Or, would he prefer to remain in the Democrat majority of the Senate come January 20? Or maybe he’s even sending out feelers for a Cabinet post in an Obama Administration… It is getting hard to tell. In fact one could possibly argue that he doesn’t really want it. After all, how many opportunities has McCain had to call into question Obama’s stealth past, his socialist and terrorist connections, his complete and very obvious lack of any academic work that might offer even a minute view into that the man is really thinking and how he views the world – and he has passed nearly all of them by until last week. Indeed, even going on the attack for Senator McCain seem to mean letting you running mate do the dirty work. It is not an abnormal thing to have the candidate at the top of the ticket try to remain above the fray and appear more “statesman-like” while their running mate goes for the jugular. 

Here’s where I have a problem with McCain’s alleged strategy: he’s not going for the jugular and I don’t think he will. Worse, I believe it’s not that he wouldn’t, it’s that he believes he shouldn’t. Senator McCain, a career navy man who has more than served his fair share of time in combat and the living hell of North Vietnamese POW camp, no doubt understands very well the essence of combat. Whether the combat is military or political the goal of combat is victory, and one achieves victory in only one of two ways: one forces the enemy to surrender, or one destroys and terminates the enemy. 

Given the stakes in this election and the fact that they have just been raised immeasurably higher by the recent government actions to nationalize massive segments of the private economy, which McCain himself supports, one would think the Senator would be fighting as hard as he can to destroy and terminate the enemy rather than simply try to force him to capitulate and surrender, and this most especially so given the fact that Obama is undoubtedly the most dangerous man ever to position himself for a takeover of the US Government. I say takeover, rather than “seek election” because in seeking election one does not employ miscreants to engage in vote fraud on a massive scale, nor does one celebrate little children being forced to sing propaganda songs about “hope and change,” nor does one remain conspicuously silent on the subject of youths dressed in fatigues performing paramilitary drills in public schools while shouting out Obama’s plans for “change.”

The thing I am finding truly disturbing is that right now he appears to be fighting for neither capitulation nor destruction of the enemy. In fact, just within the last couple of days Senator McCain has actively defended Obama. His admonished his own supporters for demanding he hit Obama harder over his connection to terrorist William Ayers, and then called Senator Barack Obama an inherently good and decent man who loves and believes in America.

Senator, I beg to differ wit your assessment of Mr. Obama, and here’s why:

1. Inherently good and decent men do not enable infanticide;

2. Inherently good and decent men do not remain silent when their supporters threaten to bring criminal charges against anyone who speaks ill of The One;

3. Inherently good and decent men do not remain silent when children are being exploited for political purposes;

4. Inherently good and decent men to not go out of their way to hide their past;

 5. Inherently good and decent men to not remain silent when children are indoctrinated into politically extremist views by those who are entrusted with their care and education’

6. Inherently good and decent men would not have spent 20 years in a racist, anti-American “church” listening to their pastor incite hate in the name of Christ;

7. Inherently good and decent men would admit to their past associations with extremist groups like ACORN, would admit to the roles they served, and denounce attempts to win an election by fraud;

8. Inherently good and decent men do no associate with admitted and unrepentant terrorists;

9. Inherently good and decent men would denounce their endorsements by Marxist and socialist groups, as well as foreign terror organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah;

10. Inherently good and decent men would not actively try to subvert the foreign policy of the sitting President (however misguided he may be…);

