Showing posts with label john kerry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label john kerry. Show all posts

Friday, April 12, 2013

North Korean Believed to Be Nuclear Capable – Concerns Regarding Stability of Young Dictator – Upping the Ante in a Game of Nuclear Chicken





The Atomic Bomb dropped on Nagasaki, as horrifying as this event was in terms of loss of life, it is not comparable to the capabilities of these weapons today - image from atomcentral.com

The New York Times is Reporting that the North Korean’s may have nuclear missile capability, based on U.S. intelligence estimates. It is suggested that although capable of attaching a nuclear warhead to a ballistic missile, the reliability would be “low and there are doubts that the weapon would detonate on the right target. Apparently, the information was given to the Administration and members of Congress yesterday.

Reuters has a somewhat different take on the development noting that the Pentagon’s report of a nuclear capable North Korea, is being dismissed by “U.S. Officials” and South Korea, where it is believed war is not “eminent”. In addition, it was there is the capability, yet, “Washington's greatest concern, the official said, was the possibility of unexpected developments linked to the inexperience of North Korea's 30-year-old leader, Kim Jong-un. "Kim Jong-un's youth and inexperience make him very vulnerable to miscalculation. Our greatest concern is a miscalculation and where that may lead," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”

Meanwhile, Secretary of State John Kerry, is on his way to South Korea and China to request the Chinese add a bit of muscle to the game, and take a “tough stance” against their protégé and neighbor, North Korea.

The North Korean’s, are apparently undaunted by the hand that feeds them (China), as footage by the Guardian, UK, shows North Korean’s troops carrying out drills on the Chinese Border.
It is, without question, time for less “tough stances” and “veiled threats” from those opponents of the North Korean’s, and turning to a more visible show of force, along with the methods already deployed by several nations used to hopefully deflect a nuclear warhead, mounted on a missile. This game of chicken that is being played out by the North Korean Regime under “Mini-me, Un” is starting to look like less of a game. What if strongly worded condemnations by the U.S., the UN and all the weight that body carries, wont’ do the trick. What happens if the new Chinese leadership fails to deliver a message that is not quite strongly worded enough? What if, the current leader, inexperience aside, might not give a whit about what havoc he may cause in the name of his obviously gigantic ego? If one looks at the barbaric North Korean’s lifestyle, one might begin to understand that there is little compassion, or common sense involved in that nation which we now find, has nuclear capability.

The UK Mirror obtained images and videos (here) of life in North Korea, and specifically the treatment of children, and those the regime controls as slaves. Political prisoners (or those who have family members how may oppose, or may have escaped to South Korea (China at one point, returned them to a certain death, that may have stopped with the new administration.) It is common in North Korean, should an individual commit a crime against the “government” to take every relative , down to distant cousins, and put them labor camps. The photographs are chilling – and leads on to believe a nation capable of committing crimes against its citizens, for decades, (albeit given strongly worded condemnation), might not care if it lobs a nuclear capable missile at – pick a neighbor. The Wall Street Journal offers this list of options for the North Koreans to launch:

  • vKN-01: Short-range anti-ship cruise missile. Range estimated at 160 kilometers. Believed to be an improved version of the Soviet Termit missile.


  • KN-02: Short-range, solid-fueled, highly accurate mobile missile. Modified copy of the Soviet OTR-21; unknown number in service. Believed to have been deployed in the late 1990s or early 2000s.


  • Hwasong-5 (Scud-B): Initial Scud modification. Short-range, road-mobile, liquid-fueled. Estimated range of 300 kilometers (can reach throughout South Korea), and capable of delivering a 1,000-kilogram payload. Tested successfully. It’s believed 150 to 200 units have been deployed on mobile launchers. Delivered to Iran for Iraq-Iran war.


  • Hwasong-6 (Scud-C): Later Scud modification. Increased range of 500 kilometers and smaller payload of 700 to 800 kilograms. Said to be the most widely deployed missile, with at least 400 units in service.

  • Rodong-1/-2: Midange missile with an estimated range of about 1,300 kilometers and payload of 700 kilograms; capable of reaching across Japan; presumed capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.


  • *Musudan: Road-mobile missile that physically resembles a 1960s-era Soviet submarine missile called the SS-N-6. Estimated range of 3,000 to 4,000 kilometers, with a payload of 650 kilograms, so capable of direct strikes on South Korea, Japan and Guam—putting U.S. military bases at risk. Reports of its existence first appeared in the Western press in the mid-2000s, and the world outside North Korea got its first good look in 2010, when Musudans rolled in a military parade in Pyongyang. No test-firing yet.


  • Taepodong-2: Multistage missile, believed to be a potential intercontinental ballistic missile with possible strategic capability against continental U.S. Estimated range of more than 6,700 kilometers. Still in development stage. No test-firing yet.


  • Intercontinental ballistic missiles: The possibility of North Korea’s developing an ICBM capable of delivering a chemical, biological, or nuclear warhead to the U.S. continent remains a grave concern. Given repeated test failures, most missile experts believe Pyongyang is far from achieving this goal. A year ago North Korea displayed a new long-range missile, the KN-08, that some experts believe may be part of an ICBM development process. Others suspect it’s a fake.


  • Therefore, what we know is that the North Korean’s can drop a nuclear weapon on South Korea and Japan, they may have a missile capable of reaching Guam and U.S. bases, and they also “may have” missiles capable of reaching into the United Sates. However, the later is suggested to either be in development or even possibly a fabrication. That said, until yesterday, it was also suggested that the North Korean’s did not have the capability to go nuclear.

    The question remains, in this crazy politically correct world, where the reliance on diplomacy is the first order, and should that fail, there really does not appear to be a second option. Unless it is the direct threat of the U.S. or one of the allies (including China) of attempting to out-crazy the young North Korean Leader. Either way, previous to the briefing to the Administration and the Congress, it appeared North Korea was all bluff and bluster, and it may well remain that way. In a perfect world, a nation that starves its children and its people, has no wherewithal to turn on the electricity at night, may just not have the wherewithal to put together a functional nuclear weapon. Perhaps that is more likely the case, and the bluff and bluster is what it is, a child looking for attention and approval from its peers. That is what we can pray for, as the alterative would be unimaginable. Although it is known that globally nuclear tests are performed, a nuclear strike by North Korea on another nation, would have the effect of retaliation, and once Pandora’s box is open, the earth as we know it would be changed.

    Having grown up in an error where school children were taught to “duck and cover” under a school desk in the event of an Atomic Bomb being dropped on the U.S., the memory of bomb shelters in every home, and the level of preparedness (which would have been inadequate in any case), by the populace then, compared to now, is somewhat unnerving. It is not so much the fact that a nuclear missile is even likely to strike the U.S.; it is the fact that anyone, regardless of how insane, might consider lobbing one in the direction of a neighbor, no matter which corner of our globe, is truly horrific.

    Thursday, March 14, 2013

    Massachusetts Special Senate Election Update – Gomez, Sullivan, Winslow – first debate. Gomez Releases Letter to Governor – All Hades Breaks Loose





    Mass Special Election GOP Candidates during Debate - image Boston Globe

    The Massachusetts Special Election primary to fill the vacant U.S. Senate seat (John Kerry), will take place this April, with both major political parties offering choices of 2 to 3 candidates in a closed primary. One is only able to vote in the primary if one is unenrolled and declares a party, or one is registered as either a Republican or Democrat. The Democrats have offered up two U.S. Congressmen, Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch. While the Republican race offers three; Dan Winslow, (State Representative), Michael Sullivan (former U.S. Attorney) and Gabriel Gomez (political neophyte). The three Republican’s met in a debate on Tuesday where the issues of the day were discussed, along with trivial, humanizing questions such as a favorite junk food. (NECN - video)

    During the debate, the subject of a letter written by Gomez to Governor Deval Patrick, asking the Governor to consider Gomez for an interim replacement to fill the Senate seat until the election took place, has apparently become somewhat of a sticking point. Gomez vowed to release the letter to the public during the debate (Boston Herald). The contents of the letter were summarily touted by the by the Boston Globe as Gomez reaching across the aisle They also included a handy PDF which can be downloaded and shared here.

