Posts Tagged ‘Elections’
The Best Campaign Finance Reform: An Informed & Engaged Electorate
Last year’s presidential campaign broke a record for campaign spending. This has prompted a lot of criticism that while understandable, misses the point.
We get all flustered about the amount of money that political campaigns raise and spend. But we give little thought as to why they have to do it.
For the most part, the American public (that’s us) are disengaged from the process. We are so busy working, taking care of our families, dealing with every day life that we have not made the selection of our civil leaders a priority.
Think about it…. Can you name the members of your local school board? And these are people you trust your kids to for 8 hours a day. But how many of us can name the final contestants on Survivor or American Idol?
And since we won’t pay attention to the races, candidates are forced to bring the campaigns to us. They fill our mailboxes and clutter the airwaves with political ads… all in an attempt to catch our interest.
And we are full of excuses as to why we don’t pay attention… “I don’t know the candidates.” “I’m too busy.” NONSENSE!
If you can put in hours planning for your fantasy football draft, you take some time to read up on the candidates and their issues. And it should be easy. We have access to more information at the touch of a button than any generation before us. You should be able to find out who is running for dog catcher in Beaulah, Wyoming.
Our system is dependent on you and I doing our job. When we don’t take the time to inform ourselves about what candidates stand for and actively support those who share our values, we open ourselves up to being led around by expensive campaign advertising.
Here’s the truth… The only thing that will put an end to the influence of money in politics is an informed and engaged electorate.
Voter ID could be a reality
California State Senator George Runner is on the proposition warpath again. This time the target is those who should not be voting. What a novel concept!
According to the Sacramento Bee’s Capitol Alert:
A new initiative filed by Republican Sen. George Runner — who spearheaded the placement of statewide measures on the ballot in 2006 and 2008 — has been cleared to begin collecting signatures. The measure would tighten requirements on voting, including requiring government-issued IDs and eliminating suffrage for ex-felons on probation.
As the article points out, Sen. Runner has led several efforts to pass measures via the initiative process that couldn’t get through the legislature. One was Proposition 83 dubbed Jessica’s law which dealt with sex offenders was approved by voters in 2006. The other Prop. 6 dealt with increasing penalties for gang activity, was defeated in 2008.
Schwarzenegger’s 2009 State of the State Address
Prepared Text of Governor Schwarzenegger’s 2009 State of the State Address
Lt. Governor Garamendi, Chief Justice George, President pro Tem Steinberg, Speaker Bass, Senate Republican Leader Cogdill, Assembly Republican Leader Villines, Members of the legislature, ladies and gentlemen, we meet in times of great hope for our nation.
Although we hear the drumbeat of news about bailouts, bankruptcies and Ponzi schemes, the nation with great anticipation is also awaiting the inauguration of a new president.
Our nation should be proud of what President-elect Obama’s election says to the world about American openness and renewal.
President Reagan used to tell about the letter he got from a man who said that you can go to live in Turkey, but you can’t become a Turk. You can go to live in Japan, but you cannot become Japanese. And he went through other countries.
“But,” the man said, “anyone from any corner of the world can come to America and become an American.”
And now, we know that any American child, no matter what corner of the world his father or mother comes from, can even become President of the United States.
What a wonderful national story for us.
This nation rightfully feels the hope of change.
Californians, of course, desire change here in their own state as well.
Yet they have doubts if that is possible.
For months, in the face of a crisis, we have been unable to reach agreement on the largest budget deficit in our history.
We are in our third special session and we’ve declared a fiscal emergency – and every day that goes by, makes the budget problem that much harder to solve.
As a result of all this, California, the eighth largest economy in the world, faces insolvency within weeks.
The legislature is currently in the midst of serious and good faith negotiations to resolve the crisis, negotiations that are being conducted in the knowledge we have no alternative but to find agreement.
The importance of the negotiation’s success goes far beyond the economic and human impact.
People are asking if California is governable.
They wonder about the need for a constitutional convention.
They don’t understand how we could have let political dysfunction paralyze our state for so long.
In recent years, they have seen more gridlock in Sacramento than on our roads, if such a thing is possible.
