Trump and Clinton 2012: Trump to New Hampshire and Iowa Hitting the right Meetings, Hiring Staff, LA Times Makes Case for Clinton Run

Trump In on 2012 - image New York Post

What are the odds of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton being Top of the Ticket 2012 Candidates? If one is prone to placing a wager now and then, the opportunity exists in several off-shore sports betting websites. For example: Both Trump and Clinton are on the “board” on linesmaker.com with Clinton at a 15/1 and Trump (recently added) at 50/1. Most wagers are going to Sarah Palin who is at 10/1 and Barack Obama who is at 4/5 (the incumbent, one should note, always has the higher odds this early in the game, regardless of actual outcome). What are the odds of the American Public hiring a President who has either a “rock star personality” or has been involved in “entertainment”, appearing on Television shows? Those odds become fairly high, when considering the nation’s history since 1980 vis a vis Barack Obama and one Ronald “Death Valley Days” Reagan.

Therefore, all those pundits who operate out of ivory towers, use charts, or other props, and think Beltway, Beltway; Beltway just may be out of luck this time around. Obviously, rumors are rumors and wishful Monday Morning Quarterbacking is what it is, however, as to the actual who would the U.S. electorate accept (overall), one can bet it will be someone who is easily recognized as a celebrity of sort, someone who is in the spotlight, has been seen by millions of TV viewers and is both loved and hated at the same time. One just has to take a quick look at the GOP hopefuls who are polling at the top of the heap of “those who may step forward”, such as Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin. Although Trump is only recently on the board, he’s in the same position, except for two stunning facts: He is, granted a “celebrity”, but he’s also a businessman with zero ties to traditional politics. That’s points for Trump.

Understanding that last night on the Fox Program “The O’Reilly Factor”, veteran journalist Bernie Goldberg dropped “the Bomb “that Trump is indeed, running for President, and he cited “sources”.

Perhaps they were sources such as New Hampshire’s WMUR, a must read for political junkies everywhere: Back in mid-March of this year, WMUR reported that Trump was heading to the Granite State to attend an all-important “Politics and Egg” Series in June. Further, Trump has reached out to New Hampshire foremost politico in order to “set up meetings” – named in the WMUR “scoop”, one Congressman Charlie Bass. Congressman Bass is a Republican Congressman from the 2nd District, who served 12 terms before being bested by a Democrat in 2006, and was reelected in 2010. How influential is Bass? Bass hails from an influential New Hampshire Political family according to all business.com, noted as The Clinton's or Rockefeller's of New Hampshire.

That aside, Politico noted back in March that Trump was actually looking to hire staff in New Hampshire.

There have been myriad reports on Trumps impending Trip to Iowa, (See this blog.)

Those sources alone would be enough to indicate that Trump is more than “thinking about” entering the 2012 race, he is “exploring”, interviewing staff and laying groundwork.


Will She? Clinton 2012 - image southasiaspeaks wordpress blog

Hillary Clinton’s stock is continuing to rise, as the numbers out on the President continue to plummet, a recent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times bluntly states: Why Clinton Must Run in 2012 and goes on to list the obvious reasons why Hillary must come in and salvage the Democrat Party. The blog, by John Phillips, states the obvious, and what has been obvious to almost every breathing right of extreme left to moderate Democrat that would vote for Clinton in a primary match-up. One need only search this blog for reasons why even a moderate Republican would find Clinton a formidable opponent and ready for “prime time” going back to 2007.

Although it is much less certain that Clinton would enter the race (although there are some valid arguments being med in favor of a Clinton run), Trump looks like a given. If he does not push the rest of the pack (Palin, Romney, Huckabee) to move up their announcement time lines) and begins to poll at least even with the aforementioned, come November of 2011 he’ll be a force that will be difficult to best. The 2012 Presidential Sweepstakes, the best of Reality Television from the GOP Primary to the possible DNC Primary to the General Election.

Anita Dunn - Media Controlled by Obama Campaign/Administration – Was the Media “In the Tank” for the Administration or merely duped? Analysis

Anita "I Control the Media" Dunn, with David Axelrod - image daily life

Within the past few weeks, Obama administration officials have been downplaying the role of the Fox News Organization - from Communications Director Anita Dunn to White House Advisor David Axelrod came comments designed to minimize the role of Fox as a legitimate news organization. Additionally, the administration has refrained from providing guests for Fox News shows, outlining the entire organization as one which is opinion driven rather than actual “news”. Anyone who has ever watched Fox programming understands that certain shows are “opinion driven”, but are presented in that manner, while the news segments, are no more or less different than those on CNN, CBS, or NBC, with one minor difference; anchors on Fox report the news, while opinion is interjected into broadcast from the other networks. (Many of which are not designed to be news networks, rather entertainment networks – CBS, ABC, NBC, while CNN is a straight “news” network with similar programming.) The reason: Fox continually questions the administration, which, apparently, is not the way Anita Dunn views the press – as an independent watchdog for the nation. The brouhaha is discussed here at the Detroit Free Press. This article appeared today.