    In the letter, Gomez informs the Governor that he is a “moderate” Republican, one who supported Barack Obama in 2008, and also is supportive of the Presidents Gun Ban as well as his Immigration Reform policies. In a nutshell, while on the campaign trail, it appears that Gomez, is much like Kerry in his ability to “flip-flop” on issues, as noted in several GOP activist emails flying through cyberspace (with the PDF attached.)

    Understanding that the actual Massachusetts GOP is diverse, made up of those moderates, those country club Republican’s, those Libertarian, those Right-wing Conservatives and yes, Tea Party Members, one might have burned that letter and taken back all copies before releasing it prior to a primary.

    On the flip side, Gomez, a father of four, may have had a reaction to the sudden screaming for Banning Guns by those who legally own them (i.e. the 2nd Amendment), or he may have been attempting to jump ahead of the curve, by sounding like a progressive Democrat (i.e. extreme moderate), in order to stand a chance of getting into a position without the need for a primary. The previous is, of course, sheer speculation.

    In any event, the race, as it stands, appears to be exciting the national media, and of course, the state media, as Lynch and Markey are about as exciting as watching paint dry. One might want to take early bets on either Winslow or Sullivan to pull out of this primary, to face either (most likely) Markey or Lynch in what will be the most boring election in Massachusetts history. Gomez, at least garnered some excitement, given his youth and compelling story, and may have given either of the two Bay State Congressmen a run for their money, however, that may be less likely at this point.

    With approximately a month before the primary, the situation may change, and Gomez may be “forgiven” his stance on gun control. However, one must remember, in the land of Smith & Wesson, in a state that is seeing an increase in a call for new gun permits, and a lack of supplies at area gun shops, it may have behooved the political newcomer to choose another topic in an attempt to ingratiate himself with the Governor.

    Tuesday, January 29, 2013

    MA - Deval Patrick to Announce Kerry Senate Replacement on MSNBC – Last Word - Replacement to be “out-of-the-box”





    The Next Interim U.S.Senator from MA? Patrick will announce today. - Image: journalism.nyu.edu Governor Deval Patrick will announce his choice of interim U.S. Senate Replacement today. He will go on to discuss the weighty decision in of all venues, MSNBC’s “The Last Word”:

    From Twitter:
    Thursday at 10pm ET, @MassGovernorDeval Patrick joins @Lawrence to discuss who will temporarily fill John Kerry's Senate seat. @msnbc



    Patrick, according to the Boston Herald, will choose a replacement that is “out-of-the-box”, bringing up names of political insiders, who are normally behind the scene, rather than those who are begging for the seat (See Barney Frank). The bet is that whoever the choice might be will be calculated to help the Governor and his legacy – possibly towards a run at the oval office in 2016, although that is possible, it is highly improbable in light of the Progressive push for Elizabeth Warren to be the next Barack Obama.

    Kerry should be easily confirmed as the next Secretary of State, a position he has coveted for some time. The anti-war movements, second best icon next to Jane Fonda, will be easily confirmed in the U.S. Senate. The Replacement will be in place until the Massachusetts Special Election which will be held in June, on the 25th. There will also be a primary, that date has been set for April 30. (Fox-Boston) To date, only one individual has thrown their hat into the political ring, U.S. Congressman, Ed Markey.

    Although the MSM is suggesting that former Senator Scott Brown might run in the special election, better odds are on Brown running for the Governor’s office in 2014. That said, Brown might run against Markey in the special election, and forgo running in the 2014 Senate Election, in favor of the Commonwealth’s top job. Try as anyone might, there has been zero inference from Brown as to his plans at this point. The aforementioned is pure speculation by the media.

    As to the MSNBC announcement by Patrick, that does put Patrick on a national stage (of sorts), chock full of progressive stalwarts, and sending a message to the national “base” that Patrick is serious about a run. This after Hillary Clinton supporters have launched a “Super PAC” for a run in 2016. One might speculate that with Clinton’s health questionable, and the beating she took by a hostile press in the 2008 run for the Presidency, not to mention the use of “super delegates” to push Barack Obama to the nomination (in spite of the popular vote in the primary going to Clinton), she might reconsider. Either way, it is a long way from 2016, and the conventional wisdom is that whomever runs the Progressives in the Democrat Party, will make the ultimate decision as to whom “they” want to be the next “Obama”.

    As to the interim Senate Replacement – bet on a “safe” choice and a political insider – sorry Barney!

    Thursday, January 20, 2011

    Richard Neal (D-MA2) – Up for Reelection in 2012 - From No News During 2010 Mid-Terms to Media Spotlight – Neal Kicks it Up A Notch. What Gives?


    Congressman Richard Neal (D-MA2), photograph: Politico via AP


    During the 2010 Election, Google Alerts and/or news of the Congressional Representative from the Massachusetts Second District appeared to be almost non-existent, one could Bing, Ask, or even"Scrub the Web, and come up short of mention, news or comment. It was as if Neal was caught in an almost virtual “news blackout” – rather unusual for a Congressman who was vying for the top slot on the House Ways and Means Committee. This was up until the results of the 2010 Election dropped all high-profile Democrats in Congress off a rather lofty perch. Neal’s method of campaigning also changed in 2010, from a once every two year postcard to constituents warning about the evils of Republicans, to actual campaign stops surrounded by local elected officials at nursing homes and Smith College. Neal was more visible in the Western Massachusetts district than he had been in decades, but still it was limited and somewhat sparse coverage.

    Now, Richard Neal appears to be everywhere in the local and national news, (clearly bypassing Google alerts for one Mitt Romney) – although one might look at the fact that Massachusetts is set to lose a Congressional Seat with the release of the 21010 census, it is doubtful, from a logistics standpoint, that either Neal or John Olver (MA1) would be in danger of losing a seat although that has been cause for some speculation from the East of the Bay State media. It would, in all likelihood, in this Democrat controlled state, with most district Representatives being quite visible in Congressional circles, with a few exceptions, it is one those few exceptions that will, in all likelihood be merged into another district, the most likely being the 10th merging with the 4th (or one might argue, the most sensible.)

    One has to wonder, therefore, what gives with Neal – the 2010 elation was a lot closer than he would have been comfortable with, and he may be gearing up for 2012, where, in all likelihood, he will face opposition from a center right Republican. It may be that Neal has realized that being out of the spotlight gave the opposition ammunition, and as that 75% win margin predicted by the New York Times in 2010 failed to materialize, it is time to get out and talk to the “folks”, or at least the media, while sending out constituent post cards, far more frequently than in an election year.

    A recent media roundup for Congressman Richard Neal (D-MA2) follows:
    ”Western Massachusetts organizations get $2.6 million for homeless, mentally ill” an article from January 19th, crediting Neal with ‘Bringing Home the Bacon” (Springfield Republican)
    ”Life sciences push focus of conference” an article from January 17th, announcing Neal as a speaker at a symposium at Smith College to further development of a Life Sciences Industry in the Western Part of the State. (Springfield Republican
    January 15th, Neal Attends a MLK Scholarship Breakfast(CBS Local News)
    January 11th, in the wake of the Tucson Tragedy:

    Congressman Richard Neal and Senator Scott Brown were both in Springfield Monday and spoke publicly about the tragic shooting. "I'm not going to change my schedule or the manner in which I meet people, I can tell you that," said Neal (D-Springfield). (NBC Local News)"

    There are 4,295 news articles which include or mention Neal on the Repeal of Health Care Legislation, the most recent: from NPR: January 19th, “House Moves Towards Health Law Repeal Vote, includes remarks made on the floor by: Richard Neal
    The Boston Globe, January 17th ”Some in Congress look at incentives in disability benefit” The article, on the “abuse” of Social Security Benefits and the rise in Children who are diagnosed as having behavioral issues, being added to the SSI roles, showcases Neal in his quest to end the abuse:

    Neal, a Springfield Democrat, said he has been talking about children’s SSI with lawmakers in both parties, including Dave Camp, a Republican from Michigan who now chairs the House Ways and Means Committee. Neal said he also met with Michael Astrue, commissioner of the Social Security Administration, and said Astrue expressed concern about the issues raised in the Globe series.


    January 19th, the Hill Blog”Democrat Slots on Ways and Means Announced” Neal is set to serve as a ranking member of that committee.

    The list goes on and on, when previously weeks might go by without a mention!

    Therefore, either Congressman Neal is now determined to be in the spotlight ahead of the 2012 general election, but one might want to ask, given the statewide and national scope of most of the articles, and specifically the number of articles coming out of Boston, for which office?