I will not give the traditional State of the State address today, because the reality is that our state is incapacitated until we resolve the budget crisis.
The truth is that California is in a state of emergency.
Addressing this emergency is the first and greatest thing we must do for the people.
The 42 billion dollar deficit is a rock upon our chest and we cannot breathe until we get it off.
It doesn’t make any sense to talk about education, infrastructure, water, health care reform and all these things when we have this huge budget deficit.
I will talk about my vision for all of these things… and more… as soon as we get the budget done.
So, no, I did not come today to deliver the normal list of accomplishments and proposals.
I came to encourage this body to continue the hard work you are doing behind closed doors.
There is a context and a history to the negotiations that are underway.
It is not that California is ungovernable. It’s that for too long we have been split by ideology.
Conan’s sword could not have cleaved our political system in two as cleanly as our own political parties have done.
Over time, ours has become a system where rigid ideology has been rewarded and pragmatic compromise has been punished.
And where has this led?
I think you would agree that in recent years California’s legislature has been engaged in civil war.
Meanwhile, the needs of the people became secondary.
Our citizens do not believe that we in government are in touch with their needs.
These needs are not unreasonable.
At the end of the day, most people do not require a great deal from their government.
They expect the fundamentals.
They want to live in safety.
They want a good education for their children.
They want jobs.
They want to breathe clean air.
They want water when they turn on the faucet and electricity when they turn on the switch.
And they want these things delivered efficiently and economically.
One of the reasonable expectations the public has of government is that it will produce a sound and balanced budget.
That is what the legislative leaders are struggling to do right now.
There is no course left open to us but this: to work together, to sacrifice together, to think of the common good – not our individual good.
No one wants to take money from our gang-fighting programs or from Medi-Cal or from education.
No one wants to pay more in taxes or fees.
But each of us has to give up something because our country is in an economic crisis and our state simply doesn’t have the money.
In December, we even had to suspend funding that affects 2,000 infrastructure projects that were already underway.
So, now, the bulldozers are silent.
The nail guns are still.
The cement trucks are parked.
This disruption has stopped work on levees, schools, roads, everything.
It has thrown thousands and thousands of people out of work at a time when our unemployment rate is rising.
How could we let something like that happen?
I know that everyone in this room wants to hear again the sound of construction.
No one wants unemployment checks replacing paychecks.
So, I am encouraged that meaningful negotiations are underway. And, as difficult as the budget will be, good things can come out of it.
Because, in spite of the budget crisis, when we have worked together in the past, we have passed measures that moved this state – and even the nation – forward.
When a budget agreement is reached, when some of the raw emotions have passed, I will send to the legislature the package of legislative goals and proposals that a governor traditionally sends.
These proposals are sitting on my desk. Let me tell you, I have big plans.
They include action on the economy, on water, environment, education, health care reform, government efficiency and reform, job creation.
But, our first order of business is to solve the budget crisis.
And I have an idea going forward.
As you know, in the last 20 years of budgeting, only four budgets have been on time.
So, if you don’t mind, let me make a little suggestion.
We should make a commitment that legislators – and the governor, too – lose per diem
expenses and our paychecks, for every day the budget goes past the constitutional deadline of June 15th.
You have to admit it is a brilliant idea.
I mean, if you call a taxi and the taxi doesn’t come, you don’t pay the driver.
If the people’s work is not getting done, the people’s representatives should not get paid either.
That is common sense in the real world.
And I will send you some other reforms, too.
Let me close by saying something about the fires of 2008.
At one point, I got a phone call that we had 875 wildfires burning all at the same time.
I said to myself, how do we deal with this?
The next morning I get a call, “Governor, there are now 2,014 fires burning all at the same time.”
The largest number on record.
Imagine, 2,000 fires, a huge challenge and every one of those fires was put out.
You know why? Because we have the best trained, the most selfless, the toughest firefighters in the nation.
Thirteen of whom lost their lives.
They gave their lives for this state.
Ladies and gentlemen, the courageous examples of those firefighters should not be lost on us.
In our own way, we, too, must show courage in serving the public.
