ProConPundit.

2009-07-07T18:38:00.000-07:00

Michael Jackson Still Not Buried.
ProConPundit Pushing for Gary, Indiana.
The Jackson Family wants Michael buried as Neverland, where, I imagine, he would have wanted to be buried. The State of California has very strict regulations regarding the burial of dead human remains outside of a cemetery. Santa Barbara County is also DEAD SET AGAINST his burial there, for all of the turmoil it would create to the quiet, upscale area. The ProConPundit also questions whether Jackson actually still owned the property. I thought he donated/sold all or part of it to a boarding school.

Conventional wisdom would have Jackson buried at Forest Lawn which is where most of the rich and famous are buried, if they are not tucked away in the small Westwood Village Cemetery. The ProConPundit thinks burying Jackson at Forest Lawn is crazy. I think, like Elvis, wherever he is buried will bring a lot of people. Elvis is buried on the grounds of his Memphis mansion, Graceland. It’s a great tourist attraction site in a place that needs one. It also raises a lot of money for Elvis’ family. I think it would be unfortunate for him to not be in a place unique to him and also hard to imagine his family not capitalizing on it. Although you’d be inclined to think they should have figured it out in the two weeks since he died, it makes sense that it would take time to work out legalities, logistics, details.

The ProConPundit believes it makes best sense for Michael Jackson to be buried in GARY, INDIANA. It’s his birthplace, his boyhood home and from there that his music career, and that of his family, was launched. Its located in the heartland, close to Chicago, near several interstate expressways and a place that could benefit immensely from the tourism his burial, and presumed, museum or tourist center would be located. The ProConPundit is pushing this...to the point of calling Al Sharpton and Gary Mayor Rudy Clay.

A person has always had a greater chance of being murdered in Gary than getting a job. Bringing the King of Pop to his hometown for burial would help Gary become something better and be a last, lasting act of altruism on the part of MJ.

2009-07-07T18:28:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Softens Stand on--
King of Pop, and...

The ProConPundit watched the entire funeral of Michael Jackson. And, incidentally, it was a Funeral Service, not a Memorial Service. The media seems to lack the distinction but a funeral service one in which the body is present and a memorial service is one in which it is not. In all fairness, it was unknown until 8:30 a.m. Chicago time today as to whether the body would be present for the service. When it was announced to the assembled masses at the Staples Center that the casketed remains of Michael Jackson would be present, people were euphoric. I experienced it something of a teachable moment in that his body being present mattered to people. It was, naturally, a continual focal point during the service. Particularly in a case where people didn’t get the chance to say good bye, the presence of the body, even in a closed casket, is helpful.

I was never a fan of MJ. It was a great funeral. I was particularly moved by Stevie Wonder, Brooke Shields, my dear friend, the Rev. Al Sharpton, and the words by Jackson’s daughter, Katherine Paris Jackson. I also learned a lot about Jackson. I had not realized the depth of his financial generosity and humanitarian efforts. I still stand with Congressman Peter King (R-NY) on Jackson, in general, but I cannot dismiss the impact he has had on music, history, and the African American community.

Queen of Conservatives

When Sarah Palin was plucked from relative obscurity to be John McCain’s running mate last year, she was already a remarkable success story, an effective governor, and someone who fought her way to the top. Some people blame him for the defeat, some blame her. Definitively: It was his fault–it was his race to lose. I don’t think she helped. She solidified conservatives who were already holding their noses and voting for McCain. She alienated moderates and independents, as did he. For all of his talk of being a maverick and for as much as conservatives shunned him, he chose to dance to the right, instead of the center in the general election, the opposite of the Nixonian recipe for GOP victory.

As much as I don’t personally care for Palin, I do think the media has absolutely been relentless in their ridicule of her and her family. When Saturday Night Live made jokes about the child Chelsea Clinton being homely, they were forced to apologize. When MSNBC’s David Shuster, an unabashed liberal, referred to Chelsea Clinton’s role in her mother’s campaign last year as being “pimped” by her parents, he was suspended for over a month. Don’t let anyone tell you Palin was treated fairly. She wasn’t.

Palin’s resignation as Governor of Alaska is inconsequential, one way or the other. Personally, I don’t support it and don’t think it is equivalent to people vacating an office for higher office. She isn’t. Whatever her reasons, it doesn’t really matter. She accomplished what she was going to accomplish, which was much, prior to McCain tapping her as his running mate. That was at a time when the Democrats in the state legislature played ball with her to get things done. The Republicans in Alaska were always look warm to her given her defeat of her GOP predecessor. The one thing she has handled badly in this is her assertion that lame duck office holders take advantage of their constituents by taking trade trips and just letting the clock run out. Bullshit. She is vacating her office with 17 months remaining in a 48 month term. If that suits her, and she feels her agenda will be continued more effectively by the current Lt. Governor, her ally, good for her. To do so ridiculing others who finish the commitment they were elected to is poor.

I don’t like her and I don’t think she’ll ever be elected to national office.. So what? According to a USA Gallup poll, 43% of Americans would vote for her today over 54% for Obama. 43% doesn’t win, but its pretty impressive for such a controversial figure. She is the Queen of Conservatives. She will have the time now to spend in the lower 48 to give speeches, raise money and be a formidable presence in the GOP for years to come.

2009-07-07T18:25:00.000-07:00

The ProConPundit loves anyone
who gets buried in this casket!

The Promethean is made by Batesville Casket Co., of Batesville, Indiana. Batesville is the largest American manufacturer of caskets. A decade ago or so, they acquired Marsellus Casket Co., the premier casket manufacturer of hardwood caskets in the U.S. Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Ford are all buried in Marsellus caskets. Aurora Casket Co., of Aurora, Indiana is the second largest manufacturer of American caskets. Aurora acquired Clarksburg Casket Co., the runner up to Marsellus as fine hardwood caskets. The Promethean is a 14 karat gold plated casket with a dark blue velvet interior and a hand-polished, mirror finish. The wholesale cost alone is around 25k.

2009-06-26T18:01:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Hall of Fame

First Inductee:
MAUREEN ORTH

These have been challenging times for the Progressive Conservative movement. The death of Michael Jackson, as much as anything, ratifies the mission of the ProConPundit as a spokesperson for a common sense moderate majority.

Michael Jackson’s death also occasions the absolute necessity for the ProConPundit to establish a HALL OF FAME. There are a lot of personal heroes I could have named to the HALL OF FAME, but the first inductee is someone I had never heard of before the death of Tim Russert one year ago.

My attorney, one-time professor, fellow funeral director, and, I’d like to say, friend, Frederick Cappetta, once said, “There is a remarkably small number of people in the world who have the courage to tell the truth.” Telling the truth is particularly difficult to do when people, as Jack Nicholson would say, can’t take the truth. It’s even more courageous to tell the truth when it marches against the flow of a parade. Maureen Orth has done that.

It’s no wonder the ProConPundit never heard of Maureen Orth. She is a journalist who covers pop culture. She is a correspondent for Vanity Fair, a former contributing editor for Vogue, and a former columnist for New York Woman. I never heard of Maureen Orth until her husband, Tim Russert, died a year ago.

Is it intellectually honest to say that you were shocked but not surprised by something? That’s how I felt yesterday about Michael Jackson’s death. Shocked to hear it, shocked at the timing, but not really surprised. I am sensitive to the fact that there are tons of people who are fans to his music. I’m not one of them. Not since the Jackson 5, really. I experienced Man In The Mirror and We Are The World as powerful songs. I was a little shocked but not surprised by the over reaction to his death. I thought the LA Coroner removing his body from the UCLA Medical Center by helicopter was outrageous.

At the gym this morning I watched “Morning Joe” on MSNBC while tread milling. They convened a panel to discuss Jackson’s death including Maureen Orth, who had covered him extensively. Also on the panel was the ultra liberal ideologue, Eugene Robinson, columnist for the Washington Post and unemployed comedian and commentator, John Ridley. Maureen Orth, who objectively knew more about Jackson than anyone else on the panel was candid about, well, the truth. While noting his undisputed musical talent, she also spoke of what a keen business person he was, something the others on the panel clearly knew nothing about. In responding to others who spoke of his having been acquitted of the criminal prosecution for child molestation, stated that it was simply factual that he had spent “millions and millions and millions” of dollars to pay off three different sets of parents. She also spoke of his having dangled his infant son over a balcony. John Ridley was visibly angry and unnerved by Orth’s temerity to speak the truth. To be truthful, I have not watched a lot of the coverage of Jackson’s death. From what I have seen, balance has been in short supply.

On MSNBC last night, Keith Olbermann ( a real chuckle head) was speaking with a reporter in LA and asked her about “man on the street” comments about Jackson’s death. She said the most poignant remark she heard came from an 8 year old boy who said, “I feel bad that Michael died. I hope that he had a chance to tell God how sorry he was before he died.” You should have seen the look on Olbermann’s face. Olbermann was none too pleased, I presume, that God had been brought into it.

Michael Jackson wasn’t proclaimed the King of Pop by anyone other than himself. I am not objective but I don’t think his music had the kind of cross generational appeal that, say, Elton John has. Prognosticators predict that Jackson’s scandals will fade from his reputation and only his fame will endure. That may be, but I don’t think his music will have the staying power decades from now the way the Beatles and Elvis have.

As I establish the ProConPundit Hall of Fame, I think it fitting to name Maureen Orth as the first inductee. I wish I knew the name of the 8 year old boy so I could name him, too. Neither the ProConPundit nor I suspect the 8 year old boy is a religious fanatic. I am also one who believes strongly in the grace of God and the power of God to forgive...I’m banking on it.

The 8 year old boy spoke of something so basic yet profound, and still it was poo-pooed. He wasn’t preaching fire and brimstone. This child understands right and wrong. He has a world view that perceives a loving God who can forgive anyone with the humility to express–if only to God–that we have done wrong.

I have more pity for Michael Jackson than judgement. I do think he was used and manipulated for a good part of his life–perhaps mostly by his father and family. I also don’t think he was a child molester in the sense of violent acts. I picture two types of active pedophiles. The first is the stereotypical perv in a raincoat or like the types who commit violent acts then kill their victims/witnesses. The other type is the less violent, trusted person like a clergyman, or King of Pop. I don’t think Jackson ever violently assaulted anyone. I do think he had sick relationships with children some of whom may have been so thrilled by his attention or awestruck by his wealth to have either not known or ignored that there was anything wrong. Their parents did. They were paid off. He was a pedophile and a drug addict. He wasn’t a good role model. I don’t begrudge him his musical success and acclaim.

When Richard Nixon died, his own intentions, his family’s request, as well as common sense dictated a subdued funeral given his “resignation in disgrace.” The liberal media has never allowed any telling of Nixon’s life without including his transgressions. Jackson should be held to the same account. He was a far more lethal influence on young people than tricky Dick.

Cheers to Maureen Orth and the 8 year old boy.

2009-01-26T19:02:00.000-08:00

The ProConPundit has always respected Bill Kristol's intellect and have often agreed with him. He and his magazine, The Weekly Standard, vigoroulsy pushed the Iraq War and he has been a chief apologist for it. His dangerous neo-conservative insincts are where he and I parted company. Nonetheless, I thought his presence in the New York Times was a good thing. This was his last column, printed Sunday.

I agree with Kristol that the Conservative Era has ended. Its not gone for good. It will be back. Republicans and Conservatives in exile will eventually learn what they need to learn to wage a come back. When more competant and reform minded people than George W. Bush and Sarah Palin emerge, they'll be on their way back.

