Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Monday, September 21, 2009

We Should All Be Disgusted

Thanks to internetshame.com for demonstrating that Jimmy Carter was right. Many right-wing extremist are absolutely racist no matter how much they whine.

Friday, September 04, 2009

I AM DISGUSTED

Usually I am in favor of dialogue to resolve differences, but to all those people out there whining because the President of the United States wants to tell their school children to work hard and stay in school, get over it. Presidents have been talking to school children for as long as I can remember, which is a long time. My very first memory was of President Eisenhower when I was in the third grade.

Just a few examples:

Ronald Reagan took questions from high school students at the White House in 1986, and the question-and-answer session was broadcast nationally. Reagan urged the students to stay in school and say no to drugs, but he also discussed overtly political matters, such as national defense funding, nuclear disarmament and -- in suprising policy detail -- taxes.

President George H.W. Bush gave an address to schools nationwide in 1991, from a junior high school in Washington, D.C. News reports from the time said the White House hoped that the address would be shown at schools nationwide, and Bush began his remarks by saying he was talking to "millions" of students "in classrooms all across the country."

And in the interest of fairness, I will not use the most famous of the George W. Bush pictures, but he made many school visits to gain support for his, in my opinion very ill-conceived, no-child-left-behind programs.


I am especially disgusted with those people who claim to be upholders of the constitution and then violate the constitution by not recognizing that Barack Hussein Obama is the constitutionally elected President of the United States. In other words, no matter how much you dislike and or disagree with him and his policies, HE IS YOUR PRESIDENT. So stop whining and talk with your children about the significance of what he has to say and how all of us need to be working together to get the country through these troubled times. We have too many real problems to waste time on trivial issues like this.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

The Incipient Racism of Southern Baptists

Richard Land needs to be very careful. The incipient racism that flows so easily just beneath the surface of many southern baptists tries to rear its ugly head in his recent statement concerning the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  See Justice Sotomayor?—More for some, less for others?

He begins with a statement questioning the President's statement about most middle-class Americans not feeling particularly privileged.  Yet it does not take very much listening to black Americans living in the Bible-Belt or Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans living many places in this country to realize that racial discrimination is alive and well. And any time or place there is this kind of discrimination, more often than not, it is white middle-class Americans who benefit from it.

Next he parrots one of the major talking point of the right wing media about the president's pre-selection statements about wanting a judge with empathy and assumes quite erroneously that a judge cannot be both empathetic and impartial. Just for the record, a definition of empathy-the capability to share your feelings and understand another's emotion and feelings. It is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes," or in some way experience what the other person is feeling.  I can state from personal experience that you are much more likely to get justice from a judge who has some understanding of where you are coming from than one who doesn't have a clue about what goes on in your neighborhood.
Next he talks about the Ricci case as if she is solely responsible for it. When in fact, she was one of a three judge panel which unanimously upheld the decision of the district court and in the majority of a 7-6 decision that the case did not merit further review at the circuit court level. He also does not mention that the plaintiffs in the case were not all white, but white and Hispanic. If she is guilty of letting her "race" influence her decision, why did should rule against the Hispanics in this case. Maybe one should look at the Cabranes dissent as the one that was racially motivated.

And finally he continues to parrot the right wing talking points by taking her comments about "a wise Latina woman" totally out of the context. In fact he violates one of the clearest standards of interpretation by stringing quotes together to make his point. I have always given him credit for his bible study skills but wonder if maybe he also treats the biblical text so unfairly. For a brief discussion of what she meant in her 2001 speech, see Charles Savage's NY Times column, A Judge’s View of Judging Is on the Record.

I am not suggesting that Richard Land's objection to her nomination is racially motivated.  It is obvious that his objection comes from being in bed far too long with the radical right wing of the republican party. But the arguments he uses are certainly tainted by the underlying racism of the southern baptist convention. It began as a racist organization and, in spite of its proclamations to the contrary, continues to demonstrate that racism in the way it and some of its members relate to American society.

Far from being solid analysis as one reader commented, this is a hatchet job on an extremely well qualified judge.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Jesus-A Bleeding Heart Liberal?

