CORRECTION: Obama ... a man of letters

My! My! My! It does not pay to be too academic in the middle of a highly charged presidential contest. A friend said he was surprised to see me – a most tolerant fellow -- call Barack Obama a Communist. Well, I didn’t. Okay, I did ... but I didn’t. Let me explain.

In a previous blog, I did imply that Barack Obama had communist instincts. My reference is to the small “c” variety -- a person who believes in a controlled economy and government interventionalism in attempting to guarantee economic and social equity. Mine is the academic reference. It defines a form of socialism.

I am NOT suggesting that Obama is a capital “C” Communist in the traditional of the Cold War definition – a subversive agent of some adversarial Communist nation. Not at all my intent.

While communists and Communists lay claim to the same philosophy, they are not necessarily the same people. In fact, the big “C” Communists have never lived up to the small “c” communist doctrines and philosophies as offered up by Karl Marx and others. Karl was a lower case communist, who got a lot of lip service from the upper case crowd.

One might argue that Obama is more of a little “c” communist than even the old style big “C” Communists. In fact, in Russia and China today, the upper case Communists still rule but lower case communism is as dead as the proverbial door nail. So, while Obama talks the talk – small “c” variety -- I suspect if he becomes President, he will not walk the walk. At least I hope not.

So … I want to make it very clear that I do not think Obama is one of those big “C” commies who were plotting – and probably still are – the downfall of America. He is no more an upper case Communist than he is an upper case Muslim. I know from Pastor Jeremiah Wright that Obama is a capital “C” Christian even if he has been a long standing member of a small “c” church that functions more like a little “c” cult. You know … that racist black liberation theology stuff.

I just think Obama may be too influenced by all three of the little c’s -- communist, church and cult -- to make me feel good about him leading our nation as a capital “C” Commander-in-Chief.

My concern about Obama is heightened as we move down the alphabet. While there is no doubt that he is an elitist upper case “D” Democrat, I fear he is not at all a common lower case “d” democrat. He comes from Chicago and there are no little "d" democrats to be found among the big "D" Democrats who rule of the one party Windy City machine like the big "C" Communists rule over China. Furthermore, most communists – whether little “c” or big “C” are way not small "d" democrats.

So ... these are a few of the reasons why I hope and pray that Obama does not take up residency in … you know … D.C.

I hope this clears things up.

OP ED: It's not racism, stupid

Barack Obama’s standing in the poles is testimony to the fact that non-black America is not nearly as racist as the Jesse Jackson’s of the world would contend to maintain their relevancy. Having now shown the significant racial tolerance of the non-black communities, it is time to focus on Barack Obama, the man. Should HE be the next president? (<-- The "he" is capitalized for emphasis, not for the purpose of deification, as many might assume.) Had it not been for the economy tanking, and panic running amok, that answer would have been a decided “no.” The non-racial reasons for rejecting the Obama candidacy are still valid, however. He possesses five qualities that are totally wrong for America.

1. Despite the sweet talk and pleasant demeanor, Obama is among the most radical left-wingers to be seriously considered for the presidency. His proposals for massive government programs, here and abroad, and redistribution of the wealth from the productive sector to the non-productive community is a socialist agenda by any measure. It sets America on the terminal path most recently traveled and abandoned in failure by the old Soviet Union and cold war China. His redistribution of wealth comments are distrubingly akin to the language of Karl Marx -- and why not? The policies are disturbingly similar pure communist ideology.

2. He is a radical internationalist, who would realign our foreign policy toward greater accommodation with the America-hating Islamic fundamentalist at the expense of Israel, yield elements of our sovereignty to international agencies and withdraw from the Reagan-launched era of dedication to world democratization. There is a reason why those who wish to ring down the curtain on "the American era" have expressed universal hope and encouragement for an Obama presidency.

3. Obama’s personal history of associations with radical anti-American extremists, from childhood to just before his pole numbers started rising, is significant to understanding what drives his thinking. From the early education at the knee of his proclaimed American-loathing Communist family and childhood mentors, to the racist political foundation of liberation/revolution theology preached by his father figure pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and to the propaganda-as-education philosophy of unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, Obama has been consistently cradled and influenced by the haters of the successful American capitalist system – those who would rather wage class warfare on the rich than bring a just war to the doorsteps of murderous tyrants.

4. He brings to office, albeit in a polished form, the lust for raw power exemplified in the Chicago political machine -- the wellspring of his political life. He is a graduate of arguably the most corrupt political environment in America. The support he has received from, and the support he has given to, friends and allies wallowing in local political chicanery strips away the flimsy mask of reform he dons on the national stage and belies the scripted lines in his stage role as a small "d" democrat. The Chicago way of political control is to constantly change the rules to increase partisan power and advantage, and if that is insufficient, to simply break the rules to maintain power. Obama’s arrogant radical liberalism -- characterized by a twisted sense superiority and noblise oblige -- coupled with a Chicago-style contempt for citizen participation, gives him an already discernibly unhealthy lust for personal power -- and the instinct to pursue it.

5. Obama would come to the presidency as the most woefully inexperienced and untested candidate in American history. His simplistic idealism is at once charming and dangerous. In addition to his misguided instincts, Obama brings a naïveté to the presidency that makes America more vulnerable -- politically, diplomatically and physically -- to the advances, actions and assaults of our avowed adversaries. Voting for the recordless Obama is an act of faith. He is the proverbial “pig in a poke” – lipstick notwithstanding.

6. Finally, there is a matter of integrity. With enormous financial advantage, Obama has been able to undermine the credibility of the Republican team. Yet, much of his image is founded in lies. He would have us believe that after 20 years of intimate association with Trinity Church, and the fiery Jeremiah Wright, he had never “heard a disparaging word.” His latter day answers, on such matters of abortion and taxation, stand in stark contrast, yet he is not challenged on these discrepancies. He denies his days as a slum lord in partnership with the now indicted Tony Rezko. Obama is not what he appears.

Hillary Clinton got it right when she said that Obama’s national launch was on the basis of one skillfully crafted and presented speech. He has remained aloft on the same vacuous propellant. He is a spellbinding orator, as any snake oil salesman must be. A President Obama will undoubtedly be a great disappointment – either to those who did not fully appreciate his commitment to a radical world socialist agenda or to those who will watch the malleable Chicago machine President again re-invent himself to accommodate the moderating influence and pragmatism of the American system. Is he a Roosevelt or a Clinton? Stay tuned.

REACT: ACORN - another left wing nut?