The ProConPundit wishes President Obama well. I want him to succeed and I hope to God he does. I wish him well despite the otherwise poorly run Democratic Party. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Dick Durbin all share in the responsibility for the econimic woes of this country.

The ProConPundit is responding to the end of the conservative era in two ways. First, retreat from Republicans. The time of exile for Republicans to regroup won't be pretty and I neither have anything to add to it nor anything to gain from it. Second, I'll not be joining the Democrats any time soon. I wish the President well and support him. The Democratic Party, led by the evil posse named above, are not for me.

The end of the Conservative era will be over in four years if Obama fails. Otherwise, it will be at least eight years before they return with potence. The return to Liberalism will be nothing more than Carterism if Obama fails. Carterism, is a ProConPundit defined pathogen that is a piercing, short term, experiment in self righteousness and weakness. Hopefully, Obama will do better.

As for me, I intend to spend this new era learning and listening--and putting my two cents in ALL THE TIME. In terms of political parties, I want to flirt a bit with the Reform Party http://www.reformpartyusa.org/ and the Libertarians http://www.lp.org/. Is the ProConPundit running with the losers? I am still drinking my coffee out of a McCain cup. What else is new?

Will Obama Save Liberalism?

By WILLIAM KRISTOL

Published: January 25, 2009 New York Times

All good things must come to an end. Jan. 20, 2009, marked the end of a conservative era.

Since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, conservatives of various sorts, and conservatisms of various stripes, have generally been in the ascendancy. And a good thing, too! Conservatives have been right more often than not — and more often than liberals — about most of the important issues of the day: about Communism and jihadism, crime and welfare, education and the family. Conservative policies have on the whole worked — insofar as any set of policies can be said to “work” in the real world. Conservatives of the Reagan-Bush-Gingrich-Bush years have a fair amount to be proud of.

They also have some regrets. They’ll have time to ponder those as liberals now take their chance to govern.

Lest conservatives be too proud, it’s worth recalling that conservatism’s rise was decisively enabled by liberalism’s weakness. That weakness was manifested by liberalism’s limp reaction to the challenge from the New Left in the 1960s, became more broadly evident during the 1970s, and culminated in the fecklessness of the Carter administration at the end of that decade.

In 1978, the Harvard political philosopher Harvey Mansfield diagnosed the malady: “From having been the aggressive doctrine of vigorous, spirited men, liberalism has become hardly more than a trembling in the presence of illiberalism. ... Who today is called a liberal for strength and confidence in defense of liberty?”

Over the next three decades, it was modern conservatism, led at the crucial moment by Ronald Reagan, that assumed the task of defending liberty with strength and confidence. Can a revived liberalism, faced with a new set of challenges, now pick up that mantle?

The answer lies in the hands of one man: the 44th president. If Reagan’s policies had failed, or if he hadn’t been politically successful, the conservative ascendancy would have been nipped in the bud. So with President Obama today. Liberalism’s fate rests to an astonishing degree on his shoulders. If he governs successfully, we’re in a new political era. If not, the country will be open to new conservative alternatives.

We don’t really know how Barack Obama will govern. What we have so far, mainly, is an Inaugural Address, and it suggests that he may have learned more from Reagan than he has sometimes let on. Obama’s speech was unabashedly pro-American and implicitly conservative.

Obama appealed to the authority of “our forebears,” “our founding documents,” even — political correctness alert! — “our founding fathers.” He emphasized that “we will not apologize for our way of life nor will we waver in its defense.” He spoke almost not at all about rights (he had one mention of “the rights of man,” paired with “the rule of law” in the context of a discussion of the Constitution). He called for “a new era of responsibility.”

And he appealed to “the father of our nation,” who, before leading his army across the Delaware on Christmas night, 1776, allegedly “ordered these words be read to the people: ‘Let it be told to the future world that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive, that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet it.’”

For some reason, Obama didn’t identify the author of “these timeless words” — the only words quoted in the entire speech. He’s Thomas Paine, and the passage comes from the first in his series of Revolutionary War tracts, “The Crisis.” Obama chose to cloak his quotation from the sometimes intemperate Paine in the authority of the respectable George Washington.

Sixty-seven years ago, a couple of months after Pearl Harbor, at the close of a long radio address on the difficult course of the struggle we had just entered upon, another liberal president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, also told the story of Washington ordering that “The Crisis” be read aloud, and also quoted Paine. But he turned to the more famous — and more stirring — passage with which Paine begins his essay:

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”

That exhortation was appropriate for World War II. Today, the dangers are less stark, and the conflicts less hard. Still, there will be trying times during Obama’s presidency, and liberty will need staunch defenders. Can Obama reshape liberalism to be, as it was under F.D.R., a fighting faith, unapologetically patriotic and strong in the defense of liberty? That would be a service to our country.

This is William Kristol’s last column.

2009-01-26T05:33:00.000-08:00

A ProConPundit First: Watching The View

Thank you Blago. Not only is the Lifetime movie that is YOUR LIFE going down the tube but now you are taking me with you! Today, I will go lower than I ever imagined. I have never watched The View. Honest. I've seen clips from it when political flair ups put it on cable news. The thought of it makes me feel, well, a little icky. When I've seen clips, I have found The View to be in over its head scratching and clawing at each other over politics. But I won't miss it today. Actually, I'll record it and watch it later. Embattled, beleaguered, mile-high hair, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has taken his PR blitz to the national stage today. He is making several appearances including The View at 10 a.m. Chicago time on ABC. (Program note: Technically, I will record The View and watch it later. Does that still count? Hell, recording it--thats even worse!)

Blago has been impeached by the Illinois House and will be tried this week by the Illinois Senate. He will most definitely be found guilty and be removed from office by Friday.

The ProConPundit has been curiously silent on Blago, who Chicago Mayor Daley calls cuckoo. There is an ongoing investigation which has kept me from saying much. Ha ha. As if that was possible even if I was involved. I'll say more following his appearance on The View. For now, I'll say this:
1. It's Mayor Daley's fault he is the Governor.
2. The ProConPundit twice voted against him. I regret not having more opportunties to vote against him.
3. He is a creep.
4. His civil liberties have been violated.
5. His impeachment was triggered by a crime the Federal Prosecutor has not indicted him for.
6. Even a broken clock is accurate twice a day. Blago should never have been the Governor but he is being railroaded out of office.

7. Illinois voters should be horse whipped for picking him over Illniois Attorney General Jim Ryan in 2002 and Illinois State Treasurer Judy Baar-Topinka in 2006.

2009-01-24T20:58:00.000-08:00

Three Cheers by the ProConPundit

Reagan Wouldn't Recognize This GOP

Op-Ed January 24, 2009 Los Angeles Times
The Gipper may be the patron saint of Limbaugh and Coulter,

but he'd be amazed at what's been done in his name.

By Mickey Edwards

Mickey Edwards is a former U.S. congressman, a lecturer at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School and the author of "Reclaiming Conservatism."

In my mind's eye, I can see Ronald Reagan, wearing wings and a Stetson, perched on a cloud and watching all the goings-on down here in his old earthly home. Laughing, rolling his eyes and whacking his forehead over the absurdities he sees, he's watching his old political party as it twists itself into ever more complex knots, punctuated only by pauses to invoke the Gipper's name. It's been said that God would be amazed by what his followers ascribe to him; believe me, Reagan would be similarly amazed by what his most fervent admirers cite in their desire to be seen as true-blue Reaganites.

On the premise that simple is best, many Republicans have reduced their operating philosophy to two essentials: First, government is bad (it's "the problem"); second, big government is the worst and small government is better (although because government itself is bad, it may be assumed that small government is only marginally preferable). This is all errant nonsense. It is wrong in every conceivable way and violative of the Constitution, American exceptionalism, freedom, conservatism, Reaganism and common sense.

In America, government is ... us. What is "exceptional" about America is the depth of its commitment to the principle of self-government; we elect the government, we replace it or its members when they displease us, and by our threats or support, we help steer what government does.

A shocker: The Constitution, which we love for the limits it places on government power, not only constrains government, it empowers it. Limited government is not no government. And limited government is not "small" government. Simply building roads, maintaining a military, operating courts, delivering the mail and doing other things specifically mandated by the Constitution for America's 300 million people make it impossible to keep government "small." It is boundaries that protect freedom. Small governments can be oppressive, and large ones can diminish freedoms. It is the boundaries, not the numbers, that matter.

What would Reagan think of this? Wasn't it he who warned that government is the problem? Well, permit me. I directed the joint House-Senate policy advisory committees for the Reagan presidential campaign. I was part of his congressional steering committee. I sat with him in his hotel room in Manchester, N.H., the night he won that state's all-important primary. I knew him before he was governor of California and before I was a member of Congress. Let me introduce you to Ronald Reagan.

Reagan, who spent 16 years in government, actually said this:"In the present crisis," referring specifically to the high taxes and high levels of federal spending that had marked the Carter administration, "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." He then went on to say: "Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it's not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work." Government, he said, "must provide opportunity." He was not rejecting government, he was calling -- as Barack Obama did Tuesday -- for better management of government, for wiser decisions.

This is the difference between ideological advocacy and holding public office: Having accepted partial responsibility for the nation's well-being, one assumes an obligation that goes beyond bumper-sticker slogans. Certitude is the enemy of wisdom, and in office, it is wisdom, not certitude, that is required.

How, for example, should conservatives react to stimulus and bailout proposals in the face of an economic meltdown? The wall between government and the private sector is an essential feature of our democracy. At the same time, if there is a dominant identifier of conservatism -- political, social, psychological -- it is prudence.

If proposals seem unworkable or unwise (if they do not contain provisions for taxpayers to recoup their investment; if they do not allow for taxpayers, as de facto shareholders, to insist on sound management practices; if they would allow government officials to make production and pricing decisions), conservatives have a responsibility to resist. But they also have an obligation to propose alternative solutions. It is government's job -- Reagan again -- to provide opportunity and foster productivity. With the nation in financial collapse, nothing is more imprudent -- more antithetical to true conservatism -- than to do nothing.

The Republican Party that is in such disrepute today is not the party of Reagan. It is the party of Rush Limbaugh, of Ann Coulter, of Newt Gingrich, of George W. Bush, of Karl Rove. It is not a conservative party, it is a party built on the blind and narrow pursuit of power.

Not too long ago, conservatives were thought of as the locus of creative thought. Conservative think tanks (full disclosure: I was one of the three founding trustees of the Heritage Foundation) were thought of as cutting-edge, offering conservative solutions to national problems. By the 2008 elections, the very idea of ideas had been rejected. One who listened to Barry Goldwater's speeches in the mid-'60s, or to Reagan's in the '80s, might have been struck by their philosophical tone, their proposed (even if hotly contested) reformulation of the proper relationship between state and citizen. Last year's presidential campaign, on the other hand, saw the emergence of a Republican Party that was anti-intellectual, nativist, populist (in populism's worst sense) and prepared to send Joe the Plumber to Washington to manage the nation's public affairs.

American conservatism has always had the problem of being misnamed. It is, at root, the political twin to classical European liberalism, a freedoms-based belief in limiting the power of government to intrude on the liberties of the people. It is the opposite of European conservatism (which Winston Churchill referred to as reverence for king and church); it is rather the heir to John Locke and James Madison, and a belief that the people should be the masters of their government, not the reverse (a concept largely turned on its head by the George W. Bush presidency).

