My Daily Rant---2/7

Here are just a few things I want to get off my chest.

More Media Bias

Everyone remember yesterday when the entire media narrative was Clinton's supposed money problems and the headline of every morning show and newspaper was the same?  I know I do.  But suddenly, you hear nothing at all about it.  Why?  Because just in the last day or two, Clinton has raised over $6.4 million.  So is it too much to ask of these same people who were burying Clinton last night because of those "money problems" to come out tonight and say that those money problems seem to be long gone?  Even the Huffington Post had on their homepage a huge picture of Clinton with the headline concerning money problems.  Where's the updated info tonight?  In a tiny box buried under the headline, not even in the main section of news.  Fair?  Balanced?  I think not. 

More Debates?

Sen. Clinton has called for more debates, one per week, from now leading up to the Ohio/Texas primaries on March 4. Barack Obama says no so far.  He says that people are tired of debates.  It really is despicable to me that in an election this big, this close, that a candidate would refuse to debate, which in essence denies the undecided viewer a forum to decide on whom he/she will vote for.  There has only been one 1 on 1 debate so far.  There needs to be more.  Although both Obama and Clinton are 100 times better than the Republicans, and I would support either over McCain, there are real, substantive differences on key issues.  The voters deserve to hear these candidates in a debate format---not a one-sided stump speech or biased media coverage, but a one-on-one debate centered on issues.  And all the talk about Obama being bad at debates and therefore needing to skip out on them....bull!  Although Obama may not be the best debater in the world, he has steadily improved and his last debate performance was his best yet.  But even if it wasn't, he still owes the American people a chance to hear the differences he has with Sen. Clinton.  

A Brokered Convention?

The phrase itself gives me mixed feelings.  On one hand, as a political junkie, a brokered convention is a dream.  But on the other hand, a brokered convention would surely divide the Democratic party at a time when we all need to be united behind our nominee, whomever that may be, because he or she will be better than McCain any day of the week.  Howard Dean has proposed a plan, which I would go along with, where in mid-April to May, Obama and Clinton get together and essentially work out a deal.  The only problem I see---neither candidate is going to back down, and to their credit, there is really no reason for them to.  Clinton would surely never give up.  And I can't see Obama accepting a VP slot. But at the same time, Dean seems dead set on having this thing settled before the convention.  It's a good idea, and I hope it happens for the sake of this party, but the only question is, how?

GOP Split; A Dem Opportunity

This thing on the Republican side with McCain vs. conservatives is really getting heated.  With Romney out of the race, what are the right-wing looneys going to do?  From what it appears, they will continue their attack.  Tom Delay appeared on Hardball today and basically ruled out supporting John McCain.  He even went as far as saying he would consider backing Clinton or Obama.  We've heard the same thing from other right-wingers such as Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh.  In fact, Limbaugh apparently claimed that if McCain is the nominee, he would not only vote for the Democrat, but fundraise for him/her as well.  One thing if for sure, this is good news for Democrats in '08.  If the GOP is divided and far right conservatives stay home, or better yet vote for our nominee, and Democrats stay united, we will surely win.  But that brings me back to my point earlier, us Democrats must stay united, whomever the nominee is.  I'm a Hillary supporter, and I do disagree with Obama on several issues, but when I compare Obama to McCain, the choice is obvious on who would be better for this country.  A vote for McCain would be a vote for 4 more years of Bush and a vote for a third party, or not voting at all, would essentially be a vote for McCain as well, and as we've established, that's unacceptable.  

The Forgotten Enemy: al Qaeda

On Tuesday of this week, Mike McConnell, Director of National Intelligence, told the Senate Intelligence Committee that al Qaida has significantly rebuilt its network since the 9-11 attack.

 

He also reported that al Qaida is gaining strength in its refuge in Pakistan and is steadily improving its ability to recruit, train, and position its operatives to carry out attacks against the United States.  Bin Laden and his deputy, al-Zawahri, remain in control and has promoted a new generation of lieutenants.

 

Does this sound like the same Al Qaida Mr. Bush has been telling the American people we have on the run with our military offensive and pressure?  It has to be a devastating feeling for our military to have 160,000 troops in Iraq, fighting a war and occupation over WMD that did not exist, instead of having our military fight the war against those who actually attacked our country on 9-11.

 

Sadly, Mr. Bush, the Republicans in Congress, and Senator McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee, want us to continue the war in Iraq with no plans to end it.  In fact, they want a permanent U.S. presence in Iraq.  Can any one really understand their reckless behavior in keeping our troops in harm's way in a foreign land for years to come, while allowing our true enemy to rebuild in another land?

 

When the Commander-in-Chief and the one who would like to be the Commander-in-Chief stay in a state of denial, our military can only wonder when and how it will all end.  To think that 6 years after being attacked, we find out that al Qaida is in a position of strength and is a growing threat, which is much the same position they were in prior to the attack of 9-11, is just plain sad.  Could the people of this country elect a new President who continues to promote and support a war in Iraq over WMD that did not exist?  Could that really happen?  I would certainly hope not.