Repeat: The Detroit Free Press

First one must understand that from the lefts perspective, Fox News, although an independent organization is viewed as being “conservative”, while the majority of journalists are seen as holding a left-of-center ideology. This perspective, pushed by the administration and organizations such as the DNC and George Sorros’ Moveon.org, is an attempt to dismiss a point of view contrary to their own, specifically when it comes to the networks pure opinion segments.
When reading the Detroit Free Press Article, one sees the “disdain” for Fox; however, one sees something highly unusual, a defense of the organization – unheard of until recently.

Another article in the Chicago Sun Times which appeared yesterday, is the most scathing attack on the U.S. Media and the administration seen to date. Entitled: “Excuses wearing thin for Obama, media pals”, the piece by Steve Huntley questions why, on so many occasions, has the press not investigated certain aspects of the Obama administrations and goes on to name names, demeaning MSNBC and CNN, as being virtual mouthpieces for the administration. (Note: The Sun Times, has, to date, the best record as far as pieces questioning the administration – which may be why their on-line poll, gives the Obama Presidency such low grades - see screenshot)

Chicago Sun Times On-Line Poll - Obama Approval with Article on Media

What has caused this sudden backlash (two articles – so far), against certain media organizations and the White House by, what one might call, sister organizations?
The knowledge that those who work for and in the news organizations have been duped, used and manipulated by the Obama Campaign and administration, which had previously been held to such high esteem.

In a video that surfaced recently, White House Communications Director, Anita Dunn, while attending a conference on January 12, 2009, laid out how the campaign, and consequently the administration controlled an otherwise witless media. A partial abridged transcript of the video follows, with the complete video, (for verification) which by now, has been seen by a certain percentage of the press that, from what can be surmised by the first salvo of articles today, is none too happy with being “witless servants” of a political campaign, versus, “willing accomplices” as was previously believed by a majority of the nation.

One has to wonder, why it took so long for these journalist to investigate and discover the intent and manipulation of “Team Obama” – understanding that the definitive distrust of the previous administration, by the media, was so engrained, that those journalists, momentarily forgot that their job was to act as a watchdog and report, regardless of the findings; so much did they long to believe in what the media itself, was guilty of perpetuating, the evil of Conservatism versus the good of a progressive candidate who would be President. They were, in simple terms, in denial.

Denial, however, can only last so long, when evidence of being a “useful tool” is brought to light – it is just a question now of which one what is known as the “mainstream media” saw this first. One has to believe it was someone connected with the NBC program “Saturday Night Live”. Although a comedy skit show, the focus on the political has been prevalent for the past 30 years, and often the parodies are predictive (See Ford and Nixon walking hand and hand on SNL before the election that saw, Jimmy Carter enter the White House). It is a part and parcel of American culture, a blend of entertainment and politics.

Now the question is how will the media respond in the coming weeks? Will they continue to deny the fact that they were used by the administration, or will they now stand up and fight for the profession they chose? It is the media that should, regardless of political party, report upon and disclose information regarding both policy and politician in pointed fact, so that the populace may actually receive news (see FOX), and where opinion is printed (or broadcast), note it as such (again see FOX).

Transcription in part of Anita Dunn – on the Obama Campaign Controlling the Press
From: The Movement for Change: Barack Obama Campaign. Part 8 Anita Dunn and Ben Self Auditorio Fundación Global Democracia y Desarrollo January 12, 2009

“We had people assigned to us, after having one too many emails that his candidate and his wife said, isn’t there something more we can do – we had obviously a large department to deal with the traditional media of the united states – and given the international interested in this election, we had a huge press corp to deal with - but the reality a huge part of our press strategy was making the media cover what he was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it what the tactic was – we had a huge premium both on message discipline on people on the camping in leaking to reporters or discussing our strategy or cover what we were saying. Making the Press Cover What we wanted “to get the Message Out without having to actually talk to reporters – so it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlling it. Very rarely did we communicate to the press what we did not absolutely we could control.”

Whatever happened to Truth in Advertising? Barney Frank ‘s New Campaign Commercial

Barney Frank, the Congressman responsible for the destruction of our financial systems (see Freddie, Fannie and the host of Frank Pals that pushed our system over the ledge), is up for re-election. Frank has gotten a bit of press in the Bay State the past few months, most of it positive from the Globe and like-minded outlets; however, judging by the hundreds of comments which accompany each article, the people just aren’t buying it. Now Frank comes out with this commercial blaming Fox News and the Republican’s for the entire mess and further, insists that he is the one that will be able to save the day. This one is worth watching for the laughs.