11. Inherently good and decent men would not subvert the Constitution at every opportunity;

12. Inherently good and decent men would not subvert their own nation’s sovereignty to a world body like the UN;

13. Inherently good and decent men speak plainly about what they believe and what they want to do;

14. Inherently good and decent men do not actively sanction the suppression of free speech;

15. Inherently good and decent men do not devalue human life to the equivalent of a “mistake”;

16. Inherently good and decent men do not engage in corrupt activity and then point fingers at others;

17. Inherently good and decent men would admit to past mistakes and ask forgiveness;

18. Inherently good and decent men do not play the “race-card”;

19. Inherently decent men do not incite race-riots through their surrogates;

20. Inherently good and decent men would speak the truth.

There is nothing good and decent about Barack Obama. He is a monster who enabled infanticide simply so he could continue to rake in campaign money and support from Planned Parenthood. He was an “academic” yet never published any professional work, only is self-crafted and spun autobiography. He has denied associations anyone with an internet connection can validate that he had, he refuses to answer questions on almost every facet of his life’s story, and he received not merely a free pass but the adulation and love of the smitten masses who have been waiting for “the One.” History shows time and again when a man come out of nowhere and ascends to high office without vetting and proper examination, the consequences can be most severe. And now with the perfect storm brewing economically, socio-politically, and culturally, we have in Obama the most extreme and dangerous ideological zealot every to seek the Presidency, and a man who has employed masterfully the teaching of his master, Saul Alinsky – deceit on a massive scale, because one cannot divulge who they really are lest they be rejected. Hence the necessity of pretending to be like everyone else; to lie, cheat and steal, to employ thuggish threats and corruption, and to deny everything with a smile while playing the “race-card.” 

The fact is that we no more about Sarah Palin’s 17 year of daughter’s pregnancy and Sarah’s newborn son Trigg than we do about Obama. But John McCain believes he is a good and decent man. The man who as President would utterly destroy what is left of capitalism and liberty in this country is a “good and decent man?” 

While I had been a “fence-sitter” or a “nose-holder,” in less than lukewarm support of this ticket, with this statement coming from a man who portents to be a conservative and a maverick, I can stand it no longer, because with such a statement McCain has as much as openly admitted that he will not rock the boat in Washington, he will not cross the line that counts, he will not be a real maverick when it comes to truly standing up for what is right. And most disappointingly of all, in admonishing his supporters he makes it clear that he will not go for the jugular and fight to terminate Obama’s chances at the White House with the arsenal he has available to him. He will not use all the weaponry at his disposal to bring this combat to a victorious conclusion for the American people. He will not put his country first – for fear of offending fence-sitting Democrats and perhaps losing their support. At this point, in my own opinion, the only reason McCain can call himself a maverick is because he has fought conservatives every inch of the way. 

Like many others out there, I can take a lot and compromise to a point. My line in the sand has been crossed. And, I am now more than ever convinced that if this republic is to survive as a free society, it will be because the third parties run the Democrats and Republicans out of town and make the Constitution the law of the land once again. Anything less will be un-survivable after an Obama Presidency. Continued capitulation to Obama’s Chicago socialist propaganda machine is merely a policy of appeasement that will only serve to undermine the cause of the right. I am now convinced that McCain does not have it in him to fight Obama to the death, so to speak. We all know the MSM is in the bad for Obama, and that Obama is a vey intelligent man with a massive underground extremist organization determined to hand him the Presidency licitly or illicitly – by any means necessary. 

And now we know that the GOP leadership will roll over and cut the best deal it can with these traitorous thugs while leaving the rest of us with false hope. I will not be fooled. I know the GOP cannot be trusted any more than the Democrats. If the future of this republic is in any way to resemble the glories of her past days, the only viable way to set this course is through independent candidates, third parties and merciless phone and email assaults on Capitol Hill. I, for one and for what it is worth, will be throwing myself into third party activism and campaigning. If I had money I’d be throwing that too. It is far better to begin and end the revolution with the ballot rather than with the shedding of blood which should be avoided at all costs, although I am not at all convinced that the government, especially under Obama, would be able resist the temptation to fire the first shot. May God help us in our righteous cause of Liberty.

And trashes her family. Nice, and very enlightening insight into the minds of progressive socialists.

It appears Obama’s surrogate minions in the Great White North have been working overtime in the creativity department. The latest overtly sexist attack against Sarah Palin comes from… you guessed it, a progressive socialist writer in Canada who just looooves Barack Hussein Obama! According to Heather Mallick writing for the Canadian Broadcast Corporation, Sarah Palin is not merely “inexperienced” and “unprepared” and “frighteningly extreme on abortion.”   No, she is comparable to a porn actress.

I guess now that Canada has delved to the very depths of socialism and legislated a radical progressivism that apparently encourages, if not mandates hate-speech filled and sexist-slurred articles against anything purporting normal, traditional Judeo-Christan values. How very sad for them. I wonder how Mallick will feel when her progressive extremism celebrates diversity and multiculturalism to the extent that they recognize sharia law and allow Muslim men to brutalize their wives in the name of Allah? Oh. Wait – they’re already doing that in BC. But I digress…

Mallick is so clever. Here’s a couple of excerpts for you:

“Palin has a toned-down version of the porn actress look favoured by this decade's woman, the overtreated hair, puffy lips and permanently alarmed expression. Bristol has what is known in Britain as the look of the teen mum, the "pramface." Husband Todd looks like a roughneck; Track, heading off to Iraq, appears terrified. They claim to be family obsessed while being studiously terrible at parenting. What normal father would want Levi "I'm a _______ redneck" Johnson prodding his daughter?”

