Receive the eNews Reference RSS Feed

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton has pointedly stated that Democrats are ignoring the race issue in the US. The logic of this assault to some degree excuses the Republican field of candidates who all but ignored forums setup to outline their positions on issues facing Black America.

If you compare 2004 with 2008 discussions, I think you’ll find a greater degree of dialogue around the race question in the ’08 race. There is a fear among of civil rights leaders in Obama’s candidacy and it ability to usher in a new era of how Afro American’s view themselves and more importantly how they perceive their place in America.

Michelle Obama is correct in stating “they will wake up.” Unfortunately Obama has to not just make history by overcoming substantial odds and doing well in Iowa, he will have to win it to sway even his own Congressional Black Caucus colleagues. He’s held to a greater standard among Black America because of a distrust of some of what a more perfect America can be. And in the event of a Obama Presidency every Dream of Dr. Martin Luther King will become a personal and individual matter.

It would be logical for some to argue that the fear of Jackson and Sharpton with Obama’s successes is that it will unravel their influence. I might concur that the moment Obama gets sworn in, the world and this country begin to look at itself differently. The main thrust of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton’s argument will lose it’s shelf life.

Joe Klein used his blog to blast Senator Hillary Clinton's attack on Barack Obama over the weekend writing:

"Clinton's poll-driven attack on Obama today seems a bit too sweaty and desperate for her current situation, which is still a dead heat in the totally unpredictable January 3 caucus, although an Obamaward ripple can be discerned."

Barack Obama has responded by saying, “I think that folks from some of the other campaigns are reading the polls and starting to get stressed and issuing a whole range of outlandish accusations,” Obama said in a press conference Sunday in Des Moines, Iowa. “Everything that we’ve done is in exact accordance with the law.”

Obama receives the likeability nod in his tight race against Senator Clinton. It doesn’t help that Bush is being quoted as saying he believes Clinton will be a “formidable candidate,” as if the Washington establishment begot it’s own.

The month of December will not disappoint political analysts, armchair pundits and bloggers in this race.

Former President Bill Clinton had an opportunity to speak out against the war in Iraq and three interviews give some insight into the way in which he approached his at best lukewarm opposition or his calculated position on the situation in Iraq. There were points at which he was quoted at supporting the war. These exclusive interviews give insight into Clinton's position on the Iraq War.

On July 7, 2004 Jim Lehrer of the News Hour interviewed Bill Clinton at length about the war in Iraq, Monica Lewinsky, the Starr investigation and many other subjects. President Clinton was careful in his answers regarding the Iraq war. He even bolsters Obama's election by saying that a first term Senator from North Carolina was more experienced than President George W. Bush when he ran for president.: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/july-dec04/clinton_7-07.html

In June of 2004 President Clinton gave an interview to Dan Rather of 60 Minutes in which he again talked about some of the problems of the war and the fact that we rushed getting in there, but never once telling Dan Rather anything that would amount to a moral stance against the war in Iraq. In fact he stated he supported some of Bush's action on the war: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/60minutes/main620619.shtml

And this is a good one, he talks to Fox News' Chris Wallace at length about Osama Bin Laden, Terrorism and the Iraq War, but instead of giving anything substantial about the War in Iraq and hundreds of US soldiers dying he defends his record on terrorism and talked about the "Global Initiative". This interview, some would argue, is classic Bill Clinton because he accentuates all of the Clinton personality traits: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/ .

The question is why now on the campaign stump. If it is important now many years after the fact to say he is in opposition, why not then at a time when it could have changed some things. A strong rebuke of the administration could've gotten John Kerry elected at the time when he was writing his book and that could've put an older Senator Clinton's chances at president at around 2012.

eNews References: Jim Lehrer News Hour Interview (Full Text): http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/july-dec04/clinton_7-07.html

CBS News Dan Rather Interview (Video): http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/01/60minutes/main620619.shtml

Fox News Chris Wallace Interview (Video): http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/

eNewsReference.com: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/hillary_clinton.shtml http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/rudolph_giuliani.shtml http://www.enewsreference.com/barack_obama.shtml

Today at the dawn of a new century we are still grappling with questions of race and skin pigmentation in America. If our forefathers could have peaked into our nation’s challenges at this chapter, what would they offer about some of the questions we are asking about an Afro-American candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America. I think they would be amused as I am. Every time I hear the media ask is America ready I cringe. The fact that an Black Presidential candidate has made it this far leading in the polls is one of the greatest indicators that America is ready! Jackson and Sharpton might not be but America is.

In America today hundreds of years later, the one drop rule applies. We still coexist under the great text “That all men are created equal…” but don’t think about running for President yet.

I can’t help but suspect that media types bring up the experience question when they want to disguise the question of blackness. There will not be another Administration in the White House more ‘experienced’ than the one that entered in 2000. Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice were not coined ‘The Dream Team’ for nothing. No one imagined an inexperienced John F. Kennedy impacting the previous American Century. There were a lot of “Let us…!” in Obama’s speech reminiscent to Kennedy’s memorable speeches; by the way.

Barack Obama had it right in the 60 Minutes interview when the question was asked about poll numbers showing Black America supporting the Hillary Clinton campaign by double digits. Black American’s are sophisticated enough not to vote for a candidate strictly based on race. Obama recognizes the fact that he has to get out there and earn every vote.

If you confronted most Americans with this very question, Do you think Colin Powell would have served us better as President in the last eight years than President George W. Bush? I think an overwhelming majority would say yes. They would base their question on Powell’s widely reported reluctance in going into Iraq and the consequences he articulately posed about engaging in a long occupation there. They also believe the man is capable based on experience as well; none of it having to do with elected office either.

Barack Obama is basing his candidacy on the audacious assumption that American is one step ahead of the commentators, strategists, and media hawks who question our readiness. There is nothing like being there on the ground and sensing the tremendous support for Obama’s candidacy. When the crowds are shown at Obama rallies the sites cannot be scripted like other political events.

With the rise of candidates of color in many elected offices across the country, voters know that the need for change trumps race. The need for leadership is great for our generation.

Governor Mike Huckabee returned every blow effectively in last night’s debate. Being knighted with front runner status at this stage in the election gives him even more room for mobility as the other contenders stand at his heels. Huckabee has become likable in Iowa and that is what Romney’s camp fear the most.

I was listening to a New Hampshire voter on the radio who happened to be a Romney supporter saying she was very impressed with Huckabee’s climb in polls in Iowa and even stated she was considering a second look at Huckabee. He provides the conservative credentials along with a likable Gomer Pile feel. One of the things that politics is missing in all the mudslinging is a candidate that projects a Reaganesque optimism.

Huckabee involved his pastor’s advice about knowing you’re ahead when opponents are kicking you in the butt was similar to the confident ”there you go again” reply to Jimmy Carter in the 1980 debate. Finally I’m sensing some excitement at the Republican debates as voters in the early states start to pay attention.

If nothing else Huckabee is building a case for the VP bid and he’ll provide a lot better contrast to a dour Cheney selection in 2000 that wanted to convince voters the administration was experienced.

eNews References:

Jabs at Huckabee during debate throw him firmly into GOP fray

1. The most important theme of the debate will have to be consistency. He will have to let viewers know that he's held to the same conservative principles on abortion, guns and fiscal responsibility for a long time and has not changed and catered his message with the times.

2. He will have to tactfully state that he's not bankrolled his campaign or arrived in Iowa with all the money, but his message is resonating in the street because Iowans trust him to bring the core conservative values to the White House.

3. Do not let his opponents pin him on the Immigration debate. The license issues has come up and his counter can simply be what Obama has incorporated into the debate...because states has been essentially left to solve this issue, due to the federal government's failure to comprehensively deal with the problem, as a matter of safety he had to protect folks with the added benefit of bring immigrants out of the shadows and on the path towards legalization.