    It may not, in retrospect, have anything to do with either redistricting or Neal seeking reelection or a higher office; it may have to do with Neal doing his job in a highly unusually visible manner. It is always of interest with a leopard, so to speak, appears to change its spots, so speculation naturally, occurs. The only offices higher in the grander scheme of things are one Senate Seat (Brown (R-MA) and Kerry (D-MA), the later with lower numbers in approval that one Scott Brown from Wrentham, but then again, closely aligned with Neal. The other office, of course, is the Presidency – is that unthinkable – hardly – recall Calvin Coolidge, the allegedly last Republican from Northampton.

    Therefore, in the interest of the MA Hampden Second District having a Congressional Leader in the spotlight for, again, the first time in decades, a quote of the week is in order – and it is a doozy.

    On the Health Care Repeal Vote: (The Boston Globe)

    “This legislation is modeled after a modest, market-driven proposal offered by that left-winger, Mitt Romney,” said Representative Richard E. Neal, a Springfield Democrat. “But what do we hear? The usual scare tactics.”


    This particular quote was chosen due to Neal a) reminding a nation of Republican’s that alleged 2012 GOP Presidential Front-Runner (depends on the polls), Mitt Romney, was responsible for Universal Health Care, and b) giving some “blue meat’ to his own party – Progressive Democrats. Two birds, one stone, one quote.

    Thursday, December 16, 2010

    Massive Federal Budget Bill – MA Democrats Scramble for Earmarks – Scott Brown (R-MA) name erroneously placed on earmark request!

    The 1900 plus page budget for the United States Government is now available for viewing online HERE . Included in the budget are billions in earmarks for a variety of projects that, depending upon ones point of view, might be shelved – permanently. The earmarks are so extensive that separate tables are available for public viewing by department. The Financial Services Earmark Chart at http://apprpriations.senate.gov/news (here) includes 5 pages in small type by line item and Congressional Representative requests or “earmarks”. There is also an 11 page Agriculatural Earmark Chart (here), a 29 page table on each spending item requested by each Senator and/or Congressman (here). (and multiple tables follow) The later, includes a mere $600,000 request from Barney Frank (D-MA) and John Kerry (D-MA) to study scallops. The Bill, from start to finish is peppered with two words in particular: research and salaries. The sheer size and scope of the Government can only be appreciated when one does a search for “salaries” in this document. For example: (from the Bill text) “ For salaries and expenses of the House of Representatives, $1,371,172,000” – one might ask does the Citizen legislature seriously require 1.3 Billion dollars for salaries? Of course, compared to the balance of the budget, that may be considered “chump change”.


    Understanding why the Massachusetts Congressional Representatives and one Senator (Kerry) might not understand the publics distaste for Earmarks (otherwise known as wasteful and/or unnecessary spending) due to their keeping their jobs in 2010 (by the skin of their teeth and a lot of help from “Dream Act” voters). They are clearly deluded into thinking that Massachusetts ever shrinking pool of taxpayers actually supports the process. There is clearly no excuse for those in the 111th Congress who did not lose their jobs in the mid-terms and are (including the Massachusetts Congressional Reps) all up for reelection in two short years, to so clearly ignore the general public in the waning hours of the Democrat Controlled 111th Congress by loading the next budget (late as it may be) up to the hilt with unnecessary spending.

    The lone Republican in the Massachusetts mix, Senator Scott Brown (MA-R), had his name erronealy attached to a pork spending project by an appropriations committee aid. He requested it be removed. (Boston Globe) Brown is clearly aware that the election in 2012 depends upon his (and any other Congressional Representative or Senator) paring down the budget, not adding “junk” items, or items that are clearly unnecessary. Apparently the balance of the Democrats and some Republicans in both houses don’t understand what happened on the 2nd of November 2010, of course, a good percentage of those that do not, were not faced with an electorate, and will not, again, be up for reelection until 2012.

    Some of the projects deemed worthy by Boston Globe Standards include the following: $8 million for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute which, as noted by the Globe has already received 30 plus million in public funding There is also a $600,000 grant to research scallop fishing stock in New England. It is difficult to fathom, that while those taxpayers who are struggling to get by, watch $600,000 go to a University in order to study scallops, which, at $13.00 per pound in most grocery stores, is out of reach to the average household. As to the legacy of Edward M. Kennedy and an institute in Washington DC receiving any funding, let alone an additional $8 million, is purely frivolous.

    In total the Massachusetts Democrat Delegation had requested 576 earmarks worth $1.4 billion which was “narrowed down in committee to merely 174 earmarks worth $213.4 million. (Boston Globe)
    Therefore, as the 111th Congress, controlled by the Democrats, continues to throw away taxpayers dollars until the last hour of their tenure, it is hoped that those incoming Republican’s will do the job they were sent to D.C. to do, and reign in this nonsense. Incoming Speaker of the House, John Boehner has promised weekly spending cuts. As to all the Congressional Representatives and Senators who are looking to 2012, understand that the issue of being fiscally responsible will directly impact ones chances of reelection regardless of Political Party Affiliation.

    Best quote from a MA Congressional Representative in the Globe article goes to Richard Neal (who lost his bid to Sander Levin of MI to become the ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee)


    Representative Richard Neal, the Springfield Democrat, said yesterday that the earmarks for Massachusetts in the bill support jobs and would be helpful to the state’s economy.
    “What’s missing in this discussion about earmarks,’’ said Neal, is that attempts to ban them “would transfer spending authority from Congress to the White House. I have always resisted anything that weakens congressional authority. I like to say, ‘You can get a meeting with your congressman. Try getting a meeting with the president.’ ’’


    One might suggest to Congressman Neal, that is what’s missing from his fallacious argument is the fact that earmarks are a rather recent addition to the budget process and have nothing to do with taking away or giving any powers to the Executive Branch (which does have the power of line-item veto) as it stands.
    Kudos to Scott Brown for not requesting any earmarks.

    Monday, November 15, 2010

    Washington Post Op-Ed – Obama Should Not Seek Reelection in 2012 – Who’s To Blame for Obama’s Woes


    John Kerry, one of the first to endorse Barack Obama, also was instrumental in the making of Obama's Presidency - image Washington Post

    An editorial written by Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen suggests that President Barack Obama should not seek reelection in 2012, instead using the time to focus on cutting the deficit and eliminating entitlements “without constantly worrying about the reactions of senior citizens, lobbyists and unions.” The criticism has been coming from the two aforementioned for some time, with piece in the Wall Street Journal this past July entitled “Our Divisive President”. Both men, long-time Democrat pollsters, are understandably frustrated after the historic gains made by Republicans in the 2010 mid-terms, and begin the op-ed piece by citing Obamaisms over the past month; from his calling Republicans “enemies” during an interview with an Hispanic radio personality, to his remark about making “mid-term corrections” to the possibility of “working with Republicans”, the two pundits bring home the nature of the President who would prefer to campaign than govern. In addition, while calling on Obama to Step aside, they do so insinuating that he would have a chance to become, historically, a well-respected, President. With all due respect to these august pundits, that ploy is as transparent as dangling a carrot on a stick in front of a rabbit.

    Is it fair, to ask the President to step aside for the good of his party? The fact that Barack Obama was propelled to the Office of the Presidency with little experience outside of campaigning should have been worrisome to these pollsters and pundits who now are heavily criticizing the man. The fact that overwhelmingly a group of top Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi during the Democrat Convention in 2008 propped up Obama over Clinton with the use of Super Delegate votes should have been an issue. Although to be sure, the media has played its part in propping up the community organizer, turned three term Illinois State Senator (after the loss of a Congressional Race), turned part-term Senator, turned President with lighting speed, who else is to blame but those who put him in the limelight in the first place?

    John Kerry, (D-MA) brought the young Illinois State Senator, to the 2004 Democrat convention the year Kerry ran against George W. Bush, Obama took the convention by storm. It could have been the comparison between the candidate for President, Kerry, and the young, energetic, Barack Obama, that got those in a position and desperate to take back the White House at any cost, begin to think that Obama would fit the mold. The problem with American politics and the notion of a President being more popular than capable has been the bane of the Democrats, with a few glaring exceptions, since the 1930’s, with Republican candidates that win or lose, being the exact opposite of the “almost “rock star” status that those who run on the Democrat ticket (or are brought to the ticket)
    exude.

