Obama's America:

Credit to Taylor Marsh for the photo; It speaks for itself.  

Republican Administrations = Fiscal Disasters

The economic numbers for the first quarter are in, and they are not good.  And even worse, it comes at a time when the Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, says that he does not rule out a recession.  Let's take a look at what is behind all of this:

 

The economy lost 80,000 jobs in March; 76,000 jobs in February, and 76,000 jobs in January for a total of 232,000 jobs lost in the first quarter of 2008.  The government reported that the March job loss was worse because the actual number of jobs lost in the private sector was 98,000 and only hiring by the government brought the job loss to 80,000.  The unemployment rate increased from 4.8% to 5.1%, the highest  in two and half years---at the end of March there were 7.8 million people unemployed.  The Federal Reserve also reported first quarter GDP will more than likely show none or very little growth.

 

It was reported in my three part series, "The Economy: Which Party Performs The Best", that the problem with Republican administrations and the economy is twofold.  They have a tax cutting plan ,called trickle down economics, but no real, broad based economic policy.  They have a reckless fiscal policy of deficit spending and debt creation, rather than what this country needs for a stable economy--- a sound fiscal policy, based on balancing the federal budget.

 

The economy lost jobs in the first term of George W. Bush because a lack of a economic and fiscal policy.  Job creation under his administration, when it comes to an end, will be one of the weakest since Hoover.  One recession has already taken place on his watch and another one is brewing.  Yet with all the bad news, the President does nothing.   

 

It should be noted the unemployment rate on Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43's watch never went down at a steady pace.  On each of their watches it increased over what it was when they took office before it came back down: Reagan from 7.5% to 10.8% before it started to come down;  Bush 41 from 5.4% to 7.8% before it started to come down.

 

When President Clinton took office unemployment was 7.3% and it never went over that.  In fact, the unemployment rate went down on a steady basis every year that he was in office and was at 4.2% when he left.  The Clinton administration was also steady in creating jobs upward and in record numbers while Reagan, Bush 41, and now Bush 43 were/are inconsistent.  That was also covered in my three part series mentioned above.  Those three neocon presidents did not even come close in creating a sound economic and fiscal policy.  Clinton had a real economic and fiscal policy that produced the greatest economy, created jobs, low unemployment, advancement for the poor, middle class and all through the economic ladder and real increase in wages.  Not to mention, he also produced a balance budget that returned surpluses, paid down debt, and left Bush a $5.6 trillion surplus, which he of course blew.  By the way, crime and unemployment hit its lowest level in 40 years on Clinton's watch.  Yea, you read right, it happened on a Democrat's watch.

 

The Clinton haters are out now in full mode, especially journalists who are infatuated with Obama, since his wife is seeking the Democratic nomination.  They are still reporting opinions and false hoods as fact, just as they did during the impeachment of the President by the Republican Congress.  The voting public would also do well to remember that the U.S. Senate found Clinton not guilty of the impeachment charges, and a five year investigation by the government concerning Whitewater found nothing.  The only thing the President was guilty of was lying to the public about an affair.  The same Clinton haters are trying to do the same thing to Senator Clinton---they just can't stand the fact the country and its people did so well on President Clinton's watch and they don't want to see Sen. Clinton have that same success. 

He's Gone!!!

Mark Penn is gone.  Thank god.  I am unwavering in my support for Sen. Clinton, but Mark Penn was the single biggest idiot on that campaign.  In fact, I could have run that campaign better then Penn.  Not much more to say than that, but thank god.  

Hopefully now someone with actual knowledge can take control.  Carville anybody?  Begalla?  Hell, I'd take anyone at this moment over Penn.  Hillary's chance's although still slim, just went up with Penn not there to screw every thing up.  Hillary can finally now be...Hillary.  

DSCC Road to Victory: Mary Landrieu

As all attention is focused on the Presidential Race, it's important to keep in mind that in November, many Senate and Congressional seats will be up for the taking.  But more important than gaining seats in Congress, is keeping those seats which Democrats currently occupy.  