Over the last several years, conservatives have turned themselves inside out: They have come to worship small government and have turned their backs on limited government. They have turned to a politics of exclusion, division and nastiness. Today, they wonder what went wrong, why Americans have turned on them, why they lose, or barely win, even in places such as Indiana, Virginia and North Carolina.

And, watching, I suspect Ronald Reagan is smacking himself on the forehead, rolling his eyes and wondering who in the world these clowns are who want so desperately to wrap themselves in his cloak.

2009-01-21T20:03:00.000-08:00

Sen. Caroline Kennedy, (D-MA)?????

Did Caroline Kennedy opt out of contention for the U.S. Senate in New York, once held by her uncle, RFK, because she knew she would not be picked? Or, is she setting her sights for the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts, once held by her dad, upon the death of Uncle Teddy? If she had the seat in NY within her grasp why would she want to set her sights to Massachusetts? Well, consider this...

Ted Kennedy has held the MA seat since 1962. He has a huge staff of Kennedy loyalists. If she fills Hillary's seat, she has a staff of Hillary loyalists, many of whom didn't want her and may be partial to someone challenging her in 2010.

Plausible?

2009-01-20T11:34:00.000-08:00

The Torch Has Been Passed
Barack Obama
44th President of the United States

Born in 1961 and sent to Washington from the great Prairie State, only the second Illinoisan and first Chicagoan to become President, Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States.

I watched the inauguration from my office computer and was really taken aback by the massive crowd. Inaugurations are always inspiring occasions but none, in my lifetime, more so than this. I say this, having not voted for Obama but happily among the 83% of the American people who wish–and pray him well.

His speech was great. As the first member of the legislative branch elected President since JFK, he was not at all senatorial in his speech. Thank God. It was an inspiring, reconciling speech. I also appreciated the statement he sent to the rest of the world that, sorry conservatives, America is back. President Reagan was the last person to announce that.

The pageantry, symbolism, and the witnessing of the new President and family entering and the outgoing President and his family quietly taking their leave was touching to watch. I sense, politics aside, the Obama’s and the Bush’s are fonder of each other than either of them is of the Clinton’s. Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Bush seemed to genuinely like each other. Obama’s daughters are adorable and are well on their way to beloved status by the American people.

Two criticisms. First, Rev. Rick Warren, Purpose drivin, saddle backin, bible huckster who gave the invocation. Any seminarian worth their salt knows that when you are asked to give an invocation to an interfaith group, you do not pray in the name of Jesus. The ProConPundit is very fond of Jesus. Not sure if the feeling is mutual. Not the point. You don’t pray in the name of Jesus at a national event. It’s insulting to people who are not Christian. If you think that’s picky just imagine the furor had someone prayed in the name of Buddha or Allah. He went on to effectively invite the country to join him in The Lord’s Prayer, a prayer Jesus taught his first followers to pray. Apart from the exclusive nature of using a prayer so exclusively tied to one faith tradition, insult is added injury because it’s poor to have a prayer recited when a copy of it is not available for people to follow. There are mucho inactive/disaffected Christians who don’t know it by heart, let alone people who are not Christian. It was poor.

Second, poorer still was the "Nana hey hey hey GOODBYE" song being sung by the crowds as President Bush entered the inauguration site and again as his helicopter took off. Memo to white trash and their counter parts in other races: it’s not a sporting event. No one wanted Bush gone more than Bush...notice how fast he walked, ahead of wife and daughter, to airplane from helicopter. It was a failed presidency. I also support investigating torture and war crimes. Whatever. Don’t boo the guy at a national ceremony. It was a poor side show to an otherwise spectacular national event.

God bless America. God bless President Obama and former President Bush.

2009-01-19T17:27:00.000-08:00

We Need An Inauguration...

Right This Very Minute

I’ve never seen anything like it. It has similarities to Kennedy and Reagan, but bigger. It’s more like Lincoln or Roosevelt. A great deal of it has to do with Obama but not all of it. A great deal of it had to do with Lincoln and Roosevelt but not all of it. Those times, like these, were times of great peril and fear and Americans yearned for hope and unity. Lincoln and Roosevelt, and as of tomorrow, this new, young, black and white, African and American, liberal, orator from Lincoln’s Land and the Windy City will inaugurate a new, challenging, exciting era in American life.

I have been hearing from a lot of my conservative friends that they think the build up to the inauguration is too much, like a coronation. John McCain could never have inspired this much fervor and, to the conservative critics, the liberal media would never have sat still for it. There are a lot of reasons for the energy and fervor about the Obama inauguration. Here’s a few...

1. I am reminded of the Christmas carol, "We Need A Little Christmas–Right This Very Minute." An inauguration is a solemn ceremony that launches the beginning of something new. America has been through a grueling eight years and no one wants it to be over more than President George Bush. Departing office with a 22 % approval rating and with 83% of the America people ready to give Obama a whirl, 35% more than voted for him, we need an inauguration–right this very minute.
The inauguration is one of our few national liturgies. And it is the people’s event, the country’s event. It is by definition, and with all the symbols, substance and nuances of the event, a national liturgy of unity. It brings both parties, all branches, administration past (s) and future, and Americans from everywhere gathered in the mall and at flat screens and tubes the world over.

2. I’ve never been one to obsess over what the rest of the world thinks of us. America has always ruffled feather abroad. The wanton and reckless approach the Bush Administration took to playing the world sandbox has damaged our reputation. The Iraq war was a mistake (am I the last person to admit this?), and Don Imus was right–Dick Cheney is a war criminal.

3. The Bush Administration has not only damaged our reputation abroad. They were neither compassionate nor conservative. Bush never met a spending bill he wouldn’t sign and, in their dealings with the Republican congress (to say nothing of Democrats), he and Cheney both disregarded and demeaned the legislative branch. The legislative branch’s cup raneth over as well with congressional failures and incompetence. For eight years, damn few Republicans ever criticized them. That no Republican, save Ron Paul, who ran for President was willing to reject, denounce or distance himself from Bush-Cheney sealed the fate that it was time for a Democrat. I am not sorry Obama won. I thank God he beat Hillary Clinton in the primary. Whatever your misgivings about Obama, we are far better off with him than her.

4. I am moved by what Obama’s election has meant to African Americans. From what I read to what I see and, mostly, from what I hear from African Americans I know, the meaning of this momentous occasion to them is awesome.

The streets and railroad tracks and all of Washington, indeed that "D.C. has come to Washington," is about generational shift, our first African and American President, a host of other reasons to be sure–but mostly, I think, its about this pivotal moment that our country shifts, for the better I pray, and our national yearning to be inaugurated–right this very minute–to a new morning in America.

God bless America!

2009-01-17T22:05:00.000-08:00

A Progressive Conservative Boards Obama Express

By popular demand, a little berating and one raving Italian from Philly, the ProConPundit is back! First, a confession. When asked, I’ve been joking some of you that the ProConPundit went to bed election night following John McCain’s concession speech and set the clock for 2012. The truth is I did go to bed after McCain’s speech but I did record Obama’s historic Grant Park victory speech and watched it later. My hiatus from the blog has neither been an anti-Obama statement or a concession whatsoever that the progressive conservative movement has gone anywhere. Truth be it, my day job has kept me busy–too busy.

I’m back. And with an about-to-be sworn in Barack Obama–the most liberal U.S. President ever–who will govern from the center (judging by his words, actions and appointments) its clear that progressive conservatives are not in exile, unlike other flavors of conservatives. In fact, progressive conservatives, moderate Republicans, conservative Democrats, Reform Party and Green Party will all have a better friend in Obama than they had in Bush. I am not sure how Libertarians will feel about Obama.

EXPERIENCE VS. COMPETENCE
I didn’t vote for Obama. Truth be it, part of me wanted to vote for him. Mostly, I think, because I knew he would win and thought I should be on the right side of history. Even given the fact that I was an early, longtime and devoted McCain fan, I had a hard time voting for him–mostly because of the incompetent judgement he showed in picking homecoming queen turned hockey mom, Sarah Palin and for demonstrating a Bob Doleish refusal to grasp or resonate with the concerns or lives of ordinary Americans. In the end, I held my nose and voted for McCain.

My big apprehension about Obama was that I thought he lacked the requisite experience to be President. I’ve realized the difference between having experience and having COMPETENCE. Obama is short on experience but not COMPETENCE. President George W. Bush was a two term governor of one of the largest states when he became President. He didn’t necessarily lack experience but he clearly lacked the COMPETENCE to lead this country. I voted for him in 2000 and against him in 2004 and believe he is a good and decent man. He had more perilous issues to deal with than most Presidents and was in over his head. Yes, he kept us safe post 9/11 but at a huge price. Bush was the "Decider," but not a thinker, not a seeker. His lack of requisite COMPETENCE forced him to make his decisions based on the advice of others. Sadly, he was influenced by Cheney and Rumsfeld while he ignored Powell and his father.

Obama has demonstrated tremendous competence in how he ran and managed his campaign and staff, as well as his transition. We are experiencing a more momentous shift than I have seen in my lifetime. Obama’s election was more decisive than Kennedy’s narrow and disputed victory in 1960. I think the analogy to Kennedy has more to do with the generational shift and young family. For the record, the ProConPundit was not born when Kennedy was elected...but was born three weeks after his inauguration. My first words were, "Ask not..." I think Obama’s election is more analogous to the Reagan Revolution. Reagan won an electoral college landslide against Carter in 1980, 489 to 49. His popular vote victory was 9% over Carter. Obama beat McCain by 6% in popular vote and 365 to 173 electoral college votes. So Reagan’s victory was much more substantial but given that our last two presidential elections were cliff hangers and virtual ties, I think Obama’s 6% victory is decisive though not a landslide. Reagan and Obama share the advantage as incoming presidents who succeeded unpopular and incompetant presidents, Carter and Bush.

The day after the election, given Obama’s decisive but not dramatic victory, I didn’t think it was so much of a mandate, judgement neutral. Since his election, more and more of the American people have lent their hope and goodwill to our President-elect, for varieties of reasons. I share the view that he has to succeed in order for us to succeed as a people. I don’t think we can waste time senselessly tearing him down or looking for reasons to oppose him. Not to say people shouldn’t have differences with his agenda but there is a line.

The ProConPundit is back, he is aboard the Obama Express and hoping like hell the good times roll once again.

2008-11-04T17:03:00.000-08:00

Pennsylvania Goes to Obama;
McCain Certain to Lose

Tom Ridge would have carried this state for McCain and he can’t win without it.

2008-11-04T16:57:00.000-08:00

ProConPundit Nothing If Not Loyal

In my first presidential election in 1980, in the primary I took a Democratic ballot and voted for Ted Kennedy over Jimmy Carter. In my own youthful view, I thought Ted Kennedy was more conservative, more competent than Jimmy Carter. In the general election of 1980, I was one of 6.6% of the American people who voted for Illinois Congressman John Anderson over Reagan and Carter.

I have voted for losers (Bush I, Dole, Kerry) and winners (Bush I, Bush II) but, until today, I have never been hesitant in a voting booth as to who to vote for.
Part of me wanted to be on the right side of history–for once. I voted against Reagan and clearly history is on the side of his presidency, for its great achievements and in spite of its flaws. I have tended to think I was on the wrong side of history by twice voting against Bill Clinton even thoughI joined 57% of Americans in voting against him in 1992 and 50.8% of American in rejecting him in 1996.