“I assume John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential partner in a fit of pique because the Republican money men refused to let him have the stuffed male shirt he really wanted. She added nothing to the ticket that the Republicans didn't already have sewn up, the white trash vote, the demographic that sullies America's name inside and outside its borders yet has such a curious appeal for the right.”

Here is the full article: A Mighty Wind blows through Republican convention

Here is Heather Mallick’s website: www.heathermallick.ca

Here is the feedback link to the CBC: SEND YOUR FEEDBACK

I am sure they would love to hear from you. 

I would be hard pressed to think of a time I have rad something so offensive masquerading as journalism. But, then again, as Michael Savage has repeatedly said, “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.” And this is incontestable proof that he was right.

Or, are they suffering from a bit of buyers’ remorse from their excessive secularization and collective devolution into socialist nanny states and wants us to become just like them? Since the Republican National Convention last week and the shift in momentum, European socialists and socialists throughout the world seem are lamenting the obliteration of Obama’s lead in the polls by the McCain-Palin ticket. There is a rising clamor abroad, you might say, incredulous that Americans could possibly make such a grave mistake as to NOT elect Obama. After all, polling data in many European countries show that Obama would be elected there in landslide victories, and we all know how “progressive” they are now, don’t we?

In fact, now there are not-so-veiled threats of pending severe bouts of “anti-Americanism” emanating from the four corners of the globe. OK, it’s mostly leftists trying to disguise themselves as non-leftists, but whatever. An article in Britain’s Guardian UK online tries to make that point as if to scare Americans in to electing Obama’s corrupt socialist political machine in November. The article is entitled, “The world's verdict will be harsh if the US rejects the man it yearns for: An America that disdains Obama for his global support risks turning current anti-Bush feeling into something far worse.” Are you shaking in your boots yet? Good. I’m not either. It gets better, though. Here’s the first sentence: “The feeling is familiar. I had it four years ago and four years before that: a sinking feeling in the stomach. It's a kind of physical pessimism which says: ‘It's happening again. The Democrats are about to lose an election they should win - and it could not matter more.’”

After several paragraphs bashing Sarah Palin and making McCain out to be George W. Bush Jr., the author Jonathan Freedland writes this gem: “Remember, this is a woman who once addressed a church congregation, saying of her work as governor - transport, policing and education – ‘really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God.’” Remember this folks: cultured, enlightened and properly progressive European politicians would never address a church of any kind, nor entertain the thought of acknowledging God in a public venue, because Europe acknowledges no God – only Allah. And don’t you soon forget it, or they’ll put out a Fatwah on you.

But here is what is probably the best reason NOT to vote for Barack Obama on November 4: “But what of the rest of the world? This is the reaction I fear most. For Obama has stirred an excitement around the globe unmatched by any American politician in living memory. Polling in Germany, France, Britain and Russia shows that Obama would win by whopping majorities, with the pattern repeated in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. If November 4 were a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama.” (emphasis mine) 

And if McCain-Palin win we can expect the cold-shoulder from our comrades in Europe “For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.”

In a poll of 22,000 of our fellow global citizens, “49 per cent across the 22 countries preferred Senator Obama compared with 12 per cent preferring Senator McCain.”

I bear no ill will to our friends in Europe or anywhere else, for that matter – at least toward those who are not trying to kill us. The problem that the rest of the world is suffering from is that the rest of the world is not America. The do not understand us, they do not think like us, they can neither conceive of nor truly grasp what makes one “American.” They never will. 

We are different from the rest of the world. Always have been. Always will be. Most of the time we are willing to work well with others, but sometimes we find it necessary to go it alone, regardless of world opinion, because at the end of the day those 22,000 people polled in Moscow, and Berlin, and London, and Paris, and Khartoum, and Beijing, and Singapore, and Seoul, and Beruit, and Gaza, and Amman, and Istanbul, and Riyadh are not Americans. 