Now, with that being said, the general consensus is that Mary Landrieu's (D-Louisiana) Senate seat is the most vulnerable, and I, from being on the ground here in New Orleans, agree.  Still, she has had a very impressive first quarter in regards to fundraising and has racked up many high profile endorsements, from both Democrats and Republicans.  

What's important to remember, on a personal note for me, is how hard Sen. Landrieu has fought for the people of Louisiana, especially after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.  The following video, from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), highlights just that:

The Morning Dose---4/5

Today's Morning Dose is from Quinnipiac University, taking a look at the key general election swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania:

_________________________________________________________

...In general election match ups of the three largest and most important swing states in the Electoral College, the survey finds:

-Florida: Clinton 44 percent - McCain 42 percent; McCain beats Obama 46-37

-Ohio: Clinton beats McCain 48 - 39 percent; Obama gets 43 percent to McCain's 42%

-Pennsylvania: Clinton tops McCain 48 - 40 percent; Obama leads McCain 43 -39 percent

"When it comes to November, Sen. Hillary Clinton's strength is a big edge over Sen. Barack Obama among white voters, who have not given a majority of their votes to a Democratic presidential nominee since Lyndon Johnson in 1964," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute." 

More than a third of voters in the three states think Obama's race is an advantage, more than twice the number who think it is a disadvantage. By contrast, roughly a quarter of voters say Clinton's gender is an advantage, and about the same number think it is a disadvantage. 

"Former Democratic vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro's assertion that Obama's race has helped his candidacy finds some support among the electorate," said Brown. 

"At least for now, Sen. Clinton's argument that she is the better general election candidate in these key battleground states appears to have some validity," said Brown. "In this survey, her strength among white voters is why she runs better against Sen. McCain than does Sen. Obama. 

"Roughly one in five Democrats in the three states say they will vote for McCain against Obama, but less than 10 percent say they would vote for McCain over Clinton. Among white Democrats, 23 percent defect to McCain in a matchup with Obama, but only 11 percent defect when Clinton is the Democratic candidate." Pennsylvania...

"Her strength is her clear advantage among white voters - blue collar whites, less educated whites, economically hurting whites, that group known famously as Reagan Democrats in the Keystone State."...

"The economic concerns of voters make Ohio a tougher challenge for McCain than has traditionally been the case for Republicans, who have never won the White House without carrying Ohio," Brown said. "But Obama's weakness among white men is an indication that he has not yet closed the sale among the lunch bucket brigade."... 

"The difference between Clinton and Obama in Florida is the white vote," said Brown. "She gets 38 percent to 50 percent for McCain, but Obama loses to the Arizona senator 54 - 27 among white voters. If Obama does get the nomination, how he fares with whites will be crucial to his chances." ...

The Inadequacy Of Being A Conservative

Senator McCain, the Republican nominee for President, is now attempting to reintroduce his and his family's military service on the campaign trail, attempting to show that he is better qualified to be President versus whomever the Democrats nominate.  Conservatives, like McCain and Bush, like to think they are tougher than their opponents on national security and protecting America.  They feel inadequate, so they try to work on the fears of the people and cry wolf.  Any American who desires to be President should have the wisdom and character to keep fear out of the campaign. 

 

The tragic event of 9-11 befell the U.S. while the conservatives were talking tough, and after seven years we still have not won the war on terror; bin Laden is still free to plot more attacks, all while George Bush, a conservative, is Commander-in-Chief. That should be a stalk reminder that trying to talk tough does not get the job done.  Most people who served in the military on active duty do not feel they have to exploit their service by trying to act tough, rather they use that experience to come up with sensible solutions to present to the American people.  

 

Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy were all combat veterans and served their country during the Cold War, but did not campaign on their service record; did not campaign on fear; nor were they critical of their opponents ability to protect our country during a crisis.  They spoke to all the issues facing the country, because they knew we faced more problems that did not require military solutions than those that did.  Today, some of our leaders and hope-to-be-leaders focus on military action above all else, and try to create an atmosphere of fear for society to live in.  In contrast, those three Presidents tried to educate the people that the only thing we had to fear was fear itself.