I am frequently reminded how wrong we can be when we stereotype people based on their religious convictions, or based on just about anything else. I am guilty of thinking of people I know (with a few very notable exceptions) that attend the Alexander Campbell type of Churches of Christ as being conservative reactionaries when it comes to politics. The following letter, written to a Tulsa newspaper by an elder in one of the local churches is just such a reminder.

You can read the full letter on the Morning Rush blog at http://terryrush.blogspot.com/2006/12/being-salt-and-light.html.

I will just give you his final paragraph:

"If Jesus were walking the Earth today, from his actions and his words, some might understandably describe him as a bleeding heart liberal. But in truth, he is more accurately described as a bleeding hands, feet and side compassionate. And so must we be if we intend to bear his name. "

I have been told that the author of the letter went beyond words to actions when he contributed to the Obama campaign.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

An Open Letter To Barack Obama

If anyone with any connections to the Obama campaign reads this letter, please pass this on to somebody who can influence campaign strategy.

Dear Senator Obama,
I watched the debate last night with friends who are mostly Obama supporters plus a couple of independents who have not made up their minds. Unanimously, the consensus of the watchers was that you wasted valuable time repeating the attacks you made in the previous debate against John McCain. Everybody knows McCain is tied to Bush. Everybody knows McCain supports the war in Iraq. Everybody knows McCain supports tax cuts for the rich. What all of us were looking for were specific answers to questions that concern us all, particularly on the economy. We all thought you were better than your opponent last night, but you did let McCain steal the headlines for coming up with something new that might help the average American, the buy-up of mortgages. Please stop wasting time attacking McCain. Spend more time convincing the independents that you really are the one that can help them.

Let the bloggers do the attacking. They really are better at it than you are anyway. Don't get down in the gutter with Palin/McCain. Take the high road, talk about the issues, refuse to be sucked in to the character debates. The main reason swiftboating hurt John Kerry was because people remembered him throwing his medals over the Whitehouse fence. It resonated with them. There is nothing in your background that can cause the same reaction. Just shrug off the attacks saying, "We don't have time for that kind of campaigning. There are too many problems to solve and too little time to solve them, so here's what I'm going to do . . ."

You have our support. My family, which is large, is 100% behind you. Now show us your are worthy of our support.

Thanks,

Manny Tomes
An evangelical Vietnam Vet from Norman, OK

Thursday, September 25, 2008

I don't always agree with the folks at MoveOn.org but this message hits the nail on the head.







Yesterday was one of the stranger days in presidential election history. John McCain actually asked to "suspend" Friday's much anticipated debate with Barack Obama so that he could posture on the financial crisis.


Even the arch-conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board was mystified.


Bottom line: This isn't presidential behavior. It's a desperate, reckless move that actually threatens to make it harder to resolve this crisis. And of course, presidents have to be able to handle lots of important issues at once—they can't panic and take their eyes off of one urgent priority when another one pops up.


Obama wants the debate to go forward. So do millions of other Americans. With 40 days left until the most important election in a generation, we deserve a debate on the issues. What's motivating all this panicky erratic behavior from McCain? It's hard to tell, but here are what some of the experts are saying might be behind it: A drop in the polls. As Politico writer Ben Smith pointed out, "In terms of the timing of this move: The only thing that's changed in the last 48 hours is the public polling."


Stopping the VP debate. Last night, McCain surrogate Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested that the vice presidential debate between Gov. Palin and Sen. Biden be postponed indefinitely to accommodate his request to postpone tomorrow's debate. (Now, why would they ever want to postpone or cancel the VP debate?)

Pure reckless decision-making. McCain has a history of reckless decision-making. Here's how Time's Joe Klein put it yesterday, "McCain suspends his campaign because of financial crisis? Oh please. Given today's poll numbers—even Fox has him dropping—it seems another Hail Mary (like the feckless selection of Palin) to try make McCain seem a statesman, which is difficult given the puerile tenor of his campaign's message operation."


And the Wall Street Journal wrote last week: "In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help."

But whatever the cause is, McCain's wrong. Serious situations like this one are exactly the time when Americans most need a real discussion—a debate.

We've got to make sure that the Debate Commission doesn't bend under Republican pressure. Can you sign this emergency petition to the Commission on Presidential Debates urging them to hold strong and make sure that the debate go forward on Friday, as planned? We'll make sure they get your comments by the end of the day.