Ladies and gentlemen, let this be a year of political courage.
Let us be courageous for the people.
Let us be courageous for the common good of California.
Let us resolve the budget crisis, so that we can get on with the people’s work.
Thank you.
Sarah Palin discusses media bias
This is an interesting video interview from Andrew Breitbart’s Big Hollywood.
Craig DeLuz on the Capitol Hour- The Republican Reformation
“And if by these things you are not reformed by Me, but walk contrary to Me, then I also will walk contrary to you, and I will punish you yet seven times for your sins.” Lev 26:23-24
Republican voters sent a clear message to Republican elected and candidates- start governing like Republicans or we will send you packing! So have we learned our lesson?
Is this the beginning of the Republican Reformation?
We will be talking about this and more TODAY on the Capitol Hour.
Details Below:
When: Today, November 26th
Station: KTKZ 1380AM
Live Audio Steaming at http://www.ktkz.com/ (for those of you out of the Sacramento Region)
TIME: 12 noon-1 pm (PST)
Call in Numbers: (916) 923-3300 or 1(800) 923-1380
How Obama Got Elected (Video)
I find it funny how little these Obama voters know about the candidates or their campaigns.
Normally I would dismiss stuff like this as juvenille propoganda. But the responses in this video are totally consistant with just about every encounter I had with Obama supporters.
The video’s creator writes:
On the evening of November 4th, 2008 I along with millions of Americans were shocked that a man of Barack Obama’s extreme liberal positions and radical political alliances and policies could be elected President of the United States.
This is further proof that the news media, completely engrosed with Obama’s persona, simply refused to do their job.
Twelve Obama voters were interviewed extensively right after they voted to learn how the news media impacted their knowledge of what occurred during the campaign. These voters were chosen for their verbal abilities and willingness to express their opinions to a large audience. The video below seeks to provide some insight into which information broke through the news media clutter and which did not.
Is the Religious Right wrong for the GOP?
Is it just me or wasn’t the man at the top of our ticket a guy who took great pride in the fact that he was not a member of the Christian right? And wasn’t his campaign run by folks like Steve Schmitt, who did everything possible to run their candidate as anything but a conservative Republican? Face it, this was the year of the “Moderate Republican” and they lost.
The only reason it was as close as it was, was because of the addition of Sarah Palin to the ticket. We all watched as crowds cheered, donors gave and volunteers flooded the campaign. Why were they doing this? It was because this young energetic PRO-LIFE, PRO-GUN, PRO-MARRIAGE, CONSERVATIVE woman was now on the ticket. Like her or not, Sarah Palin brought energy and excitement to this presidential election at levels her more moderate running mate could not. And had it not been for the conservative haters in the campaign undermining her at every turn, the ticket might have done even better.
But let’s be honest, considering the level of Obamania that swept the country and the media, an almost $1 billion war chest and a meltdown of the financial markets; Ronald Regan- heck, even Abraham Lincoln couldn’t have won. So, I don’t blame John McCain. But to blame religious conservatives for the state of our party is just plain wrong.
I believe that there are two primary culprits to this meltdown.
The first is Republicans not walking the talk. We claimed to be about smaller government, but the greatest expansion of government spending happened under our watch. We claim to be about family values, but we had leaders propositioning congressional pages and playing footsies in the men’s room. We claimed to be the party of “Ethics and Moral Values”, meanwhile members of our party are being run out of office (some to jail) under corruption charges. We claim to be a party who supports equality for all, but we can’t seem to find our way to some communities until we need their vote. To make a long story short, we lost because we governed like democrats.
The second culprit is the GOP infighting. Moderates blame conservatives, stating that the only way to win is to abandon our socially conservative principles and change the party platform. Then conservatives fire back, questioning the “Republicanism” of anyone who disagrees with them on anything. We become the proverbial circular firing squad shooting at each other instead of the Democrats. If we are to turn this around two things are going to have to happen. First, moderates need to stop attacking our conservative values. Conservatives make up the core to of the GOP’s base. We are the meat and potatoes, moderates are the side dish. So, stop trying to change the platform. Likewise, conservatives must realize that not everyone is going to score 100% on the conservative values test. The party platform is the measuring stick we should use when judging our candidates. But we must also keep in mind that in some cases the perfect Republican candidate will not be the perfect Republican. Believe it or not, one can be a fiscal conservative and social moderate and still be convicted of being a Republican. In the infamous words of Mr. King (Rodney that is) “Can’t we all just get along?”