 

The country today has many major problems that need sound policies to deal with, and that are not involved with military solutions or tax breaks for the wealthy.  Conservatives do not have policies; they only have an ideology that calls for a military or tax solution.  The nation's current problems have not been addressed or solved because of this ideology for the past 8 years, or in the Reagan-Bush 41 administrations for that matter.  Conservatives are now scrambling around to patchwork the economy and the financial mess we have---a mess we have because of their lack of policy.

 

Senator McCain is silent when it comes to the debt that the last three conservative Republican presidents piled on our country and its people, for which we are paying for today.  He continues to go along with the fail policies regarding Iraq and Afghanistan.  He has now abandoned his past policy, and lines up with George Bush for more tax cuts for the wealthy.  The bottom line: Senator McCain and his tough military talk will not be an asset in over coming the Conservative's inadequate feelings, or getting himself elected President. 

The Problem With Pollsters

As everyone knows, or should know by now, political polls have been both accurate and inaccurate in the past and have become the subject of debate during this primary season.  The big problem with polling at the present time on McCain vs. Clinton/ Obama is that the numbers are unreliable.

 

John McCain is the Republican nominee but neither Clinton or Obama is the Democratic nominee at the present time, so the voting public should pay no attention to the numbers being given on that match up.  The numbers will change once the Democratic nominee is known.  The only reason the polls are being taken now on that match up is to influence the people's vote in the up coming Democratic primaries.

 

Once the debate starts between the two final candidates, then the people will have a chance to see what real policies they will advocate and talk about.  The issues and the answers put forward by both candidates will become clearer for the people to understand and sharper in their tone.  Right now that is not possible and the polls do not take that into consideration.

 

The issues now being raised by journalists on cable news do not represent the real issues facing the candidates, the country, or the people and, in fact, represent false reporting of trying to create issues that are not even there.  They are good at running captions on the T.V. screen that have no bearing on what is actually taking place in the campaign.  Case in point: "Should Clinton Drop Out of The Race?";   "Is Bill Hurting Hillary's Chances?";  "Obama's Lead Can Not Be Overcome," and the beat goes on and on. 

 

The polls will definitely change when the final nominees are known and the real issues are focused on---The War in Iraq; The War on Terror; The Economy; Fiscal Responsibility; The ability to lead and the ability to be an American first and put ideology on the shelf.  The people will do well to remember the best poll is the one that takes place in the voting booth.  The pollster's polls try to circumvent that. 

 

The Morning Dose---4/2

Today's Morning Dose comes from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and is entitled, Not so fast: The Clinton-Obama race still has a way to run:

_______________________________________________________________________

Just when Pennsylvania is about to have its moment in the presidential primary season, calls have been made in the Democratic Party for Sen. Hillary Clinton to drop out and concede to Sen. Barack Obama in the interest of unity.

Mrs. Clinton says she will fight on -- and she's right to do so. We say that not because of Pennsylvania's interest in holding a relevant primary on April 22. Simply put, this fight isn't over.

To be sure, Mrs. Clinton is trailing in the combined totals of delegates and the math looks bad for her chances. Even so, Mr. Obama hasn't clearly won. What we have now is something of a stalemate, one that is likely to harden before it breaks. As Sen. Bob Casey said of the candidate he endorsed Friday, Mr. Obama is "the underdog in our state." Gov. Ed Rendell, who supports Mrs. Clinton, believes the race will tighten.

All of this speaks to the larger picture: It's premature for Mrs. Clinton to quit while the race remains competitive. These calls to step down by Obama supporters are no more realistic than the earlier ones floated by the Clinton camp that Mr. Obama would make a great vice presidential nominee on a "dream ticket."

While Pennsylvania has a late primary, it is not the latest. Among others, the voters in Indiana and North Carolina (May 6), West Virginia (May 13) and Kentucky and Oregon (May 20) will still have to be heard from after Pennsylvanians go to the polls three weeks from today.

As Major League Baseball starts another season, a bit of hardball wisdom from Yogi Berra applies to the Clinton-Obama race: "It ain't over till it's over."