I passed on the presidential pick and completed the rest of the ballot. Then I went back. I love Joe Biden and I do think Obama will win and yet, not only could I not vote for them, I could not even flirt with the idea. I had to vote for John McCain. He’s run a terrible campaign but I do admire him and, in the end, I’ll stick with him knowing history was moving in another direction.

2008-11-04T16:42:00.000-08:00

McCain and ProConPundit In Touch With Reality

John McCain knows he has lost this race. He knew it at the Al Smith Dinner in Manhattan on October 16 when he said, "In the event that I am actually to pull out a victory."

There is a sense in which no Republican could have won. One of the reasons John McCain was nominated was because, among let’s face it–a lackluster field of candidates, McCain was believed to be more popular among moderates and independents.

He has run a dismal campaign. He ran a campaign from and for the far right. In his apparent psychological need to prove to the right that he was one of them, he has won the battle–and presumably lost the war.

He ran on experience and showed none. He had nothing to say about our economic crisis other than our economic fundamentals were fine. He pushed a lot of photo ops by hanging out in DC during the crisis but accomplished nothing.

On the largest amount of "socialism," "redistribution," that has ever happened in our nation’s history, we took $ 750 million dollars of working people’s money to bail out Wall Street. This bill was laden with pork and goodies and Mr. "No Pork Barrel Spending" McCain voted for it.

I’ll have more to say later about Sarah Palin and the train wreck that has been her rise to prominence. She solidified a right wing base that would have voted for McCain over Obama under any conditions. Other choices like Tom Ridge would have won Pennsylvania for McCain while Susan Collins, liberal Republican Senator from Maine, would have actually attracted Hillary Clinton supporters and brought a triple digit IQ to the GOP ticket.

2008-11-04T16:22:00.000-08:00

WHAT A COUNTRY!

Election coverage from Undisclosed bunker of ProConPundit, Chicago, IL

As we begin this election night and the end to a long, long, and frankly, fantastic campaign, I have to say that it has not been as much fun without Tim Russert. He often quoted his dad who would often say, "WHAT A COUNTRY!" I think that’s a great mantra come what may this night. It’s been an amazing, fun, maddening, long-suffering campaign season. It’s not Ford vs. Carter or Bush vs. Gore–this is not a choice between dull and duller. It’s not Bush vs. Dukakis or Reagan vs. Mondale or Clinton vs. Dole–where we know what is going to happen and its all perfunctory. The night will likely be a sizable victory for Obama but we don’t know for sure and, in any case, we are, as Americans, moving in a new and better direction. All I can say is; "WHAT A COUNTRY!"

2008-10-21T03:13:00.000-07:00

There He Goes Again: Biden Puts Foot In Mouth
McCain Suspends Campaign

to Visit Obama’s Dying Grandmother

It was only a matter of time. Please allow me to paraphrase Biden by speaking of him as he speaks of John McCain. I LOVE THE GUY BUT BLESS HIS HEART HE JUST DOESN’T GET IT. Joe Biden has delivered a great gift to the McCain campaign by scaring the hell out of America by warming that we will, set certain, have an international crisis visited upon us within the first six months of an Obama campaign. I have pasted below an ABC News article about his remarks. It’s truly UNBELIEVABLE that he would say such a thing. Part of it was self-promoting to re-assure us that he would be at Obama’s side. But he makes clear that because of Obama’s youth and inexperience he will be tested by foreign leaders. We’ll see how that sits with voters–if it’s actually given serious attention. So much of the media is in the tank for Obama that it may slide by.

Meanwhile, early erroneous reports were that Barack Obama is suspending his campaign to be at the bedside of his dying grandmother. Wrong. While it is true that his grandmother is dying, it is John McCain who will suspend his campaign to be with her. Kind of the way Sarah Palin connects with real people, who is better to relate to a dying person that the leader of a campaign on life support.

Biden to Supporters: "Gird Your Loins",

For the Next President

"It's Like Cleaning Augean Stables"

October 20, 2008 7:35 AM

ABC News' Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions."Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. "And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."Not only will the next administration have to deal with foreign affairs issues, Biden warned, but also with the current economic crisis.

"Gird your loins," Biden told the crowd. "We're gonna win with your help, God willing, we're gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy."

The Delaware lawmaker managed to rake in an estimated $1 million total from his two money hauls at the downtown Sheraton, the same hotel where four years ago Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., clinched the Democratic nomination. Despite warning about the difficulties the next administration will face, Biden said the Democratic ticket is equipped to meet the challenges head on."I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I'm not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it," the Senate Foreign Relations chairman said of Obama. "This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

"There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision'," Biden continued. "Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."Biden emphasized that the mountainous Afghanistan-Pakistan border is of particular concern, with Osama bin Laden "alive and well" and Pakistan "bristling with nuclear weapons.""You literally can see what these kids are up against, our kids in that region," Biden said in recalling when his helicopter was forced down due to a snowstorm there. "The place is crawling with al Qaeda. And it's real." "We do not have the military capacity, nor have we ever, quite frankly, in the last 20 years, to dictate outcomes," he cautioned. "It's so much more important than that. It's so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it."After speaking for just over a quarter of an hour, Biden noticed the media presence in the back of the small ballroom. "I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here," he joked."All kidding aside, these guys have left us in a God-awful place," he then said of the Bush regime, promptly wrapping up his remarks. "We have the ability to straighten it out. It's gonna take a little bit of time, so I ask you to stay with us. Stay with us."

2008-10-20T19:16:00.001-07:00

October Non-Surprise: Powell Endorses Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh_c5bbvmqc/

Yesterday, the man who Tucker Carlson said, "sold us the war" endorsed the man who opposed the war. Joe Scarborough called him "the most important military figure of this age." I prefer to think of him as the only general since Eisenhower to win a war–a Bush war in Iraq.

The youtube.com clip above is Powell’s remarks outside of Meet The Press. There and on MTP he spoke eloquently, at length, without notes as to why he supports Obama and how he has grown disturbed by McCain, his friend of 25 years.

I agree with Jack Kemp who said winning is just as important as being worthy of winning. He, of course, was more of a loser than a winner on the national stage but he knew something about not forgetting who you are. John McCain has lost that or, at least, forgotten it. The ProConPundit has spent much time and energy pushing and promoting McCain and, I might add, sticking by him when few did. I’ve earned the right to honestly be disgusted with him and nearly every damn move he’s made since he was nominated.

Many of you have e-mailed me because you think I’ve been conspicuously silent in recent times. I’ll have more to say–I always do about McCain. For now, I will deal with Colin Powell.

Rush Limbaugh and others have castigated Powell today. There is only one criticism I will make with respect to Colin Powell. Had he endorsed McCain, the same liberal crowd who is hailing him today for his objectivity would have bashed the hell out of him. They would have reminded us, as they have for years, that he failed the nation when he pushed the war for the Bush Administration while personally opposing it. It's true that there is a thin line between him being a hero and a rat to the left: endorsing Obama makes him a hero. Powell never failed the nation. He served the President well and gave his advice. As a military man, you follow orders.

Many on the right will criticize him for it. I found his words compelling. Limbaugh thinks his endorsement was entirely racial in nature. I don’t think it was entirely racial but if Obama was a white, impressive, first term senator from Illinois, I can’t really picture him endorsing him. But so what? That doesn’t take away from the criticism he has of McCain’s lack of vision, lack of laying down solid and believable plans, and running a pathetic and perversely negative campaign. I think Powell’s endorsement was as much generational as racial.

So the left accepts Powell conditionally and many on the right are disgusted with him. He is a self-described moderate Republican. If he had a tad more stature, he’d be a PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE! :-) Powell’s endorsement of Obama signals to moderates and independents and to those who are skeptical of Obama’s inexperience, that he is okay and that McCain is not. Won’t mean much to those on the right but among the people who will decide the election, it may.

Republicans will lose and will lose big. Barack Obama will name the next two supreme court judges. Roe v. Wade is here to stay folks–FOREVER. All this because John McCain decided to play to the base of his party and to the base instincts of our fears. (Those are 2 different things, by the way.)

I can’t believe I am recommending an article from the LEFT LEFT Huffington Post. It’s called, The Powell Endorsement and the End of the Republican Foreign Policy Establishment. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ilan-goldenberg/the-powell-endorsement-an_b_136313.html

I like it. Powell represents the type of Republican I am. I liked Ford over Carter, Bush over Dukakis. The Republican Party is increasingly becoming what Pope Benedict said the Catholic church should be: smaller and purer. The Pope has every right to declare that his church should be smaller rather than accept things it can’t accept. Political parties, as James Carville says, exist for one and one reason only: to win elections. Republicans will become Libertarians or Green Party folks who have great principles but can’t possibly win–unless they become in reality, beyond rhetoric, a big tent party.

2008-10-20T18:25:00.000-07:00

Nothing Funny
W The Film

http://www.wthefilm.com/index2.html

Fighting depression and despondency over John McCain’s sure and certain loss, the ProConPundit was on vacation last week in Savannah, Georgia. I got back on Friday evening and was very much aware that it was opening night of the movie, W. I normally eschew Olive Stone movies because they tend to not bother letting the truth get in the way of a riveting story. I decided that I wanted to see W anyway because, unlike other Oliver Stone movies, the previews I saw seemed laugh out loud funny. Because it was a political movie and I think everyone is into politics like I am, I just presumed I would never be able to get into see the movie on opening night. I went to my Kenosha home and bought a ticket online for the 12 Noon showing Saturday of W at the Kenosha Tinseltown Theater. I was so proud of myself. I imagined walking ahead of the throngs of people to see the movie. Turns out I was wrong on two counts. First, I was one of 6 people who watched the movie and second, there was not one damn thing that was funny about the movie.

The casting was superb. Josh Brolin played W and he was great. One of my favorite actresses, Ellen Burstyn played Barbara Bush and was fantastic. James Cromwell played President Bush–and from now on, whenever I say President Bush, I will be referring to the real President Bush who served as our 41st President from 1988 to 1992. Cromwell was a compelling Bush. Elizabeth Banks played an adorable and bright Laura Bush. Richard Dreyfuss portrayed an evil Dick Cheney. Karl Rove was depicted as nearly perverted by Toby Jones. Thandie Newton played an idiotic Condoleezza Rice. Jeffrey Wright played Colin Powell and Scott Glenn played a stunning Donald Rumsfeld.

So much of what is told in the movie are things that are only known by people who would have never divulged them. So I didn’t think it was terribly credible. It was basically the story of the rivalry between Bush father and son, W’s dream of being a president more like Reagan than like his father, and the struggle between allies of President Bush I and the neo-cons who have influenced, formed and informed the presidency of W.

One weird moment in the movie was a lunch meeting shortly after W realized that there were no WMD. He was furious and his closest advisors were trying to explain, regroup, and appease him. Rummy was pre-occupied to the point of obsession with the pecan pie that was served.

It was a good movie to see. Don’t think it’s gospel truth but enjoyable nonetheless. One thing it wasn’t: funny.

2008-10-20T17:49:00.000-07:00

Something Funny

Forget Saturday Night Live. If you are looking for something funny this political season, Obama and McCain and the Al Smith Dinner last week beats all. For all of John McCain's insistence that Sarah Palin realtes to real Americans if not the Washington cocktail crowd, he certainly felt right at home with them--on location in Manhattan.

It was yet another example of John McCain using the Bob Dole playbook. He is the funniest guy alive when doing stand up among elite politicians and media types yet unable to relate to regular people.