The Europeans cannot understand us because they have sacrificed their Liberty for comfort and security – and obtained neither. Europe has devolved by choice into a continent rife with socialism or the kind that would make Karl Marx proud. They have become one giant bureaucracy that dictates to every aspect of daily life. This is something that, when it comes right down to it, is inconceivable and unconscionable to Americans. For all of our differences and eccentricities, the one thing we Americans all have in common is that we cherish our Liberty; and, even though there are those among us who even now are misled, misguided and deluded into thinking that we can achieve a benevolent government run welfare state to care for our every need, provide our security, bring a lasting peace to the rest of the world and still retain their Liberty, we respectfully make our case, the case for Liberty, and try to enlighten them as to why they are wrong. That is the American way, a way that other peoples cannot understand. 

Many have come to understand that socialistic government programs must by their very nature as dictated by the purpose for which they are created, encroach upon the Liberty of the people. Government authority and Liberty are diametrically opposed forces, irreconcilable except for law. A free people cannot relinquish only “a little” Liberty; a people is either free or it is not. 

With all due respect, the continent of Europe has forsaken Liberty for the vain promises of arbitrary government authority, and it is failing them. Europe is in decline, economically, morally, socially, militarily, politically and in any other way one can imagine, and it has been in decline for decades. When one trusts in government, any government – no matter how well designed – to fulfill roles never intended for government one is bound to be disappointed. The Europeans want Obama because his vision for the future is Europe, and they understand that. They revile resistance to such “enlightened” positions as radical or extremist because they have become so secularized by their own government systems that they cannot understand Americans’ willingness to fight and die for such things as going to church on Sunday.

Europe chose socialism and is now paying the price, and that price is the decline and ultimately the death of nationhood and liberty. That is where Obama’s vision will lead us if we allow him to. So, if you really need another reason NOT to vote for Obama on November 4, just look to Europe.

McCAIN AND OBAMA CAMPAIGNS

With the expected news of a poll-bounce for the GOP in the wake of the Republican National Convention comes the unexpected, albeit much welcomed news for conservatives that the McCain-Palin ticket has pulled ahead of Obama-Biden. Real Clear Politics averaged the major poll results and came out with McCain at 48.0% and Obama at 45.6%, a 2.8% lead for McCain. The pollsters from whom these averaged results were taken ranged from CNN/Opinion Research and Rasmussen Tracking polls showing the two candidates tied at 48%, to a USA Today/Gallup poll showing McCain ahead by ten points at 54% to Obama’s 44%.

Clearly the McCain-Palin ticket has succeeded in stealing Obama’s thunder, but a 2.8% lead is still a statistical dead-heat, and although the GOP ought well to take a measure of pride in surpassing Obama in the polls for the time being, gloating and/or complacency could prove fatal.   Momentum has shifted, but the deal is far from sealed. So how does the McCain-Palin ticket seal the deal? This is a difficult question with many potential answers.

First, it is noteworthy that in the weeks prior to the Republican National Convention Obama was generally the frontrunner. The week just after to the Democrat convention in Denver saw Obama ahead by as many as 8 percentage points (Gallup). The week prior to the DNC event in Denver revealed a general trend of an Obama lead, but that lead only ranged between 1 and 4 percentage points. This is significant, because in the weeks beginning 01 July and ending 25 August, Obama was up as high as 9 percentage points the week of 13 July, but averaged only a 4 to 5 percentage point lead until the week of the Democrat convention. In the days immediately following the Democrat convention Gallup Tracking and CBS had Obama with an 8 percentage point lead over McCain, while Hotline/FD gave him a 9 percentage point lead. On the low end, a CNN poll result showed Obama with only a 1 percentage point lead that week.

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL

Why is this significant? It is significant because at no point in the several weeks leading up to the Democrat National Convention was Obama leaving McCain in the dust, which is what one would expect if things in this country were perceived as being really as bad as Obama campaigns on. Indeed, there is real discontent with President Bush as he currently has a 32.8% approval rating with 64.0% of voters polled indicating disapproval of his administration. With a disapproval rating twice that of the incumbent Republican’s approval rating, one would rightly assume that voters should be flocking to Obama in droves. Despite the messianic coverage of Obama by the mainstream media, this is apparently not the case; and, this is a very interesting thing, because in general, one can view approval ratings and disapproval ratings of the incumbent President as a referendum on the party as a whole during a combined general and presidential election year. 