Iraq: "The Outcome Of The War Will Merit The Sacrifice"

Those were the words of George Bush after the 4000 deaths of Americans in Iraq was recorded this past week.  Mr. Bush continues to be in denial on why he started this war and he and his supporters who want to continue this war are too small of a people to admit to their mistakes and incompetence.  As a result Americans will continue to die over WMD that did not exist.

 

Anyone who is following this war knows that American and Iraqi casualties have been going back up since the first of the year.  Bush and his administration are now trying, through the news media, to compare the deaths in Iraq to those that the U.S. has suffered in our two world wars, Korea, and Vietnam.  They do so to try to minimize the deaths in Iraq and use other wars where there is no comparison.  In those wars, the U.S. was not the aggressor nor were any preemptive wars.  Our opponents in those wars had millions of troops we faced in battle.  In Iraq, by our own count, Al Qaeda and the Sunnis and Shiite who are carrying out the civil war number less than 5,000---a great difference than the other wars that the Bush administration mentions.

 

Now in its 6th year, Bush, McCain, Cheney and the neocons intend to keep our military in Iraq for years to come.  This will be remembered as Vietnam, number two.  We are already well pass the half way point of that war.  Our men and women in uniform are being used as pawns, with 3 and 4 deployments, continually putting their lives at risk, even though Bush proclaimed over 4 years ago, "mission accomplished." The only mission Bush has accomplished, unfortunately, is destabilizing the entire Middle East and making America hated around the world.  

 

Our troops go where the President tells them, without complaint, to do their job well and serve their country.  The least a Commander-in-Chief can do for them is to make sure that they are fighting the war for the reason the war was started in the first place.  This President violated that responsibility to our troops.  

 

It should be noted with great concern the remark Bush made on March 29, 2008 at a joint news conference with the Canadian prime minister.  Bush said that we are in Iraq to establish Democracy in Iraq and the Middle East.  That statement, as we start the 6th year of war, was not the reason he gave the people for going to war in 2003.  Another bold face lie. History will not and should not be kind to Mr. Bush. He used the services of our men and women in uniform to mold the Middle East and Iraq in his own warped ideology.  He purposely misled them, and the country, on why we went to war.  Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican, said this week that Bush misled the Congress about the intelligence and about the reasons for going to war.  He also noted that Bush had already decided to go to war in Iraq even before Congress voted for the resolution he asked for. Democrats have long been saying that.  Now a well respected Republican is.  These are impeachable offenses and the President needs to be judged on that level of thinking.  

The Morning Dose---3/30

Today's Morning Dose comes from the Washington Post and is entitled, Don't Stop Campaigning:

_____________________________________________________________

The growing chorus among some Democrats and other interested observers for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) to get out of the race for the Democratic Party's nomination for president is troubling. We're not promoting Ms. Clinton over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), or either of them over Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), for that matter. A time may come when someone should gracefully bow out. But their extended contest informs the electorate and serves to battle-test them both. We don't see why the process should be short-circuited when millions of votes are yet to be cast and two qualified candidates believe themselves to be the best potential Democratic nominee...

One proffered justification for ending the campaign now, in fact, is the assumption that we know pretty much how everything will turn out. Ms. Clinton will win Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama will carry North Carolina and so on. But throughout this campaign, just about everything we've "known" has been wrong: Mr. McCain was finished, Ms. Clinton was inevitable, Mr. Obama had New Hampshire locked up. No doubt the Democrats have gotten themselves into a fix with rules that may leave the final decision to unelected superdelegates -- but why is the answer to that less democracy? Why not give as many voters as possible a chance?

Last week they tackled the economy and the mortgage meltdown. But there are plenty more questions for voters to consider. How would the candidates pay for their billions in increased spending on health care, energy and education? With diplomacy toward North Korea faltering, how would they handle its nuclear ambitions? What's the future of affirmative action? The list of issues to hash out is endless, and doing so in polite political combat could produce a stronger Democratic candidate for the fall and a better-informed electorate....

And this contest is far from over. While Mr. Obama leads Ms. Clinton in the popular vote and in the number of pledged delegates, it's assumed that neither candidate will win the 2,024 delegates needed to secure the nomination.