However, there is a silver lining to this rather dark cloud. The best solution for the syndrome that now ails the Republican party past has always been a Democratic administration. Nothing brings combatants together like a common enemy.
Let us not forget that Jimmy Carter helped us usher in the Regan Revolution. Then there was Bill Clinton’s liberal leadership, which led to the Contract With America. The election of Barak Obama could turn out to be best thing that could have happened to the GOP. That is, if we can learn to get along, govern according to our values and take a serious look at how we plan to attract new Republican voters.
So, what will Republican need to do to attract these new voters? We need to go to where they are; to get to understand their issues; and then, effectively communicate how our common conservative values can produce societal and public policy solutions to the challenges they face.
Change we can believe in?
If I sound bitter, I’m not. The American public has spoken. This election was about change; and clearly Barak Obama offered the kind of change that voters were looking for. My only question is, what kind of change exactly is that?
Throughout the election, I came across Obama supporters who had no idea what his record was or what he planned to do once elected. But , they did know that we needed change. My response was always the same, “Out of the frying pan, into the fire- That’s change!”
My brother David seems to think that Barak Obama will learn from the mistakes of the past. He believes that unlike Clinton, who also had the benefit of a working majority in both houses of congress, Obama will not adopt a far left agenda. For the nation’s sake I hope he is right.
However, I just don’t think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will be able to help themselves. When left unrestrained by conservative roadblocks, liberals seem to develop a policy turrets syndrome. “RAISE TAXES!” “UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE!” “END GLOBAL WARMING!”
You name it, they will propose it. It doesn’t matter whether or not it will work; or what the negative consequences may be. As long as it sounds good they will run it up the flagpole. But this time they have enough people to salute and actually pass their liberal agenda. The only question that remains is whether or not a man who was the most liberal member of the Senate will sign on the dotted line.
Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical.
Debra Bowen hosts drive by registation, but has no voter reg cards for GOP
According to the California Republican Party, Secretary of State, Debra Bowen’s office refused to fulfull their request for 20,000 voter registration cards. The excuse given was that the delayed budget caused them to run low on printed voter registration cards.
When confronted by the media, Bowen’s office denied any such shortage. Little did the folks at the CRP saved the voicemail message for them from the Secretary’s office. and it tells a very different story.
Meanwhile, Ms. Bowen has hooked up with her fellow Democrats to host a “Driveby Voter Registration” event at the Sacramento Convention Center. I guess they the shortage only applied to certain groups.
DeLuz Brothers Discuss Race And The Presidential Election
David believes that the Republicans are up to their old tricks, including fear-mongering. Meanwhile Craig thinks that while some of the complaints are legitimate, the Democrats are also doing whatever they can to deflect legitimate criticism away from their candidate by declaring it all to be racist.
To tune in simply go to http://www.deluzbrothers.com/ and click on the Listen Live Button at the top of the page.
You can even join the conversation by calling in at (347) 237-5073. We will be breaking down the upcoming election and much more. You don’t want to miss the fireworks!
Details Below:
When: Friday, October 10th
Station: Blogtalk Radio
Live Audio Steaming at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-DeLuz-Brothers
TIME: 9:30-10 am (PST)
Call in Number: (347) 237-5073
Why I can’t Vote For Barak Reason #1 – He voted against the Infant Born Alive Act
I find it difficult to understand how anyone could vote against protecting the life of a child. This is not about abortion. These are children! To let them die amounts to infanticide.
Here is the story that CNN did:
For more on Obama’s voting record on this issue go to BornAliveTruth.org.
In 2004 Maxine Waters said Fannie & Freddie weren’t broken
Republicans are the ones who have pushed to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Democrats continually fight any regulation.