    It takes a national crisis, or the economy in tatters, for a Republican to gain the White House and that is regardless of how well-spoken or photogenic the individual may be. Veteran Democrat pollsters and politicos’ surely see 2012 as being yet another nightmare for the Democrats, with more Senate Seats to Defend in 2012, as well as the potential for further losses in the Congress - there appears to be only one solution – take out the figurehead, the President who is also the Head of the Democrat Party (in title only). That still leaves the woman American’s love to dismiss, Nancy Pelosi (a boon to Republicans if she maintains her power, and it appears she will), while, making room for another, more experience, less divisive individual to run on the Democrat Presidential Ticket. Should Obama step down, the floor opens to a cast of hopefuls, like to run, and that would, in all likelihood be one Hillary Clinton (the one who actually won the popular vote in 2008, but was cast aside by Super Delights). Certainly there would be the usual cast of characters to fill in the debates, however, it makes the transition to the candidacy and the Whet House a lot easier, than it would to challenge a sitting President. It can, however be done.

    Unfortunately, Barack Obama, not unlike Jimmy Carter, came up through the ranks with little experience and a great deal of public relations smoke and mirrors, which made them appear to be the most attractive candidate to a public that seeks “star power” from its leaders. Is it no wonder Obama is all over the map, and that the certain pollsters and others on the left are now trying to figure out how to get out of this gracefully (or not, see rumors coming from the left about the Presidents meltdown and possible removal under the 25th amendment.) in order to maintain control of the Executive Branch?

    Should the powers that be, those donors and others who pull the strings for the DNC, decide that Obama is Carter redux, then it opens the door for safe, less telegenic, less controversial moderates to take the field, and then possibly the White House. What this tells us, is that political parties, and those whose allegiance to a party, are rather mercenary when it comes to maintaining power at all cost, using individual’s that may or may not have the capacity to run a Grinder Shop, on the one hand to gain the White House, only to push them aside for a less divisive figure, one who is capable, perhaps. It remains to be seen who will be the candidates that these pollsters decide would be the one to a) stop the hemorrhaging of remaining House and Senate seats currently in the Democrat column, while having the ability to take on the GOP with an option of winning the Whet House in 2012. One can certainly not rule out one Hillary Clinton, who, as previously mentioned, should have been sitting at Pennsylvania Avenue since 2008, which leaves many moderates certain that the House and the Senate would not be in play, and the Democrats would never have suffered such an inglorious defeat in the mid-terms.

    Thursday, October 01, 2009

    War in Afghanistan Rages on - As Casualties Mount – Obama Needs “Several Weeks” to Decide U.S. Course of Action


    Afgan Soldiers Treat Wounded U.S. Service Member - Military Time


    American Casualtiesin Afghanistan are on the rise; with a total of 43 service men and women having died since August 30. President Obama, meanwhile, will wait several weeks before making a decision regarding the Afghan War – this according to an AP Report yesterday. The President is weighing the advice from both civilian and military members within his administration, while the 68,000 troops serving in Afghanistan face increasing pressures from Taliban/Al Queda Insurgents. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates is in favor of adding additional troops, in an effort similar to the counter-insurgency that worked in Iraq (until such time as the President withdrew U.S. combat divisions, leaving those military forces in Iraq vulnerable).
    This is advice given by Stanley McChrystal, who asked for an additional 40,000 troops. Gates is not in favor of a proposal to use drones and limited military in order to strike at Al Queda camps – citing that this strategy was used pre-9/11.

    The crux of the matter is that the President has found himself in a boondoggle as regards Afghanistan, a country that has yet to be conquered by any force, including those of Alexander The Great. On the one hand, should he commit to further increasing the military option, he runs the risk of an already comparative Viet Nam, as troops become scarce, the need for a draft will be evident. On the other hand, should he commit to a smaller police force, with limited back-up, the same situation will occur, emboldening Al Queda further, and leading other nations to assume the Paper Tiger is back (see Carter). The civilian advisors would rather limited involvement in Afghanistan, and those advisors are the Presidents base, without which, and during an upcoming election, he may not be able to do without, and the possibility that the President himself, shares the distaste for military action equal to his peers. Therefore he is stuck between a rock and hard place, with few discernible leadership skills, while American Troops are under fire in two theaters.

    Obama options, according to the Washington Post, are somewhat limited. The President may rely on the G.O.P. members of both Houses to help him should he take the commander’s advice of adding more troops in the theater. Although that would be a good strategy after the 2010 election, should the GOP gain a majority (polls lean in that direction now), at the moment, there are too few Republicans to make much of a difference vis a vis, and extremely left-leaning majority. With the likes of Massachusetts Senator (I don’t’ know what Cap and Trade Means) John Kerry pontificating on the Viet Nam comparisons, using the fact that during the administrations of both Kennedy and Johnson, troop increases failed to make a difference. (He fails to mention which administrations). What Kerry does not mention is the fact that troops on the ground were hamstrung by political nonsense such as the demilitarized zone, which was honored by the U.S. Forces, not the Viet Cong. Additionally, they were mainly made up of 18 and 19 year old draftees, normally coming from poor urban areas, with little training, and less chance of survival – This is very unlike the volunteer military the U.S. enjoys today.

    With the pressure mounting, the President must weigh all the facts before, deciding the fate of those in-country and the fate of those yet unnamed who will surely follow, or face the derision of the world, specifically those countries and terrorist organizations who are still bent on destroying the U.S. (despite the election of one Barack Obama). It will remain to be seen, if the President will weigh in on the side of the military for the first time in his very short presidency or allow his own political ideology (in concert with his civilian advisors) to shape the course of events similar in scope to those decisions made during the Johnson and Carter administrations.

    Thursday, February 19, 2009

    Pope Benedict Reads Riot Act to Pelosi – Will the Pope Rock the Catholic Vote in 2010?


    Photograph: Catholic News Agency

    Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Speaker of the House, and third in line to the Presidency (lest we forget), met with Pope Benedict on Wednesday. The Pope met with Ms. Pelosi as the Head of State of the Vatican, specifically not the “Head of the Church”, which, in itself was significant. Pelosi, along with other pro-abortion Democrat candidates, consistently use their Catholicism during campaigns, either by professing to be “ardent Catholics”, or making “newsworthy” appearance at churches; while vigorously campaigning for a women’s “right to choose”, and receiving endorsements from pro-abortion organizations such as N.A.R.A.L. CNA (The Catholic News Agency) has been reporting this meeting and printed the following from the Vatican:

    Immediately after the meeting, the Holy See’s press office released a statement saying, "following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage."
    "His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

    Further, Pope Benedict allowed no camera’s or press during the brief meeting, taking away any opportunity for Ms. Pelosi to use the press to further political ambitions. (It is estimated that Catholics make up one of the largest voting blocs in the United States and are a key “swing vote” in U.S. elections. , Additionally, 70% of Hispanics identify themselves as Catholic )

    Benedict's Vatican, has been, by far, the most vocal in opposition to politicians and abortion worldwide. In October of 2008, the Prefect of the Vatican's Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature, labeled the Democrat Party – “the Party of Death” in response to the pro-abortion policies of the majority of the party’s figureheads. The Pope’s statement issued after the private meeting with Pelosi, constitutes a strong rebuke of all Catholic Politician’s who profess their faith and then, to pacify their backers and some constituents, rely on the excuse of “choice”. Benedict is clearly not buying any of this.

    Reuters reported that Ms. Pelosi issued a very brief statement after her meeting at the Vatican, however, did not mention abortion, rather praised the Catholic Church on its stance on peace and global warming.

    A Catholic “pro-choice” group (oxymoron) “Catholics for Choice”, headed by Jon O’Brien, in an interview with “The Hill” hoped that the meeting with Pelosi would focus on “bigger” issues than abortion: “That would be a real conversation about choice, instead of this micro-obsession with abortion,” O’Brien said. “They made a very intelligent, diplomatic move.”
    The Groups Website Article entitled “Catholic Voters and Policy Makers Lead the Way” written this past November by Mr. O'Brien praises the election of Barack Obama and the role Catholics played in electing such a pro-choice President, the following excerpt is chilling to this Catholic:

    As pro choice Catholics, we celebrate the election of a pro choice President who has been a strong supporter of abortion rights, comprehensive sexuality education and access to reproductive health care. The next administration will have to work hard to repair the damage done to reproductive right during the last eight years: the Global Gag Rule, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, subordinating science to personal belief, and a pervasive program against family-planning efforts. Undoubtedly, concerns about America’s economic security and military engagements overseas will garner a great deal of attention. However, we urge the next administration and Congress to also work for advances in reproductive health care in the US and abroad.