Clicking below will add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/demanddebate/o.pl?id=14042-8768238-oW5enXx&t=3



The petition reads: "Now more than ever, the American people deserve a presidential debate. We urge you to make sure the debate goes forward as planned tomorrow night."

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Witch: But we spell it differently

One of my favorite musicals is Brigadoon. And one of my favorite lines in the show come when the townspeople of Brigadoon are telling New Yorker, Jeff Douglas, about the witches that threatened the village. Jeff responds, "We have them where I come from too, only we spell it differently." That has always been my approach to Ann Coulter, but she makes some truly outrageous claims in her column when she tries to demonstrate her knowledge of the Bible and fails miserably. It comes in her rather lame response to the rather lame comments by a well-meaning democrat as reflected in the bumper sticker at the top of the post. In response to the incredibly stupid remarks by Rudy and Sarah at the repubcon, Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee said: "Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor." I have been amazed at the groundswell of righteous or not so righteous indignation emanating from the religious non-left.

An editorial by the publisher Loné Beasley of an Ada, Oklahoma newspaper said: "Jesus was not a community organizer. For anyone to say so as a way of promoting a political candidate shows as gross a misunderstanding as has ever been generated by a presidential campaign. Jesus dealt with individuals and individuals only, not entire communities."

The publisher needs to look at the gospels again. He will find that Jesus entire ministry took place in communities, both large and small. When he was in town, the crowds were so big, people had to tear through the roof to get to him. When he walked by the sea, he had to get into a boat to keep from being pressed by the crowd. Even when he went up on the mountain side, the crowds followed him. How could he have fed 5,000 and 4,000 people dealing with "individuals and individuals only." I wonder what the publisher thinks Jesus was doing when he organized his own community called "the church."

Pastor Chris, Gig Harbor, Washington, said: "Let me make one thing clear – as an actually believer in Jesus: 'Jesus was not a "community organizer.' Jesus is the Son of God, the Lord of the universe, the savior of humanity. Demeaning Jesus as a "community organizer" is an insult to every Christian believer in the world. But, more importantly, it is a reckless, blasphemous and profane attack on the Divine Person who sits at the right hand of God the Father.

He goes on to give a dire warning to those who would stoop to such political skullduggery, "I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of anyone who throws around such mischaracterizations of the Living God for political gain."

I guess Pastor Chris forgot that part of the Christian creed that says that Jesus was fully human as well as being fully divine. Somehow, in light of many of his teachings, I don't think the human part of Jesus would object to being known as a community organizer. Remember that the teaching of Jesus that is emphasized more than any other by nearly all of the New Testament writers is "Love your neighbor as yourself." Do publisher Loné and pastor Chris think all of those neighbors were living out in the wilderness all by themselves? Perhaps there were some communities around somewhere.

I really liked the comment by the guy who said that even if Jesus was a community organizer, Pilate was not a governor, he was a prefect. If this guy will do just a little more homework he will find out that a prefect is one level of Roman governor.

But the best (worst) comments from the aforemention witch (check spelling) who in her regular fashion produces some poorly written attempts at being ironic or satirical saying, "Rep. Cohen would be well-advised to stay away from New Testament references. As anyone familiar with the New Testament can confirm for him, there are no parables about Jesus passing out cigarettes for votes, lobbying the Romans for less restrictive workfare rules or filing for grants under the Community Redevelopment Act. No time for soul-saving now! First, we lobby Fannie Mae to ease off those lending standards and demand a windfall profits tax on the money-changers in the temple."

If she really knew as much about the New Testament as she wants us to believe, she would know that Jesus spent very little time "saving souls." That was left to his followers after he ascended back to heaven. Those closest to him at the time (the community of twelve) really did think he was "organizing" the Jews to throw off the Roman oppressors and bring on the kingdom of God. She also makes her weak little attempts to insult the work of community organizers.

But her number one, super-stupid remark comes earlier in the column when she tries to make a case for George Washington being pro-life because in a speech to his troops before going into battle in 1776, he said, "The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of the army." She says, "So Washington . . . gave us one of the earliest known references to the rights of the "unborn." That's right! George Washington was a "pro-life extremist," just like Sarah Palin. I've know her to say some crazy stuff, but that one pretty much tops them all.

Friday, September 12, 2008

Potholes and Garbage

Question: Who said

"I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time. "

Answer: John McCain in the Republican Debate, October 21, 2007.