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) was where Barack Obama plied some his community organizer talents. Alas, it seems this is just another relationship that requires more ‘splaining. Apparently, the mission of ACORN is to advance the flagrantly corrupt election practices of the Chicago Democrat machine to the national stage.

Never in American history has there been a better funded and better organized effort to pack the voter roles across the nation with fraudulent “voters.” The audacity (to use the word of the day) of the group in filing phony voter registrations is beyond belief. Their efforts are clearly coordinated with the Obama key states strategy. And why not? The Obama campaign have this so-called independent group $800,000 directly.

NOW GET THIS!! Obama also supported legislation that would exempt ACORN from Truth-in-Lending laws to protect homeowners from unscrupulous and crooked mortgage "middlemen" SUCH AS ACORN!!!

Just in case you missed the point: These are the people and the liberal Democrat policies that created the housing bubble that recently burst, triggering the worldwide credit crisis.

ACORN has become nothing less than the vote stealing wing of the Obama campaign -- paid for by the illegal contribution wing of the Obama campaign, a cadre of liberal fat cats and YOU, the victimized taxpayer.

All this comes at a time Democrat lawmakers throughout the nation have unhinged ballot protections to every extent possible through legislation that they claim was designed to make it easer for more folks to vote.

Well … there is some truth to that. Thanks to their efforts, it is now easier for dead people to vote. Fictional people (yes, even Mickey Mouse) can now vote. Illegal aliens can vote. Under aged children can vote. Prisoners can vote. Those locked-up in mental institutions can vote. And even nonexistent people can vote. Not only can these ineligibles vote, they can vote as often as they please. The can vote at the same time in different polling places. They do not even have to go to the polling place. In fact, they do not even have to be aware of the fact that they voted. All thanks to the efforts of ACORN.

Opening the door to this new opportunity for election tampering is ACORN. By most counts, they have registered, or attempted to register, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of the aforementioned ineligibles. They are to elections what bootleggers were to prohibition.

Under Obama’s starched white shirt is the heart of a true Chicago machine Democrat.

Time to be afraid again. Be very afraid.

OBSERVATION: Will Obama fail to win?

Like the race between the tortoise and the hare, Barack Obama can out sprint the lumbering John McCain any day of the week. Thus, McCain was right when he said that the media had now written him off. Aside from a few columnists, the news corps, entertainment-as-news comics and left-wing talk show jabber mouths are back to gloating over their vision of Obama hopping over the finish line by a wide margin.

I have reluctantly surrendered to the possibility that Obama can now win, but I have not written off McCain just yet – not by a longshot.

The most interesting bewilderment about this election is why Obama is not slamdunking McCain into some neo-Goldwater status. McCain is portrayed as a geezer – and a cranky one at that. The economy has tanked. The war drags on. George Bush continues to be the increasingly unpopular dunce-in-charge. McCain and his campaign cannot seem to maintain footing on the slippery ledge of the political chasm. The veep candidate is made out to be a dizzy blond slapped with a pseudo-scandal. It even appears that the less-popular-than-Bush congressional democrats are poised for gains in both chambers.

Then there is the money. Obama, by virtue of flip flopping on public funding, is proving that his devotion to campaign finance reform is as fragile as anything and that the entire concept is fatally flawed. However, his Machiavellian switch-a-roo, augmented by some very questionable money bundling schemes, means the Illinois senator enjoys a substantial financial advantage.

Finally, there is Obama himself. A gifted speaker. Tall. Movie star handsome, with an engaging smile. Kennedyesque. He can sell anything – or more appropriately, nothing. McCain, but virtue of his age and handicaps, has the movements of a hand puppet, with a voice like the mad scientist in a horror flick.

Yet … there are those polls. No matter the situation, Obama cannot seem to breakaway from McCain. They are still sweating heavily in the Obama camp – and well they should. First, the polls are probably inaccurate. The current 10 point lead Obama sees in Ohio, for example, is just bad polling. That state will not be a blow out for Obama, if he even carries it at all.

Then there is the tendency for the Republican candidate to pick up the lion’s share of the independent votes. The notion some have, that “independent” is synonymous with “liberal,” is just wrong.

This election may see the nationalization of the Bradley Effect, which suggests that African American candidates (at least at the gubernatorial level) enjoy significantly higher polling numbers than vote totals. There is every reason to assume that this will be even more dramatic in the presidential campaign, since there has been so much accusation of racism against those who do not support Obama.

From the get-go, everyone assumed that this would be another in our modern series of close presidential elections, where anything can happen. That has not changed. Give McCain a couple good days and/or Obama a couple bad days, and the dynamic of this race completely changes.

There is always talk of an “October Surprise.” Maybe we have seen it, but cannot recognize it at the moment. Perhaps the October Surprise with how far off the current polling is. I can only say… if the polls are proven to be way off base, the truth will not be to good news for Obama.

OBSERVATION: President Obama? Arrrrrrgh!

For those following my writings, you know I have consistently indicated that Barack Obama was not electable. In most cases, I added an escape clause – a great big “UNLESS.” The “unless” came in two versions. First, unless John McCain commits an enormous blunder, which is always possible. Second, unless there are dramatic events that alter the anticipated normal voting patterns.

Well … now I am nervous. Yeah, I would consider the economy dramatically tanking on the eve of the election an event that can shatter the “anticipated normal voting patterns.”

Events of recent days are shaking up the foundation of my theory that Obama is unelectable. First, we are in the grips of a true financial crisis. The long anticipated housing bubble burst has arrived and the over extended credit markets are grid locking.

Now add to this mix that the dive in the economy is due to greed and financial shenanigans by a lot of office holders, and you can see why the electorate is running scared – and angry. Sure, a lot of blame rests with past Democrat policies and the current Democrat Congress, but the knee-jerk blame is easily affixed to the encumbent in the White House -- and his political party.

This is never a good situation for the “ins.” While the crises is significantly short of the Great Depression, the willingness of the “outs” to draw the comparison for political advantages is both despicable and understandable. It is the equivalent of falsely yelling “fire!” in a crowded theater.

Like most economic crisis, fear is as damaging as reality – and can become a self-proving prophesy. The crisis creates a Hobson’s Choice for the electorate. Truth be known, they would probably prefer to scratch off both Obama and McCain as their choice to lead us out of the economic chaos of the moment. But … the voters must pick between the candidates at hand.