    In other words, Mr. O’Brien and like-minded politician’s who are staunch advocates of abortion – against the teaching of a Church they profess to follow faithfully - merely use the Church to promote their agenda.

    What Mr. O’Brien and politician’s like Ms. Pelosi, Biden, John Kerry, etc. had banked on in the past was the disconnect between Catholics, specifically, moderate politically minded Catholics and more traditional Conservative Catholics, as well silence from the U.S. Church and the Pope. However, Benedict is far removed in temperament from John Paul, and the growing evangelical base within the Catholic Church, the inclusion of a very conservative Hispanic Catholic population coupled with an increasingly vocal group of U.S. Bishops, may actually put an end to the game of mixing politics and church by pro-abortion politicians seeking re-election.

    The following AP Video puts the meeting and the Pope’s view of Politician’s and their role as “Catholics” into perspective: (Note: there are 1,057 articles in a Google Search: “Pelosi and the Pope”)


    Speaking as an Evangelical Catholic, and a values voter – to cast a vote for a politician who pro-actively campaigns on the abortion ticket – regardless of religious affiliation would run counter to conscious for this Hispanic, first generation American. To use a phrase form one of the commenter on CAN’s article regarding the Pope’s stand: “Benedict Rocks!” It remains to be seen, with the 2010 elections on the horizon, how this will play out in states that have a significant block of Catholic voters.

    Wednesday, October 29, 2008

    Gallop Traditional Obama Lead Shrinks to 2, Margin of Error +/-3 – and CNN's Brown Finally Discovers Obama Breaks a Promise!

    So much for Polls – the Gallop Poll’s Traditional Voter Model (those most likely to vote), is now within 2 points, and the IBD/TIPP has been fluctuating between +2 and +6 for the past week (now at Obama +4), further, pollsters are becoming increasingly leery of calling the race. Why is that? Without the internal campaign polls, it’s all a big guessing game – except, McCain is grinning from ear to ear – while Obama is clearly telling his people not to relax. It’s a horserace – modeled on elections from the past 2 generals. The only way this could be a landslide, at this point, would be if this were a repeat of 1980 (judging from the current polling trends, and outcomes, given the same Common man (Reagan) versus Elite Socialist (Carter) schematic), and then, that too is gross speculation.

    This sudden realization that the media push for Obama may have personal ramifications (loss of jobs, for example, due to layoffs), has given some who may be more astute at seeing which way the wind might be blowing, a reason to suddenly become a bit less partisan. Campbell Brown of CNN had decided it was time to point out that Obama broke a promise on Campaign Finance. Although McCain pointed this broken promise (goes to character), in debates and campaign speeches, the media has ignored any criticism of Obama, heaping it back on McCain. In Browns commentary, she points to the huge amounts of cash Obama has on hand –enough to bore the country for 30 minutes on almost every prime time network tonight. What Campbell may also be aware of is, historically, large sums of cash do not necessarily translate into winning an office. One only has to look back to February and March of 2008 to understand that point. The Republican Primary had one candidate who was rolling in cash (Mitt Romney), while others McCain and Huckabee, were desperately trying to get their message across on a shoe string. The result - by Super Tuesday, the man with the most robo-calls and television commercials was out of the race and those that were cash strapped – were still in the game. Other big-money primary and general election losers of the past were Kerry and Forbes, who went on to defeat despite being well-funded.

    Speaking of Obama Cash, The Obama Infomercial will be seen on almost every network with some glaring exceptions: ABC, FOX News and CNN. ABC will be enjoying an increase in viewership as well as FOX and CNN (the later two will run segments of the infomercial as “news”).
    Will the Obama Infomercial convince anyone at this point in time, to change their vote? Not unless someone is so incensed that the World Series was delayed in order to accommodate Barak that they switch to McCain.

    It bears repeating, no-one has a crystal ball when it comes to November 4th, polls are merely “best guesstimates”, pundits get paid to pontificate, party lines are drawn, and independents, for what its worth, generally vote the same way they always have when it comes down to the crunch, unless of course, you have a Jimmy Carter in office, or his twin trying to get into office.

    Saturday, October 25, 2008

    Barney “Rubble” Frank – Congress Will Reduce Military, Increase Taxes – After Election

    Ouch, just when you thought it was safe to elect Obama (speaking to committed Democrats and those independents who consistently vote Democrat and of course, all those voters registered by Acorn, including Mickey Mouse), president – Barney Frank opens his mouth and suggests you rethink your choice.

    In a meeting with the Standard-Times editorial board (not an uncommon practice in Massachusetts: Ted, John, Barney are rumored to have monthly meetings with all major daily papers), Barney Frank dished up what he envisions happening as soon as the Left assumes power over Washington and the rest of us. A heartfelt greeting (warning) to the nation: “Welcome to Massachusetts”! Those conservatives living in the Bay State will finally have their worst fears realized, the exportation of Massachusetts political think to 49 other states.

    First on the Frank and Nancy's agenda is a second economic stimulus package, aimed at raising taxes, increasing food stamps and funding states that might have under budgeted their Universal Health Care Plans. Thrown in to the mix are extended unemployment benefits - which will be necessary once businesses haul out of the states to climates that favor less taxation. How are Barney and company going to pay for all of this not to mention those infrastructure projects he has in mind? By cutting the military and raising taxes - If you have a job, go look in a mirror.

    Of course, Barney could not get through this meeting without paying homage to one of his closest friends, Jack Murtha while discussing cutting the military budget. (Who is, ironically, dubbed by the paper as a key supporter of military budgets) (They have got to be kidding.) Jack Murtha is about as popular in his district now as Barney Frank is in his.

    Although it is highly likely Frank will retain his seat due to voter apathy, the help of the Boston Globe and like-minded editorial boards (Longing for the days when newspapers were out finding facts, instead of taking direction from one political party to print fiction.), the papers are chewing up his opponent, Earl Sholley. Sholley, a Republican, has come under scrutiny by both the Globe and Frank due to Frank’s recent bout of unpopularity (The bailout, his ties to Freddie, Fannie, Raines and on and on.) Of course, his constituents may be reading the Herald, in which case, Frank could be at a loss. Murtha may likewise have an electoral problem - those bible clinging, gun toting, racist rednecks that populate his district may be inclined to send him into retirement.

    You have to hand it to Frank - he's slick – in his vision (along with key players: Obama, Pelosi and Reed who also like the idea of spreading the wealth, taxing everyone and cutting defense – shades of Jimmy Carter!), Frank insists that the economic problem is mainly “psychological”!

    The only individuals who will be psychologically affected, should this bunch be elected, are people who pay taxes. According to Barney “ultimately, there will be tax increases on the upper brackets.”We'll have to raise taxes ultimately. Not now, but eventually," he said.” The problem is that Barney does not define upper bracket, having been down that road before (see: Massachusetts Conservative Feminist), upper bracket can be any breathing taxpayer.

    For those of you inclined to favor economic recovery, a robust military that will defend us both here and abroad, as well as jobs and fewer taxes - the following websites will be beneficial in allowing you the information needed to make the right choice for your wallet on November 4th.


    John McCain for President
    William Russell (Republican – PA) (Now within 5 Points of Jack Murtha)
    Earl Sholley (Republican – MA) Running against Barney Frank
    Jeff Beatty (Republican – MA) Running against the “Joker” (John Kerry)

    Tuesday, September 09, 2008

    When All Else Fails – Democrats on the Offence

    Barack Obama’s campaign strategy, so far, has been to compare John McCain to George Bush. This has been the go-to tactic since the primary process began to wind down. It does nothing to contrast and compare policy – the charge that one man is so like another, when evidence strongly suggests otherwise, is fairly transparent. Playing off the fears of the base, many of whom have been in therapy for the past 8 years, is the biggest card that the DNC has to play – one has to ask, if it did not work in 2004, then how can they expect it to work in 2008? There are a finite number of elitists who are airing concerns to their steadfast followers on the standard issues that the DNC holds: abortion, Republicans who go to church and war – adding lack of experience into the mix when it appears that the general public isn’t engaged, is fine on both a state and national level. Obama, and Democrats in general, were supposed to have run away with the 2008 election, yet polls appear to indicate otherwise. The problem stems from a disconnect between the general public and those who feel entitled to hold office – the tantrums of children who have lost a turn – so to speak – to rule the playground. What’s a politician to do? Dispatch lawyers and journalists to Wasilla Alaska and go after every single shred of what might be a scandal or a negative against an increasing popular Republican Vice Presidential nominee.