Of course then he was running against Mayor Giuliani, mayor of one of the largest cities in the world, and Governor Romney, governor of Massachusetts with 6.5 million people.

Let me make sure I understand McCain's reasoning.
Being the mayor of one of the largest cities in the world doesn't adequately prepare you to be president.
Being governor of Massachusetts, population 6.5 million doesn't adequately prepare you to be president.

But being mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, population 5,469 and governor of Alaska, population 670,000 does adequately prepare you to be the proverbial "heartbeat away from the presidency."

I think Barack Obama said it well last night. Being mayor of a small town is a tough job. You have to make sure the potholes get filled and the garbage gets picked up. Sounds like qualifications to be the strongest person in the free world to me. So please send Sarah back to her potholes and garbage and get serious about who is going to be president of the United States.

Monday, September 08, 2008

Eight Years of Lies Is Enough

I have been upset for the last couple of years because no one on a national level, whether politician or media pundit was willing to tell the truth about George Bush and John Cheney. The flat truth is that they lied about the situation in Iraq in order to get support for their stupid war. And they have continued to lie in order to keep the American people from totally revolting against them. I lost all respect for several people at high levels in government for not only refusing to call a lie a lie but continuing to support the Bush war even though they knew it was based on lies. Among these are Condolezza Rice, Joe Lieberman, and sure enough John McCain. I don't care how much they think the war was a good idea. It was based on lies that Bush and his cronies told to the American people.

And now, John McCain and Sarah Palin evidently think if Bush could get away with it regarding the war, they can get away with it in the campaign. And even after the truth is told they keep telling the lies, evidently thinking that if they just keep saying it, people will eventually believe them. One reallyobvious big lie is that Sarah Palin was against the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere." She supported it from the beginning of her statewide political career until it was obvious that it was making Ted Stevens the laughingstock of the Senate. Then even after she canceled the project, she kept the $200+ million for other pet projects in Alaska including a new road that led to the place the bridge was supposed to be.

John McCain lied when he said Barack Obama had not introduced any legislation. John McCain lied when he said he was the lobbyists worst enemy. Sarah Palin lied when she said BarackObama had asked for a billion dollars in earmarks in one year. Sarah Palin lied about her own requests for "earmarks" both as a mayor and as a governor. Sarah Palin lied about her involvement in the troopergate scandal. I was amazed just this morning when one of her old exercise buddies said on Good Morning America that if there is one thing Sarah Palin is, it is honest.

Of course, the BIG LIE concerns John McCain himself. Far from being a proponent of change, he is a major part of the problem in Washington. George Bush along with his republican allies in congress has come close to destroying the American economy in the last eight years and we haven't even begun to pay for the war yet.

I do not understand how anyone can honestly support John McCain and Sarah Palin in the current election. Their campaign is filled with lies from beginning to end. My only conclusion is that the purported 46-48% of Americans who are supporting the liars McCain and Palin are blind, stupid or just plain evil.

This is not a lie. It's 133 days until the end of the Bush disaster and America cannot stand one more day of the same failed policies, much less four more years. If you really care about this country, look at the records, look at the evidence and tell John McCain to pick one of his houses to go hide in and tell Sarah Palin to go back to Alaska. They elected her, they can have her.

Friday, August 29, 2008

McCain Throws the Election

I knew McCain and his ilk were desparate, but this is absolutely crazy. His most effective criticism of Barak Obama has been his lack of experience and now, if he wins, a 72 year old heartbeat away from the most powerful office in the world will be a person whose primary experience is being mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a town of about 8400 people. She has no experience, she has no credentials, she has no credibility, she has nothing to justify her as a candidate for Vice President of the United States except that the McCain people hope that some of the dissaffected Hilary supporters will vote for her just because she is female. Oh yes, she was Miss Wasilla of 1984.

If you take a look at the City of Wasilla webpage for today (http://www.cityofwasilla.com/) these are the two lead stories:

Former Wasilla Mayor Picked for Vice Presidential Run
CNN and Fox News are reporting Senator John McCain has picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate on the GOP ticket for the White House! More...

Baby & Me Lap-Sit Program at the Library
Baby & Me Lap-Sit is a new one-on-one program for an adult and baby (ages 4-18 months). The program will be held of Fridays at 10:30 am at Wasilla Public Library. Registration is required.