This next set of numbers, however, is very telling about the current electoral climate when looked at in context with numbers cited above.

CONGRESS AND GENERAL ELECTION PREDICTIONS

First is the Real Clear Politics Congressional Job Approval average of four polls over the period from 12 to 31 August. The RCP average gives Congress a meager 17.8% approval rating and a staggering 73.8 disapproval rating. The approval ratings for Congress were as follows: Quinnipiac from 08/12 to 08/17 16%; LA Times/Bloomberg from 08/15 to 08/18 17%; Hotline/FD from 08/29 to 08/31 at 18%; and FOX News from 08/19 to 08/20 at 20%. The disapproval ratings show FOX News and LA Times/Bloomberg at 73%, Quinnipiac at 74%, and Hotline/FD at 75%. 

This next set of numbers is very telling, again when taken in context with the previous results. 

The polls for use in predicting the emerging trends for the general Congressional electoral results for November averaged by Real Clear Politics from 15 August through 07 September give Democrats a 5.4 point advantage with 45.8% of the vote over the Republicans an average of 40.4%. The two extremes were the NBC News/Wall St. Journal poll conducted between 08/15 and 08/18 that show Democrats likely gaining 47% which is 11 percentage points above the Republicans 36%. The other extreme was the USA Today/Gallup poll conducted between 09/05 and 09/07 showing the Republicans up 5 percentage points likely gaining 50% of the vote to the Democrats 45%. It is noteworthy that the remaining three polls in the RCP average, Democracy Corps, Hotline/FD, and FOX News showed marked advantage for the Democrats, with that party polling ahead 5, 7, and 9 percentage points, respectively. 

SUMMARY

1. Emerging trends for the General Election: Beginning with the last batch of numbers, these clearly show that the Democrat Party has the overall advantage going into the November general Congressional election with the combined RCP average showing them up 5.4 percentage points over Republicans. Clearly the result demonstrates a widespread dissatisfaction with both Congress and the Republican Party. This is interesting because it is indicative of a distorted perception that the Democrats in Congress are doing a better job that the Republicans, when this is clearly not the case as evidenced by the Congressional approval ratings.

2. Congressional Job Approval: The interesting factor here is that the Democrat Party is the majority party in Congress that the polls show overwhelming dissatisfaction with. Congress gets a 73.8% overall disapproval rating and is ruled by the Democrat Party, yet the emerging trends above show this same party with a 5.4 percentage point advantage over Republicans going into the general election.

3. Presidential Approval: President Bush and his Republican Administration are disapproved of by voters by a margin of 2 to1, or 64.0% overall disapproval to 32.8% overall approval.

4. Presidential Campaigns: On 7/01 Obama had a 5.9 percentage point lead over McCain. His lead decreased to 2.3% on 8/04, and then climbing back to 4.8% on 8/12, dipping to 1.2% on 8/20 the week prior to the Democratic convention and then climbing to 6.4% on 9/02. Immediately upon entering into the Republican convention, and following the significant development of McCain announcing Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, Obama’s numbers began to fall off from a 6.4% lead on 9/02 and continued to drop as momentum appears, at least for now, to have shifted to the McCain camp with a 2.4% lead as of 9/08.

CONCLUSIONS

Clearly this is as tight a race as has been in recent history, with the poll results showing mostly a statistical dead heat once these polls are averaged together. What is certain is that the announcement of Sarah Palin’s addition to the Republican ticket served to give the GOP a definitive boost in the numbers, and once both candidates’ acceptance speeches were delivered at the GOP convention, erased Obama’s lead and put the McCain camp ahead. This is largely due to the fact that Palin is viewed by the conservative base of associated with the Republican Party as a solid conservative, fiscally and socially, and is also seen as a true reformer with a proven record.

That notwithstanding, the McCain ticket is clearly hurt to some degree to whatever extend the Obama-Biden camp can sell the argument that McCain is the equivalent of President Bush, a fellow Republican with a 64.0% disapproval rating. This is where things get as interesting as they do confusing. While the high rate of dissatisfaction with President Bush and his administration can be understood as a referendum on the entire Republican Party, and so while it is no surprise that the polling for emerging trends and predictions for the general Congressional elections gives the advantage to the Democrats, the advantage is not as large as one would think, a mere 5.4 percentage points. What is truly interesting here is the fact that Congressional disapproval ratings are averaged at 73.8%, down only slightly from a high of 77% in July. 