I am not saying the Republicans are completely free of blame. The fact is, they were in charge in 2001 when this issue first popped up, all the way until 2005. And no legislation was ever passed providing the sort of oversight they knew was needed.
But it is clear from this video and other media reports that Democrats have been the ones preventing the reforms that could have prevented this crisis. I just think it’s sad thata the MSM is letting them get away with such hypocracy.
Biden on Obama: This ad wrote itself!
It is going to be fun watching as Democrats try to spin these very public statements that Barak is not ready to lead by very popular figures like Biden & Clinton.
Barack Obama: The Child – The Messiah – The Obamessiah
This video pretty much says it all…
HYPE: The Obama Effect
I saw this adv for “HYPE: The Obama Effect” while watching Fox News this morning.
The trailer is even more compelling. I really hope that this movie will help unmask the left’s newest messiah and reveal the fact that once you get past all they rhetoric of “Hope and Change” Barak Obama is nothing more than a Jimmy Carter liberal in a shiny new package.
Obama changes mind on the surge: It ain’t so bad!
Let the flip-floping continue! Below is an article fromt he New York Daily News noting that the Obama Campaign unceremoniously removed all criticizm of the the surge from their website.
I don’t know that this represents a change of opinion. But more a change of tactics. You know… If you don’t have anything nice to say about the surge, don’t say anything at all. (Hat Tip to the CRP)
“Barack Obama Purges Web Site Critique Of Surge In Iraq”
New York Daily News“Barack Obama’s campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop ‘surge’ in Iraq, the Daily News has learned. The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a ‘problem’ that had barely reduced violence.”
— Daily News’ James Gordon MeekBy James Gordon Meek
July 14, 2008Barack Obama’s campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop “surge” in Iraq, the Daily News has learned.
The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a “problem” that had barely reduced violence.
“The surge is not working,” Obama’s old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks – not U.S. military muscle – for quelling violence in Anbar Province.
The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004.
Obama’s campaign posted a new Iraq plan Sunday night, which cites an “improved security situation” paid for with the blood of U.S. troops since the surge began in February 2007.
It praises G.I.s’ “hard work, improved counterinsurgency tactics and enormous sacrifice.”
Campaign aide Wendy Morigi said Obama is “not softening his criticism of the surge. We regularly update the Web site to reflect changes in current events.”
GOP rival John McCain zinged Obama as a flip-flopper. “The major point here is that Sen. Obama refuses to acknowledge that he was wrong,” said McCain, adding that Obama “refuses to acknowledge that it [the surge] is succeeding.”
In Case You Missed It: Muslims barred from picture at Obama event
This article is from Politico.com:
Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.
The campaign has apologized to the women, both Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally.
“This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers.”
Building a human backdrop to a political candidate, a set of faces to appear on television and in photographs, is always a delicate exercise in demographics and political correctness. Advance staffers typically pick supporters out of a crowd to reflect the candidate’s message.
When Obama won the North Carolina primary amid questions about his ability to connect with white voters, for instance, he stood in front of a group of middle-aged white women waving small American flags. On the Republican side, a Hispanic New Hampshire Democrat, Roberto Fuentes, told Politico that he was recently asked, and declined, to contribute to the “diversity” of the crowd behind Sen. John McCain at a Nashua event.
But for Obama, the old-fashioned image-making contrasts with his promise to transcend identity politics and to embrace all elements of America. The incidents in Michigan, which has one of the largest Arab and Muslim populations in the country, also raise an aspect of his campaign that sometimes rubs Muslims the wrong way: The candidate has vigorously denied a false, viral rumor that he himself is Muslim. But the denials seem to some at times to imply that there is something wrong with the faith, though Obama occasionally adds that he means no disrespect to Islam.
“I was coming to support him, and I felt like I was discriminated against by the very person who was supposed to be bringing this change, who I could really relate to,” said Hebba Aref, a 25-year-old lawyer who lives in the Detroit suburb of Bloomfield Hills. “The message that I thought was delivered to us was that they do not want him associated with Muslims or Muslim supporters.”