4. His humor and candor have to be supreme as usual. Thompson and Romney are telegenic but stiff at times and Huckabee can give a wonderful contrast to their robotic approach to question answering.

5. Offense Offense Offense. You can't appear desperate, but in calm low-key approach you have to respond damaging and strategically to criticisms of your plans and policy proposals. Comparing Romney's formal positions to what Democrats/liberal proposals will bring the audience into the equation.

6. Talk about Hillary...this is another crowd pleaser and talk strong on fixing some of the challenges facing the party.

7. Put a more persuasive and Presidential demeanor to his appeal. Romney and Thompson probably have the edge on the Presidential look and feel category, unfortunately they both will give up some of it when they engage in the one-on-one battles required in a tough debate.

Other eNews References:

http://www.enewsreference.com

Huckabee issues a debate challenge to Fred Thompson in September.

Quote on Fred Thompson's response to Huckabee's challenge

Huckabee: America enslaved to Saudi Oil

The Sunday Shows: Open Season on Huckabee eNews Reference: Campaign 2008

The real question for Giuliani will be does he have enough foreign policy experience in a post 911 world. The Fire Fighters will be to him what the Swiftboaters were to Senator Kerry and Giuliani’s ability to persuasively put the facts out there will be critical in a general election.

http://www.enewsreference.com

“I will govern according to the common weal, but not according to the common will.” -James I

This quote came to mind when poll results indicated Iowans believed Senator Clinton is more inclined to not say what is on her mind. The Obama camp has linked this sort of politicing to the administration of George W. Bush. Senator Obama has stated in one of his ads we need to tell people what they need to hear…we need to tell them the truth. Obama has simplified the race on average-everyday-people terms to the extent that he has had to fight off criticism of being naive.

Along comes an opponent like Barack Obama, a candidate who seems to be willing to govern to both the common “weal” and will. Voters are looking for candidates who are not looking past them, but candidates who are willing to give straight answers to some of the toughest questions in the history of this great country. Should we talk to our enemies. When the unliked neighbors and your child get into a fight you bite your tongue and engage in a dialogue to settle the dispute. Our system of justice hinges on meeting with those we have had a disagreement with and settling it in court face-to-face. For too long Americans have been told to let Washington deal with Washington, or on the stump candidates give that sheepish smile as though our questions are too simple.

Ten years down the road we have to look back on this period and know that we got it right. Our generation have to be able to vote out of our pocket books or on fear, but for the common will. Hillary Clinton has made it a point to change her image to appear friendly and voters have detected that change and the polls indicate that some are questioning whether or not it is authentic.

Obama’s showing in Iowa and New Hampshire will hinge on whether or not he can articulately provide an alternative to the Clinton brand of politics and show the relevancy of his life’s story.

http://www.enewsreference.com

 In the Seacoast region of New Hampshire there’s no competition at this point. Hillary has staked her claim in the signage war

http://www.enewsreference.com

As usual look for a Clinton and Obama fight or two. And, Gov. Romney come out fighting with Gov. Huckabee on his heels in Iowa. Huckabee appears to be more down-home and user friendly than the stoic all-business appeal of Romney. 

In the next two to three weeks candidates will either secure their rightful place in the fight or they will be given a one way ticket back to their home states

http://www.enewsreference.com

In this race she has shown herself to be the toughest of the Obama’s. If Senator Obama makes it to the White House Michelle Obama will be an imposing figure in setting policy and her involvment will be even more significant than Hillary’s if you can imagine that.

http://www.enewsreference.com

Obama could feel the wrath of the Clinton war machine in the coming weeks. Everyone has made a lot of accusations against the Clintons, but being unwilling to give a knock out punch has not been one of them.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are wrong in the way they’ve argued their position on this topic. Hillary was miffed at the fact that Obama brought up the subject of authorizing the war so she waited patiently for her chance to pounce on Obama. The way in which she articulated a position that arguably contradicts an earlier statement on meeting with rouge nations was very strategic. In the final outcome it is too early in the race for these sort of battles especially when the Democratic party is trying to present a unified front.

The real issue is campaign funding. Clinton’s supporters see Obama’s grassroots network and Hollywood support as a threat to her fundraising and general election initiatives. Obama has the tools and ability to weaken her chances at unifying the party against the Republicans.

It is surprising to think that the Hillary Clinton and Obama controversy is still playing out in the media. Some media analysts and pundits crave this sort of cat fight in politics, but the real question is whether or not voters are receiving the information they need for an informed decision in November ’08.

When all is said and done many believe Hillary Clinton will receive the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. In the mean time, Barack Obama is organizing thousands of new contributors to the party to give Hillary a very easy base to tap into. The great success of the first legitimate African American presidential candidate could mean the Presidency for the first female President of the United States.

When you factor in the fact that Obama has over 250,000 contributors at the grassroots level who’s very excited about this race you can understand why Hillary has put on the happy face during the debates. Bill Clinton is not going around saying Hillary’s voting record is similar to Obama’s for nothing as it relates to Iraq.

In the beginning it seemed as though Hillary Clinton could be swept off stage by Obama’s grassroots appeal until her advisors stepped in and told her, just wait ‘this too will pass’. Hillary is the champion of weathering storms.

http://www.enewsreference.com/political_enotes.shtml

Terms like "vast right wing conspiracy" and the proverb "It takes a village to raise a child" will forever be a part of the political lexicon in America simply because she uttered them. The Democratic field would look totally different if she wasn't "in it to win it." What will beat Senator Clinton is the task of defeating her on her own terms.

The White House was very stormy during the Clinton years. Never before has an affair unraveled in such a way. Honesty and integrity was in short supply during those years. It was painful to see living rooms, workplace and classroom discussions about the sleaze in the White House during Bill Clinton's Administration.

Today there is the potential that Clintons will occupy the White House again. Monica Lewinsky will write a reflective book about her immature years in the White House and have book signings in Washington, DC.

Republican contenders should waist no time in discussing Senator Clinton's policy decisions. Her flip on Iraq and other key votes should be analyzed and discussed in a substantive way. If Republicans walk gingerly on attacking Clinton because of the female vote she will exploit it and dance into the White House.

Ultimately she has her nomination sewn up barring no major surprises. And make no mistake about it she will be tough to beat. She was the reckoning force behind the Clinton campaigns. Today she is far removed and operating on her agenda and her own terms.

Some would argue that at the heart of all the problems besetting the Bush administration lies a great deal of stubbornness. President Bush's critics would continue to argue that some of the immediate major challenges and concerns of this country, like the Iraq war, immigration, and corruption within his own administration are the result of a brazen disregard for the intricacies of diplomacy and bipartisanship.

Bill Clinton's administration had it's problems, but I think your most staunch conservative would have to say that the issues of the Clinton years pale in comparison to the complexities of the Bush years.

Will history write that Bush was the right leader for this period? The pages are still being written. Bush did not exude the optimism, but as the candidates line up to replace him, will he be credited for the tough and forward thinking of the battle against terror?

Politics is as evil as a serpent in a lot of ways and Hillary is no stranger to these sort of ploys. This is the vastness of the lows in which this potential president will go to win the White House.

If you were a man from freakin Mars you'd think he had some insight analysis and a $2.00 fortune teller sitting in the studio somewhere. Tucker Carlson talks with gusto about the Iraqi war as though he could last there for more than an hour. Carlson would drop from the heat in Iraq alone, yet he doesn't hesitate to claim to know about the cost of death. I'm glad they took the bow tie off this dude, maybe some oxygen will get to his brain.

There are some people that should be banned from speaking about Iraq and presidential policy decisions. When the execs at CNN gave this guy his start, did they have a conversation with him. Tucker Carlson doesn't know what it means to exist in our world let alone what it means to breath out of two nostrils. The man speaks as though he is enlightened and he couldn't survive on a busy street in New York, not to mention Iraq.