Which is perceived as the less bad choice? Common sense would say Obama. Troubled times are the fertile ground for the glib salesman who just arrived in town with a wagon load of snake oil as the cure for the maladies the town doctor was unable to cure. He is flash and dash -- style over substance.

The economic crisis has warped the campaign universe. At the very time the traditional GOP surge was rising, and the “Palin effect” was kicking in, the economic sputtering reversed the polarities, and suddenly Obama has moved ahead. This is significant at this stage of the game. State-by-state, Obama garners enough electoral votes to be the next President.

This does not mean the game is over for McCain. The economic crisis will not be over by Election Day. In fact, it may be worse. There is no “good news” scenario that will restore McCain’s momentum.

However, Obama is a guy the majority of the electorate would like to vote against. McCain must show the nation that despite his membership in the blamed party, he has both the will and the ability to address and resolve the economic mess. He has only days to show the American public that has the experience, the resolve and the right solutions to revitalize the economy. So far, he is not making made a convincing argument.

There is lies the other issue. McCain is screwing up. If you have read past blogs, you know I never thought he was the best candidate for the GOP by a long shot. For me, he has only become the best option between two very bad choices. He has proven to be as bad a candidate as I feared.

Seventy-six years ago, this nation descended into economic hell. In their fear, the people turned to a great orator, Franklin Roosevelt, an urban political machine politician who believed in the pre-eminence of government as the source of personal freedom. This man brought America as close to dictatorship as any time prior or since. He infused the neo socialism that continues to this day as a virus in the body politic. Upon is death, the Congress, recognizing the danger, swiftly passed a Constitutional amendment limiting the terms of presidents to eight years. It took thirty-five years for this nation to largely recover from what was known as the “New Deal.”

Now we again stand on the precipice of seeping socialism – driven by the same kind of fear that brought us to the paternalistic socialism of Roosevelt. George Bush, the democrat Congress and our two presidential candidates have found common cause in applying the feel good socialist band aid rather than the more painful but effective free market cure. We have choosed to treat the symptoms of economic and political cancer while ignoring the spreading disease.

All this has changed the game. For the first time in more than a year, I have to admit that Obama is now electable. It is not a foregone conclusion, but it is now very possible. I do not think it will be as overwhelming as the current polls show, but it is possible.

OBSERVATION: Time to muddy up this campaign

Hold on to your seats, ladies and gentlemen. The 2008 Presidential Campaign Roller Coaster is about to get wild.

As we head into the last weeks of this historic and close election, you can bet that both campaigns will play pretty rough – while pointing the finger of blame at the other side. Self-serving claims to the contrary, both candidates have slung some mud and volleyed a few hand grenades at the opponent. Still, that was mild stuff compared to the bombardment of negative campaign ads about to pop up on your television screen – not to mention inundating radio and the Internet.

Personally, I like negative ads. They are among the most cleaver, the funniest and in many ways, the most revealing of underlying truths. Oh! I know. We’re not supposed to like them. We’re supposed to be offended. Folks … that’s all pretense. We all love them. If so many of you were truly repulsed by those ads, they would not be effective.

The best of them will not come from the campaigns directly – in order preserve their official “above it” claims. They will come from the various and sundry issue committees and independent political operations. But … it is still all part of the campaign strategies.

While Barack Obama will be respectful of you will see an unusual negative attention focused on John McCain’s pick for veep. McCain’s age, health and mental stability will be distorted to scare the hell out of the electorate. He will be portrayed in Halloween-esque ads as either feeble or deranged – or both.

If you think Obama’s friends, such as William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Franklin Raines, Tony Rezko, are old news, just wait. I expect to hear a lot more about Obama’s family ties – his America loathing mother, his impoverished brother, and his Muslim dad.

Those negative ads in the past were just test sample, we are about to get on to the real thing. And just remember, while the pseudo sophisticated are feigning chagrin, I will be loving ever one of them.

BRING ON THE MUD, AND LET THE PRESIDENTIAL WRESTLING BEGIN!!!

REACT: Biden wins debate ... Palin wins the voters.

Who won? That is the ubiquitous question. I guess a lot depends on your criteria of success.

If you go by strict rules of debate, Joe Biden’s formal style and handling of the issues would probably get him more points. If you question who gained the most personally from the debate, Sarah Palin had a huge victory. If you want to know who touched the audience the most, and perhaps shifted votes in their favor, I would say Palin gets the gold.

I know some post debate poles give Biden the edge as the winner – as they gave Palin the edge as the most likeable. However, that still leaves the question of voting preference. We commonly assume the “winner” of the debate gain votes, but that is not necessarily the case.

By most measures, including polling, Jimmy Carter bested Ronald Reagan in their debate. He was smoother, more articulate and had a stronger command of factual information. The only thing Reagan won was the hearts and minds of a lot of people who decided to give him their vote.

I can agree that Biden was the academic victor, but I think Palin got the net gain in the all important vote count. One sign of that is the likeability victory. People tend to vote for the candidate they like the most.

FOLLOW UP: Maybe not so funny

As I considered my pervious blog on the Obama Cabinet choices, I had a chilling thought. Even though my picks are supposed to be a bit of political satire, I suddenly realized that all these god-awful choices ARE Barack Obama's friends and confidantes -- with the exception of the senator's impoverished brother. Scary stuff.

INSIGHT: Obama's Cabinet -- God help America!!

A number of people have suggested that Barack Obama can assuage some of the concerns about his incompetency to be President by revealing the names of his Cabinet. (Ooops! I think I was supposed to say “inexperience.” Same thing, just sounds better.)

Since it appears he is not going to take that advice, I thought I would help him out and leak some the names of his likely Cabinet members. Keep in mind, Obama comes from the Chicago School of politics, which means he will look to his closest friends and family to dole out the spoils of victory. This will not be easy for poor old Obama since there are only of few Cabinet positions, and he has a lot of cronies to reward. Also, some folks are multi-talented and could be logical picks for more than one post. But let’s give it a go.

First, there is Obama’s pal, William Ayers. He could serve in a number of positions. Of course, he could be a good choice for Attorney General. Having avoided the criminal justice system on murder charges due to some technicality, he can well appreciate the plight of criminals. I am sure he would do a lot to alleviate jail overcrowding – especially by pot heads and terrorists. In fact, he would make the entire Gitmo problem go away immediately by releasing all the inmates to go back to the Middle East, where these can resume their careers.

Then I am thinking … Ayres has spent more recent years introducing left wing, anti capitalism indoctrination into the curriculum of our public schools by teaching teachers to be radical activists in the classroom. He is currently terrorist-in-residence at the University of Chicago. This could land him as Secretary of Education.

