . Hillary was wonderful on FOX with Bill O’Reilly and on Sunday’s, This Week with George Stephanopoulos. First husband, Bill, has hit his stride again as he talks to people in small towns all over North Carolina and Indiana . . . and the sound you hear in the background? It’s the sound of Hillary’s campaign machine as it hums along.

If your only source of news was MSNBC, you would never know that Hillary is poised to confound the pundits, her critics, and Obamakins, yet again. North Carolina voters could actually choose Hillary over Barak; and if that happens this game isn’t over. If that’s not a come from behind upset, I don’t know what is.

So what does this have to do with Obama’s Chickenhood?

Well, the truth is this, anything can happen in a campaign. Should the worst case scenario take place and Hillary were to lose the nomination to Obama after every option had been exhausted, I would have no choice but to support McCain.

The reason is, I believe that at this point in his life, Barack Obama lacks the type of courage this country needs. Obama’s message for change is spot on. We are all tired of Bush, the war, the antics of the many, and the accomplishments of the few. We may be looking at “right message . . . wrong man.”

No matter how hard I try, I can’t get over the fact that Obama has voted present over 100 times; not yes or no, but present! Come on, Barack, how much courage does it take to place a vote one way or another and make it part of the record? What is this, more situational ethics or another case of being too cute, once again? Some would even call this kind of behavior deceptive.

Now compare the courage of McCain when he was a prisoner of war! His captors offered McCain an opportunity to leave years early and he chose to stay with this men. That takes courage! How much courage does it take to cast a vote? My guess is, a lot less than spending 5 years as a prisoner of war in Viet Nam.

Hillary gets up every morning and fights to win this nomination in order to make this country the country it can be . . . all of this in the face of occasional ridicule and a national media that long ago wanted her out so they could continue their inane narrative about Barack.

Let’s not forget to mention the assorted “fast friends” who have chosen to jump ship while wrapping themselves with intellectual dishonesty about the rationale behind their switching. In the face of all of this, Hillary fights on for the heart and soul of this country . . . that takes courage!


More than once, I have made the point that Barack Obama suffers from situational ethics.

Searching for illustrations of situational ethics? That’s easy, “flip flop” if necessary, move to the right if pushed, move to the left because there’s move cover there, vote “present” instead of yes or no over 100 times. Above all else, make sure these moves are nuanced and wrapped in heroic speech. After all, we know how dumb the media are don’t we . . . they can barely spell nuance, never mind recognize it when it is used as a cover-up tool.

The media dust-up about Obama’s pastor of the last 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, is yet another example of how Barack’s judgment dictates his choices. If we are expected to choose Barack over Hillary and John McCain because of Barack’s claim of superior judgment, his decision to wait until yesterday to denounce and separate himself from Pastor Jeremiah Wright’s hate filled sermons must be examined.

Obama did disagree with Wright’s hate speech, but only when it became apparent that it would have a negative affect on his run for the presidency. Notice, there hasn’t been a repudiation (only a distancing) by Obama of Pastor Wright, a man who preaches that blacks should be saying, “God damn American, not God bless America.”

Obama’s statements about being unaware of Wright’s extremist sermons are not believable. Come on! He’s known this man for 20 years and not even a whisper of Wright’s racist hate speech ever reached him. No one except the Obamakin Kool Aid drinkers will believe that. Obama is not ready for prime time. Period!

Last week I thought that the perfect Democratic ticket to go against McCain was Hillary/Barack, with Barack as VP. Why as the VP? Two words … Jimmy Carter. Those old enough to remember, know Carter was a one-term Democratic president who also went Washington promising CHANGE.

How’d that turn out, you ask. Carter’s presidency was a disaster. The country suffered from inflation so high that interest rates for businesses were as high as 22%, 16% home mortgages were the norm, we had gas lines and gas rationing (if your plate ended in an even number you could only buy gas on even numbered days etc.)

One thing Carter did do right is he tried to get this country on the road to energy independence, installing solar panels on the roof of the White House to set a good example for the public, urging conservation and fuel efficiency. As soon as Reagan beat Carter for his re-election, Reagan went about dismantling all the conservation measures Carter had put in place, including taking the solar panels off the White House roof.

Had we continued on Carter’s energy conservation course we wouldn’t be faced with gas at close to $4 a gallon, a war in the Middle East, and the destruction of our environment. You can thank Reagan and the Republicans for that mess.

Which brings us back to the November election. We know with Hillary, like her or not, she will be ready to be president on day one.

The Pastor Wright controversy has changed my position on a HIillary/Obama ticket. Why? The Wright videos will be the gift that keeps on giving for the Republicans and all the 527 groups out there just gearing up ready to sling mud.

Obama cried “foul”when Hillary hit his campaign with the “kitchen sink” strategy. What do you think he’ll do when the Republicans hit him with the ” hit the sucker with the house and half of Cleveland” strategy?

If there’s only one thing Republicans hate more than people who don’t practice sex their way, “God’s” way . . . it’s someone they believe doesn’t love America . . . all of American, its imperfections and all. Michelle, are you listening? That includes you too.

You know all those red states with those white votes Obama has collected; you can forget them in a general election if he’s the one that goes up against McCain. The Wright videos won’t away.

Why Hillary & me?