Most polls are showing Giuliani ahead of the pact among the list of GOP candidates vying for the White House these days. The fact that three of the leading candidates (Giuliani, McCain and Gingrich) have about 5 or 6 marriages among them along with adulterous affairs have been reported in the media extensively these days. Who would have ever thought that there are more Bible holding churchgoers on the Democratic side these days?

The party of family values currently has a leading candidate with a collection of photos in drag. Maybe a psychiatrist will be able to tap into the side of Giuliani that enjoys that fantasy when he is in the White House. In the meantime conservatives will have a tough decision to make about the candidate they feel will best represent their interests as President.

When you consider the fact that for the first time the leading GOP candidates have very vague positions on issues like Same-sex Marriage, Abortion, and even gun control of all things, it is opening up the door for a third-party candidate that will emerge to champion the causes that conservatives and especially the evangelical wing hold near and dear.

Homosexuality is an immoral act among conservatives that will nominate their candidate for president. It cannot be implied it has to be explicitly stated. Why it took a second tier candidate in Senator Sam Brownback to do it is beyond belief.

All of a sudden it’s not about core values it about the candidate who can raise the most money and the ability to beat Hillary Clinton’s war machine.

Article at: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/articles/2007/AR200703300120.shtml

Hillary Clinton is pushing her campaign forward amid the latest bickering between Senator Barack Obama and Reverend Al Sharpton. The only benefit from this clash is enjoyed by her campaign. As long as Obama's campaign is mired in petty clashes about endorsements and fundraising issues it keeps Senator Obama from waging the real battle over ideas.

Presently, Al Sharpton has alleged that Obama's camp planted a story in the New York Post about being jealous of the media attention surrounding Barack Obama's candidacy for President of the United States. It is not understood if Obama had anything to do with the story at this point.

Sharpton's points about Obama's support of Joseph Lieberman brings up chilling reminders of how Senator  Kerry was able to tactfully utilize Sharpton in the the 2004 race against Howard Dean.

Article: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/articles/2007/AR200703140117.shtml

In the final hours of William Jefferson Clinton’s Presidency, controversial pardons were made to individuals who made significant contributions and cash payments to the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign for Senator of New York, President Clinton's brother Roger Clinton Jr.  and Senator Clinton’s two brothers Tony and Hugh Rodham.

At the time the ‘vast right-wing’ conspirators didn’t have much footing because the President has the absolute and unambiguous authority from The United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2 on his side that grants the authority to make “…pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

When you fast forward today and consider the areas where a huge segment of Americans have reservations about another Clinton presidency, the appearance of and real improprieties surrounding everything from Whitewater, the Lincoln Bedroom, Paula Jones, Vince Foster, cattle futures, the Rose Law Firm, Monica Lewinsky and ‘Pardongate’ provides the opportunity to resurface Senator Clinton’s connection to a very dark episode in American politics.

A US Bankruptcy Court Judge Marian Harrison has ordered Tony Rodham to respond by March 16 to the allegation that he failed to repay a loan of $107,000 from Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory who were convicted of bank fraud and hired by Tony Rodham and paid him $244,769 in salary over 2 1/2 years, according to a congressional report.

The problem this presents for the Senator Clinton's campaign for President are doubts in the mind of independent and moderate voters in a general election. What will be key is Senator Clinton's ability to come out quickly and state she had nothing to do with the pardons as First Lady even although her brothers were involved. The story and other previous scandals galvanizes her enemies and will make the competing political ads even nastier.

Now the gloves are officially off in the very first spat between the two Democratic front Runners in the race for President of the United States. Hillary Clinton has her operatives on the attack against Barack Obama. In any race you attack your opponent's strengths and Senator Clinton is not pulling back punches in her quest to go after what the crowds are energized about in Senator Obama's candidacy.

The strategy in Senator Clinton's camp is to smile and allow other members in your campaign to throw the dirt. The decision to attack first was decided weeks ago and Clinton will seek other opportunities to go after the freshman Senator from Illinois. Clinton's war room wants Obama to trade political barbs at this point to cast aspersions on his version of politics. At the center of this fight is Obama's ability to step on the Clinton's familiar turf and bring in an unprecedented $1.3 Million.

It appears as though Obama will be a major challenge to Clinton in her Presidential ambitions with enough cash to keep him in the race for a long time to come. The Iraq war will continue to be one of the central points of debate.

Article at: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/articles/2007/AR200702220115.shtml

Today we have come a long way since the Women's Suffrage Movement in America. It is quite remarkable when you think that a former First Lady is a Senator from a state with one of the largest populations in the country and she is being considered a frontrunner to become the President of the United States. Eleanor Roosevelt and other First Ladies are proud of this moment regardless of their political affiliation.

Some of the guiding truths to the Clinton institution are they both love the political spotlight and all of the glamour it entails.

Some other truths are:

1. If Hillary Rodham Clinton becomes President of these United States there might be another post election exodus to Canada

2. Former President William Jefferson Clinton will pursue major initiatives in the vein of his wife's health care debacle

3. I foresee the Clintons going to the far reaches of the earth and making a deal with Satan to find Osama Bin Laden

4. There will be a women's jubilation ceremony similar to the one Nancy Pelosi put on during the inauguration, saying men look what you've gotten us into and relegating our roles to being more supportive and submissive...yes dear types

5. After the first couple of months I can almost see Hillary Clinton in the mirror even shedding a tear or two after finally ascending the position that was rightfully hers to begin with (Barack Hussein Obama...yeah right)

6. George W. Bush will join Sr. and Billy on golf and fishing outings in Maine

7. And finally Dick Cheney will go on more quail hunting adventures...alone

Article at: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/articles/2007/AR200702200114.shtml

Throughout the Campaign 2008 Primary Obama will try to pick apart Senator Clinton's seeming annoyance of some in her party to want her to pick a side on the war and stick with it. Some Democrats demand to know, either you supported it or you didn't. If you state you support the approval of the war but deplore the mismanagement your base want to see the balanced and articulately stated positions and solutions for operations in Iraq and a real strategic winning strategy for Iraq and the stabilization of the middle east as a whole. Unfortunately Hillary Clinton and the democrats are lacking in this area.

Dennis Kucinich position on "International Cooperation" is spelled out on his website where he quotes Abraham Lincoln. One of the things you see in a Kucinich nomination is the true nuts and bolts of a campaign exposed and in the open. Most of the language on Kucinich's site reads like it's coming directly from his stump speeches.

"In the America of my dreams, the America I see taking root and flourishing under new administration, other nations will encounter an America that abides by Lincoln's precept: "The only lasting way to eliminate an enemy is to make him your friend." We will accommodate rather than alienate, make friends instead of enemies, and employ carrots far more often than sticks. We need an administration that will drain the swamps of hopelessness, exploitation, and humiliation that cause vulnerable individuals to head down the terrorist road."

Other campaigns are frustrating for media types because the heart of their strategy is tucked away. With Kucinich you see it all without the many political professionals. Some could argue there was no one in the Kucinich camp to let him know that you can't extend the hand of friendship to a determined enemy. The 'lasting way' of defeating terrorism is not showing signs of weakness. Field commanders listening to a speech with phrases like "we will accommodate rather than alienate." must wonder about the Democratic field of candidates resolve in defeating the enemy for several reasons:

Other democratic candidates are a little more scripted and subtle about their plans. Well funded campaign speechwriters are more creative in criticizing the war. Some argue positions that are thrust on the airwaves like "we should be talking to our enemies" naively miss the fundamental nature and scope of today's enemy versus the Cold War of industrialized superpowers.