Hillary Clinton Fox Interview Part II

photo from Virginia Federalist

Hillary Clinton continued her interview with Fox News, Bill O’Reilly last night. Her take on foreign policy, vis a vis Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Iraq, the issue of water boarding and torture in general and the issue of illegal immigration were moderate, not too left, not too right and again, consistent with her voting record in the Senate. Once again, she stood her ground and came across as sincere, knowledgeable and, most importantly, tough on issues. (Granted, some might argue not tough enough). She did make a convincing case for all three issues.

Fox News Video

It now comes down to the following: as voters, and the public in general, have to make a decision that will affect the lives of middle America more than any other segment of the population this November, which candidate from either party would make one most comfortable leading the nation forward. This has nothing to do with party affiliation, rather, experience, policy and a persona that would lend to the credibility of the nation overall. There appear, as of this moment, to be two that stand out - Senator McCain and Senator Clinton. In conversations, both allow for some level of comfort, as both are similar in their previous voting patterns. The lack of experience, and the recent remarks regarding Middle America that Barrack Obama has displayed, render that candidate unacceptable to moderates and conservatives on any level.

Of course, the obligatory race and gender discussions followed the interview. O’Reilly was guilty of noting that he treated a woman differently than a man, during the interview process, which, from this perspective is one of the most appalling remarks that could have been made. That and a discussion on the Senators wardrobe, made this conservative feminist balk. All network news programs, both cable and mainstream, have been guilty of this nonsense. Not one anchor, male or female, has commented on the other two male candidate’s wardrobes. Why take away from a brilliant interview (and it was), with stupid fluff questions? Good question.

Now sitting firmly on the fence, McCain interviews next Thursday evening. It is hoped that he will be honest and forthcoming about his stance on the issues, and not play to the “base”. It is where McCain can make the case for his candidacy.

Although certainly an underdog by press standard, Hillary Clinton’s rise in the polls over the past week, indicate that “it’s not over, till it’s over”. She’s within the margin of error in North Carolina and leading in Indiana. It is my hope that she will be successful in both states and go on to secure the nomination of her party. This will allow the American people a chance to be led by one of two moderates, not an ideologue with zip for experience. Just an aside, she appeared more Regeanlike in this interview segment, than any Republican candidate, with the exception of Mike Huckabee, who remains the only true conservative to have run in the race.

What made Mike special is his ability to reach out to both parties, despite the constant drumbeat from the media that he was basically a one-dimensional candidate, stressing the fact that he was a pastor and failing to mention that his true calling was politics and he had successfully led the state of Arkansas into the 21st century. The right wing turned its efforts to downgrading Mike Huckabee, simply because he could and would work with both parties, and of course, he may not have been “elite” enough by the core group standards. His endorsement of McCain came as no surprise, and as Mike Huckabee is generally known for his character, one can assume that McCain is a man of integrity, regardless of the fact that he is less conservative on issues that are at the heart and soul of the base.

Hillary Clinton, John McCain – it would be a very close race, granted, but again, an opportunity for the country to be led by a more moderate and experienced president.

The Case for Hillary Clinton’s Candidacy

One Interview and her stock rose significantly

Hillary Clinton appeared on Fox’s Bill O’Reilly “No Spin Zone” in a two-part interview which began last night. In a word, she was brilliant. Almost Maggie Thatcher like. This fact was not lost on the pundits who spent a total of 5 minutes discussing her performance before they turned to the typical Obama rant. A quick check of conservative points of view immediately following the interview resulted in one question: Why do both conservatives and the left hate Hillary Clinton?