Of course, as a former terrorist, who makes no apologies for his deadly rampaging in the 1960s, he is a natural for the head of Homeland Security. This is sort of a fight fire with fire appointment. Who can know the mind of a terrorist better than … a terrorist? So, Home Security it is.

We should not discount Ayers’ wife and fellow radical, who did do time for killing a few people. Of course, she claims that any bomb she does not personally detonate doesn’t count. Not sure how the dead feel about that. At any rate, Bernadette Dorn, is not only out of prison, but is a respected professor of law at Northwestern University. This could give her a shot at any of the three offices I mention for her hubby. Think about it. If he gets Home Security and she gets to be Attorney General, they could be Obama’s most prolific agents of change – with more impact than all the bombs they blew off in their days of rage. So, seems like AG is the spot for her.

Moving on … (no pun intended) … there is George Soros, the Hungarian gazillionaire who is spending a chunk of his fortune on left wing proselytizing through such groups as moveon.org and what I like to call (hot) Air America, the radio voice of socialism -- not to mention the money he pours into independent campaign expenditures trying to get Obama in the Oval Office. Usually these types of money bags wind up as Secretary of the Treasury or Secretary of Commerce. But, I think he would be the perfect guy to head the Federal Reserve Bank, where he can continue their trend toward a controlled economy. On the other hand, he may demand the Treasury job where he can get control of all the mortgage bailout money being donated by Congress on behalf of the taxpayers. (I know this is not one of the official Cabinet positions, but if Obama tried to exclude him from Cabinet meetings, he would just stomp off and buy the Congress -- in which he already has a fifty percent stake.)

In attempting to resolve conflicting ambitions, Obama would likely give the Secretary of the Treasury job to Alex Giannoulias. He is currently the very young Illinois State Treasurer. See, he’s already a treasurer. Also, he has had a lot of experience helping his daddy run a bank that provided much needed money for down and out mobsters and high clout customers. If this is not enough to qualify him to head the Department of the Treasury, bear in mind he and Obama are long time pick-up basketball buddies.

For Secretary of Commerce, I see the frontrunner to be Jim Johnson, the former head of Fannie Mae. He is an Obama confidante, and even headed the search committee that brought Joe Biden the vice presidential nomination. Since housing and credit are the central issues in the business world today, who can be better suited to the job than the guy who saw the crumbling of the American economy from the inside. Even though Fannie Mae had to be bailed out as part of the biggest taxpayer financial rescue in American history, I am sure Johnson did a good job. Why else would they give him a $20 million severance package when he resigned?

For some reason the word “godfather” just popped into my head … and that reminded me of outgoing Illlinois State Senate President Emil Jones, who is widely recognized as Obama’s political godfather -- and a guy how never saw a reform he liked. (Godfather? Hmmmmm. Now that I think about it. Put Jones in a tux and he does conjure up the image of a black Marlon Brando – even the gravelly voice. But, I digress.) If Obama can talk Jones out of spending his retirement years as the Ambassador to Jamaica or Aruba, he could be the odds-on favorite for one of the welfare posts – Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Health and Human Services (HHS) and Agriculture (think food stamps). My inside information has it as HUD, because he has a lot of friends, like Tony Rezko, who know how to do the public housing real estate deals. Hmmmm. But they are also good at hospital licensing. NO. (Oh! Scratch Rezko. He’s going to jail. But there is no end of other influence peddlers Jones can look to for project management.)

Jones could be pushed aside if Franklin Raines, formerly of Fannie Mae, wants the job. He knows housing. Not only did he get paid more than $90 million dollars while presiding over the collapse of the housing market, but he knows how to negotiate a good loan. He was able to obtain millions of dollars in personal loans in what are being called “sweetheart deals.” If Obama wants experience to go with loyalty, this is the guy – and he’s a brother. While he is under federal investigation, I think Obama can put him in the ceremonial job of Treasurer of the United States. Having skimmed almost $100 million from the taxpayers, he SHOULD have his name on the money. He thinks it is all his anyway. (Again, not an official Cabinet position, but who would tell a guy with such audacity to get out of the meeting?)

I think Veteran Affairs is a slam dunk for Massachusetts Senator John Kerry. He has an ability to understand, and take, both sides of an issue. He boasts of his active duty combat experience in Vietnam (okay, some dubious claims), but he returned to America and gained attention for ratting out his follow soldiers for a massacring innocent civilians. I know his stories turned out to be bit … shall we say … counter accurate, but any one can make a mistake. (You will recall Hillary once mistook a bouquet of flowers from a 12-year-old girl as bullets from a band of terrorist.) More recently, Kerry has become an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, which he voted to start and supported the funding. Given Obama’s get-out-at-any-cost policy, Kerry is a natural to handle the return of the troops.

While so-called organized labor (unions) controls only about 8 percent of the work force (and declining), they do control the Democrat party and the Obama-Biden team. This means a small group of union heads will name the next Secretary of Labor – saving Obama the problem if vetting anyone he might otherwise wish to choose. Given the labor leaders’ presumption of the right to name the secretary in Democrat administrations, we should call it the Department of Organized Labor. Well, I see this going to Jimmy Hoffa – the one that has not gone missing. He’s broke with his GOP friends to support Obama, and as head of the Teamsters, he has a lot of members Obama should want to keep happy. Nothing worse than an angry trucker.

Health and Human Services maybe the most humanitarian Cabinet post. I say it goes to Oprah Winfrey. The issues handled by HHS reads like a schedule of her upcoming shows. Of course, she maybe not want to take the downgrade from her show. I mean, what Secretary of HHS is remotely as popular as her – and as well paid? If she declines, I put my money on Dr. Phil or Dr. Oz.

Another easy call is Secretary of Energy. This is one confirmation away for Al Gore. From this position, he can reduce American man-made carbon emissions to levels not seen since the Jurrasic Era (because mankind was not around. Duh!). He will reduce our bio fuel dependency by developing such innovative resources as flatulence fuel. His Oscar and Nobel prizes will look great on his credenza, although not so easy to see in his dimly lite office. He will become the national spokesperson for the new “dim bulb” policy.

Then there is the Department of the Interior. Since no one has any idea what this agency does, and since every Cabinet needs to be bipartisan, this is where Obama buries the sole Republican. Who would that be? Who cares?

