Political JUNGLE

  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the man behind the September 11^th terrorist attacks, defended himself before a Military Judge at Guantanamo Bay on Thursday.  Except that he didn’t defend himself at all. 

In fact he told the Judge he wanted to be put to death and therefore become a martyr.  Mohammed was of course offered attorneys, but rejected them and even stated to the Judge, “Yes, this is what I wish, to be a martyr for a long time, I will god willing, have this by you.” 

There were also reports from journalists inside the courtroom that he was extremely mocking of the entire proceeding and laughed at many of the onlookers. 

This is very much a political issue especially in coming months, as two candidates, both in agreement on not using physical torture of any kind with detainees, will fight for the White House.  Obviously there is no place for torture in the U.S., however when dealing with terrorists of this magnitude and the chance you could save American lives, water boarding may be necessary. 

Mohammed has successfully showed us that just throwing a terrorist with this mentality in prison and threatening death, or taking away his freedom will not affect him.  He wants death.  He believes this will take him to a far better place.  So when dealing with someone who is unafraid and actually striving to die, the only thing that may work is torture with no end in sight, and no death in sight. 

Understandably McCain disagrees with torture, as he himself was tortured.  But as he speaks about protecting this country he must understand this could be a part of that.  Water boarding at Guantanamo will not be debated heavily in this presidential election because both candidates disagree with it.  But it is an important issue because it can drastically affect our safety as Americans, and how we are viewed around the world. 

We’re not talking about using force with normal captures, but with TERRORISTS. If you don’t agree with water boarding explain how better to deal with terrorists that may have information that could save literally thousands of Americans.  In my opinion this isn’t a Republican or Democrat issue, but an American issue.          

Scott McClellan, former White House press secretary, recently wrote a book supposedly airing the dirty laundry of the White House.  The problem is he didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. In his book he also does something groundbreaking.  He blames everything on Bush and his administration.  McClellan, join the droves of media lemmings who will turn their back on you the minute something more newsworthy surfaces. 

In addition, everyone being interviewed that was close to him or worked with him is adamantly refuting his book.  Not to mention who will trust him now?  Even liberal democrats, who are his new best friends, won’t trust him tomorrow. 

So, congratulations McClellan, you made some money, you got your 15 minutes of fame, but you’ll have no friends, you lost any career in politics, and more importantly you lost all respect.  You’re a weasel.  

Most disappointing is that it again displays the dirty and deceitful side of politics.  It leaves many of us wondering if there are in fact honest people in Washington.  That should be the focus of criticism surrounding his book, NOT PRESIDENT BUSH.        

Is race really an issue?  

Obama loses Kentucky huge, but wins Oregon by double digits. 

Cable news networks break down the exit polls by every demographic possible, but can race really be considered a factor?  Obama won Iowa, a state largely populated by whites, and wins Oregon, even after the Rev. Wright debaucle.  Supposedly its the upper middle class educated yuppies that flock to the polls for Obama.  He seems to have that group in his pocket.

So again, what about race?  Everyone seems to think he has the black vote locked down, but I beg to differ.  His race does not, and should not matter, as much as the media and certain civil rights activists seem to want to make it matter.  Granted, in some states he did get a resounding percentage of black voters, but the race discussion needs to cool down.

And keep in mind, he’s as much white as he is black.    

As I was gearing up to remark on McCain’s speech about what this country would be like four years after his presidency, another story broke far more interesting.  It wasn’t the story itself that seemed more important but its glaring comparison with the speech McCain just delivered.   The parallels between these two images, these two news stories, these two men were fascinating.   Fascinating because within minutes we saw the drastic difference between a presidential candidate and the President.  Not only the difference between them, but the difference between the reactions to them. 

As president Bush spoke in Israel, condemning terrorists, rogue nations and those who want to meet with them, the Obama camp suddenly lambasted him.  This began moments after McCain surmised his 30-minute speech on how we can all get along, and what will be his apparent attempt to avoid confrontation with the other side of the aisle.   

As McCain was talking about political harmony another man was actually standing for something.  Isn’t it true that when you’re standing up for something you believe, you’ll have people that hate you and people that love you.  If you wander around in the middle you will have neither.  