There are two links below. The first is McCain and the other two are Obama. They are pricless...especially McCain's remarks to Hillary Clinton.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXS4Q7mUKQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkBQf4FJi-o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXKaAQ-6BiU

2008-10-20T17:39:00.000-07:00

Who Should You Vote For?
Take the ABC Match-O-Matic Quiz.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchoMatic/fullpage?id=5542139

2008-10-17T20:13:00.000-07:00

Chicago Sun-Times Endorses Obama

Unlike, the endorsement of the Chicago Tribune, this endorsement is not unusual.

Americans are ready to be one country. By the millions, they yearn to bridge their differences, to find common cause, to rise above ideology, race, class and religion.

They have grown weary of the culture wars and the personal attacks, tired of the exaggerated lines that divide. They dare to imagine a more constructive discourse, a debate marked by civility and respect even in disagreement, a politics that begins with listening to each other.

Nothing else so fully explains the meteoric rise of Sen. Barack Obama. If America had preferred a master of policy for its next president, Sen. Hillary Clinton would have won the Democratic nomination. If America valued experience in public life above all else, Sen. John McCain would be trouncing Sen. Obama in the polls.

But it is Sen. Obama who won his party’s nomination, and it is he who leads in the polls. Americans across the land want to pull together, and in Sen. Obama they see a man of exceptional gifts who just might show them how.

Our endorsement for president of the United States goes to Sen. Barack Obama, Chicago’s adopted son. He has the unique background, superior intellect, sound judgment and first-rate temperament to lead our nation in difficult times.

Through the eyes of others

Sen. Obama’s strengths begin with the unusual circumstances of his childhood, a biracial and cross-cultural upbringing that imbued in him a remarkable ability to see the world through the eyes of others. A now familiar story is told of how the young Barack, as the first African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review, would go around the table listening to all views on an issue. Then he would gesture toward the quietest person in the room and ask, “Bob, what do you think?” He called the shots, but was confident enough to hear out those with whom he might disagree.

Sen. Obama’s remarkable talent for hearing all the disparate voices of America was perhaps nowhere more evident than on March 18 at the Constitution Center in Philadelphia, when he delivered an instantly historic speech on race relations. As millions of Americans watched and nodded, he boldly challenged whites and blacks to see the truth in the other’s perspective.

Guided by these same cross-cultural instincts, Sen. Obama climbed the ladder of Chicago Democratic politics — from community organizer to state senator to U.S. senator — while dodging the tag of “machine-made.” We watched in admiration, here in Chicago, as he developed alliances with the old Harold Washington coalition, but also with party stalwarts such as State Sen. Emil Jones. He mostly steered clear of unwise political entanglements, and when he did use poor judgment, he learned from his mistake. The senator no doubt learned to appreciate the enormous importance of transparency in politics when he was dogged by questions about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the political fixer. When he finally sat down with the Sun-Times and answered every question, the Rezko story lost its steam.

Right on the issues

We agree with Sen. Obama on many of the most pressing issues of the day.

He is right when he says America must be open to talking to its adversaries. He is right when he says America must lose the swagger abroad and repair its standing in the world. He is right when he says America must stand with Israel.

Sen. Obama is right in his prescriptions for the economy, though they need expansion and vetting. He is right in his compassionate but fiscally prudent plan — unlike Sen. McCain’s plan — to help millions of homeowners avoid foreclosure.

And Sen. Obama is right on energy policy. We support his proposals to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil by a host of means — domestic drilling and nuclear energy, to be sure, but also an unprecedented national commitment to developing wind power, solar power and other forms of “clean” energy.

Tested in a marathon

It is a peculiar virtue of a marathon presidential campaign that the ordeal itself becomes a powerful test of who has the right stuff — and Sen. Obama has won that test hands down.

From the moment he announced his candidacy, on a cold Saturday in Springfield in February 2007, he has demonstrated extraordinary leadership skills, grace under fire, laudable restraint and a sincere respect for the intelligence of the voter. He has surrounded himself with excellence — imagine such competence moving into the West Wing — and built what is perhaps the most effective ground organization in the history of presidential campaigns.

Sen. Obama writes his own best speeches. He refuses to play the “gotcha” game. He runs his own campaign — it does not run him.

He has kept his cool while his opponent runs hot and cold. He shook off the advice from his senior advisers to “go negative” when the polls were more grim, the way President Kennedy coolly rejected the overly bellicose advice of his generals in the heat of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Sadly, the same cannot be said of Sen. John McCain.

Sen. McCain is an American hero. His courage as a prison of war and his 26 years on Capitol Hill command our respect. Anybody who happened to notice him struggle to shake hands with moderator Bob Schieffer at the end of the third debate had to be moved.

But somewhere along the line, McCain stopped being McCain. The maverick who always thought for himself turned his thinking over to others. He cared too much about winning.

He reversed his position on major social issues to curry favor with the Republican base. He pulled silly surprises from a hat, such as “suspending” his campaign. Most egregiously for a man of advanced age who knew how important this decision could be, he chose the unqualified Gov. Sarah Palin to be his vice president.

Right for the times

Often in America’s most difficult days, the nation has been blessed with extraordinary leaders who seemed just right for the times. We have in mind George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The times again demand an extraordinary leader. Our next president will take the oath of office in a country that is at war, heavily in debt, deeply divided and sliding into a recession. He will have to make hard choices — the money won’t be there for all his ambitious plans — and he will have to work with a Congress so lopsidedly Democratic that it may be veto-proof.

Here in Chicago, we have been watching Barack Obama and sizing him up for some time. We knew him well before he introduced himself to the nation with his electrifying speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention.

We saw the strength of character, the steady temperament, the intellect, the compassion, the ability to see through others’ eyes.

The very title of Sen. Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope, foretold what America will need in the circumstances under which the next president takes office.

Success will require audacity, in all the best meanings of the word: nerve, spunk, grit and, especially, boldness.

And success will require a president and a people ready to embrace hope, in all the best meanings of that word: A conviction that what we want and need can be had.

Barack Obama believes in the audacity of hope. He inspires it in others. He inspires it in us.

Barack Obama should be the next president of the United States of America.

2008-10-17T19:39:00.000-07:00

The Son of William F. Buckley, Jr. Endorses Obama

Christopher Buckley isn't Ronald Reagan, Jr. He isn't spending his life working out his daddy issues by being against everything his father was for. He also isn't like Michael Reagan: a nit wit who rides his late father's coat tails. Christopher Buckley is accomplished in his own right and a bona fide conservative...who has endorsed the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate for President.

Forgive Me Pup: I'm Voting For Obama

Let me be the latest conservative/libertarian/whatever to leap onto the Barack Obama bandwagon. It’s a good thing my dear old mum and pup are no longer alive. They’d cut off my allowance.

Or would they? But let’s get that part out of the way. The only reason my vote would be of any interest to anyone is that my last name happens to be Buckley—a name I inherited. So in the event anyone notices or cares, the headline will be: “William F. Buckley’s Son Says He Is Pro-Obama.” I know, I know: It lacks the throw-weight of “Ron Reagan Jr. to Address Democratic Convention,” but it’ll have to do.

I am—drum roll, please, cue trumpets—making this announcement in the cyberpages of The Daily Beast (what joy to be writing for a publication so named!) rather than in the pages of National Review, where I write the back-page column. For a reason: My colleague, the superb and very dishy Kathleen Parker, recently wrote in National Review Online a column stating what John Cleese as Basil Fawlty would call “the bleeding obvious”: namely, that Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that. She’s not exactly alone. New York Times columnist David Brooks, who began his career at NR, just called Governor Palin “a cancer on the Republican Party.”

As for Kathleen, she has to date received 12,000 (quite literally) foam-at-the-mouth hate-emails. One correspondent, if that’s quite the right word, suggested that Kathleen’s mother should have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a Dumpster. There’s Socratic dialogue for you. Dear Pup once said to me sighfully after a right-winger who fancied himself a WFB protégé had said something transcendently and provocatively cretinous, “You know, I’ve spent my entire life time separating the Right from the kooks.” Well, the dear man did his best. At any rate, I don’t have the kidney at the moment for 12,000 emails saying how good it is he’s no longer alive to see his Judas of a son endorse for the presidency a covert Muslim who pals around with the Weather Underground. So, you’re reading it here first.

As to the particulars, assuming anyone gives a fig, here goes:

I have known John McCain personally since 1982. I wrote a well-received speech for him. Earlier this year, I wrote in The New York Times—I’m beginning to sound like Paul Krugman, who cannot begin a column without saying, “As I warned the world in my last column...”—a highly favorable Op-Ed about McCain, taking Rush Limbaugh and the others in the Right Wing Sanhedrin to task for going after McCain for being insufficiently conservative. I don’t—still—doubt that McCain’s instincts remain fundamentally conservative. But the problem is otherwise.

McCain rose to power on his personality and biography. He was authentic. He spoke truth to power. He told the media they were “jerks” (a sure sign of authenticity, to say nothing of good taste; we are jerks). He was real. He was unconventional. He embraced former anti-war leaders. He brought resolution to the awful missing-POW business. He brought about normalization with Vietnam—his former torturers! Yes, he erred in accepting plane rides and vacations from Charles Keating, but then, having been cleared on technicalities, groveled in apology before the nation. He told me across a lunch table, “The Keating business was much worse than my five and a half years in Hanoi, because I at least walked away from that with my honor.” Your heart went out to the guy. I thought at the time, God, this guy should be president someday.

A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.

But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.” This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?

All this is genuinely saddening, and for the country is perhaps even tragic, for America ought, really, to be governed by men like John McCain—who have spent their entire lives in its service, even willing to give the last full measure of their devotion to it. If he goes out losing ugly, it will be beyond tragic, graffiti on a marble bust.

As for Senator Obama: He has exhibited throughout a “first-class temperament,” pace Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.’s famous comment about FDR. As for his intellect, well, he’s a Harvard man, though that’s sure as heck no guarantee of anything, these days. Vietnam was brought to you by Harvard and (one or two) Yale men. As for our current adventure in Mesopotamia, consider this lustrous alumni roster. Bush 43: Yale. Rumsfeld: Princeton. Paul Bremer: Yale and Harvard. What do they all have in common? Andover! The best and the brightest.

I’ve read Obama’s books, and they are first-rate. He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books. Imagine. He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative who clings tenaciously and old-fashionedly to the idea that one ought to have balanced budgets. On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian. I believe with my sage and epigrammatic friend P.J. O’Rourke that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away.

But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.

Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.

So, I wish him all the best. We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship. And so, for the first time in my life, I’ll be pulling the Democratic lever in November. As the saying goes, God save the United States of America.

2008-10-17T19:25:00.000-07:00

Chicago Tribune Endorses Obama

Founded in 1847:

Tribune Has NEVER BEFORE endorsed a Democrat.

However this election turns out, it will dramatically advance America's slow progress toward equality and inclusion. It took Abraham Lincoln's extraordinary courage in the Civil War to get us here. It took an epic battle to secure women the right to vote. It took the perseverance of the civil rights movement. Now we have an election in which we will choose the first African-American president . . . or the first female vice president.

In recent weeks it has been easy to lose sight of this history in the making. Americans are focused on the greatest threat to the world economic system in 80 years. They feel a personal vulnerability the likes of which they haven't experienced since Sept. 11, 2001. It's a different kind of vulnerability. Unlike Sept. 11, the economic threat hasn't forged a common bond in this nation. It has fed anger, fear and mistrust.