For the Department of Transportation I think Obama picks Chicago's former transportation guy, Frank Kruesi. He is a pal of Mayor Rich Daley and Obama has a lot of quid pro quo for machine support. I mean, what good is bringing the White House under the wing of the Chicago Democrat machine if you cannot take care of your friends in the spirit of good old fashion Chicago cronyism.

Finally, there is the most prestigious position of all, Secretary of State. I see that going to Bill Clinton. He is the perfect choice. Anyone who can finagle those highly profitable deals with the potentates of the Middle East has the negotiating skill to solve any world problem. Some suggested Hillary, but she is not about to be the second or third woman anything. She is still looking for a glass ceiling to break -- not rise through a previously shattered portal. This will allow Bill Clinton to move beyond his well known affinity for domestic affairs and into the more exotic world of foreign affairs.

That's not all folks. Here are a few important miscellaneous appointments.

In England, the national department heads are called "ministers." Well, Obama his own version in the personages of not-so-reverend Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton and Michael Pfleger. The sometimes Reverend Jackson covets the SOS job (among other things), but the simple truth is that Obama doesn't like him at all. I see Wright as Congressional Chaplain, where he can beseech God to damn America in front of the men and women who are doing a good job of it already. Sharpton as head of the Employment and Equal Opportunity Commission, where he can organize demonstrations agains himself. Pfleger? Hmmmm. Oh. Pfleger becomes U.S. Envoy to the Vatican, where his imitations of black preachers will keep the Pope in stitches. The are both Aryans, you know. Jesse Jackson? I mean, you have to do something with the guy. Maybe ambassador to Zaire to get him out of the country.

Since Obama is sure to fire U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who is cleaning out the corrupt Chicago machine of a lot of Obama friends and supporters, we should consider the replacement -- which will come at the recommendation of Illinois' strident paritsan hack senator, Dick Durbin. I am thinking the new U.S. Attorney in Chicago will be Mayor Daley's brother, Michael Daley (no photo available).

Speaking of brothers ... Obama needs to help out is own, who is living on one dollar a month in Kenya. With his knowledge of the ravages of poverty, I think Obama's brother makes him head of the Food Stamp Program.

Correction: I originally had George Soro identified as a Greek. An understandably outraged Greek blog reader corrected my error. Soros is a Hungarian. My apololgies to the Greeks ... and the the Hungarians, for that matter.

OPINION: America (On Line, at least) gives debate win to McCain

Looking at the current** (Saturday, 5:30 p.m.) results of the AOL Hot Seat (unscientific) poll, John McCain won the first debate by a 57 to 37 margin, with about 6 percent who are clueless. The state-by-state break down confirms my impression of this year's presidential race. Barack Obama is the clear choice of blacks and left wing loonies. I draw this conclusion because McCain was declared the winner in every state of the Union (including Obama's home state of Illlinois) except Washington, D.C. and Vermont.

**Results may change as more voters express their preferences.

Now we all know D.C. has the highest proportion of black population of any place in America. The apparent propensity of blacks to vote skin color and even (partial) ethnicity over any and all issues is racist, by definition. So, when the Obama whiners talk about how he will suffer unfair disadvantage due to non-black racism, remind them that he is gaining an offsetting advantage from black racism.

Less known, but easily provable, Vermont is like that candy bar -- chuck full of (left wing) nuts. It is the home base of the only truly socialist senator in Congress, Bernie Sanders (left, of course), and the headquarters of Ben and Jerry, who dole out left wing propaganda with ever scoop of their ice cream.

You may recall from past blogs, it is also famous for the alien village of Brattleboro, which voted to have President Bush arrested for violating the U.S. Constitution if he set so much as one toe across the village boundary. The irony that their action is ... ah ... unconstitutional is lost on the good people of brattleboro.

I have said it before, and I will say it again ... the American part of America would glady let Vermont slip out from under the Union if it was not for thier maple syrup.

So ... there you have it. The bedrock of Obama's support are racists and nuts.

DISCLAIMER: In these days of uptight politics and anal attitudes, I find it necessary to note that the above blog is offered as a tongue in (my) cheek commentary. It is not meant to be reverse reverse racism or mean spiritedness. If you cannot see the good natured jest then you don't get it -- or you are uptight with an anal attitude. Lighten up!

LMAO: What ... and give up show business?

You know it's always my desire to bring you valuable behind the scenes information that is often overlook by the major media. Here is one such example.

I am sure you have not read any reports about the guy in the photo just finishing up his important work. This unheralded hero is responsible for cleaning up the bullsh*t after each presidential debate. He claims to be able to determine the winner of the debate by the amount of refuse he has to remove around each podium.

So ... how did he judge this debate? After cleaning up the stage, he is reported to have commented, "I've seen a lot worse. This was pretty evenly spread around both podiums."

He tells friends that nothing compares to the Reagan/Carter debate, where he says the entire stage was knee deep in bullsh*t. He regrets not being around for the historic Nixon/Kennedy debate. "I hear stores that the bullsh*t overflowed the stage, but no one kept records in those days," he said.

When asked why he is assigned to this mission after each presidential debate, he simply replied, "I'm the duty officer." (No pun intended).

REACT: Who won? It's debatable.

If you think of the first of the four presidential debates as the first quarter of a football game, I say no touchdowns ... no fumbles ... and minimal yardage gain -- mostly John McCain recovering lost yardage due to economic set back and dropping the ball on the pre-debate strategy (as in threatening not to show up for the game).

Despite a lot of attempts, Barack Obama could not get control of the ball. The best sacks of the quarterback were McCain's remark that he does not have a (presidential) seal yet -- alluding to Obama's past unveiling of HIS seal, which was pretty much trash canned due to negative public reaction to the obvious (execpt to Obama) arrogance and presumptiveness of the gimmick -- and McCain's cleaver comparison of Obama's persistence in the face of misjudgement to the governing style of the unpopular George Bush.
I think the contest suffered from some bad ref'ing. This game was to be played on the foreign policy field. However, for almost the entire first half, Jim Lehrer, of PBS, had them over on the economic field. This was an inappropriate call, and cannot be explained other than Lehrer's desire to be the celebrity questioner on the pressing domestic issues of the week. He made a very lame attempt to justify the call by saying the eocnomy impacts on foreign policy. I would call for an official protest on the ruling.

OBSERVATION: Team Obama off message?

First we have Bill Clinton appearing on “The View” and “The David Letterman Show” on the same day. Given two major opportunities to push the Barack Obama candidacy, Good ole Bill hardly mentions the Democrat presidential nominee. I would say Clinton damned Obama by feint praise, but he didn’t even offer up any praise, feint or otherwise.