McCain has great ideas, and no doubt knows how to fight as a war hero, but he seems to have lost that fighting spirit.  He seems to have lost the strength to stand alone on that pier because he knows something is right.  I’m sure you had that teacher or coach in high school that seemingly everyone hated.  We all did.  Its not until years later that when thinking back you remember them.  Not because you hated them, but because you respected them.  Because they actually stood for something. 

I fear McCain in his attempt to be moderate will in fact be moderate.  Great people are never moderate.  This doesn’t mean all people on the fringes of insanity are great, but they are probably passionate, at least.  

Underneath it all McCain must have some passion and strong opinions, but he needs to let it out and take the potential strife that may follow.  Of course it’s a good thing to maintain a level of bipartisanship, but if you try to appease everyone you won’t get anything done.      

The fact that President Bush can immediately get this type of a response from the Obama campaign also says something.  First of all, it again proves, as mentioned in earlier blogs, that Obama will play up anything to allow people to feel sorry for himself, and make it an attack on him.  It also says Bush’s tenacity and willingness to take a stand upsets many liberals.  

Although a slightly different topic, Obama’s eagerness to respond to Bush’s comments as “Sad,” and to act so offended will not help him in the long run.  Obama needs to stop playing the role of victim, and start showing he has some strength, if in fact he has any.   

Young people will flock in droves this November to pull the lever in the presidential election.    Surveys and polls suggest these under 30’s are voting more than ever.   Many of them gather information on the internet, and through online groups formed on interfaces like Facebook, the social networking website invented in 2004, designed mainly to appeal to college students.  

Admittedly, much of the youth vote can be attributed to the rise and popularity of Obama. But are these young voters truly informed? 

Readers Digest did a story about this younger generation and gathered some interesting information, so check it for further insight.  The Facebook Election,  also linked in my News Across The Web section.   

This Facebook phenomenon is not a new thing, but as the general election gets closer it could prove important.  Young people have increasingly swayed over to the democrats in the last 20 years.   Going back to Super Tuesday, more than 3 million under 30’s headed to the polls, with 2 million checking the box on the democratic side, and 900,000 voting for the GOP, according to CIRCLE.   And that’s just in a primary. 

Anything that motivates young voters to get involved is a positive thing, but it’s also important to help them become properly informed.  The democratic candidates have really fed off the emotional vote, and likeability factor.  Obama especially has been able to capitalize off this idea.  

Obama is smart to target this demographic, but is he really looking out for their best interests?    

Facebook and MySpace type places are great for getting young people involved but I encourage you to look further, and really research and form your own opinions.

Stay tuned for a complete layout and analysis of the differences between McCain and Obama. This will be based solely on policy and issue. Maybe I’ll throw Clinton in there for good measure.

Civil rights activist, Al Sharpton, was arrested alongside a couple hundred others for protesting the acquittal of three police officers in the fatal shooting of Sean Bell.

Sean Bell was shot by police on his wedding day outside a nightclub in Queens.  

Sean Bell was an African American.   

The three cops involved in the shooting are Mexican, White, and African American.    

There may be some validity to the argument that the 50 bullet barrage of shots in this occasion were excessive, but thats not the argument I’m confronting.

Al Sharpton claims this protest is about the use of excessive and unfair force in minority neighborhoods. The question is should Al Sharpton, and others, make this about minorities?  Is that really the issue here?  Were these cops malicisously going after this guy because he’s a minority, or lives in a rough neighborhood?  There’s no easy answer.  

The solution, however, is consistency. Al Sharpton needs to have consistency, whether the victim white, black, or any other race, to be accepted as a true civil rights leader.

What if the man shot by the police was white?  Would this have ever been a story?

Sharpton does a lot for the black community, but the ideas he promotes are not always those of togetherness, responsibility, and hard work.  

“Today we want motorists to think about how three (other) motorists were shot at 50 times for no reason,”  Al Sharpton said in referring to the protests.  

The protests were technically referred to as pray-ins.  There is no argument against his right of free speech, but against his continuing interest in the racial divide.