On Nov. 4 we're going to elect a president to lead us through a perilous time and restore in us a common sense of national purpose.

The strongest candidate to do that is Sen. Barack Obama. The Tribune is proud to endorse him today for president of the United States.

On Dec. 6, 2006, this page encouraged Obama to join the presidential campaign. We wrote that he would celebrate our common values instead of exaggerate our differences. We said he would raise the tone of the campaign. We said his intellectual depth would sharpen the policy debate. In the ensuing 22 months he has done just that.

Many Americans say they're uneasy about Obama. He's pretty new to them.

We can provide some assurance. We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready.

The change that Obama talks about so much is not simply a change in this policy or that one. It is not fundamentally about lobbyists or Washington insiders. Obama envisions a change in the way we deal with one another in politics and government. His opponents may say this is empty, abstract rhetoric. In fact, it is hard to imagine how we are going to deal with the grave domestic and foreign crises we face without an end to the savagery and a return to civility in politics.

This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause--the Republican Party. The Tribune's first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.

The Tribune's decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.

We see parallels today.

The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. The government ran a $237 billion surplus in 2000, the year before Bush took office -- and recorded a $455 billion deficit in 2008. The Republicans lost control of the U.S. House and Senate in 2006 because, as we said at the time, they gave the nation rampant spending and Capitol Hill corruption. They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.

We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party's course. We like McCain. We endorsed him in the Republican primary in Illinois. In part because of his persuasion and resolve, the U.S. stands to win an unconditional victory in Iraq.

It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them. He promises a balanced budget by the end of his first term, but his tax cut plan would add an estimated $4.2 trillion in debt over 10 years. He has responded to the economic crisis with an angry, populist message and a misguided, $300 billion proposal to buy up bad mortgages.

McCain failed in his most important executive decision. Give him credit for choosing a female running mate--but he passed up any number of supremely qualified Republican women who could have served. Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. His campaign has tried to stage-manage Palin's exposure to the public. But it's clear she is not prepared to step in at a moment's notice and serve as president. McCain put his campaign before his country.

Obama chose a more experienced and more thoughtful running mate--he put governing before politicking. Sen. Joe Biden doesn't bring many votes to Obama, but he would help him from day one to lead he country.

McCain calls Obama a typical liberal politician. Granted, it's disappointing that Obama's mix of tax cuts for most people and increases for the wealthy would create an estimated $2.9 trillion in federal debt. He has made more promises on spending than McCain has. We wish one of these candidates had given good, hard specific information on how he would bring the federal budget into line. Neither one has.

We do, though, think Obama would govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect.

We know first-hand that Obama seeks out and listens carefully and respectfully to people who disagree with him. He builds consensus. He was most effective in the Illinois legislature when he worked with Republicans on welfare, ethics and criminal justice reform.

He worked to expand the number of charter schools in Illinois--not popular with some Democratic constituencies.

He took up ethics reform in the U.S. Senate--not popular with Washington politicians.

His economic policy team is peppered with advisers who support free trade. He has been called a "University of Chicago Democrat"--a reference to the famed free-market Chicago school of economics, which puts faith in markets.

Obama is deeply grounded in the best aspirations of this country, and we need to return to those aspirations. He has had the character and the will to achieve great things despite the obstacles that he faced as an unprivileged black man in the U.S.

He has risen with his honor, grace and civility intact. He has the intelligence to understand the grave economic and national security risks that face us, to listen to good advice and make careful decisions.

When Obama said at the 2004 Democratic Convention that we weren't a nation of red states and blue states, he spoke of union the way Abraham Lincoln did.

It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation's most powerful office, he will prove it wasn't so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.

2008-10-03T18:06:00.000-07:00

Try to remember the magic that we shared
In time your broken heart will mend
I never used you, you knew I really cared
I hate to see it have to end
But it's over
Sad eyes, turn the other way
I don't wanna see you cry
Sad eyes, you knew there'd come a day
When we would have to say 'goodbye'

It’s over. Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States. It’s over. It pains me to say it. As much as I believe anything, I believe John McCain would be–as we have never needed before-- a great president. It’s over. Obama is ahead beyond the margin of error in every state that John Kerry won in 2004. In the rarest turn of events, Indiana and North Carolina, reliably Republican, are within Obama’s reach. Virginia and Florida were carried by Bush and those are also within Obama’s reach. There are a few things, not to be dismissed but also not likely, that could bring about a defeat for Obama:

1. Polls do not take into account the number of white people who will not vote for a black. If McCain is behind within the margin of error or under 10 points, this could be a factor.
2. The Clinton’s do not want Obama to win. I would not underestimate their dirty tricks in the weeks ahead.
3. Jeremiah Wright, Fr. Pfelger and "I’ve never been proud to be an American before." These themes will be highlighted in the weeks ahead.
4. Another Georgia-Russia type incident that underscores McCain’s experience.
5. Mac Attack. McCain never does so well as when he is down for the count. Against all odds, McCain could stage a comeback.

A McCain comeback is what I am hoping for. So far, my predictions have been right-on. I predicted McCain would be the nominee when no one else did. I predicted Sarah Palin would be his running mate along with three other, preferable choices. I hope I am wrong in this prediction.

2008-10-03T17:55:00.000-07:00

You Can Call Me Joe
Palin Wins Battle, McCain Loses War

Sarah Palin is a remarkable women, brilliant in her shrewdness. She began by introducing herself to Joe Biden, on microphone, saying, "It’s so nice to meet you. May I call you Joe?" You could have blown the ProCon one over with a feather. What a statement. She communicated to a nation how much of a Washington outsider she was. There isn’t a waiter in Washington, DC that could have met him for the first time or dared to have asked him if he could call him Joe. It was great.

For the record, Gwen Ifill is a left wing pig. She’s writing a book predicated on Obama’s victory and didn’t think she should recuse herself from creating the questions for this debate.

Lets talk pluses/minuses
Joe Biden

+ Pluses
He knows his stuff.
He loves this country.
Barack Obama will be a better, more competent President for having Joe Biden at his side.

-Minuses

He CONTINUALLY began his remarks saying, "Gwen." It looked as though he was having an INSIDE THE BELTWAY conversation with his pal, Gwen Ifill. By contrast, Palin spoke directly to the American people.

In the split screen that I watched, every time Sarah Palin was speaking, Biden was doing his impression of Al Gore in the 2000 debates. Instead of sighing, Biden had an impatient grin on his face as though he was suffering through his step-daughter’s piano recital, all the while emotionally rolling his eyes toward kindred spirit Gwen Ifill.

Biden lied repeatedly. Several times he SPECIFICALLY stated things McCain voted for which McCain, in fact, voted against. Likewise, he stated things McCain was opposed to that he actually supported.

Sarah Palin

+Pluses

She connected with America. She showed common sense and poise, and given her very limited experience on the national stage, carried herself very well.

She pounded Biden and Obama.

She had passion and vision for a McCain presidency.

She surpassed expectations. Expectations were that she stumble and combust. She didn’t.

-Minuses

While conservatives love her–and I’ll have more to say about that later, she did nothing to establish to anyone outside of the Republican base, and frankly within it to a degree, that she is prepared to be the Vice-President of the United States.

Its cute that she can wink and flirt and change the subject. The fact is she should be able to answer any damn question anyone asks of her. Please, lets take the gloves off. Hello? This is the United States of America. We are running someone for Vice-President that won’t hold a press conference and won’t be interviewed unless forced to. Conservatives: hear me out. I agree that the media is against her. I also agree that in a two hour interview with Katie Couric, the only parts of that interview promoted widely were the least favorable to Palin. I agree, no contest.

At the same time, it is shameful and disgraceful that during a time of national economic crisis, John McCain would join Sarah Palin in a follow-up interview with Katie Couric not to talk about anything important. Instead McCain went off on Couric for the gotcha questions foisted upon Palin. Again, I agree that the media hates her. Even given that, it is not a gotcha question to ask the would be Vice-President about specific supreme court rulings she disagrees with, let alone asking her what newspapers she reads. It was embarrassing.

When asked during the debate about gays and lesbians, Palin was noticeably uncomfortable. I’m sorry. It’s 2008. Gays and lesbians are here to stay. The ProConPundit doesn’t support gay marriage but does support domestic partnerships/civil unions. She is way too young to be so uptight about this issue. Not for nothing, the church that she belongs to has support groups for people trying to overcome homosexuality. That workshop takes place in the classroom next to the people who think the world is flat. When asked about gays and lesbians, she said, "We have diversity in our family. Lots of different people." Please, give me a break. She’s whacked.

I have long defended John McCain in the experience over change argument. In judgement, arguably the most important judgement a nominee can make, he blew it. He made a choice that would appease conservatives, who would have voted for him anyway, instead of choosing someone who would appeal to the moderates and independents who will decide this election.

2008-09-29T18:53:00.000-07:00

The People’s House Carried The Wishes of the People

BAILOUT BILL
Democratic 140 YEAS 95 NAYS
Republican 65 YEAS 133 NAYS
205 YEAS/ 228 NEAS

Today the People’s House defeated Corporate Welfare. House Republicans are being demonized for putting the brakes on the bailout. The House Democrats could have passed the bill on their own. The bill failed 228 to 205 with 95 Democrats voting against it. The demagoguery of the House GOP by for their part in not passing this bill is ridiculous.

Leadership and "straight talk" have been in short supply on this issue. The American people are livid at the thought of bailing out Wall Street AT ALL let alone without fully understanding, or at least better understanding, the ramifications of this bailout. CEO golden parachutes, ownership, return on this investment, etc., are among things that give us pause. Politicians, the Bush Administration, and the media all pushed this thing saying it had to be done today in order to protect the markets. This was the equivalent of telling the terrorists what day we will leave Iraq. They should have sent out a message that a bailout would be worked out and it would take a week or so to put together. I know that sounds simplistic but its equally simplistic to think the American people would swallow this horrific throwing away of our hard earned dollars to bail out scoundrels.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are both despicable and ought to be put out of office. Their behavior in this crisis has been staggering. Chris Dodd was on the Sunday morning shows blathering about how he and Harry had to stay up until 11 p.m. the night before working. Give me a break. Her speech blaming Republicans for this crisis was incomplete, if not inaccurate, and not a good way to garner Republican votes. Barney Frank has criticized House GOP members for not voting for the bailout when 10 Democrats on the banking committee he chairs voted against it. He is a liar and a pig.

President Bush once again has let us down in a crisis. He’s done a poor job of leading and a poor job of communicating.

John McCain exercised good judgement by returning to Washington to be a part of the process but misread what was going on in speaking as though he had helped forge a deal that didn’t exist. McCain did help to get the original bill improved. Personally, I think McCain would have been better off being against the bill. I appreciate the urgency of the matter but he’s Mr. Reformer, Mr. No Ear-Marks and No Pork. That was WAY TOO MUCH loosey-goosey and fast shuffle with this thing. AT LEAST McCAIN SHOWED UP.

Barack Obama, just as when he was in the Illinois Senate, voted "Present." He is staying as far out of the fray as he possibly can. When asked, he wags his finger and lectures us about what he expects to see in a bill.

2008-09-29T18:35:00.000-07:00

Tough Times for Americans
& McCain Candidacy

The ProConPundit has been noticeably silent of late mostly because I am disgusted. Unless something changes and changes quick, Barack Obama will be elected–by default–as our next president.