In Detroit on Monday, the two different Obama volunteers — in separate incidents — made it clear that headscarves wouldn’t be in the picture. The volunteers gave different explanations for excluding the hijabs, one bluntly political and the other less clear.
In Aref’s case, there was no ambiguity.
That incident began when the volunteer asked Aref’s friend Ali Koussan and two other friends, Aref’s brother Sharif and another young lawyer, Brandon Edward Miller, whether they would like to sit behind the stage. The three young men said they would, but mentioned they were with friends.
The men said the volunteer, a twenty-something African-American woman in a green shirt, asked if their friends looked and were dressed like the young men, who were all light-skinned and wearing suits. Miller said yes, but mentioned that one of their friends was wearing a headscarf with her suit.
The volunteer “explained to me that because of the political climate and what’s going on in the world and what’s going on with Muslim Americans, it’s not good for [Aref] to be seen on TV or associated with Obama,” said Koussan, who is a law student at Wayne State University.
Both Koussan and Miller said they specifically recalled the volunteer citing the “political climate” in telling them they couldn’t sit behind Obama.
“I was like, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me. Are you serious?'” Koussan recalled.
Shimaa Abdelfadeel’s story was different. She’d waited on line outside the Joe Louis Arena for three hours in the sun and was walking through the giant hall when a volunteer approached two of her non-Muslim friends, a few steps ahead of her, and asked if they’d like to sit in “special seating” behind the stage, said one friend, Brittany Marino, who, like Abdelfadeel, is a recent University of Michigan graduate who works for the university.
Ding! Dong! The Witch is…. Oops… Not so fast!
The Associated Press is already calling the Presidential nominations for Barak Obama:
Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday, based on an Associated Press tally of convention delegates, becoming the first black candidate ever to lead his party into a fall campaign for the White House.
Campaigning on an insistent call for change, Obama outlasted former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton in a historic race that sparked record turnout in primary after primary, yet exposed deep racial divisions within the party.
The AP tally was based on public commitments from delegates as well as more than a dozen private commitments. It also included a minimum number of delegates Obama was guaranteed even if he lost the final two primaries in South Dakota and Montana later in the day.
So, one would think that the natural thing for Hillary Clinton to do would be to offer her concession speech tonight as well. But this may not be the case.
Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede Tuesday night that Barack Obama has the
delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, campaign officials said,
effectively ending her bid to be the nation’s first female president.The former first lady was not ready to formally suspend or end her race
in a speech Tuesday night in New York City. But if Obama get to the magic number
of delegates, 2,118, she was prepared to acknowledge that milestone, according
to aides who declined to be identified.
Will Hillary hold the Democratic party hostage?
Well according to politico.com this may not be the case. This afternoon they are reporting:
We can’t get her to sit down and talk,” the Hillary Clinton person was telling me. “We have been having a hard time getting her to stop campaigning long enough to talk about how she actually ends this thing.”
It is understandable. She has been campaigning for so long. She has fought so hard. And, let’s be fair, in recent months she has done so well.
So why talk about losing? You know who talks about losing? Losers. And that is not how she sees herself.
As much as Obama would like to have the delegates won in these final two primaries put him over the top. Unfortunately for him, he will still need to capture about 30-40 more super delegates making him the first Democratic Presidential Nominee since George McGovern in 1972 to win the nomination without winning the popular vote. This very relevant fact is the final thread upon which the Clinton machine will hang their far-reaching hopes of victory.
The only question left to ask is whether or not the fight will go to the DNC convention in August. If Hillary has anything to say about it, I would look forward to a spirited convention battle.
Listen to Craig DeLuz on the Capitol Hour with Eric Hogue
Tomorrow, Tuesday June 3rd at 12:30 pm I will be joining Eric Hogue as we breakdown several local races and discuss the battle for the heart of Sacramento’s Republican Party
Here are the details:
Tuesday, June 3rd (Tomorrow) @12:30 pm
1380 AM KTKZ
Call in numbers :916-923-3300 or 888-923-1380
To listen online simply Click Here. Thenk hit the “Listen Live” button in the upper righthand corner of the page.