    The latest test appears to be Palin’s religion – her affiliation six years ago with an Assembly of God church – complete with You-Tube videos and in-depth analysis by CNN – all warning of extreme faith in God – or “Christian”, a cry that appears fine when referring to Obama (lest someone refer to him as a Muslim), but worrisome when it applies to someone with conservative values. The danger – abortion may be at risk, or worse, someone with faith may pray when faced with a serious decision.

    On abortion, the issue has not given Democrats the traction they need to win over Independents; apparently all that is left is a candidates Religion as well as comparisons and ties to the current Bush administration. What is truly important to those caught in middle America – security, the economy, the dismal state of public education – are barely discussed – there is no contrast to be had simply because nothing has been done in Washington over the past two years – and Republicans and Democrats alike spent like there was no end is sight – making it difficult to tell the difference. The exception has been those committed either right or left – the right calling for reform, the left calling for investigations of the Bush administration. It is Us vs. Them -and although they should realize that the general public is tired of this tune, they just can’t seem to help themselves.

    Now, in a heated campaign, the left is left holding the bag – so to speak. They must attack – but lacking any real substance, they turn to the old standbys – even when the players are on the same team. A group called Dems For Kerry, in defense of Senator John Kerry and his campaign for Senate (Kerry is facing his first challenger from inside the party.) is going YouTube. As Ed O’Reilly, Democrat challenger appears to be more serious than first thought and with a primary less than one week away, a video charging that O’Reilly is best friends with Jeff Beatty, Republican challenger is up on YouTube. The fact that O’Reilly and Beatty are both pleasant and reasonable men is used in this ridiculous video as an “attack”.



    Actual campaign ads for Kerry (all two of them), are downright boring – one rehashes his ties to Veterans and the other his ties to Al Gore. They may do well in certain areas within Massachusetts, but one has to factor that the majority of voters are Independents or Unenrolled – (not unlike the entire country) or the wild card in the state and national races. People in general want to hear about the issues, not about what church someone belongs to, or if they actually are pleasant when speaking to someone with opposing political views. Should the trend continue Obama and Kerry may find themselves in similar situations as Matthews and Oberman - allowed to play to a point, but left out of the main event.

    Friday, August 15, 2008

    The Democrat Convention – This Should Be Reality Television at Its Best

    The fact that Hillary Clinton’s roll in the upcoming conventions has been greatly expanded to include a nomination has many a pundit nonplused! Some are calling the nomination of Clinton “symbolic”, an appeasement process to bring Clinton supporters to Obama’s side. Other’s are a bit unnerved over the Clinton’s involvement in the process. Dick Morris, in a recent Fox News appearance, sees it a bit differently. Morris, who is not a fan of the Clintons and has a less than stellar track record of predicating the outcome of any given race, made an interesting point nonetheless: Obama caved into Hillary Clinton. How? By allowing her far too much time at the convention, and an opportunity to upstage Obama. The question: "How’s that for leadership on the part of Obama?" Morris went on to ponder; if Obama cannot control Hillary Clinton, how can he be trusted to control critical situations? (Issues of import to the security of the nation.)

    That’s a valid question. However, can one place the blame entirely on Obama? Yes and no - it depends on who is chosing his advisors. That is not entirely clear. The one term senator from Illinois whose mentor, John Kerry, Democrat Massachusetts, brought to national attention in 2004 at the DNC convention, has hired members from Kerry's old campaign team. Those advisors, although well-intentioned, may not have the best track records.

    John Kerry campaign staff from his failed 2004 presidential bid that are working for Obama include:
    Heather Higginbottom, Obama’s policy advisor, Stephanie Cutter, senior advisor to Obama and chief of staff for wife, Michelle and Jim Margolis leads the commercial production and daily message team. Additionally, Tom Daschle is a national co-chair of the Obama campaign.

    The Obama camp is hoping that the “symbolic” nomination and multiple appearances by the Clinton’s during the convention will mollify the 18,000,000 Democrats who voted in the primary’s – bringing them over to the side of the “magnanimous Obama.” This remains to be seen. One can bet the house that the ratings for the Denver Convention will be through the roof – not necessarily because Obama will be on the stage, along with a yet to be announced running mate – it is the drama. This year’s DNC party will be the best of Realty TV. It remains to be seen how much control Obama and his staff will have over those delegates on the floor who are there for one reason and one reason only – to nominate Hillary Clinton as their party’s standard bearer. Comments on the original news release from the ABC Blog are an interesting read with a common theme – disarray. What types of message will this sending to the average voter?

    To recap: Obama’s surrounded himself with campaign advisors who have major political failures under their belt and Hillary Clinton will have a huge percentage of air time at the Convention. Republicans, who were destined to lose every election this year, are looking more likely to retain the White House and those Daschle-like, DNC “Obamafiles” (Pelosi and Kerry come to mind), may end up on the outside looking in.

    Thursday, August 07, 2008

    John Kerry - “In a Corner” Tour – Primary Woes Continue

    John Kerry, Junior Senator (D) Massachusetts, who is facing his first primary challenge in 23 years, has made several appearances in the Bay state in the past few weeks. This is the first time in decades that Kerry has been forced to actively campaign for his seat – one would expect that Kerry, a national figure, popular with the party elite, would be a shoe-in for reelection – but there are doubts.

    Ata recent campaign stop in Quincy, Kerry was surrounded by 25 supporters and his campaign stop in Framingham, netted a crowd of 100, where “almost all wore Kerry stickers”.

    Although the Polls have been kind to Kerry, a recent Suffolk University Poll indicates that the incumbent may be in bigger trouble than previously anticipated. Barrack Obama’s lead in Massachusetts is tumbling (Jeff Beatty Republican predicted a McCain victory in Massachusetts in July) and John Kerry’s lead over Jeff Beatty is just breaking 51 % in the poll of 400 respondents - not good new for the incumbent this early in the game. The Republican challenger, Jeff Beatty has only begun to run television ads in the Bay State – holding back until after the results are in from the September Democrat primary.

    What seems to be Senator Kerry’s problem in a state that has been taken for granted for years? There may be several answers, but one that comes immediately to mind is – Clinton Supporters. The junior senator, who began backing Obama in 2004, endorsed his candidacy after the majority of his constituents voted for Hillary Clinton in the February 2008 primary. Ed O’Reilly appears to be a favorite of those Clinton supporters who have yet to embrace Obama, and Kerry has become a target.

    The ACTBlue website also shows an indication of how well Kerry is doing against his affable challenger, Ed O’Reilly. O'Reilly is garnering donations from Progressive Clubs and Clinton supporters - 258 individuals with 7 different organizations donating to his campaign in 2008. On the other hand, John Kerry , has a measly 4 organizations supporting him in this cycle, with exactly 4 donations to his campaign, a noted departure from previous years.

    To learn more about the challenged and the challengers visit:
    Ed O’Reilly and his campaign – Ed O’Reilly.com
    Jeff Beatty and his campaign – Jeff Beatty.com
    John Kerry and his campaign – John Kerry.com

    Wednesday, August 06, 2008

    House Republican’s Revolt against Pelosi Continues – Oil Prices Continue to Fall

    The Price of Oil has dropped again yesterday, to 118.60 as speculators backed away – coinciding (coincidentally) with the third day of protest by House Republicans. The House was called into recess last week for a five week vacation by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi had continued to block a vote on an energy plan that would allow for offshore drilling, a popular energy plan with U.S. consumers. House Republicans continued to call for a vote, after Ms. Pelosi shut down the House, turned off the lights, and tried to silence those that were calling attention to the nations’ energy crisis.

    The first noticeable drop in the price of oil came after President Bush lifted the Presidential Ban on Offshore Drilling, on July 14. At the time, oil was trading at $145 per barrel – a week after Bush lifted the ban and called on Congress to act, oil fell to $128. On Monday, oil dropped again - below $120, and the trend continues while House Republicans continue to call for action.