Democratic Senator Obama's plan to bring home the troops by March 2008 should be scrutinized by other world leaders, because the fundamental premise of the plan does not take into account the over 3000 lives that he deems wasted. There can be no apology for stating what you fundamentally believe. Obama's botched speech is detrimentally more harmful than even what Senator John Kerry said about the troops. Singing the noise that he was against the war and campaigned against it from the beginning is a lot easier than putting a more comprehensive agenda to win and stabilize the region.

When you want to see the full measure of a party's position, there is some credence to looking at the candidates without the power players. Kucinich's approach to the Iraq war -- his immediate withdrawal plan and lasting fight against terror based on friendship and accommodation -- is easy to be viewed as the Democrats plan without the dressings of paid political professionals.

From eNews Reference article: http://www.enewsreference.com/enr/articles/2007/AR200702160112.shtml

Senator Hillary Clinton is ‘in it to win it’ in her quest to be the 44^th president of the United States of America and at present her closest challenger is trailing her by double digits. Senator Barack Obama even trails her by double digits in a poll of Afro-American Democrats at present.

By far she is the clear and frontrunner in the Democratic field.

For any candidate the long hard fought race will be about unforeseen challenges and candidates will be taken to task on a whole list of issues, but Senator Clinton seems to have a well oiled machine at the onset. Her opponents will eventually have to attack hard and use all of the arsenals in their war chest to get on the same playing field.

In 2004 Governor Howard Dean had a lot of momentum and media buzz and Senator John Kerry had the establishment and years of political favors to cash in. In the 2008 Campaign Hillary Clinton sits in a similar position of having the overwhelming support of the Democratic establishment. She has vast Democratic network of supporters and will not feel the need to get into a battle in the primary unless her poll numbers start to slip.

Being the front has the obvious advantage of the powers of the donor purse, but the worry in the Clinton camp would have to be peaking early in the race and being position to withstand the onslaught of attacks from the likes of Edwards, Obama, Vilsack, Biden, Dodd and others.

Look for 5 persuasive attacks on Senator Hillary Clinton to dethrone her as frontrunner.

1. Hillary Clinton has never been challenged in a debate by the likes of Edwards and Obama. The New York State challengers were no match, but look for Hillary's Democratic opponents to be tough with Hillary specifically on the Iraq war and line by line of her policy proposals.

2. True leadership is the ability to say you’ve made a mistake and move on. It took Bush’s November ‘thumping’ to make him state he made mistakes. Colin Powell has used words like, “It was painful” and “I was enormously disappointed” in going before the world to state the US position leading up to the evasion of Iraq, but Hillary has yet to be able to provide the words to assuage the many Democrats who want her to say more than the ‘if I knew what I know now’ or her attempt to position the blame on the current administration. Look for her opponents to get her to definitively state simply she made a mistake and then attack her for not doing it sooner.

3. The question of Hillary Clinton's ability to '...win it' in a general election will be presented to Democratic voters. Does all the baggage from her past deem her too polarizing of a figure to garner the moderate and independent mantra of the November elections?

4. Look for challengers to ask the Democratic base to not allow another Bush/Clinton decade. The candidate who can articulately state it is in our interests to not be defined by the same political Bush/Clinton tree. Obama has already positioned his campaign against the old partisan politics of divisiveness and the other candidates will stump asking Americans to do better than old style politics. Look for groups operating outside the campaigns to put the Rose Law Firm, cattle futures, Vince Foster, accusations of using the 'N' word in the past, Whitewater and  pricy gifts received when the Clintons were in the White House back into the talk show circuit.

5. If anyone other than Hillary wins the nomination they will be successful in separating her from the enormous success of her husband and even reminding voters in a peripheral way the moral failures of the Clinton household.

Analysts are wrong in stating it is Hillary's race to lose. In 2008 she will have to do more than smile. Voters will want to see something different  in this race.

Today at the dawn of a new century we are still grappling with questions of race and skin pigmentation in America. If our forefathers could have peeked into our nation’s challenges at this chapter, what would they offer about some of the questions we are asking about an Afro-American candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America. I think they would be amused as I am. I don’t wishfully think that the same question will not exist for some time to come.

In America today hundreds of years later, the one drop rule applies. We still coexist under the great text "That all men are created equal..." but don't think about running for President yet.

I can’t help but suspect that media types bring up the experience question when they want to disguise the question of blackness. There will not be another Administration in the White House more 'experienced' than the one that entered in 2000. Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice were not coined 'The Dream Team' for nothing. No one imagined an inexperienced John F. Kennedy impacting the previous American Century. There were a lot of "Let us...!" in Obama's speech reminiscent to Kennedy's memorable speeches; by the way.

Barack Obama had it right in the 60 Minutes interview when the question was asked about poll numbers showing Black America supporting the Hillary Clinton campaign by double digits. Black American’s are sophisticated enough not to vote for a candidate strictly based on race. Obama recognizes the fact that he has to get out there and earn every vote.

If you confronted most Americans with this very question, Do you think Colin Powell would have served us better as President in the last eight years than President George W. Bush? I think an overwhelming majority would say yes. They would base their question on Powell’s widely reported reluctance in going into Iraq and the consequences he articulately posed about engaging in a long occupation there. They also believe the man is capable based on experience as well; none of it having to do with elected office either.

Barack Obama is basing his candidacy on the audacious assumption that American is one step ahead of the commentators, strategists, and media hawks who question our readiness. There is nothing like being there on the ground and sensing the tremendous support for Obama’s candidacy. When the crowds are shown at Obama rallies the sites cannot be scripted like other political events.

With the rise of candidates of color in many elected offices across the country, voters know that the need for change trumps race. The need for leadership is great for our generation.

One of the most important rules on swift-boating is: Never mind the facts, provide enough inferences and miscellaneous rhetoric to place doubt in the minds of voters, like the parable about someone tossing thistles into a farmers field. Unfortunately there was a lot of room for doubt with Kerry. The candidate doesn't even have to have his campaign generate the attack ad, ask Senator Corker from Tennessee. In a lot of ways the attention that this Afro American, Caucasian, Native American, Kenyan National, Multiracial, Multiethnic, Hawaiian, Kansan, and Illinoisan candidate is getting is too good to be true. And even Obama has asked, is it just hype?

With Obama however the trick will be to not attack him personally, but provide enough minutia to question his experience while positioning your campaign as being more experienced. Senator Clinton and many many strategists around the country are digging for all the info they can find on the young Obama before he even thought about the Late Show; when he was a shirtless teenager running on the beaches of Hawaii.

I'm going to make it easy for them because I simply want to make sure he's been through the fire. There are five swift-boating tactics that should be utilized to insure he has the mettle to be the leader of the free world:

1. That old Illinois Senate voting record: Illinois is not your typical western state. They tend to think different from those on the open prairie. Obama has built quite a liberal voting record on issues like justice & law enforcement, entitlements, education and many controversial issues. Along with all this are quotes...yes yesssss. Many quotes that this Presidential wannabe has stated in the newspapers and even on video. All you Obama folks get ready. You will see enough stuff to ask yourself is he a viable candidate. We know where Kucinich stand on the issues. He'll come out and tell you screw Iraq, bring our troops home. Obama on the other hand will tell you he supports the troops and we should have a sound policy in Iraq...and we don't doubt him on this, but all a bottom tier strategist needs is to provide a little doubt people.

2. Land deal: Yes in every candidate's past, like McCain among the 'Keating 5' and the Savings and Loan bust, there is a transaction or special favor that doesn't need a lot of scrutiny when you're talking about swift-boating. Like the so call vast conspiracy against Billy between now and the first primary vote we will know everything Obama has purchased in his entire life. There is a controversial land deal that Obama has gone on record as saying it wasn't the most wise decision. Stay tuned.