A blog entitled Hillary & Me probably deserves some explanation.

First, this is a blog in support of Senator Clinton and and in support of common sense. Hillary may not be the perfect candidate, but I believe she is the candidate this country needs now. Every time I hear some pundit, usually MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, say, “she’ll do anything to get elected”, my question remains, “And your point is?”

She’ll do anything! Good! We need someone tough enough to undo the damage inflicted on this country for the last seven years. The litany of charges against Bush’s failed administration is endless. President Bush, his VP Darth Vader, and the whole group of conservative radicals who brought us into a war with phony intelligence can’t leave fast enough. (BTW, every time I hear someone pose the question, “Why would Saddam have said he had WMD if he didn’t?” I want to ask, “Doesn’t anyone in Washington play poker?” Saddam had a pair of deuces! He was bluffing! He puffed himself up, said “boo” and we were suckered into war.)

According to Hillary’s critics, she’s mean; she’s tough; and she’s conniving. Good! Are we to suppose to believe that the bad guys on the world’s stage are any less conniving? She’s got bigger gonads than most politicians today. Given a choice of putting Senator “this contest isn’t over yet” Clinton or Barack “she’s mean to me” Obama against Vladimir Putin or his successor, Hugo Chavez, or the North Koreans, or the Iranians and their nuclear quest, which one do you think would fare better?

When Hillary entered the Senate, she made sure she got on the Armed Services Committee; she crossed the aisle and worked with the other side (Lindsey Graham, one of her husband’s harshest critics), and she gained the respect of 30 generals now supporting her candidacy. That was smart. It was politically savvy, as well.

By contrast, when Barack entered the Senate what choices did he make? In his judgment (a corner stone of his campaign) running for president was more important than attending to the people’s business. Maybe Hillary can’t say this, but I can. He chose career over country. I have no shortage of contempt for this man knowing he has been the Chairman of a committee capable of investigating the Bush administration’s neglect of Afghanistan & the war and did nothing. Surprise, this is a fact that was revealed in a debate not uncovered by the media.

There is no shortage of irony in the blog title, Hillary and Me. If anyone were to tell me in April of 2007 that I would be blogging in support of Hillary’s candidacy, I would have said they were crazy. What happened in April of 2007? The Don Imus, Media Matters, Hillary, “nappy headed ho’s”, debacle. Long time Imus fans and supporters watched in disbelief as the media convulsed. The so-called “liberal media” were particularly shameful.

Not to argue the Imus matter all over again, but it was during this period I watched FOX News, Bill O’Reilly, (OMG) ANN COULTER (!), and numerous conservatives defending Imus, pointing out that the stupid comment he uttered didn’t rise high enough for him to be fired. Anyone familiar with my posts during that period can attest to the fact, that no one was harder on Hillary than I was. There were multiple posts as to the cowardice and complicity of MSNBC, NOW, NABJ, Steve Capus, CBS, and Olbermann and others in this mess.

So, how did we arrive at this point, Hillary and Me?

Watching what the media didn’t report during the Imus affair was a major part of the change. When Kerry got “Swift Boated” in 2004, we knew everything about the PAC group that put on those political ads. We had news clips going back to 70’s demonstrating the animosity that existed between Kerry and some of these Viet Nam vets. The liberal mainstream media reported every about this PAC group except their shoe sizes.

By contrast, when Imus got punked by Media Matters, we heard virtually nothing about who did this, how they did this, why they did this. Here you have one of the most influential radio talk show hosts in America being fired (for an admittedly stupid & insensitive comment in the middle of a comedy sketch) and no one was asking how this was possible in so short a time? Say, what?

The Imus show was requisite listening in Washington every morning. Every morning we heard intelligent political conversation by members of both parties. Even Dick Cheney and wife appeared on the show, and no one in the mainstream media was the least bit curious to get answers. The truth is, these weasels were too busy running for cover and constructing their new narratives about Imus, the show, his fans, race relations in the country.

Which brings us to today, as we watch the media selectively “reporting” on Hillary’s campaign, on Obama’s campaign etc. The hypocrisy has risen to obscene levels. The media have honed their skill sets. Their abilities to take things out of context and spin topics any way they want to, is now unparalleled.

The truth is, regardless of the topic you pick . . . race relations, the economy, what Hillary said, what Barack said, the cable news outlets don’t want context. They want conflict. Never let the truth get in the way of good story, right? Context is a concept that was left in the dust when the corporations that bought the networks decided to combine the news and entertainment divisions.

When the media started piling on Hillary, just before New Hampshire election I had to reevaluate my position. Defending a cranky old cowboy and radio host was one thing, evaluating the person best suited to be the next president was another thing, My views on Hillary were changing.

Finally, Hillary and Me is here because of Barack, himself. I listened to of his lofty and inspiring speeches and I gotta say, I was taken aback. His “Joshua Generation” speech is very good and he is very appealing on many levels. It was, “Wow, is he for real?” Hear that blowing sound in the background? That’s me being sucked in.

Had Barack not broken his word about running a different kind of campaign, had he (and his surrogates) not gone after Hillary the way they did I would probably still be drinking from the Obamakins kool aid. Yes, the “Campaign of Change” is behaving like every other political campaign before them.

So here we are boys and girls, Hillary and Me. Let’s rock ‘n roll.