John McCain is swimming upstream to begin with. It’s the end of two terms of a very unpopular President amidst constantly increasing precarious times. The mood of the country is clearly to make a change. If the Democratic nominee were anyone other than Barack Obama, McCain would not stand a chance. Obama’s inexperience, failure to connect with working class Americans, far left record (factually the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate) and skin color put him in a less viable position than any other Democrat.

Still, McCain has done a poor job of late. The perception of his handling of the bailout mess, the ability of the Democrats to tie the crisis to the Bush Administration coupled with McCain’s stupid linking of himself too often to Bush, and the Palin pick, are all crippling McCain among moderates and independents. The Palin pick was a brilliant move to keep conservatives happy. Ultimately, any vice-presidential pick probably doesn’t make that much difference. As of today, such INCREDIBLY reliable Republican states as North Carolina and Indiana are up for grabs. That might suggest having such a conservative as Palin on the ticket is not reassuring enough.
As much as I didn’t like Mitt Romney, he would certainly be a reassuring presence on a McCain ticket given the economic mess.

Check out these articles. The first two are by David Brooks. He and George Will would be my favorite conservatives. They are thoughtful and brilliant and, what I consider, authentic classic conservatives. Brooks first article sheds some light on McCain. The second critiques Sarah Palin.

The third article is by Kathleen Parker. She is a conservative columnist.. She originally favored Palin and now thinks Palin should drop out of the race. That’s crazy. The upheaval and aspersions that would cast would completely kill McCain’s chances. They are interesting articles, nonetheless.

Thinking About McCain
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 25, 2008

I’ve been covering John McCain steadily for a decade. A few years ago, I worked on a book, which I foolishly never completed, on the U.S. Senate with McCain as the central character. So when I step back and think of McCain, even in the heat of this campaign, I still think of him first in the real world of governing, not in the show-business world of the election.I think first of the personal qualities. He was an unfailingly candid man. When other politicians described a meeting, they always ended up the heroes of the story. But McCain would always describe the meeting straight, emphasizing his own failings with more vigor than his accomplishments.

He is, for a politician, a humble man. The most important legacy of his prisoner-of-war days is that he witnessed others behaving more heroically than he did. This experience has given him a basic honesty when appraising himself.

His mood darkened as the Iraq war deteriorated, but his accomplishments mounted. I don’t think any senator had as impressive a few years as McCain did during this span of time.

He lobbied relentlessly for a change of strategy in Iraq, holding off the tide that would have had us accept defeat and leave Iraq to its genocide. He negotiated a complicated immigration bill with Ted Kennedy. He helped organize the Gang of 14 and helped save the Senate from polarized Armageddon over judicial nominations.

He voted against opportunist bills like the pork-laden energy package and the prescription drug plan. He led a crusade against Jack Abramoff and the sleaze-meisters in his own party and exposed corrupt Pentagon contracts.

I could fill this column with his accomplishments during this period, and not even mention the insights. At a defense conference in Munich, I saw him diagnose and confront Russian hegemony. Week after week, I saw him dissent from G.O.P. colleagues as their party lost its way.

Some people who cover the campaign seem to have no knowledge of anything but the campaign, but I can’t get these events — which were real and required the constant application of judgment, honor and courage — out of my head.

Do I wish he was running a different campaign? Yes.

It’s not that he has changed his political personality that bothers me. I’ve come to accept that in this media-circus environment, you simply cannot run for president as a candid, normal person.

Nor is it, primarily, the dishonest ads he is running. My friends in the Obama cheering section get huffy about them, while filtering from their consciousness all the dishonest ads Obama has run — the demagogic DHL ad, the insulting computer ad, the cynical Rush Limbaugh ad, the misleading Social Security ad and so on. If one candidate has sunk lower than the other at this point, I’ve lost track.

No, what disappoints me about the McCain campaign is it has no central argument. I had hoped that he would create a grand narrative explaining how the United States is fundamentally unprepared for the 21st century and how McCain’s worldview is different.

McCain has not made that sort of all-encompassing argument, so his proposals don’t add up to more than the sum of their parts. Without a groundbreaking argument about why he is different, he’s had to rely on tactical gimmicks to stay afloat. He has no frame to organize his response when financial and other crises pop up.

He has no overarching argument in part because of his Senate training and the tendency to take issues on one at a time — in part, because of the foolish decision to run a traditional right-left campaign against Obama and, in part, because McCain has never really resolved the contradiction between the Barry Goldwater and Teddy Roosevelt sides of his worldview. One day he’s a small-government Western conservative; the next he’s a Bull Moose progressive. The two don’t add up — as we’ve seen in his uneven reaction to the financial crisis.

Nonetheless, when people try to tell me that the McCain on the campaign trail is the real McCain and the one who came before was fake, I just say, baloney. I saw him. A half-century of evidence is there.

If McCain is elected, he will retain his instinct for the hard challenge. With that Greatest Generation style of his, he will run the least partisan administration in recent times. He is not a sophisticated conceptual thinker, but he is a good judge of character. He is not an organized administrator, but he has become a practiced legislative craftsman. He is, above all — and this is completely impossible to convey in the midst of a campaign — a serious man prone to serious things.

Amid the stupidity of this season, it seemed worth stepping back to recall the fundamentals — about McCain today and Obama on some other day in the near future.

Why Experience Matters
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 15, 2008

Philosophical debates arise at the oddest times, and in the heat of this election season, one is now rising in Republican ranks. The narrow question is this: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be vice president? Most conservatives say yes, on the grounds that something that feels so good could not possibly be wrong. But a few commentators, like George Will, Charles Krauthammer, David Frum and Ross Douthat demur, suggesting in different ways that she is unready.

The issue starts with an evaluation of Palin, but does not end there. This argument also is over what qualities the country needs in a leader and what are the ultimate sources of wisdom.

There was a time when conservatives did not argue about this. Conservatism was once a frankly elitist movement. Conservatives stood against radical egalitarianism and the destruction of rigorous standards. They stood up for classical education, hard-earned knowledge, experience and prudence. Wisdom was acquired through immersion in the best that has been thought and said.

But, especially in America, there has always been a separate, populist, strain. For those in this school, book knowledge is suspect but practical knowledge is respected. The city is corrupting and the universities are kindergartens for overeducated fools. The elitists favor sophistication, but the common-sense folk favor simplicity.

The elitists favor deliberation, but the populists favor instinct.

This populist tendency produced the term-limits movement based on the belief that time in government destroys character but contact with grass-roots America gives one grounding in real life. And now it has produced Sarah Palin.

Palin is the ultimate small-town renegade rising from the frontier to do battle with the corrupt establishment. Her followers take pride in the way she has aroused fear, hatred and panic in the minds of the liberal elite. The feminists declare that she’s not a real woman because she doesn’t hew to their rigid categories. People who’ve never been in a Wal-Mart think she is parochial because she has never summered in Tuscany.

Look at the condescension and snobbery oozing from elite quarters, her backers say. Look at the endless string of vicious, one-sided attacks in the news media. This is what elites produce. This is why regular people need to take control.

And there’s a serious argument here. In the current Weekly Standard, Steven Hayward argues that the nation’s founders wanted uncertified citizens to hold the highest offices in the land. They did not believe in a separate class of professional executives. They wanted rough and rooted people like Palin.

I would have more sympathy for this view if I hadn’t just lived through the last eight years. For if the Bush administration was anything, it was the anti-establishment attitude put into executive practice.

And the problem with this attitude is that, especially in his first term, it made Bush inept at governance. It turns out that governance, the creation and execution of policy, is hard. It requires acquired skills. Most of all, it requires prudence.

What is prudence? It is the ability to grasp the unique pattern of a specific situation. It is the ability to absorb the vast flow of information and still discern the essential current of events — the things that go together and the things that will never go together. It is the ability to engage in complex deliberations and feel which arguments have the most weight.

How is prudence acquired? Through experience. The prudent leader possesses a repertoire of events, through personal involvement or the study of history, and can apply those models to current circumstances to judge what is important and what is not, who can be persuaded and who can’t, what has worked and what hasn’t.

Experienced leaders can certainly blunder if their minds have rigidified (see: Rumsfeld, Donald), but the records of leaders without long experience and prudence is not good. As George Will pointed out, the founders used the word "experience" 91 times in the Federalist Papers. Democracy is not average people selecting average leaders. It is average people with the wisdom to select the best prepared.

Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness.

The idea that "the people" will take on and destroy "the establishment" is a utopian fantasy that corrupted the left before it corrupted the right. Surely the response to the current crisis of authority is not to throw away standards of experience and prudence, but to select leaders who have those qualities but not the smug condescension that has so marked the reaction to the Palin nomination in the first place.

Palin Problem
She’s out of her league.
By Kathleen Parker
Sept. 24, 2008

If at one time women were considered heretical for swimming upstream against feminist orthodoxy, they now face condemnation for swimming downstream — away from Sarah Palin.To express reservations about her qualifications to be vice president — and possibly president — is to risk being labeled anti-woman.

Or, as I am guilty of charging her early critics, supporting only a certain kind of woman.

Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick — what a difference a financial crisis makes — and a more complicated picture has emerged.

As we’ve seen and heard more from John McCain’s running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.

Yes, she recently met and turned several heads of state as the United Nations General Assembly convened in New York. She was gracious, charming and disarming. Men swooned. Pakistan’s president wanted to hug her. (Perhaps Osama bin Laden is dying to meet her?)

And, yes, she has common sense, something we value. And she’s had executive experience as a mayor and a governor, though of relatively small constituencies (about 6,000 and 680,000, respectively).

Finally, Palin’s narrative is fun, inspiring and all-American in that frontier way we seem to admire. When Palin first emerged as John McCain’s running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood — a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

Palin didn’t make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

It was fun while it lasted.

Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: "Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this."

When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: "I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?"

If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true. What to do?

McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.

Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.

Do it for your country.

— Kathleen Parker is a nationally syndicated columnist

2008-09-10T19:57:00.000-07:00

Sara, You're the Poet in my Heart

Wait a minute baby...
Stay with me awhile
Said you'd give me light
But you never told be about the fire
Drowning in the sea of love
Where everyone would love to drown
And now it's gone
It doesn't matter anymore
When you build your house
Call me home

Thank you, Fleetwood Mac, for this song, "Sara", which I find helpful in summing up my complex reaction to Sarah Palin. Its about time there was a Fleetwood Mac song for Republicans. I never much cared for "Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow!"

Are you invigorated, excited, confused, befuddled, angry about Sarah Palin? Here’s what I have come up with.

1. It’s the most significant vice-presidential pick since Henry Wallace. FDR picked Henry Wallace in 1940. It was significant because it was the first time the presidential nominee picked his running mate. At the very beginning, the VP was the person who ran for President and came in second. George Washington didn't pick John Adams as his VP, he beat him for President. Imagine: Reagan-Carter, Clinton-Bush or Bush-Gore! Later, the running mate was selected by the party. All right, historical moment over. The selection of Palin by McCain was brilliant strategy in that it:
A. Energizes the GOP base.
B. Sparks enthusiasm and interest in the entire race while reinvigorating (or invigorating) his campaign.
C. Enables GOP to be able to potentially deliver the first woman to the vice-presidency and, possibly, the presidency.
D. Working class voters all over America are looking for someone to identify with. Some of them were among the folks in Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania who voted for Hillary, but they are everywhere and don’t feel connected to Obama, they admire McCain but don’t identify with him, either.
E. Perhaps, most significantly, the selection of her has absolutely driven the Obama campaign and liberal media CRAZY. Obama is falling all over himself saying foolish things and giving more credibility to his opponent’s running mate than I have ever seen anyone do. David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign manager is usually one cool, calm, and sharp communicator. He, too, has been making an ass out of himself raising his voice and flapping his hands perplexed over the moose wrestling hottie from Alaska.