3.Drugs: he has already told us about his drug use during his teenage years and strategist will have to be careful about attacking with this issue using too much enthusiasm as to not strengthen Obama's base. All the stuff about the Air National guard did not sway core republicans from coming to the polls in droves to support 'W', it even strengthened their resolve. Barack Obama's drug use is fair game. Test have shown to affect the mental ability and have long term effects in test rats. Who's to say that Obama does not have lingering side effects from extensive drug use. Remember we're swift-boating. We're not playing nice.

4. Is he black enough?: Some will shout I'm black and I'm proud and throw up a clinched fist to even make their point. As to not scare voters on the line about Obama how will he compile his campaign team. Can he afford to do what most Democratic candidates do; talk a good game but when you see their buddies and their senior advisors there is no hint of inclusiveness. Going to a black church and shouting amen! might not be enough for an Afro American candidate. Barack will be expected to be all things to all people, sipping on cranberry juice one day and drinking Kool-Aid the next.

As Obama drift to the right during the campaign, Democratic candidates are more than willing to point out differences with Obama's position and Al Sharpton's position. Kerry used Sharpton effectively to question Dean's ability to be president coming out of a fenced in state called Vermont. If Obama becomes president there will be no excuses for a lot of American's who make excuses about acquiring success in America. An Obama's presidency represents an end to Affirmative Action. This hidden and unspoken language given to young Afro American boys about the cards being stacked against them so why work as hard will evolve into, look at what you can achieve if you work harder...

5. Experience: Is the man ready for what it takes to be President in this day and age. Obama should be tested with questions concerning Red China and nuclear proliferation and should be expected to answer with an even greater depth and insight than his opponents because one of his greatest weaknesses is time in national politics. No one can learn on the job in this day and age. We've made that mistake with Bush. We knew he didn't know about countries and world leaders when we put him in there and look where its taken us. Just surrounding himself with great leaders and a Condi tutor will not be enough. When questions are asked voters will be looking to hear fluid responses, not political sound bites. When Obama trip-up on questions, look for other candidates to seize on the opportunity to show everyone that he's not as astute on the issues as we thought.

Running for president is a very hard task. Some have chosen the easy road and used the popularity of relatives to catapult their entry into American politics and others have used a great deal of charisma and charm to do it. In Obama we see a great deal of charm, charisma and most importantly the ability to raise a lot of dough. A lot of Hillary donors have not returned her calls as of late. Obama is the monkey wrench in her political ambitions. The Hillary mindset is, she's the village that needs to emerge in this century to set us on the right path. The Presidency is rightfully hers and she'll do whatever it takes.

If Obama has the right mettle in him, damage control and fighting the tough offensives will have to be  a part of his game plan. Alas there might be an end to politics the usual way. We can get to a day when there's not a Bush or Clinton telling American's their words are draped in gold. At last!

Today when Nancy Pelosi raises the gavel, when Oprah donates millions of dollars to a school in South Africa, or when Afghanistan women have a voice in their own wellbeing the words ‘Let freedom ring…' are echoed across the globe; thanks to a larger than life figure who decided to not accept the status quo and rolled up his sleeves for social justice.

We at eNR want to devote some words about a prolific figure who galvanized a nation for change. A lot of people knew the times were ripe for change and Dr. King answered the call. If he rose every Sunday and stood behind the pulpit and delivered a stunning sermon for many this would’ve been enough, but he gave us so much more.

There is a lot that our generation can learn from Dr. Martin Luther King’s legacy. His greatness came for his ability to uplift, mobilize, and inspired a nation. I can remember when President George W. Bush stated what is commonly stated every year: that we have come a long way and we have a ways to go to arrive at true racial equality.

King’s Dream has been fulfilled. The power of his message rings true. It was modest in it’s intent because it outlined only the framework by which racial harmony can grow. In communities all over the country we have thousands of Obamas and even more Oprahs; politicians, journalists, fire chiefs, judges and doctors thanks to the Dream.

We have a long way to go before poverty is eradicated or even slavery becomes a thing of the past, but thanks to Dr. King we have a blue print for working towards a common mission. Today that mission should be about cultivating all of the good work the civil rights movement set out to do. It starts on a small scale by our every day contact with others, tracking and understanding emotions that emerge when we observe someone that might be different from ourselves.

As a person who was born after his brutal death, I want to say his message still rings clear in my mind and even millions across the globe. The 60’s presented a cause and a mission for the young and charismatic leader.

Dr. Martin Luther King exemplified the path one takes for social justice in America and even the world. There was not a more passionate figure of his era. The depth and meaning of Dr. Kings purpose is still reaching across boundaries that exist today - timeless. Decades from now his message will speak to future generations with the same strength that it spoke to hate in the 60s.

The dimmed backdrop and even down to the gestures were reminiscent of the speech Bill Clinton made before the American people during the Monica Lewinsky scandal except during that time it was a matter of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’/a sex cover-up in the White House and today - over 3,000 US soldiers, men and women who gave the ultimate price and thousands more injured and even many more Iraqi civilians brutally killed because of the way this conflict is managed.

The Democrats are vowing not to make the same mistake twice, but they must except some of the blame for supporting and voting for the war and for not being able to develop a clear alternative to Bush’s plan for Iraq. Although they have made it clear they have many tough questions to be answers, they’ve made it equally clear that they are leading with criticisms and not concrete solutions.

The President of the United States is sending 21,500 troops to bulk up the security in Baghdad and in the Anbar Province. One of the things we got out of W’s message is his acknowledgment of mistakes made and his acceptance of the responsibility; a no-no leading up to the November elections.

In the final analysis the American people will respect the side with their sleeves rolled up and not the group with their mouths open and fingers pointed like the Republicans during President Clinton’s administration.

Is oil one of the driving factors of our mission in Iraq? This question and how history will place him among Presidents facing enormous challenges during war influenced Bush’s decision to build up our troops and try a last ditched effort at stabilizing Iraq and eventually stabilizing the region.

Al Sharpton has announced there’s no reason for him not to jumping into the field of Democratic candidates for the 2008 Presidential race during an interview at the Urban Affairs Conference sponsored by Jesse Jackson.

He was definitely what Alan Keyes was to the Republican Presidential race in 2000 in 2004, even though they’re at extreme opposites on political viewpoints. The question is: Is being entertaining and maybe having some thought provoking points here and there on the campaign trail enough?

When you factor in the most effective methods to use in raising the national conscience on issues that are near and dear, they range from a whole assortment of approaches to take other than running for President when you’re a figure like Al Sharpton.

One form is doing what I’m doing right now, writing a blog. The others range from writing a novel and hoping that it gets on the Oprah’s list of favorites, to talk radio and even riding a bike or walking across country.

It is very true that Al Sharpton like the glitter and glamor that only a presidential race can bring. There could be no better soapbox than standing side-by-side with Hillary Rodham Clinton  and the exposure it would bring. It definitely has the potential of producing a great selling book about the ills of this nation and about how wonderful your message is.

The last time Sharpton was in the state of New Hampshire he received 0.1% of the vote during the 2004 Democratic Presidential Primary. Are roughly 350 votes worth the airtime?

The AP reported Barack Obama being the other African American candidate in the race and to that I say, as inexperienced as Obama might be he should never never be mentioned in the same breath as Al Sharpton. Obama has put a lot of time in partnering with constructive change, implementing policies and setting the framework for making communities work in the state of Illinois, not just giving speeches and highlighting differences.  

A prime example of Sharpton in action was when Senator Kerry was able to effectively use him to stymie Howard Dean’s political ambitions. The question raised by Al Sharpton about Dean being qualified to be President coming from a small state with a 1% minority population was orchestrated by the Kerry camp as well as the criticism Dean received when he stated he’d appeal to southern voters with the Confederate flag on the back of the pick-ups.