As a former public librarian, I fully recognize the value of the Lap-Sit programs. In fact I have conducted some myself and they are quite a learning experience. And I don't mean for the babies. But I can conceive of no situation where any of the mayors of my town, which is bigger that Wasilla, would ever be considered as candidates for the vice-presidency.

Here is the bio of the current mayor of Wasilla. Peruse it at your leisure to discover the political nuances that would prepare here to be next in line for the most powerful job on the planet.






Mayor Dianne M. Keller was twice elected to the Wasilla City Council, Seat B.
She was previously appointed to serve a one-year term from 1996-1997, and was
elected to serve a full term from 1997-2000. Her Council term ended in October
2002 when she ran for and became the Mayor of Wasilla. Dianne was re-elected as
Mayor in 2005 and will serve until 2008.
The Mayor is an active
member of our community. She has been a member of the AML Legislative Committee
from 1996 to 2004, and the Alaska Conference of Mayors from 2002 to present.
Mayor Keller also chairs the Mat-Su American Red Cross leadership committee and
formerly was a Board Member for the Greater Wasilla Chamber of Commerce in
2005.
In addition, she is a member of the Alaska Resource Development
Council, Mat-Su Resouce Development Council, Alaska State Chamber of Commerce,
Alaska Miners Association, the Mat-Su Youth Court, a member of the Alaska Moose
Federation, and Chair for the Statewide Moose Safety & Rebuilding Task
Force.
The Mayor was appointed to serve the State residents on the State
Emergency Response Commission (SERC). She is also an active supporter of the Boy
Scouts of America and donates regularly to the Blood Bank of Alaska.
Mayor
Keller was born and raised in Anchorage and has lived in the
Matanuska-Susitna valley since 1983. She and her husband Dave have lived in
the city since 1992 and their son Seth was born in Wasilla in 1994.
After Obama's acceptance speech which should have removed all doubts about his ability to lead and after the Bill & Hilary shows of the previous nights in support of Barak Obama removed all doubts about who they are supporting the repubs really needed to pull out their big guns to counter the momentum of Obama's campaign had coming out of the election. So the first thing they do is time the release of McCain's running for the day after the convention to take away some of the headlines and talking head time. That's pretty transparent but all's fair in presidential politics. But this is absolutely ludicrous. I'm sure Mrs. Palin is a very fine woman, but she has no business being nominated or agreeing to this nomination. The Bush/McCain team continues to make a mockery of the American political system. McCain likes to be known as a maverick, but this is just plain old ordinary stupidity.



Friday, August 08, 2008

You're a liberal something, but your not a Christian.

Just in case you were wondering whether or not you can be liberal and Christian, the all-knowing Rick Santorum has given us the last word. Referring to Barack Obama, the ousted, but out-spoken former senator from Pennsylvania said,

You're a liberal something, but your not a Christian.


The comment is reported in a post on a beliefnet blog, Santorum: Obama's Faith Is "Phony"
Blogger Steven Waldman, editor-in-chief of beliefnet, says, "Santorum, known for overtly connecting his fath to his politics, said the Democrats' current efforts to be more faith-friendly are "a charade... I dont think it's sincere at all." Obama's efforts to talk about the importance of faith in his life is "phoney--absolutely disingenuous. I think he's a complete phoney. . . (At the end of the attack, he added that of course it would be inappropriate for him to judge the authenticity of Obama's faith, as only God could do that.)"

Santorum went on to question whether liberal christianity was really, well, Christian. "You're a liberal something, but your not a Christian." He continued, "When you take a salvation story and turn it into a liberation story you've abandoned Christiandom and I don't think you have a right to claim it."

I wonder if Santorum ever heard about "the truth will liberate (my translation) you. Of course, this is not terribly significant but is reflective of the kind of rhetoric that continual pours out of the mouths of the righteous right.