    Although Pelosi publicly continues to stonewall, calling the House Protest a "war dance of the handmaidens of the oil companies.", Politco reported that she is privately telling those Democrats who are in danger of losing a seat, to go ahead and back offshore drilling. John Boehner, Republican Minority Leader, has asked House Democrats to join in an effort that would force the speaker to bring the Republican energy bill to a vote.

    What can the “we the people” expect? The House Republican’s have vowed to continue their occupation of the darkened House and speculators will continue to look for excuses to back off oil futures – fearing that offshore drilling will become a reality. Should Pelosi come to her senses, allow the vote, and should it pass (which it is fairly apparent it would handily) America’s mere ability to tap into the nations vast oil supplies will send the price of oil to reasonable pre-Democrat controlled house levels. The nation cannot wait much longer, with home heating costs expected to double this year, those living in the Northeast, West and the Heartland, who don’t have the financial resources of a Pelosi, Kerry or Obama (recently changing his mind on offshore drilling), will be forced to bear the burden of her politically motivated inaction. Additionally, the people pay attention - Pelosi and companys shift with political winds - and subsequent actions speak to character and trustworthiness - these individuals, from the Oval Office through the House are merely hired by the people - political fortunes, like political winds, are subject to change.

    Saturday, July 26, 2008

    John Kerry Faces Uphill Battle for Senate Seat

    WCVB Boston is reporting that Ed O’Reilly, (Firefighter, Lobsterman, Lawyer, and candidate for US Senate MA) is challenging incumbent John Kerry to a series of “town hall style” debates during the month of August. O’Reilly, who is seen as a long-shot in the primary, won over the required 15% of delegates necessary to place his name on the ballot this September. Those attending the Democrat Convention in MA, not unlike any other state and party convention, are primarily chosen from among the party personalities; (including elected officials) they are not your average party voter.

    John Kerry, photo Wikepedia

    When the Democrats go to the polls in September, it is then that the candidate will be chosen to run against the Republican candidate, Jeff Beatty. Although Kerry is always heavily favored to win, one has to take into account that the majority of the Democrats in the state voted for Hillary Clinton on Super Tuesday. Shortly thereafter, John Kerry came out and endorsed Obama, an endorsement that was covered by every Massachusetts press outlet available. The rank and file were not especially thrilled with this endorsement – the signal – Ed O’Reilly’s ability to get on the ballot – period. When the rank and file go to the polls in September, the outcome may, again, be somewhat different than predicted. Jeff Beatty may be facing Ed O’Reilly, not John Kerry in November.


    Ed O’Reilly is the definitive Massachusetts Democrat: demanding immediate withdrawal from Iraq, promoting Universal Healthcare funded by the Federal Government, and, of course, “Marriage Equality” (same-sex). He has an interesting take on Renewable Energy; one that would please any environmentalist Read O’Reilly’s reasonable plan here.

    Additionally, O’Reilly is getting enough press to “brand” him within the state, from national CNN interviews to articles in the Boston Globe and has a full slate of appearances around the state this month.

    Finally, in an age where electronic media and communications has become critical, Ed O’Reilly has a sharp, easy to navigate and informative Website www.edoreilly.com . John Kerry’s site www.johnkerry.com is less informative, rehashing the "us vs. them" (RoadblockRepublican’s.com), difficult to read and navigate, and containing more information about national issues that may or may not have relevance for Massachusetts.

    Why would any of the aforementioned matter in a state where John Kerry is expected to win the primary and go back to yet another term in the State Senate? The rank and file: a Suffolk University poll suggests that 51% of the state voters feel it is time to replace John Kerry – the poll did not specifically name an opposing challenger, indicating that even without branding, anyone on the ballot who is “Not-Kerry” stands a chance at becoming the junior U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Most important, the primary is not “closed” to party members, independents are able to vote in Massachusetts primary’s (Massachusetts State Election Commission).



    Regardless of the outcome of this primary, change in Massachusetts is imminent. Voters view Kerry unfavorably, and should Kerry not make it past the primary, how likely is the DNC to fully fund O’Reilly’s campaign? Meanwhile, Jeff Beatty has both a strong grassroots campaign as well as the backing of the Beltway Republicans; possibly the first time a Republican running in Massachusetts has received national support. How important is this particular seat? Right at the moment – Very because this is the seat that holds the narrow lead for the Democrats in the U.S. Senate.


    That could, however, change next week. Should John McCain (who is statistically tied in all polls, despite the Obama 08 Tour), and the balance of the Republican congressional and senate Republican candidates (incumbent or otherwise), hammer home the off-shore oil drilling issue (approximately 75% of American’s surveyed believe drilling to be the answer to our energy concerns), the entire nation would be in play in a year that was supposed to be a walk in the park for the DNC. Why? The Democrat Leadership and candidates continue to bow to the environmental lobby (refusing to allow a vote on repealing the ban on drilling while they hold the majority!). Should the Republican’s begin to take advantage of this situation, it would force the DNC to defend and protect all races, including Massachusetts. Massachusetts will be the race to watch, from the Democrat primary in September to the General Election. Jeff Beatty will be the candidate to watch.

    Wednesday, July 09, 2008

    John Kerry – Kerry In Your Corner Tour – Massachusetts Senate Race.

    John Kerry, Junior Senator, Massachusetts (D) is making another rare appearance in Massachusetts to campaign for re-election to the US Senate (Tenure - 24 years). An article in the Boston Herald notes that Kerry will be accompanied by Local Elected Officials while he walks around Lowell’s Canal District - proceeding from there to Lawrence for a stroll through the business district. Earlier this year, Kerry made an appearance in Western Mass., visiting the cities of Northampton and Springfield, again, accompanied by local elected officials. Stopping by a coffee shop and visiting with constituents does not appear to be on the Senator’s agenda. A visit to the Senator’s Campaign Website John Kerry.com also does not list a “Kerry In Your Corner” itinerary giving his constituents a heads-up on where he may be showing up next. His website does include selective video from the Mass. Democrat Convention, where he was assured he would handily walk away with the nomination, thereby freeing up his summer for other pursuits, more national in scope. Things did not work out the way Kerry had planned.

    Recently on CBS Face the Nation Kerry, stumping for Barak Oabma, referred to John McCain, the Republican Presidential Nominee, as a Flip Flopper, whose judgment is “Dangerous”. It may appear, to Massachusetts locals that Kerry is more interested in being in the national spotlight than hobnobbing with the locals – he has made 3 appearances in Massachusetts since April related to his campaign. He has made hundreds of national appearances however, in support of Barack Obama. There may be a reason that his visits are brief and that he is surrounded by “Elected Officials” when he does set foot in Massachusetts – an overwhelming majority of Massachusetts Democrats voted for Senator Hillary Clinton in the February primary - not Barack Obama, who Kerry chose to support over the wishes of his constituents. This also may be why Ed O’Reilly, a Gloucester Lawyer, against all odds, received more than the necessary 15% of the votes at the Democrat Convention to become the first Democrat to challenge Kerry since he took office.

    Amazingly, Policker MA.com suggests that Kerry has a comfortable Lead against the Republican challenger, Jeff Beatty. This analysis is somewhat questionable. First, Kerry led Beatty by 62 percent in a previous poll, and is now down to 58%, which one would think comfortable for Kerry. However, factor that this poll was taken when Jim Ogonowski was still in the Republican race against Beatty and 44% of the respondents had no opinion (or knowledge of) Jeff Beatty. That is a problem with polling data over a month old being released as “news”. More over, Jim Ogonowski left the race in early June and Jeff Beatty has been crisscrossing the state, building a strong grassroots campaign and getting a good deal of press, especially on the NECN network. He has not yet begun to roll out campaign ads. A Suffolk University poll, differed from the Rasmussen Poll in both length of time to publish the poll and in results. The Suffolk Poll suggested that 51% of the state voters were ready for someone different in that Kerry held seat. Additionally, this poll did not mention names of those who might compete against Kerry for the seat.

    Kerry’s visit with Local Elected Officials coupled with dismal polling data, suggests that his tenure as Senator may be over this November. Granted, he does have the money, but, that said, residents of Massachusetts just watched Mitt Romney spend millions in a failed presidential bid against candidates who ran on a shoestring. In some instances, Money can’t buy love nor votes. One must spend time with the “masses” in order to succeed.