Al Sharpton has never tried to extinguish the flames of racial unrest in America; all too often he’s viewed as a polarizing figure. Never mind the fact that he won’t raise the capital necessary in modern presidential politics, but when it comes to the presidential qualities of coalition building he lacks tremendously.

John McCain had it right, and you won’t ever catch him saying this again, when he made the comparison of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell with Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton; they’re all separatists in their approaches to perceived ills in our society. It is one thing to say what's wrong and rolling up your sleeves to fix it and not saying what's wrong and do not attempt going after changing the root of the problem.

It is not necessary to state all of the 100 reasons why Sharpton shouldn’t run for President. The ones I’ve stated above should suffice and to say that if any Democratic Candidate goes to church with Al Sharpton on the four Sundays leading up to the presidential elections like Senator John Kerry did they would be signing their party’s death wish. The Democratic Party can't afford the divisive shadow of Al Sharpton no more than it can a strong Ralph Nader candidacy.

I'm sure it was refreshing to a lot of folks to see the President of the United States in the Rose Garden of the White House talking about cooperation and even writing a opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal urging all sides to work together for meaningful legislation.

The list of priorities hint a well choreographed message for the up-coming elections. While Democrats and Republicans are battling it out in primaries, The Bush Administration will be observed pushing initiatives that are near and dear to the electorate.

Not everything Bush will be doing in the next two years will be solely to win the hearts and minds of voters. His work is cut out for him in Iraq with Iran's influence in the Middle East at an alarming presence, the North Korean stalemate and balancing some very tough domestic initiatives.

The only way Bush can maneuver through these political straits is with political cooperation and not merely for the sake of cooperation itself, but his legacy and the backdrop of the 2008 is looming like a massive rain cloud over the White House.

At this point he has done the expected, meeting with key Iraqi officials to set the agenda for a heightened awareness on the overall security and stability of Iraq, meeting with and expressing a greater cooperation with Democrats and even as his party and his administration gets badgered by all sides, including Republicans. He is exhibiting the face of calm and resilience in getting his message out, qualities of leadership that were evident immediately following 911.

Pundits, you can look for President George W. Bush to be kindler tough and measured in these last two years. He's building his State of the Union message and will be working hard for meaningful accomplishments. He might be able to campaign for the Republican presidential candidates this go around.

Posted by eNews Reference staff | info@enewsreference.com

Reuters http://today.reuters.com/tv/videoChannel.aspxstoryid=a12e30546019929f3625ae1d8bb4eb8ae3c00394

Google

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7532034279766935521

One of the first thoughts that came to my mind when they said they will turn Saddam over to the Iraqi people was, what if the man escapes and then shortly after I thought about all of the scenarios of a Saddam retake of power if the US cut and ran in Iraq. And, using this hypothetical to determine some of the things the US should do to stabilize the country:

The first thing Saddam would do if a large band of loyalist freed him out of his awaited gallows would unite all of his loyalist and try to bring back all of the bandits who fled to Syria  and other parts unknown during the US takeover. Then he would attempt a brutal and merciless takeover by capturing and murdering all government officials within the US-backed government and old foes in the Shiite camp in a unprecedented bloodbath of civil and urban style warfare; what is currently taking place, but under Saddam a renewed and clear objective to regain power.

What we know now is that as much of a terrible dictator Saddam was and as harsh as the brutality he inflicted to the citizens of Iraq, he knew a lot more about what it took to keep the many factions in harmony. Many Iraqis are not celebrating us in the streets, but saying the sectarian violence, bombing, kidnapping, and hardships under the new government didn't exist under Saddam's regime. Many are arguing what good are freedoms on paper when you don't have the luxury of going outside of your house to exercise them.

A lot of the factions in Iraq are adamant about the US leaving the region, but at the same time opposed to a Saddam-like figure taking control because it would mean the end to their independent quests for fiefdom power grabs. Part of the problem the Bush administration has with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is their faith in his ability to operate with an iron fist and do the things to unite the people of Iraq and negate the many influences from neighboring countries; qualities of leadership that Saddam was a wizard at.

Saddam would take back most of the freedoms in Iraq until there is some measure that it would stable enough to begin pillaging the wealth and institutionalizing the subjugation of the citizenry. What is evident today is as harsh as secret prisons, tough interrogations and the Abu Ghraib situation was  it's no comparison to what Saddam has done and what he'd do if he regained power.

When reporters questioned Russian President Vladimir Putin about the loss of liberties and the retreat of the democratic process in the old Soviet Union he chided the US backed government in Iraq as not being an example of how a democracy should be and hinted we're naive if we think our approach to democracy could be implemented all over the world. At this point we admit some naivety in going in and even our ability to build the forces necessary to secure the country in a timely fashion.

Taking all of this into consideration, no wonder it is widely believed that the US underestimated the amount of force needed going in Iraq. American forces has served heroically with its first real hand-to-hand urban style combat operation greater than its test in Somalia, but unfortunately commanders and upper echelons in Defense have not put them in positions to succeed. Under Secretary Gates leadership this might be possible.

The reality however is, Saddam in hours it will be a very sad sad day for you and a joyous occasion for many who suffered under your regime.

eNews Reference - http://www.enewsreference.com

eNews Reference - http://www.enewsreference.com

One of the basic propositions on Iraq today is that we were ill prepared in our intelligence to win the objective. Our mission has failed due to improper planning at the top. One of the most notable culprits was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. This cannot be more evident in the Senate's fast track hearing on the incoming Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Having said that, one of the other entities that have not stepped up to the plate is the US media. Most of the political rhetoric has evaded sound thinking and sound analysis on our airwaves. The media has been on a roller coaster ride during the Bush Presidency. The average person has neither the capability nor the tools to scrutinize the intelligence presented to the world going into Iraq, but the media stood by and hid behind so-called reporting and not investigating the truth.

The worlds of our past has never seen the conglomerate media empires of our time, and even though we have more information at our disposal than history could fathom the media have failed to deliver sound and reasoned coverage to the public for fear of loosing the ratings war.

All of the talk shows will fineness critical issues by quoting politicians and arguing mundane points like, should be talking to Syria and Iraq or do we need more troops on the ground. We are overloaded with political jargon like 'cut and run' and 'stay the course' without knowing the full cataclysmic problem we have on an International scale in the Middle East because it's not glamorous enough.
It is sad when other national medias throughout the world are providing the intellectual and moral analysis that the US media doesn't seem fit to distribute.

eNews Reference - http://www.enewsreference.com - Reposted

When Vice President said Senator Clinton would be a formidable candidate for the White House I must admit part of me was thinking where is the rabbit in the hat. A fear that many Democrats have expressed is Hillary's ability to win. Republicans have stated that she is one of the most polarizing figures in America today. Some have even celebrated the fact that she seems to be at the head of the pack after winning her reelection for US Senator of the state of New York.

All of the pundits have pretty much given Clinton the Democratic primary race on a silver platter without considering the fact that Clinton's camp is looking at their list of supporters and checking it twice. Victory is of the utmost importance. Second place and a good running at this stage in the Senators career is not an option. The choice to run hinges on whether or not she can compel the many moderates and independents that she has a viable chance of winning the crucial votes necessary and coming out of the fire a victor.

My suspicion is that there's a sizable odd that she doesn't throw her heels into the race because she wants to win and all of the strategy session are formulated based on that question alone. When she was said to be calling potential supporters it was measuring her support and a possible tough primary and the ability to get out of the it with enough stamina to take on a strong Republican challenger.

Bush will do a better job in two years of being the kinder and gentler arm of the Republican party. Many voters might have remorse over the dishing they issued. All of this might boils down to Hillary Clinton's ability to be likable. She has evolved from the Tammy Wynette comment, but have to go a long long way on the road to a possible victory.