Monday, May 12, 2008

So Much for Compassionate Convervativism

ThePatriotPost, subtitled "The Conservative Journal of Record," revealed what most of us already knew, that there really is nothing compassionate about conservativism with this comment,
If Obama’s past Senate voting record wasn’t incriminating enough, he recently gave some revealing, and disturbing, insight into how his nominees would be chosen: “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which I’ll be selecting judges.” An Obama presidency led by empathy rather than by constitutional dictates would certainly be in keeping with his pledge to bring “real”change to Washington. Uh, you can keep the change, Barack. (PatriotPost)

I just wish conservatives would be honest about their motives. At best they are motivated by enlightened self-interest and at worst by pure selfishness and greed. I'll take heart and empathy anyday

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Skating on Thin Ice

The Baptist Messenger, mouth piece of the baptist general convention of Oklahoma is navigating some perilous waters. In the latest issue they publish at least two articles telling their readers why they should not vote for Barack Obama. I'm not really sure about the IRS rules in regard to church owned newsletters. I would think that since the BM is an agency of and wholly owned by the bgcO the same rules would apply to it that apply to churches. But maybe not. Someone really ought to tell the IRS about it and let them decide.

One article with a front page lead-in is "EDITORIAL: A gay bully pulpit?"
This staff-written editorial opens with the broad statement,

"If Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has his way, he will use the Presidency as a bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws."

They also make the common mistake of assuming that since a resolution passed at the annual meeting is the voice of Oklahoma Baptists with the statement, "Oklahoma Baptists do not agree with Sen. Obama on this issue." That is not consistent with baptist theology or ecclesiology but is common practice. Resolutions passed at an annual meeting represent only the majority opinion of those who vote at the meeting. These are non-binding resolutions and have absolutely no direct effect on the beliefs and practices of individual baptists or baptist churches. No one can speak for Oklahoma baptists because each Oklahoma baptist can speak for her or himself. The only proof I need of this is that, at least for the moment, I am an Oklahoma baptist and I don't agree.

The other article is just plain wrong for attacking Obama's view of scripture. For some reason that article does not show up in their online version so I will have to synopsize it here and make corrections after I get home tonight if I happen to mis-state any of the facts. Anyway it accuses the Senator of not believing the whole bible is inspired because he said he would prefer to act according to the Sermon on the Mount rather than an obscure passage in Romans when he was dealing with the homosexual issue. Obama is wrong because "real" Christians believe all the bible is inspired and every word is just as authoritative as any other word. I can't really do it justice from memory so I will do a follow-up tomorrow.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Can You Spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E ?


The shrub's latest attempt to show that he actually knows something about foreign policy reveals once again the fantasyland he has been living in for seven years. Barack Obama has promised to actually sit down and talk to leaders of countries that the shrub has done nothing but threaten or ignore. What a concept, diplomacy by talking instead of shouting or shooting. But the shrub responded, "It will send the wrong message. ... It will give great status to those who have suppressed human rights and human dignity." He obviously doesn't realize that nothing suppresses human rights and human dignity like an ill-conceived, ill-planned, ill-managed and probably ill-egal war. It makes you wonder what kind of insulation his handlers keep him wrapped up in.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Who Does She Think She's Kidding


The headline reads "Clinton attacks Obama ahead of debate. " A couple of paragraphs into the story she brings out the same old line, "Who is best prepared to be commander in chief on day one?" I know she's losing and desparate, but I really don't understand what possible reason she has for thinking that she is any better prepared to be commander-in-chief than Barack Obama is, or that the American people would have more confidence in her to handle a military crisis than they would in him. Somehow, I don't see being a senator from New York as preparing one to be C-i-C. Although, I must acknowledge that I have been to NYC enough to know that it can sometimes be mistaken for a war zone. And as far as spending eight years in the Whitehouse, Bill's record as CIC is second only to his "indescretions" as being among the worst things about his presidency.

Besides that she's playing right into John McCain's hand, because he is the only one in the race that can legitimately claim to be "prepared." Fortunately, the framers of the constitution did see military prowess as a necessity for being president. In spite of the unanimous election of George Washington as the first president, only three of the next ten had any military experience and one of them died a month after he took ofice. Looking at the history of how the presidents have used the CIC position, there is no direct correlation between effectiveness in office and military experience. Although there have been a number of presidents who used their military experience to help get them elected.

If Hilary really expects to make a comeback in this race, she had better find a different message. It seems pretty obvious to me that as soon as democrats and independents began to have confidence that Barack Obama was electable, her fate was sealed. We thank her for keeping the repubs on the ropes for so long, but now is the time for both candidates to heat up the attack on McCain and let the nominations chips fall as they may.