In responding to a number of questions, Clinton was more impartial than the average left-leaning news anchor. Most of his praise we reserved for his wife, with John McCain coming in second. His omission of any mention of Obama was so obvious that comedian Chris Rock, who followed Clinton on the Letterman set, did an impromptu schtick about reminding the former President who won the nomination this year. Rock mocked Clinton’s seeming inability to utter Obama’s name.

As if that was not enough surprises for Obama, his own pick for Vice President, Joe Biden, did a little dumping of his own. The Delaware senator said the "McCain can't email" television ad put out by Obama was "awful" and if he had known about it in advance, it never would have aired. I had made my own opinion known in a previous blog, but I never expected to get support from Obama's running mate. The commercial was offenisve because McCain cannot email because war injuries pervent him from useing a keyboard.

Are these guys a wee bit off message?

FOLLOW-UP: More naked truth?

A while back I was wondering out loud why liberals think nudity adds to the relevancy of their various protests. In one of those blogs, I noted the ditzy views of one Earth Friend Gen. She claims you cannot address (or is it undress?) the problems of the world until you are … as they say … comfortable in your skin. And … she believes you cannot be comfortable in your skin unless you are willing to show your comfort level to the mostly unwilling eyes of unsuspecting men, women and children. <--Listed in the ascending order of unwillingness.

I mean … it is okay to be comfortable in one’s own skin, Gen, but that does not mean others are as comfortable with YOUR skin as you are. In many cases, naked bodies are … sorry to say … unattractive at best and nausea-inducing at worst.

Seems my friend Gen (rhetorically speaking, since I never met her) is in the news again. This time for naked skating. She initially sought permission to skate naked in the Portland, Oregon Fourth of July Parade. They turned her down. I guess if you don’t have any place to stick a flag pin you can’t parade in Portland on Independence Day.

Well, despite the parade ban, or maybe protesting it, Earth Friend Gen has been gliding around town wearing only a pair of inline skates. Police report that a number of construction workers have complained.

Whoa! Construction workers complaining about a naked woman whizzing by on roller blades. We all know that construction workers are the number one “bird” watchers in America – and no one appreciates jiggly boobs and bouncing butts more than those guys with the hard ones ….. hats, that is. (Shame on you!) If they are complaining, you would think Earth Friend Gen has to be a bit on the au naturale ugly side. Judging by her photo (left), I would say not pin up pretty, but not bad enough to have the Portland construction gawkers calling the police, for heaven's sake. They are a hard to please crowd out in Portland. The pot bellied construction workers of my hometown of Chicago would think Gen a Venus -- and if they did call the police, it would only be to join in the chorus of wolf whistles.

With all that is going on in the economy and in the war on terror, I should not spend too much time on the antics of Earth Friend Gen. However, this blog has now made it a mission to keep you updated on the latest news in nude protesting. After all, someone has to do it.** Maybe I should add to the banner head, “All the nudes that fit to print.”

Rest assured, I will keep you posted on any future naked protest sightings.

**I don’t usually use the expression, “someone has to do it.” When you read that, don’t you more often than not say to yourself, “No. No one really has to do it” -- whatever “it” is?

INSIGHT: Biden his time ... for Hillary

For a moment in time, there was question whether John McCain would replace Sarah Palin as his vice presidential partner. This seems to be mostly generated by the liberal pundits as an indirect way of exaggerating Palin's negatives. Now cometh a more persistent backroom whisper -- that Barack Obama will trade in Joe Biden for Hillary Clinton.

The rumor that is getting increasing volume in the blogosphere and among mainstream pundits is that Old Joe will resign in the few precious weeks before the election due to health reasons. They even specifically say an aneurism will be the stated malady. This would give Obama a woman, to offset the surprise and effective selection of Palin, and a former adversary a la Jack Kennedy's selection of Lyndon Johnson.

It certainly is a most cynical theory -- so cynical that it is politically feasible. (I wonder if this would be matched by Palin dumping the geriatric McCain for Mitt Romney.)

Would Obama and the Democrats go to such an extreme? Why not? The Democrats are the consummate pursuit-of-power party with an anything-to-win core philosophy. I have long suggested that Obama was unelectable. If the Obamacans and Democrat leaders did not see it quite that way over the long haul, they most certainly have come closer to my thinking since the appearance of Palin on the political platform. Maybe they now see it slipping way.

The question is ... Is such a bait-and-switch too cynical for the American public. Will voters be enthralled with the progressive's dream ticket, or revolted by the chicanery of it all. Of course, much depends on the credibility and believability of Biden's health claim. Death would be much more convincing than some last minute infirmity of convenience, but not as easy to accomplish.

The more serious question ... "Would Hillary actually help?" If not, then the strategy is nothing more than bloggers with more time than knowledge playing head games.

I think the switch is within the realm of possibility because I think the Obamacans could think Hillary would pull them out of a noise dive by checkmating Palin. However, just because they think so, does not make it so.

My own unsolicited opinion is that the Hillary gambit would backfire. Hillary looks good as the also-ran. No reason to think of those pesky Whitewater days, the IRS lists and the stolen White House china. The Clintons are intriguing personalities, but that does not mean that 51 percent of the voting public would like to see them in office again. In some ways, they are political O.J. Simpsons. Their every move generates a celebrity fascination, but behind that, we all know they did it.

If Palin was the "carrot' to motivate the conservative base, Hillary is just the stick that would whip the right wing into a rabid campaign frenzy.

Furthermore, the suddenly more serious and intense vetting of the Clintons (yes, both of them) would likely lead to the exposure of a number of troublesome issues that will lay dormant as long as they are sideliners. In addition to a re-examination of all those Clinton era accusations and findings, there are more contemporary matters. Her senate fundraising activities have not been without controversy. And then there are Bill's post-presidency wheelings and dealings with Middle East potentates and liaisons of a more personal nature.

Hillary would do to Obama, what Palin did for McCain. She would shunt him off to the sidetrack of media attention. While the ham-handed McCain needed the temporary diversion of public attention, the charismatic Obama cannot afford to be taken off message in the all-critical final days of this very long, long campaign.

Also, standing next to the Clintons (yes, both of them), Obama would appear diminished -- less like a president. He would become the Sarah Palin of is own campaign -- a breakthrough novelty who seems a wee bit short of experience. This is a more serious problem for him because he is applying for the boss's position, not the assistant.