What this data show is that the country is still sharply divided politically. But what is more surprising is that given the increasing overall dissatisfaction with President Bush, the numbers have not swung more steeply in favor of Democrats. The data suggest a strong distrust of both parties as evidenced by the President’s disapproval rating, but no solid referendum for a different direction even while the RCP average taken between 08/19 and 09/07 that only 20.0% approve of the direction the nation is going in, with 75.7% disapproving.

For McCain, this is all good news and for Obama it is worthy of concern. For both campaigns it is worthy of very careful attention and much reflection. Obama, a highly charismatic person and eloquent speaker, has yet to complete the sale to the American voters. Given the state of dissatisfaction with government in general, Obama ought to be clobbering McCain, and yet he has barely pulled out a lead better than a statistical dead heat when all the poll results are averaged together.

McCain has seen momentum shift in his favor, and this is largely due to his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate, he acceptance speech, and his follow up acceptance speech which reassured the conservative base by telling them what they needed to hear to get behind the ticket, and making an appeal to undecided voters. What is certain is that prior to the GOP convention, most conservatives were very leery about McCain and if even inclined to support his candidacy did so only grudgingly and as an affront to Obama. 

What is equally certain is that by choosing a staunch conservative reformer who is solid on social and fiscal issues of concern to the conservative base, who is relatively unknown and who is a woman has undeniably galvanized and energized that same base and thereby the whole of Republican Party. McCain drastically increases his chances at victory if he stays to the right, and in picking Palin he has signaled his intent to do exactly that. What the campaign needs to do next is to take the message to the people that the Democrats are the majority party in the Congress they so disdain and hammer the point home with voters to disassociate the Republicans from the failures of a Democrat controlled Congress.

McCain must also be careful not to be perceived as being George W. Bush redux, which ought not be too difficult a task; especially in making the case that he and Palin are the candidates of real reform and change, especially on wasteful government spending. If McCain-Palin can accomplish these things, they can easily beat Obama in November. The conservative base is largely on board now, and so the sale needs to be taken to the undecided’s and independents. 

Clearly the Palin pick has put Obama-Biden in a box in a way they never saw coming, and they are still reeling and assessing what is the best move and direction to proceed. McCain put them there and only he can keep them there. Right now it’s his race to lose, though far from over.

Ever biased and unceasingly hypocritical, mainstream media outlets with a leftist bent never fail to disappoint. It is a truly sad commentary on an otherwise noble profession that so many networks, publications and individual journalists have so easily shelved the objectivity they repeatedly purport to maintain for bitter and non-too-subtle partisan attacks all designed to smear a political rising star and obliterate her character. Consider just a sampling of the headlines about Governor Palin released since she was announced as John McCain’s running mate last Friday:

From CBS News Campaign 08 Horserace: Palin’s Daughter Pregnant.

From Reuters: Palin rebuts rumors, says daughter pregnant. 

Of course both articles had to mention that the pregnancy announcement was “to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child.” 

A picture of Palin holding her son on the cover of US Weekly with a storyline: “Babies, Lies and Scandal,” along with other biased and other tabloid-style phrases to entice and further promote negative opinions of Palin before even reading the article. “Under attack… Under investigation for firing of sister’s ex-husband… New surprises.” Contrast the Palin cover with the enthusiastic endorsement of Obama in the June 19 issue. The Obama cover featured the cover story headlines, “Michelle Obama: Why Barack Loves Her.” Coupled with: “She shops at Target, Loved Sex and the City, and never misses the girls’ recitals. The untold romance between the down-to-earth mom and the man who calls her ‘my rock.’” It should be no surprise, then to find out that the publisher Jann Wenner is an open, enthusiastic and vocal supporter of Barak Obama. He has also donated a lot of money to various Progressive Democrat causes to the tune of $130,308 since 1993. Wenner also publishes Rolling Stone, whose March cover proclaimed, “Barak Obama, a New Hope.” These are Wenner’s own words on Obama.