Clinton haven't made the decision. She craves it and all of what the race entails. If the forecasts show she has many mountains and valleys to conquer she is gladly willing to do it if it shows the hint of winning the ultimate job. I have never found any strategist on the talk shows asking, how would the field look without Hillary?

The top challenger would undoubtedly be John Edwards without Hillary in the picture, but that's like a huge cloud over the Democratic field. If Hillary Clinton loses the Democratic Primary it boosts the winning candidate to greater heights than a victory without someone of Hillary's stature in the race. The Democratic Primary needs Hillary if not for President Clinton's constant presence and his world stature. As much as Bill will try to be low key during the race to not take any light from Hillary and good gauge of Hillary's race will be when and if the media takes the focus off Billy and puts it squarely on Hillary's shoulders.

The first First Lady in the White House to run and become a US Senator and get reelected, the first First Lady to ever be in contention for President of the United States (Eleanor would be proud), and if she's successful the first First Lady and female to ever be the President of these United States.

The Republicans want Hillary because she represents everything that they have been beating for a while now, but maybe the VP's comments about her chances represent a view of those who understand the process a little more. It is hard to attack a female candidate and especially one of Hillary's prominence. For some female candidates it is easy to say they're not tough enough or experienced enough. It will be hard to dismiss a Hillary Clinton. She doesn't go away after being pricked.

I find it pretty ironic that the same people who rail against how others inject politically correctness into Christmas really don't celebrate the true meaning of the day and adhere to any religious view, but are discomforted when others ask for inclusion. There are those who firmly believe their religious version of their holiday season and would try to block other forms of expression; as crazy as I think these folks are, I'm not referring to them.

I was listening to a radio station where one disc jockey sarcastically said, have a nondenominational holiday season. And there are more extreme experiences of the need to be inclusive for Christmas. There was a major metropolitan airport that took down Christmas trees to prevent having to include Jewish holiday celebrations (I'm sure they also consulted their legal counselor and they advised that it might be costly and complex to acknowledge all forms of expression and the subdivision association that made a resident take down a symbol that stated something to the effect of peace on earth because it was viewed as being too political.

We all know that first amendment rights are enjoyed when they don't infringe upon the rights of others and when you factor in the legalities of public facilities and contractual rules between neighbors it becomes a different story, but I believe this day is big enough to include all forms of expression and in fact it is the celebration of all mankind..."Joy to the world;" not just Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other religions, but the entire world. I think it was what made America great.

For those of you who can't find time to go to church and understand the redemptive and reconcilatory meanings of the day, please don't perceive other religious symbols as being intrusive into your season of shopping and glutton abandonment.

eNews Reference - http://www.enewsreference.com

Even though President Bush admittedly stated he had to assemble the advisors around him that would offset his shortcomings on foreign policy and provide the wisdom he needed when making tough decisions, we loved the idea of electing the son of a former president. At times eNR was embarrassed for W when he made made mispronunciations on world leaders and countries while Condi Rice  tutored him on some of the complex policy issues facing the nation at the time.

We were content in our pre 911 mindset that issues concerning morality and matters pertaining to our wallet and the excesses of government were the most important issues of our day, not the threat that loomed right after Bush's inauguration. In 2008 we wont have the luxury of being so lofty in our puritan ideology.

As eNR posted before, the next Commander in Chief will have to hit the ground running on foreign policy. James Baker has stated our standing around the world will have to be repaired since making the decision to launch the Iraq war.

There is no end in site in the middle east and especially the global war on terrorism. Today the Security Council approved a resolution allowing sanctions, that gives Iran and excuse to effect world markets in its oil production. All the things occurring is a direct effect with what we knew or the lack there of going into Iraq. They didn't celebrate us in the streets and there were the masses left out of the process for so long that they are now willing to revolt against the current government and even US forces considered occupiers.

The next president will have to have the ability to understand what happened and why to get a sense of how to fix the problem. Respectfully he will also have to come in operating from a clean slate unattached to Bush and the dogma that operated with the theory that some policies are ok hidden far away from the American public and even congress as long as it's in the interest of winning the wider war on terror. This logic would be hard to scrutinize if we were winning decisively. Potential candidate like Secretary Rice and former Governor Mark Warner of Virginia knows the quagmire we're in and probably believe now would be a good time because of the mess.

Finally we have a Secretary of Defense who's not going to Iraq for picture ops but his chief goal is to win for the troops on the ground and even for the Iraqi people. The first step in doing that is acknowledging we're loosing. It is unfortunate that we haven't been able to stabilize the situation, and protect the people of Iraq, but one of the more tragic events is politicians trying to seize on the opportunity of so much devastation; everyone has a plan now, but when it was time for true leadership and the ability to scrutinize the intelligence and our justification for going into to Iraq, too many of the same folks were willing to sign off on the blank check.

George W. Bush talked about the consequences of failure and about how grave the mission was at his press conference. I remember thinking, this President would've went on the books as being the greatest President since the first George if we weren't in Iraq right now; if either we overthrew Saddam and secured the borders or if we would've never went in there in the first place. I think the W. Presidency had the potential of being Regan-like in his ability to appeal to people. There has been no President to connect in press conferences with journalists like W since JFK (yeah we said it) aside from the many botched terms.

George W. Bush, even with his Yale and Harvard pedigree is something of a Jesse 'The Body' and Arnold like in his plain spoken manner.

Transparency will cure a lot of ails with the American people. As much as some would like to talk about our electorate not being knowledgeable enough, there are a lot of things they can articulate that the media wont dare to. When W starts to reach across the aisle and inform American you'll see his number going up.

There is nothing more exciting up here in New Hampshire than the up-coming primaries. If you're political junkies like eNR, every little tid bit about the candidates is monumental. Lately, former majority leader Senator Frist and distinguished Senator from Indian, Evan Bayh have removed themselves from the field.

When everything is factored in and when examining the cost in blood, sweat and and tears, too many potentially good candidates are thinking twice about it; former Virginia Governor Mark Warner is in this mold of leaders.

At this point Senator Hillary Clinton is said to be checking her listing and checking twice to stack up all of her supporters and donors. The truth of the matter is, you can have all of the enthusiasm, but if the support and the donors are not aligned you better think twice about the process. At this point Senator Clinton is starting this race on her terms...quite different than when Bill started his race. Many viewed her as the master mind, but at the same time some of the turmoil within the campaign was between Bill and Hillary on strategy. A Hillary Clinton campaign will be a more organized operation. She and her strategist would have to be measuring her support among moderates and independents. During these hours and many phone calls, she wants to know if she can win. For Hillary and even Edwards its not about making a strong showing as it is for Obama and the second tier candidates. She is a polarizing figure that would have to run her campaign to the center, this is the true chess match with her would-be Republican opponent.

That opponent is shaping up more and more to be McCain or Giuliani-like figures who are already in the center of the political spectrum. Giuliani would have to do a lot of prove he can play on the national stage, he has a lot of support at this stage in the game, but voters want to see a candidate shaking the flesh and taking a tough stance on an issue; something that Giuliani or Romney have yet to do on national issues. The two have been more like, yeah I'm for that too figures.

McCain has been doing his homework over the years and building his base of supporters. At this stage in the game he would have to be measuring how beautiful Romney is and fact that there are no photos with his hair out of place. The true test will be McCain ability to ruffle his hair and keep him off balanced on the issues. Romney likes to be on point and have a populist's view on every issues and this might be his undoing. You can't be all things to all groups. For a long time he has been in the bed with a lot of liberals and when the light is shined on those relationships voters will decided if he's a true conservative.

In the end two candidates will emerge from both primaries and battle to the end on the tough issues of our day. The candidate who's standing last will walk away with the title. Get ready for a lot of surprises.