    Tuesday, July 08, 2008

    John Kerry – Defends Barak Obama’s Flip Flops

    Massachusetts Senator, John Kerry, on the stump for Barack Obama, appeared CBS’s Face the Nation this past Sunday. The topic: Barack Obama’s apparent change of stance, or evolving view of the War in Iraq – otherwise known as flip-flopping. In defense of Obama, Kerry turned on John McCain, accusing McCain of flip-flopping on, of all things, the war in Iraq. The term, flip-flop, became part of political speak during the 2004 presidential election, when John Kerry changed his position on a variety of issues almost daily. Kerry’s use of euphemisms is therefore, somewhat ironic. John McCain has changed his position on several issues, chief among them, off-shore oil drilling. McCain, in his change of position has responded to the nation’s energy crisis – which is not a flip-flop in the pure sense of political pandering. McCain has also called for a gas-tax holiday to help reduce the burden on consumers, and has also called for long-term solutions to reduce the U.S. dependence on foreign oil. However, on the War in Iraq, McCain has remained steadfast. He has been highly critical of the handling of the war, called for an increase in troops on the ground long before the surge was implemented, and has defended the military, over the policy and politics, at all times. Kerry’s position in his 2004 campaign, voted for the war and then against the war as he tried to pacify the left and move to the middle – political pandering at its most transparent.

    Barack Obama, in his naiveté, explained his position on his “policy shift”, in two separate press conferences on July 3. Mike Huckabee, former presidential candidate, McCain supporter and Fox News contributor, noted that Barack Obama’s second press conference indicated that the candidate, and or his campaign handlers, understood that he had made an error in his first effort to explain his position.


    Barack Obama's flip-flops, Mike Huckabee comments


    Jeff Beatty, Republican candidate for Senate, MA, issued the following statements following Kerry’s comments on Sunday: “When John Kerry authorized placing American troops in Iraq, he showed a profound lack of judgment by making it about ‘politics’ and his personal political ambitions, a trend that has marked his entire Senate career.”

    “I looked at the same facts that Kerry did. As Senator, I would have voted against this war. But Kerry’s vote for the war wasn’t about ‘facts’ or about protecting families in Massachusetts or our country. It was all about his presidential run. Today, Kerry’s continued insistence on a cut and run timetable is once again all about pandering and politics and will not result in a success. This ‘withdrawal in the face of the enemy’ would lead to more trouble for the United States in the very near future.”

    Beatty goes on to question: “Can you trust Kerry to do what is in the interest of Massachusetts citizens or what is in his own political interests?” asks Beatty. Beatty goes on to say, “John Kerry is campaigning - not for the US Senate in Massachusetts, but for Vice President or Secretary of State in a potential Obama Administration. It is actually John Kerry’s lack of interest in serving the people of Massachusetts that is once again exposed, along with his poor judgment and profound lack of trustworthy leadership.”

    Beatty, who recently received the endorsement of the national organization VetsforFreedom, is challenging Incumbent John Kerry in the Massachusetts senate race. A recent Suffolk University Poll, which is at odds with a Rasmussen Poll touted by major news networks, indicates that over 50% of the states voters would like a change in the Senate in 2008.

    Note: John Kerry has not been campaigning in the Baystate to retain his Senate seat. He faces a challenger within his own party, and must first gain the State Democrat nominee before facing Jeff Beatty in the general election.


    Watch John Kerry Speak on Flip Flops

    Wednesday, July 02, 2008

    Where is John Kerry?

    In a recent AP article Google News, Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University History Professor, commented that it would be healthy for John Kerry to have to campaign at home this summer. This lead to the question: “When was the last time John Kerry set foot in Massachusetts among his constituents? With the exception of a quick trip to Western Mass earlier in the year, there has been no news of the incumbent seeking to hobnob with the locals. With 51% of the states voters (recent Suffolk University Poll) seeking a change, it may be wise for Kerry to at least set up a few appearances in the bay state. He faces a challenge for the first time in 24 years from within his own party, and in November, should he succeed in the state primary (a foregone conclusion) he will then run against Jeff Beatty, a grassroots Republican who is getting a lot of traction from an intensive statewide campaign. One note of interest on the part of this AP article, Jeff Beatty is mentioned as barely a footnote, and although the bulk of the article is centered on Kerry and his Democrat rival Ed O’Reilly, only Kerry and O’Reilly’s campaign websites are listed at the end of the article. This may be due to the fact that Kerry is perceived as unbeatable by the majority of the press outside and inside the state of MA and that any Republican would not stand a chance in November. A word to the wise,"Watch Jeff Beatty."

    Wednesday, June 25, 2008

    Jeff Beatty – Poised to Defeat John Kerry

    An article this morning from Human Events asks the question: “Is Massachusetts Ready to Dump Kerry?” Ken Pittman, the article author, points to the problems Kerry is facing in his own party and the general appeal of Jeff Beatty, which transcends political affiliation. This is the first solid anaylsis of the Baystate seen from any National Media, with specific attention paid to the credibility of Beatty as a candidate. Additionally, Pittman ties the Kennedy “Dynasty” to Kerry’s rise in Massachusetts and National politics with accuracy. Read: Pittman article here

    Tuesday, June 24, 2008

    Jeff Beatty – Massachusetts Senate Campaign - Shoring Up the Grassroots

    Political campaigns, outside of the national spotlight, generally take the summer in stride, campaigns are limited to an occasional press release and a stop here and there for a photo opportunity; there are the parades and the party meetings – all aimed at gearing up for the race come September. Campaigns, especially U.S. Senate Campaigns have been noticeably absent from the Massachusetts landscape for decades. John F. Kerry has a website: John Kerry.com, but has not made appearances in the state, with the exception of one visit to Western Massachusetts; meeting with officials in Springfield and Northampton back in late May Springfield Republican article.

    This summer is noticeably different. Jeff Beatty has been on the road, making appearances weekly and meeting with local town Republican Committees as well as well as meeting families in a variety of small settings across the state.

    Local weekly and daily media are reporting these visits and adding Jeff’s website link in their articles. His visit to Marblehead to meet with local working class families as reported in the Marblehead News is one such example.

    On Flag Day (June 14), Jeff and campaign staff attended a monument unveiling for retired navy captain, Thomas Hudner. That evening he was in Dedham, followed by visits to New Bedford and Longmeadow, with appearance on NECN (New England Cable News). Beatty and his campaign staff have been crisscrossing the state non-stop, the campaign invitation to a meeting in Agawam last evening, asked those who were attending to bring along family and friends; Independents and Democrats. Beatty intends to work to accomplish a great deal in the nation and for Massachusetts, by working with Democrats and Independents, and not excluding them based on party bias. Beatty is not excluding the national media from his summer campaign, making an appearance on Michael Regan’s talk show on the 23rd.

    Meanwhile, the Democrat contender for Kerry’s spot on the primary ticket has also been working the local circuit. Edward O’Reilly (Edward O’Reilly.com), a Progressive Democrat, has been similarly working hard getting his stand on the issues out through the press. As a Progressive, he can be viewed as a real challenger to Kerry. Although the local pundits refused to believe he’d even get onto the primary ballot, and now doubt that he will beat Kerry in the primary, one has only to examine the Democrat party in Massachusetts to understand that it is vibrantly Progressive and O’Reilly is a grand fit for the base. There is a difference between traditional Democrats (the working class party (alleged), and the Progressive movement (clearly socialist with no apologies). This is an ideology that appeals to the base – given the current climate in Massachusetts, either O’Reilly or Kerry will face a strong challenge in the fall from Beatty. As for Kerry, outside of one quick visit to the state in May, he has been noticeably absent. This is nothing new, he has been noticeably absent except for rare occasions when he feels he must make an appearance. He’s busy on the national stage, just like Daschle (D) South Dakota, removed.



    A favorite You-Tube Beatty Video features Col. David Hunt. Col. Hunt is supporting Jeff Beatty.

    If you live in the BayState, or are just interested in learning more about Massachusetts politics and those who would represent us; it is strongly suggested that one visit all three campaign websites in order to learn more about each candidate and make an informed decision.

    Amazon Picks

    Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

    FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

    Contact Me:

    Your Name
    Your Email Address
    Subject
    Message