OBAMA WINS NORTH CAROLINA by double digits.   

CLINTON WINS INDIANA; barely, WAIT maybe.

This only gives further credit to the notion that superdelegates may have the chance to take the power away from the people and decide on their democratic nominee. Although who knows how much Republicans are messing with the primaries, as they are reportedly casting their votes for one of the Democratic candidates.

Barack Obama definitely gained some momentum, as he will pick up more total delegates on the day than Hillary Clinton. I’ll give Obama this, he can with one speech sweep people out of reality and into the realm of some vague, giddy, not even sure what he’s talking about, nirvana.  I wasn’t aware that we were electing a motivational speaker. 

The ironic thing is that he proclaims how it’s all about you, the Americans, yet he always seems to speak about how horrible this country is, blaming it all on Washington politics.  I’m sorry people, but you’ve elected all the public officials in Washington. The American people have voted the current administration into the white house twice, as well as the failing Democratic congress and senate.  These people don’t appear out of thin air. 

So you’re right. This is about Americans.  But as Obama tears apart everything this country stands for, he tears apart the very Americans who voted these people into office.  Obviously change can be good, but every candidate says that.  

Hillary Clinton employs similar blame game tactics, as she sits on the same senate with Obama swearing off Washington politics.  What? They are Washington politics.  Why doesn’t anyone seem to realize this as these candidates throw all their colleagues under the bus.    At least Mit Romney could legitimately make the “Washington outsider” claim.   

Young emotional voters beware…  Don’t be fooled by the socialism attitude disguised as compassion.  In his North Carolina victory speech, he exclaims, “…We do need a government that stands up for families that are being tricked out of their homes by wall street predators.”  Americans should be protected to a certain extent with financial woes, but what happened to personal responsibility. I guess that’s not the feel good goose bump generating topic.  

Obama is inspirational.  He’s smart.  Likeable.  President though?

He will be the democratic candidate, unless superdelegates fall into the pressure of the Clinton machine and somehow manufacture the Florida and Michigan delegates into her win column. Clinton’s not quitting any time soon.  

This all as John McCain sits quietly in the background.  His turn under the microscope is looming in the near future.

Why do the media, economists, and various politicians seem so convinced that our economy is sinking into the depths of a 1929 style Great Depression?  Of course the economy isn’t booming, but you’d think we were running out of food tomorrow.  A slew of economists expected the GDP report from the first quarter of the year to be in the negative, and much to their chagrin it was not.  USAToday.com reported with the headline, “Weak 0.6% Economic Growth In Q1 Is Better Than Forecast.”  They can’t even temporarily put aside their disgust for the current administration and write a positive headline for once.  I can just see them sitting around figuring out how to get the word “weak” in the headline and downplay any growth.  

Granted 0.6% is not a huge increase, but it’s also not the massive recession that 2/3 of the 52 surveyed economists predicted. (Survey taken by USA Today)  Of course the housing market is still in disarray, and consumer spending only rose roughly 1%, but there are positives.  For example, exports grew 5.5%.  The point here is that the bias media coverage does affect people’s outlook.  It is true that the more devastating it sounds, the better the ratings.  In fairness, this quick online article was actually quite moderate and reasonable.  However, it’s still an example of how, with a republican in office, it’s like pulling teeth for major media outlets to report positively, or at least honestly.  

As Larry Elder, radio talk show host based in Los Angeles, exclaimed today:  The economic news is severely slanted based on the party of the President in office at the time.  He cited the 1992 economic study that documented how 80-90% of media coverage of the economy during George Herbert Walker Bush’s presidency was negative. Then the election takes place, and by November of that year, before Bill Clinton had even lit up one of his cigars in the oval office, 80-90% of economic news was suddenly positive.  The answer? Sort it out for yourself; don’t just take Katie Couric’s word for it (or any other major media talker).  Also, read posts like this and respond.  Healthy discussion also helps us make up our minds and search out the truth.     

Visit: www.larryelder.com 

USA Today cited: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2008-04-30-gdp-positive_N.htm