Having said that, one of the other entities that have not stepped up to the plate is the US media. Most of the political rhetoric has evaded sound thinking and sound analysis on our airwaves. The media has been on a roller coaster ride during the Bush Presidency. The average person has neither the capability nor the tools to scrutinize the intelligence presented to the world going into Iraq, but the media stood by and hid behind so-called reporting and not investigating the truth.

The worlds of our past has never seen the conglomerate media empires of our time, and even though we have more information at our disposal than history could fathom the media have failed to deliver sound and reasoned coverage to the public for fear of loosing the ratings war.

All of the talk shows will fineness critical issues by quoting politicians and arguing mundane points like, should be talking to Syria and Iraq or do we need more troops on the ground. We are overloaded with political jargon like 'cut and run' and 'stay the course' without knowing the full cataclysmic problem we have on an International scale in the Middle East because it's not glamorous enough.

It is sad when other national medias throughout the world are providing the intellectual and moral analysis that the US media doesn't seem fit to distribute.

I have not purchased any of his books, but the excerpts that I read in Time Magazine was very moving. The Obama story is definitely a movie in the making. His mother was a fascinating person in her own right. To be very blunt about it: you don't think of white woman having those experiences in the 60s and her message needs to be heard. Senator Obama spoke of her lesson to her son quite eloquently in the passages I did read..

Not many US officials, not even President Clinton would receive the reception he received in Kenya this past summer. We can talk about some of the problems that seem insurmountable in Africa, but to have our President an American and African National would say more than any policy or position speech ever would.

As it stands today, he has a very compelling life story and he appears to have a very thoughtful insight into a lot of what we need in a President, but is that what it takes to be President? We all know that if words and debates are what wins the presidency, Senator McCain would be in his second term. He was obviously a more polished leader than Bush was or even is today. Being President takes an enormous amount of luck, charisma, and a US President have to be a figure of his or her times.

When you put it in this perspective and understanding that Obama will go through the process with all of its scrutiny and examination you would have to see the obvious questions. The media has asked, is America ready? The truth of the matter is, the very fact that the question is being asked today speaks volumes. Obama himself said there is a "threshold" for minority candidates that white candidates do not experience. Looking at recent elections, in Tennessee for example you had a candidate who repeatedly stated a long term African American US Congressman candidate for Senator did not represent Tennessean values. Some took that as a code to mean you're not white. In the same race Harold Ford ended up besting most polls and expectations even after stomping on a more conservative platform than most Democratic US Senate Candidates across the country.

The recent Massachusetts Gubernatorial election had both an African American male and a female representing the Democratic and Republican tickets respectively; both representing what would've been firsts. Governor elect Deval Patrick won in a very decisive primary and general election with a very sizable portion of the vote. Given our times and entanglements in the Iraq war, Steele was able to make a late challenge to a liberal Democratic challenger in the Senate race in Maryland.

In terms of the political environment, this could be the most opportune time for a bi-racial candidate considering the media's, it would seem, early coronation celebration. When you examine Obama's position on issues like Affirmative Action and when Republicans begin to delve into his Illinois State Senate record, Obama will have to be able to use his Clintonesque charm to keep the focus on the issues and his ability to be a leader in the here and now. What is that striking quality that makes him stand out, besides the fact that he's Afro-American and even then is that in and of itself make him Presidential material? Again, I would make him king, but does American share my view. If George W. Bush is the bar we all know that early on there were issues surrounding his lack of foreign policy experience and personally I believe the Senator would be a lot more capable than W in his articulation and knowledge of complex issues given his academic credentials.

I imagine the Republicans will love seeing Hillary having to be soft and cuddly, but hard on an Afro-American challenger. She can't risk talking too much about his inexperience for fear that it might anger Blacks and keep them away from the polls when she'll need them against her Republican opponent in the general elections. They know they have nothing on her senate record, but they will be YouTubing her during her primary run to see how far to the left she'll have to go to come out ahead. This is where the Obama question confuses the matter.

When it is all said and done my belief is Senator Barack Obama will still be Senator, but if he played his cards right he will be in the running for a possibly VP selection and in a lot better standing, with a Presidential race behind him, to be President in 2012. It is very clear that the new and improved look and feel will tank out like it did for Dean in Iowa. He will need the guts and brawns beyond that point. The true success in all of this like it was for Secretary of State Colin Powell is, there are many Afro-Americans like Obama in this day and age who can be President because of intellect and the charisma to transcend the complexities of race in the United States.

It really gives you a sense of the state of politics when the first things we hear over the airwaves about this tragic situation is the effect it will have on Senate and not the effect it will have on the individual and his family first. News becomes the makeup of the Senate and not the wellness of the South Dakota Senator.

I know I'm a little naive to think that politics and news should be different, but to see the CNN news desk seeing the anchors examine the brain and in the same breath talk about his ability to continue based on what party will be in control and not what a horrific and tragic incident this is on the person and the life effect it will have on those close to him is stark.

To Democrats:

If you're a Democrat and hoped to have control of both the Senate and the House please don't blog this incident with the many misfortunes since the 2000 Presidential elections. You said you were willing to work with Republicans; as unfortunate as this situation is it might give you the opportunity to work across party line in a genuine way.

I'll never forget seeing him in New Hampshire and his supporters who appeared to be more from Senator Robert Kennedy's campaign era. I'm not implying that the times have left them by, but their are many Americans, even Democrats who believe that taking away the funding from our men and women in battle is absurd at this stage in war; not Dennis or as some calls him "Dennis the Menace".

Observing him at the Democratic debate at St. Anselm College in Manchester, NH, when the late Peter Jennings ask Al Sharpton a very tough question on monetary policy that he fumbled through without even answering, Dennis walked over to his podium during the break and sort of patted Sharpton on the back and whispered the answer.

Up here in these part I look forward to his injection in the debate. And I look forward to seeing him glowing in the light of the public spectacle in this rigorous process.

Evidence against the controversial Rep. William Jefferson appears to be open and shut, but $90,000 dollars in comparison to the thousands that have lost their home and hundreds killed due to an even larger corruption was no match. I'm sure folks all over the country will question the people of New Orleans and their votes to have this figure represent their values if they don't understand their experience, logic and loyalty. In the runoff where Rep. Jefferson won by over 50% of the vote voters were sending a message to Washington about evils in our society greater than taking $90,000 bribes.

Unfortunately the right decision wasn't made in this election. Jefferson will be expelled from office if the Feds are right,  but in the end New Orleans guiding principals will always be different from conventional wisdom.

The rap sheet in congress is very long it seems. Representative  John Murtha chosen unsuccessfully by the Speaker-in-waiting Nancy Pelosi as the majority leader and who is arguable one of the central figures in the Democrats winning in November is a part of the sheet, seen on video footage turning down a bribe by saying not right now. It appeared as though he was open for corruption and dishonoring his district, but the opportunity was not hidden or concealed enough. Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter, elected by 30-point margin, has decided to throw his hat into the presidential race even with the stench of corruption after receiving over $40,000 from defense contractors involved in the former Representative Cunningham scandal.

Representative Jefferson will join the good ole boys club where deals are done behind closed doors.

WEEK IN QUOTES ►►

"Stability and peace on our land have not fallen from the skies, they haven't yet become absolutely, automatically secured. This is the result of a very fierce fight, both inside the country and in the international arena." - Russian President Vladimir Putin

"You're going to sit at a table with drug companies and oil companies and they're going to give away their power. Right!" - John Edwards

Top headlines Index ►►

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ►►

EDITORIALS ►►

POLITICAL CARTOONS ►►

International News Sites ►►

MSNBC Interactive  PlanetSun  Russia Today  China Morn. Post  Times of India  Toronto Star

Favorite Pundit Speakers ►►

other Pundit Speakers ►►