Then there is the question of breaking the racial barrier and glass ceiling at the same time. Is that just too much progress for the nation at one time. Could be.

Maybe Obama thinks this is a way to flip a losing campaign into a winning effort. I can also see Hillary buying in on the hope of preventing Palin from shattering through the ceiling many credit Clinton with cracking.

With the American electorate being so closely divided, it is not easy to forecast the results of such a dramatic turn of events -- especially with the potential of other issues, such as Iraq and the economy, to produce their own dramatic surprises.

However, my gut tells me the Hillary maneuver would fail. Instead of boosting Obama's currently rattling rocket, it may cause a complete flame out. There were many good reasons Hillary was not choosen in the first place, and all those good reasons are still lurking beneath the surface just waiting for the chance to be bite Obama in the butt.

LMAO: Obama "calling" for reform in Illinois

While Barack Obama showed not on scintilla of interest in reforming the thoroughly corrupt political machine that produced him, he is not under some pressure to poop, or get off the reform pot. National and Illinois-based media has been wondering out loud why the self described agent of change is not pushing to pass the reform package on languishing in the Illinois Senate -- Obama's form venue. The question is particular pesky since the state senate is headed by Emil Jones, Obama's fellow African American, close friend and political godfather.

Well I am happy to report the under pressure from the media, Obama has taken action. Well ... at least the appearance of action. He said he would "call" Jones to encourage him to pass the reform legislation.

I can hear that call now.

Obama: Hello, Godfather.

Jones: Hello boy. (<-- African-Americans can use that word about each other.)

Obama: Godfather, I have been getting a lot of flack about never doing anything about reforming Illinois.

Jones: I've been reading that. They just don't know that Illinois ain't ready for reform.

Obama: I know, but its getting me some bad press ... and you know how I hate bad press.

Jones: Of course, son. You're not used to it like the rest of us. Just water off the ducks back.

Obama: Well ... today I told the press I would call you to ask you to pass the reform legislation.

Jones: Smart move, boy.

Obama: Thank you, sir.

Jones: I'll be sure to tell the press about your call, and how strongly you pressured me to pass the legislation. I can say I am reconsidering my position. Oh! Better yet. I'll say I will work to pass it because you are such a persuasive guy.

Obama: Really? You'll really pass it?

Jones: No! Of course not. You crazy? But I can say I will -- at least until after the election. I control enough votes to make sure it never passes. I'll come in favor of the bill, but make sure it gets locked up in committee anyway. You know how we do these things.

Obama: That's really great. I knew I could count on you.

Jones: No problem. After all we got to get you elected. The Chicago machine never controlled the White House before. And of course, you need to be President to get rid of that U.S. Attorney Fitzgerald. Maybe you can appoint Mayor Daley's brother as the new one.

Obama: Sure.

Jones: And brother Bill Daley to the Cabinet if he decides not to be governor.

Obama: Sure.

Jones: Personally, I would not mind being ambassador to Jamaica ... or Aruba ... or Puerto Rico. Obama: Puerto Rico is part of the United States.

Jones. Oh! Well you decide. I just want a nice tropical island.

Obama: Sure. And thanks for the help with the reform thing. People in other parts of the country seem to take that stuff pretty seriously.

Jones: Sure, son. Any time. And don't forget ... that tropical island.

Obama; You got it. Bye Godfather.

Jones: Bye boy.

LMAO: In praise of the (con) artist.

I have recently written about lunacy in the political world (lots to write about) and lunacy in the education world (ditto), so why not turn to the wacky world of fine art. I have to confess that when it comes to knowledge of fine art, I belong to the I-know-what-I-like-when-I-see-it school of artistic appreciation. So, the art snobs can dismiss me immediately as an unsophisticated oaf. That is ok because I think a lot of them are pseudo-sophisticated, low self esteem elitists.

Case in point.

Just recently, Sotheby’s Auction House sold the works of guy named Damien Hirst. I never heard of this guy, which should come as no surprise. But, I love him. Oh! Not for his art. That’s the lunacy. But for his extraordinary achievement in making fools of snobby art connoisseurs – AND making a lot of money in the process.

You see, I think a lot of modern art is simply … hmmm … trash. It’s just a bunch of no-talent pseudo-art. Not even good enough to be “pseudo.” Hirst makes no pretense at being an artist. None whatsoever. That is the beauty of it. He is actually anti art --- you might say a (con) artist.

A lot of modern art exists because of a perfect marriage between (con) artists and the new age art collectors. The artists want money – lots of it – for very little work and creativity. The money bag collectors want to show off their wealth and get their names on public galleries full of this crap.

Here is my theory. What better way to show off one’s obnoxious wealth than to be able to spend enormous amounts on things of no value, artistic or otherwise. I saw this in the antique business. (Yeah, I once owned an antique shop.) There were three types of customers. Those who looked at the price tag, and slapped down the money. Those who negotiated a better price, and then would brag to friends what a “bargain’ they got. And, believe it or not, those who actually preferred to overpay for things so they could brag how much they spent on the item. Texas seems to have a lot of the latter.

I am not talking about the difference between a Lamborghini and a Saturn. Some things are just better made and have greater real value. I’m talking about the person who announces, and usually very loudly, “This here cigar I am smoking cost me $950 smackaroos.” Or, “Take a sip of this (yucky) wine. Cost me $12,000 a bottle. I bought a case.”

These are the folks who spend hundreds of dollars for a $5 tie or $8 t-shirt because it has the name Versace on it. I mean, it’s not even personally autographed. The name is stitched on by a fifty cents an hour worker in Asia – where, incidentally, you can buy all the “Versace” ties you want at the street markets for about a buck a pop. Some even have the name spelled correctly.

The value of such “status symbols” is just that. Showing off that the purchaser can afford to pay extraordinary amounts of money for things of modest real market value. It’s the same thing as dropping $500 tips for a $100 meal. It's just a means of showing off. The greater the differential between the true market value and the amount paid, the greater the ego fulfillment – the bragging power. It is their way to flex their money muscles on the Venice Beach of life.

Oh yeah! Art. In the Hirst case, they are paying ENORMOUS amounts for almost nothing of value. THAT is power. Hirst merely provides them with the opportunity to show off their wealth. In return, they provide Hirst with tons of money for dubious art.

Let me be more specific.

Recently this guy Hirst put a lot of his “works” up for auction. Someone paid $18.6 million for a dead bull in formaldehyde with a gilted thing-of-a-jig on its head (above right). What taxidermist would not stuff that late bovine for a lot less? It looks like something that should be on display at the Indiana State Fair instead of a metropolitan museum.