The possible answer is that, despite her playing to a hard-core base (nothing more or less than John McCain has done), she appeared to be the strongest moderate candidate out of a field of three. Bill O’Reilly asked policy questions, and she more than held her ground with her answers. Of particular interest were her responses to questions on taxation, her vision of universal health care and the energy question, all important issues to that middle of the economic scale, working class Americans who are paying both at the pump and through payroll deductions. She came across as sincere in her beliefs and additionally, from an historical standpoint, did not move an inch on her perspective of each issue. Although one might not agree, in totality, with her perspective, she made a credible case. From this point of view, she has moved from 2nd choice to first choice at the voting both. Both parties, Republican and Democrat should take notice, along with an overly obsessed, agenda driven media. It is difficult to comprehend how an Obama candidacy could possibly beat a McCain ticket; however, it is not difficult to imagine Clinton winning in November over McCain. A Clinton candidacy gives the RNC and the 501’s little ammunition, besides the same old baggage that, as Clinton made a point, they have already rummaged through. The same cannot be said of an Obama candidacy. Should Clinton succeed, and it is not impossible at this point, in securing her party’s nomination, the focus will be on running mates. In order to overcome his lackluster personality, McCain must choose someone who can appeal to those on the right that have suspicions about McCain’s conservative credentials (myself included), choosing someone like Mitt Romney, would not serve the senator. Should Clinton, as the CNN and MSNBC pundits have been proposing, choose Obama as a running mate, it would spell disaster for her campaign. Although the argument has been made that the VP slot is not all that important, one can counter-argue this election cycle that it would be critical to choose the right running mate for both aforementioned candidates. With McCain, the age factor will be a focus, and the running mate will be vetted, perhaps more intensely than the candidate. With Clinton, the overtly left-leaning Obama would drag her down - the RNC has already run ads attacking DNC candidates for their association with Obama, a Joe Biden would make for a measured ticket that would appeal to those of us sitting firmly in the middle of the road. From this perspective, the only way a McCain vote would sit well, would be if he chose a man of character as his running mate, a Mike Huckabee would bring the more conservative values voters to the polls, while McCain would appeal to those on the left and independents.


On the media's coverage of the interview, the focus was all about Obama. The one clip that was played incessantly was Clinton’s response to questions regarding Rev. Jeremiah Wright. CNN used this clip as an opportunity to show that Clinton had moved past the controversy and was ready to talk about policy, as was Obama. Michelle Obama, on CNN, made her plea to move past the Wright issues and focus on her husbands policy. Fox also shifted gears to focus on Obama and the Wright controversy, from Hannity and Colms through “On the Record, the same clip was played, the same questions asked. To this moderate, enough is enough. Obama is responsible for his own mistakes, and misstatements, not his association with some crack pot, egotistical, left-wing lunatic. The press - they get that. It has therefore, come down to a question of who is most electable and who is most credible. One question that value voters are now pondering is this: “How does Hillary Clinton personally feel about the all important issue of abortion?” Should she answer that question, again from a personal perspective that notes she personally does not agree, it would go towards character, and play well with those of us who are more conservative when it comes to values issues. It should be noted that in discussions, her advocacy and love of children, has been discussed as an admirable attribute in a presidential candidate.

The balance of the interview will be broadcast tonight at 8:00.

Articles on the Web:

From ABC: Hillary's Dream Date

From CNN: Michelle Obama, Let's Move Past Wright

From Fox News: Clinton Say Obama Made the Right Move by Codemming Wright

From Boston Globe: Obama walks fine line in quest for white votes (note: 1 Clinton article to three Obama articles

From New York Times A Strained Wright-Obama Bond Finally Snaps

Jimmy Cater plans unsanctioned meeting with Hamas Leader

(When you thought a former president could sink no lower)

photo from NYT Paul Conners(AP)

Once again, former President Jimmy Carter is meddling in U.S. Foreign policy. Should there be an enemy of the United States or our ally, Israel, one can bet the house that Carter will travel to that country or dictator or terrorist group, speak magnanimously of the same, denounce the US and Israel and of course, pose for as many photographs as Reuters and the Associated Press can handle.

Historically, the man has been on the wrong side of foreign policy from the moment he backed the return of the Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran, and everyone knows how well that turned out.

Al Jezeera is, of course, thrilled with the visit. A video report on the impending visit is shown on the homepage, with links to Al Jazeera’s YouTube page (an interesting spot in itself)



Fox News is reporting that the State Department has confirmed Mr. Carter’s visit to Syria is unsanctioned.

(Fox Report here)

While World Net Daily is confirming the plans of that doddering old fool (opinion).
Hamas Confirms Plans to meet with Jimmy Carter

To sum it up, I find I am increasingly annoyed, but not surprised that this egotistical, progressive saint is able to continue to drum up press for his progressive ideals which include a hefty does of anti-American and Anti-Semitic policy.

The Arabic Al Jezeera website has a Carter replacement at the ready. Presidential hopeful Barack Obama (Carter's twin) is featured prominently on the Arabic Language website. (Including a full profile from birth to present). In an article today regarding General Patreaus’s report on the Iraqi Surge, Al Jezeera describes Barack (Jimmy Carter) Obama’s posturing before the general: The translation notes: (aalmtrsh) democratic for the elections presidential American faithful your “awbaamaa” the sitting called in first for the listening to “diplomatic momentum” in dealing with the crisis Iraq dialogist of Iran includes…..”

It is only fair to note that this translation service will miss a word here and there, and some of the context might be lost, that said, all press, is giving Mr. Obama a pass and from an historical perspective, the same pass was given to one former preacher, peanut farmer from Georgia who went on to become our 39th president with disastrous results.