Democrat Party’s racist roots are starting to show…
Race again played a pivotal role in Tuesday’s Democratic presidential clashes, as whites in Indiana and North Carolina leaned solidly toward Hillary Rodham Clinton and blacks voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama, exit polls showed.
One in five white voters said race was an important factor in their vote and 83 percent of them voted for Clinton against Obama, who would be the first black major-party presidential nominee.
Mississippi:
As has been the case in many primary states, Obama won overwhelming support from African-American voters. They went for him over Clinton 91-9 percent.
But Mississippi white voters overwhelmingly backed the New York senator, supporting her over Obama 72 percent to 21 percent.
As a matter of fact Alan Fram of the Associate Press wrote:
Exit polls of voters in Democratic primaries also show that whites who considered the contender’s race _ Clinton is white, Obama is black _ were three times likelier to say they would only be satisfied with Clinton as the nominee than if Obama were chosen.
Isn’t this the enlightened party? … Open to a diversity of cultures?
I could go on and on, but you get the point.
This just goes to show that the party that fought to keep slavery, founded the KKK, instituted Jim Crowe, authored the Southern Manafesto and fought against the 1964 Civil Rights Act hasn’t strayed too far from it’s racist roots.
As far at their modern day racist policies… I’ll leave that for another post.
Obama fails history lesson
In his victory speech following the North Carolina Primary, Obama declared, “I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.”
Well Real Clear Politics published a commentary by Jack Kelly pointing out that Barak’s statement demonstrates stupidity, not wisdom. Kelly writes:
I assume the Roosevelt to whom Sen. Obama referred is Franklin D. Roosevelt. Our enemies in World War II were Nazi Germany, headed by Adolf Hitler; fascist Italy, headed by Benito Mussolini, and militarist Japan, headed by Hideki Tojo. FDR talked directly with none of them before the outbreak of hostilities, and his policy once war began was unconditional surrender.
FDR died before victory was achieved, and was succeeded by Harry Truman. Truman did not modify the policy of unconditional surrender. He ended that war not with negotiation, but with the atomic bomb.
Harry Truman also was president when North Korea invaded South Korea in June, 1950. President Truman’s response was not to call up North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung for a chat. It was to send troops.
So apparently, Roosevelt and Truman did not agree with Barak’s belief in unconditional talks with enemy states. In fact, they held that the only condition that merited talks was that of “Unconditional Surrender.” Kelly goes on to debunk the Obama’s “wisdom” when it relates to the actions of President Kennedy:
Sen. Obama is on both sounder and softer ground with regard to John F. Kennedy. The new president held a summit meeting with Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev in Vienna in June, 1961.
Elie Abel, who wrote a history of the Cuban missile crisis (The Missiles of October), said the crisis had its genesis in that summit.
“There is reason to believe that Khrushchev took Kennedy’s measure in June 1961 and decided this was a young man who would shrink from hard decisions,” Mr. Abel wrote. “There is no evidence to support the belief that Khrushchev ever questioned America’s power. He questioned only the president’s readiness to use it. As he once told Robert Frost, he came to believe that Americans are ‘too liberal to fight.'”
That view was supported by New York Times columnist James Reston, who traveled to Vienna with President Kennedy: “Khrushchev had studied the events of the Bay of Pigs,” Mr. Reston wrote. “He would have understood if Kennedy had left Castro alone or destroyed him, but when Kennedy was rash enough to strike at Cuba but not bold enough to finish the job, Khrushchev decided he was dealing with an inexperienced young leader who could be intimidated and blackmailed.”
Ok…. I’m still waiting for the “Wisdom” to which Obama is referring? Like a school yard bully, Khrushcev saw Kennedy’s overtures as a lack of will to fight, which we all know, will provoke said bullies to be even more bold and aggressive. I wonder how much sooner the cold war could have been ended, had Kennedy not compromised our credibility as a military superpower ready to do whatever it took to protect our citizens.
There is a popular saying: “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Well, through his own words, Barak Obama demonstrates that not only has he failed to learn vital lessons from history, he hasn’t even learned the facts of history.