MSM journalists have decried Palin since Friday because they never interviewed her – remember nothing is newsworthy unless they say it is. Remember when New York Times columnist David Carr was quoted saying this after it was grudgingly decided in the newsrooms of America that a political sex scandal involving a former (ahem, Liberal) Presidential candidate and Senator who cheated on his terminally ill wife was actually news? 

To refresh your memory here is the text of what Carr said in an interview with CNN on August 10: "I was taught when I was a young reporter that it's news when we say it is. I think that's still true -- it's news when 'we' say it is. It's just who 'we' is has changed." He added, “It's also a little scary for big outfits to step up on a story like this. Sex may sell, but it can really hurt your relationship with readers.” Gee, these big outfits weren’t too nervous to break the story that Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. 

Hmmm. Let me see if I get this straight: Dirtbag politician with $400 haircuts who campaigned on how the poor are getting screwed by people with $400 haircuts gets caught cheating on his cancer stricken terminally ill wife and denies it, then gets caught again by National Enquirer reporters and photographers. Just in case you were wondering, according to the MSM, this is NOT news. But, a 17 year old girl who gets pregnant, whose Mom happens to be the newly announced Republican candidate for Vice President – now THAT’S NEWS! Remember, the mainstream media sat on the Edwards scandal for over eight months before grudgingly going with it, and even then only because their hand was forced - they had to run with it, otherwise you can bet there would still be a cover-up. Is this an arrogant double standard, hypocrisy, or simply "fact-checking" and "careful" reporting? I think we all get the idea, Mr. Carr.

“Troopergate” is yet another example of shameful biased reporting –not because of the issue itself, but because of the fact that it is being reported as a scandal. The McCain camp knew this from the vetting process and didn’t seem to care. The fact is it is not a scandal. Here’s a nice piece from the AP. Gee, you don’t think there’s any bias there, now do you? Another piece from CBS News actually mentions the fact that Trooper Mike Wooten, who should have been fired, tasered his 11 year old stepson and, among other things, has continually violated department policies and possibly laws since 2000. He was being divorced from Palin’s sister at the time. Alaska's former commissioner of public safety, Walt Monegan did not take appropriate actions against a rouge law enforcement officer and Palin fired him. An article in the Anchorage Daily News reports this: “Before she was governor, Palin pushed for a trooper investigation of Wooten over a number of matters, including using a Taser on his stepson, illegally shooting a moose, and accusations of driving drunk. At one point, Palin and her husband hired a private investigator.

Troopers did investigate, and Wooten was suspended for 10 days, later reduced to five. That took care of it, Monegan said. But the Palin administration and Todd Palin wouldn't let go, he said.”

Worthy of note, the last lines in the ADN piece is this: “The personnel investigation began in April 2005, long before Palin became governor and months before her October 2005 announcement that she was running. The investigation into Wooten wrapped up in March 2006, before she was elected. Troopers found four instances in which Wooten violated policy, broke the law, or both.” Should a law enforcement officer who has been found to have violated both policy and law NOT be fired and prosecuted?

What do we notice even about these articles that actually report such important facts? They are usually buried – at the bottom. Why? How many readers actually have the time to read a full article? Not many. Typically, the better and more objective journalist will pack the first paragraph or two with most of the pertinent information and tell the basic story. Then the story is fully elaborated upon throughout the remainder of the article. That way the reader can breeze through many articles and get caught up on events quickly. Even the biased media want you to get as much information as possible; they just make sure you get it the way they want to present it sot hey can shape your opinion before you have finished reading.

Consider how the biased mainstream media attack Governor Palin’s commitment as a mother, suggesting that if she chooses to be a good mother to her children the country will be neglected and if she throws herself into her work as Vice-President, her children will suffer. Consider how they attack all conservatives, suggesting that we have reversed ourselves on some fictitious previously held position that all women should stay at home and raise their children. 

Now that the convention is over, the media are even suggesting there is disunity about the McCain-Palin ticket, and even a GOP conspiracy due to the small number of minority delegates. A CBS News story is subtitled: “Not Much Diversity On The GOP Podium, But McCain Still Hoping To Connect With Minorities.” Still another AP slam-piece is entitled, “Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention.”