But Hirst is not a one trick scammer. No. No. No. He also sells pressed butterflies for millions of dollars. I used to collect butterflies myself – and framed them. It appears I may have pitched away about $6 million worth of the winged beauties – at least at Hirst rates.

But, as they say on those ubiquitous television ads – that’s not all folk. Hirst also makes millions on his “spin” art.

(Excuse me while I pause. I am convulsing in laughter. I mean, “spin” art???)

Yeah! I am talking about the kind of “art” your kids did in the second grade, at the carnival, or on their very own Fischer-Price “Spin-O-Matic.” You put the paper on a rotor, drizzle paint and, voile! You have created “art.”

Sometimes I feel like the kid looking at the naked king. Don’t these money flashing art collectors realize how incredibly stupid they look? While they can certainly show the power of their money, they are also revealing their insecurities and lack of common sense. And no matter how much the pay for this stuff, it isn’t fine art. It hardly rises to the level of “craft.” There is nothing wrong with rich people buying nice things – better cars, larger houses, fancier boats, bigger diamonds – but stuff like this … ???

Well, it is said that a fool and his (and her, to be politically correct) money is soon parted. Personally, I admire the fooler more than the foolee in this case. You go, Damien.

Footnote to Damien Hirst: Have you ever considered Paint-by-Numbers or Etch-A-Sketch?

FOLLOW UP: Blago’s CTA senior subsidy a loser

Well the chickens have come to roost on the buses and el trains of Chicago.

I am referring to Governor Rod Blagojevich’s blatantly political, self-serving legislation that gave all seniors, regardless of income, free rides (<= read that, taxpayer subsidized) on the cash starved public transportation system. He seems to think “old” means poor. Or maybe just more liberal politics designed to make everyone beholding to government for damn near everything.

As predicted, the ridership among seniors has increased – along with the budget deficit. The Governor’s plan was never about the poor. I can see some means-tested subsidy for seniors who must travel by public transportation. Give me a reason they need to travel, and show me they cannot afford it, and I say, “”give them a freebie.” Why any sane community would give gazillionaire Sam Zell (who spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on his annual birthday party) a taxpayer subsidized ride is totally beyond me. It is nothing less than welfare for the greedy, not the needy.

Now with the increase in ridership, the CTA is experimenting with the idea of getting more people on each el car by removing seats and provide more standing room. This is where I start to appreciate irony. You know where I’m going … right?


Yep, we add all those shaky old people, with their canes and walkers, and we accommodate them by taking away their seats. This is a joke … a game. You put 50 tottering seniors on an el car and see how many are still standing at the end of the line. You get points for knocking them over like bowling pins. Or, maybe it is more like bumper pool, were the oldsters bounce off the more foot secure passengers until the post-prime riders all topple to the floor.

When we get these kinds of half-ass solutions, just remember that the money to solve these problems has been siphoned off by the insider crooks – which some of us call the “corruption tax.” The problem with the corruption tax is that it gets raised secretly. No budget. No vote. And until U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald indicts someone, we don’t even know where the money went.

Next time you are motivated to give up your seat to an oldster, just remember, they are not paying for the ride much less the seat.
(This gives me an idea. How about we charge extra for seats? People with seating privilege get special “seating tickets.” In fact, we can even provide “season tickets” with designated seating like the pews in the colonial churches. Hmmmm. The only problem … the crazy Governor and is friends in the legislature will probably give away all the valuable seats to the old fogies – except for the ones provided to those who have at least precinct level political clout.

That’s already how the handicap license plates and windshield signs work. I am betting a lot of you … like me … know people who have handicap car signs and are quite able bodied. If you don't know anyone like that, just hang round a handicap parking spot and you will meet quite of few of them.)

REACT: Obama a reformer? Puhleeeez

In a recent Chicago Sun-Times column, Carol Marin advised Barack Obama to start naming his Cabinet as a means to get past the lipstick level journalism of the day. She suggested naming U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as Attorney General. A splendid choice, but the usually insightful columnist seems to have forgotten where she resides. So, I thought I should send her this letter.

Dear Carol,

I am a great fan of you and your professional work. However, your recent Obama column shocked me for your lack of realization of the world in which you live. Apparently you got suckered into believing that Obama IS a reformer. Oh sure, he is selling that image nationally where people do not know Chicago and Illinois politics. But, you should know better.

Obama is the product of arguably the most corrupt political operation in America. For Mayor Daley to sanctimoniously deny the existence of “the Machine” is as absurd as his father once denying the presence of “the Mob” in Chicago.

(I have to interject here. LMAO The photo on the right of Obama and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is the first photo that pops up on google images when you search for "Chicago political corruption." And you think life ain't full of funnyironies? Actually, under that search there are quite a few photos of Obama and nefarious characters. Okay, back to the letter.)

Obama was first elected to office by knocking all the competition off the ballot in the good old Chicago tradition. He was the benefactor of the patronage of some of the sleaziest influence peddlers and inside wheeler-dealers – one of whom, Tony Rezko (left), is now a convicted criminal.

Obama endorsed all the machine candidates, and in doing so he endorsed flagrant cronyism, nepotism and illegal patronage. His political god-father is Illinois Senate President Emil Jones, who supported legislative pay raises while opposing every bit of reform legislation. His chief political consultant, David Axelrod has been the flack for the machine for years. And on and on.

And what about Obama, himself? He has never … not once … produced or supported any reform legislation. He has never voiced criticism of the corrupt practices of the Machine. Most recently, he was asked to encourage Jones to pass ethics legislation. He demurred. Never once has he pointed a reform finger at the corruption within his own political base. He never challenged the establishment. He never voiced his support for whistle blowers and investigators. He never promoted “change” in Illinois – believable or otherwise.

On the other hand, as a state senator, he played Chicago-style politics by doling out taxpayer money to friends and supporters without much oversight and accountability. Several of his community improvement projects failed and the money “vanished.” He left his district not much better than he found it.

On the matter of Fitzgerald (right), Carol, you completely missed the mark. As President, Obama will do what the Machine demands – fire Fitzgerald. The most serious problem the machine has is a truly honest, independent REFORM U.S. Attorney. Whatever promises or lip service you may hear to the contrary, Obama will serve the Machine, not the public interest, in this matter. He owes the Machine bosses that much. He will deliver in the good old Chicago way.