All this bias could be plausibly deniable were it not for a 2004 study conducted by the Pew Center for the Public and the Press that looked at journalists and journalistic attitudes that found “that a majority of American journalists say they are liberals. Not surprisingly this has been grist for conservatives because it confirms the impression that journalists are overwhelmingly liberal compared to the public in general.” Really? I bet no one would have guessed such a thing. One NPR piece about the study makes the observation that “the poll never asks about the political leanings of the media owners, publishers and upper management of news organizations. It is arguable that their politics are more influential than their employees in choosing the direction of a news organization.” The study was compiled through interviews with 547 broadcast and print journalists.

To be fair, the Pew study had this to report: “Journalists' own politics are also harder to analyze than people might think. The fact that journalists--especially national journalists--are more likely than in the past to describe themselves as liberal reinforces the findings of the major academic study on this question, namely that of David H. Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit, in their series of books "The American Journalist."

But what does liberal mean to journalists? We would be reluctant to infer too much here. The survey includes just four questions probing journalists' political attitudes, yet the answers to these questions suggest journalists have in mind something other than a classic big government liberalism and something more along the lines of libertarianism. More journalists said they think it is more important for people to be free to pursue their goals without government interference than it is for government to ensure that no one is in need.”

Whatever “liberal” means to journalists, one thing is abundantly clear: one need only compare headlines, or better yet, Google the names of those authors who pen an article deemed biased and see what comes up. In my experience, it is more of the same. 

Is there bias in the mainstream media?  I suppose that is in the eye of the beholder. To be sure, one can easily identify certain liberal or conservative bias given the author or the outfit he or she is writing for. With organizations like The Politico, RealClearPolitics.com, Worldnet Daily, Newsmax, The American Conservative Daily, and the various entities of CNN and Fox News, you pretty much know that you are getting – and whether the slant is either right or left is obvious. It is those journalists who are supposedly objective in their reporting who write the headlines for the like of Reuters, AP and the like who are the most damaging to their profession, for while they may purport objectivity, if you were to cut them open I bet they would bleed blue – or given whom they long to see elected this November, Red. Remember, the Soviet news agency Pravda? Pravda, in Russian, means truth; perhaps the same truth reported to us by our “unbiased” mainstream media?

Michael Moore – where’s he been? –   on Keith Olbermann's show Countdown on MSNBC proclaimed that Hurricane Gustav hitting New Orleans on the eve of the Republican National Convention was for him “proof that there is a God in heaven.” Moor also stooped so low – surprise, surprise – as to join in the unscrupulous rumor-mongering that Palin’s newborn son is actually her Daughter’s and that she covered it up to save face. Moore had written a piece entitled, “Show us the DNA!” posted on his website on Aug 31, but it was gone this morning. Hit this link and look at the postings. They begin today Sept 01 and then jump to Aug 29. No posts for Aug 30 or 31, Mike? Were you eating and forgot that two days went by or something? Oh, silly me – you took down your slanderous posts and baseless accusations when things got to hot! Honest Mike, the True American Patriot is at it again. I’ll bet the movie comes out this summer!

Just like Fox’s Alan Combs who, on his website posted an original slam-piece accusing Gov. Palin of not getting proper prenatal care because she was more concerned with her career, which resulted in her son’s Down syndrome. The link is here, but – surprise again – Combs took down is hit-piece too! These Looney-Lefties are a cowardly bunch, eh?

This whole “cover-up” rumor began with, surprise again! – The Daily Kos blog accusing Palin of covering up true identity of baby Trigg. This story was “uncovered” by a brave blogger named ArcXIX – a person presumably without enough intestinal fortitude to use their real name. You think it could be… Nah!

Next, Former DNC Chairman Don Fowler was caught by an astute passenger when he made a comment to the effect that: “The timing of Gustav demonstrates that God is on our side.” He later tried to apologize – they all do- that he was only making a joking reference to a remark previously made by Jerry Falwell after 9/11. He concluded his apology in typical Progressive fashion by saying, “"One doesn't anticipate that one's private conversation will be surreptitiously taped by some right-wing nutcase," said Fowler. "But that's the nature of what we're dealing with." Once again it appears to be our fault that some fruity liberal said something stupid and got caught. Sorry ‘bout that Don…

Outrageous accusations of misuse of power dubbed Troopergate by the MSM and liberal minions. A political battle that has been ongoing for many months. The trooper in question whom Palin supposedly wants fired has abused the regulations of his department and violated laws about twelve times since 2001. Fire him? How about throw him in jail?