2. I think the media has been unfair to Palin, They, and the Democrats have been "Clarence Thomasing" her–discounting her as a woman because she isn’t a liberal woman. MSNBC has gone completely off the rails but I stopped watching MSNBC before the conventions.

3. I do think Obama intentionally used the lipstick remark as a jab. It was clear by the crowd’s response to his use of the "lipstick on a pig" remark that they thought that’s what he meant. God knows they could not possibly have been smarter than him. Other surrogates of Obama also used the "lipstick on a pig" remark, so it was clearly a co-ordinated effort or talking point.

4. That said, while I guess it makes hey for the McCain camp to grind the Obama camp over the "lipstick on a pig" remark, for the first time ever I find myself agreeing with salon.com’s Joan Walsh. She is a big time, self-described liberal and feminist. She disagrees with most of what Palin believes but admires her as a feminist. Walsh believes that the McCain hoopla over lipstickgate casts Palin as a victim. Sarah Palin is not a weak, pathetic, victim. She is running to be Vice-President of the United States. She doesn’t need defending and if she does, she should do it herself.

5. That brings me to the matter of her not being interviewed. Shit or get off the pot. Let’s not play games, McCain. You picked her. All of your people, including Ridge, Romney, Lieberman and Lindsay Graham have all taken to the air waves to declare how qualified she is to be Vice-President, even as they waited to see if their noses would grow. We shouldn’t have to wait 5 minutes for her to be interviewed. The notion that she can "bypass Meet The Press and go directly to the voters" is bullshit. She keeps repeating her same lines about putting the jet on ebay and voting against the bridge to nowhere (after she voted for it).

The momentum is not going to stay with her unless she can pay her dues and prove herself as a national leader. I am getting tired of all of the hoopla criticizing her and defending her. She needs to stand on her own and the topic needs to change to more important things.

Sara, you're the poet in my heart
Never change, never stop

2008-09-10T19:14:00.000-07:00

The War to End All Wars: 2012

Here is the Question:

What effect will Sarah Palin have upon the Clinton’s support

of Barack Obama in the election?

Here are three theories:
1. Michele Johnson– The Clinton’s will now really and truly work as hard as they can to get Obama elected so that Sarah Palin will not end up becoming the first woman Vice-President or President.
2. Paul Kroeger– We are witnessing the end of the era of the Clinton’s, whether or not they realize it.
3. ProConPundit– The Clinton’s will manage to actively, tacitly, and half-heartedly support Obama while secretly (or not so secretly) hoping he loses. They will campaign for him in a way that will ALWAYS cast doubts over their support which will redound to doubts about Obama. They do not want Sarah Palin to be the first woman President, certainly. However, if Obama is elected, she will never be elected President. He will either serve two terms and a Republican will beat him in 2012. 2016 is too far away. Hillary prefers electing McCain and resurrecting her Methodist prayer warriors to pray for McCain’s good health for four years. McCain would only serve one term and Hillary would face off against Palin in 2012.

If Obama loses, you think he’ll run again in 2012? Forget about it. For one thing, no losing Democratic nominee has been nominated again since Stevenson in 1956. Democrats eviscerate their losers. Besides, if he loses, the Clinton’s will do EVERYTHING imaginable to discredit him. Whether he ends up dead like Vince Foster, cocaine planted in his pocket or Terry McAuliffe planted in his bed, this is Obama’s only grab for the brass ring.

2008-09-04T20:03:00.000-07:00

Nothing Lackluster About End of Speech

Not so much insomnia but haunting. The end of John McCain’s speech referred to his time in the "Hanoi Hilton." He’s not bragging. He’s talking of something that few of us have gone through and fewer still can imagine.

He is not a great orator of a time. He is, win or lose, an American hero and patriot.

God bless John McCain and God bless America.

Now let’s win one-- not for the Gipper–but for our future.

2008-09-04T19:44:00.000-07:00

McCain’s Speech of a Lifetime is Lackluster

GOP Strategist Mike Murphy who managed McCain’s 2000 campaign and the ProConPundit lobbied the McCain camp to have McCain not do a traditional convention speech. He excels at town hall meetings. Our argument, made more credibly by Murphy was that McCain’s acceptance speech needed to be a town hall format and not him giving a speech. The concession was creating a runway where McCain could speak at a more in-the-round environment. It missed the mark.

I love this guy and admire him. His speech was poor. His code references to being against abortion were the things that garnered the most amount of applause. The ProConPundit is unabashedly and unapologetically prolife but it’s a poor impression of the GOP if that is one of few things that excites people.

What a difference a week makes. Thank God for Sarah Palin.

2008-09-04T18:58:00.000-07:00

McCain’s Closest Allies Are Horrible Speakers Cindy McCain Should Never,
Ever Speak in Public Again

I think Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Dole inaugurated the stupid notion that Americans need to hear from the nominee’s spouse. Hillary and Liddy did it well. Cindy McCain is DREADFUL. If she is sincere, she has a horrible time expressing it. She comes across as a bleach blonde bimbo and a phoney. She should NEVER, EVER speak again in public. SHE IS SICKENING.

Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and Tom Ridge, former PA Governor and first Secretary of Homeland Security are great men, great Americans, fine patriots and extremely loyal to John McCain. Their speeches were horrible and redeemed the fact that Mac did not pick them for VP, despite my urging.

2008-09-04T06:02:00.001-07:00

I alternately enjoy and depise John Kass but he hates all politicians equally. Since Chicago is largely devoid of any potent GOP presence, he most often hacks away at Democrats.

Palin's small-town ways will play big across U.S.
John Kass - Chicago Tribune
10:37 PM CDT, September 3, 2008

ST. PAUL — Sarah Joan of Arc isn't as catchy as Sarah Barracuda, yet even so, the throng called for her to lead them, an unknown from the edge of nowhere, a woman with no experience in the great city of light.So Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the conservative running mate for Sen. John McCain, hit the necessary themes in the most anticipated speech of the Republican convention: pummeling the high priests of the Washington media establishment, pushing for oil drilling in the wilderness even though the Democrats don't like it, and promising political reform while reveling in her small-town ways."I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment," Palin told the delegates. "And I've learned quickly these last few days, that if you are not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the great people of this country."

Despite the Republican spin, Palin is a political animal, a real human with the capacity for ambition and revenge and all that comes with it, including all the flaws. As I mentioned a few days ago, she is not some plaster saint to be venerated, not a Mother Teresa with a Buck knife. Her record and her background must be fully investigated if she is to be a heartbeat from the presidency, and her conflicts examined, like those of Joe Biden and his son the lobbyist.

But there's been a zeal to the Palin media vetting. Reporters here have acted like perturbed clerks, snippy that established procedure wasn't followed when McCain surprised them with Palin. Perhaps he should have gone to a party at Sally Quinn's house and asked for opinions. Years ago, McCain might have done so, back when he shamelessly sucked up to the press, but they've left him for Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama and they're not coming back. So McCain had no obligation to go through that ridiculous pantomime expected by some in my business, who think politicians actually give a rat's ears about sitting down and consulting with journalists.

And there's that family issue with Palin. Her 17-year-old daughter is unmarried and pregnant. Palin herself has a 4-month-old infant with special needs. The suggestion has been made that if she's such a good mom, she should stay home with her family rather than run with McCain. If Palin were a Democrat, such talk would be grounds for serious shunning. But Palin is a conservative. She receives no such protection.

She also poses the greatest threat yet to the Obama reform narrative. The cynical epic has become the establishment media bedtime story, with Obama as the young King Arthur riding forth to promise change. In this, the Washington Beltway media colony has been his eager Merlin, hoping to guide him, cleaving desperately to the theme that he's some kind of reformer, even though Obama is a politician backed by Chicago's Daley machine and never once challenged the political corruption in Chicago and Illinois. Not ever.

The contrast with Palin—who actually went after the Republican Party bosses in Alaska on the corruption issue—is profound and challenging for the Obama-friendly media that willfully ignore his lack of leadership on the reform front, yet are consumed to find out if Palin has an overdue library book.In her speech, Palin also pulled an old political trick, publicly reveling in what is considered a deficit—that she's from a tiny town, almost as far as geographically possible from the sophisticated salons of Washington. Electoral vote-rich Pennsylvania and Ohio don't have salons either, but they do have small towns.The Republicans will remind them relentlessly in the weeks ahead that former community organizer Obama—in a foolish display of ego—said that small-town folk deal with an uncertain world by clinging to their guns and their religion."I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA . . . because I wanted to make my kids' public education better," said the former mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population 8,471). "And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities."

Expect Palin to knock squirrels out of trees across Ohio and Pennsylvania, along with other critters, fur and feathered. Unlike other candidates, she'll probably do her own shooting and skinning, and maybe roast them on sticks, with a pinch of salt, demanding reporters eat some, so they can say it tastes like chicken.St. Joan was a threat to the established order, and Palin is being positioned as a threat.

Unfortunately, the French handed Joan over to the English, and she was burned. I don't think we know yet what happens to Sarah.

2008-09-03T21:04:00.000-07:00

The ProConPundit Was Wrong

If I were a flip flopper, I would remove my previous harsh posts about Sarah Palin.
I’d rather stand by those remarks and admit I was wrong.

I am not go to rehash her speech. If you didn’t see it, watch it online.
No matter who you support, you should hear what she had to say.

She was strong and sharp and crisp and tough and funny and sarcastic and touching.
I will reflect more later on some points she raised.

For now, let me tell a couple of people said about her:

“The Dems got a buzz saw to deal with.” Marc Jaeger
“We presumed she was
the alternative to Hillary Clinton.
Sarah Palin is not an alternative to Hillary Clinton.
She is a torpedo
aimed directly at Barack & Michelle Obama.”
Chris Matthews

“She is Dick Cheney with a good butt.” Anonymous

Mike Huckabee observed that more people voted for Palin as Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than voted for Biden as President. Biden has met his match.

McCain is brilliant.

2008-09-03T20:17:00.000-07:00

Former Opponents Go To Bat for Mac
Redmeat Romney. Mitt Romney gave a good red meat speech tonight. He fancies himself as Ronald Reagan who lost to Gerald Ford in 76, began his campaign the day after Ford lost and became the new face of the GOP and President in 1980. He’s worked hard for McCain and has been a team player. I still don’t see him being presidential timber.
Preacher-In Chief. Mike Huckabee is great. He began by saying he wished he was speaking Thursday night in an acceptance speech. He thanked the liberal media for doing what non one thought could be done: unifying the GOP and America behind McCain. He said the media was tackier than a costume change at a Madonna concert in its disgraceful treatment of the Palin Family. Regrettably, I missed most of his speech. He’s a team player with future vice-presidential or presidential aspirations.

America’s Mayor. If Fred Thompson and Joe Lieberman burned the barn last night, Rudy Giuliani blew the roof off and sent the place into orbit.

Giuliani stirred them up like no one before in this convention. He was entertaining and adds an ethnic, urban grit that the GOP needs. He also adds the moderate/liberal influence that is ever so rare and needed if the GOP wishes to stay in power.

His remarks about Obama were stinging, cogent, articulate, specific in contrasting a McCain vision and deconstructing the liberal argument of “more of the same.” He was funny and laughed with the building energy and enthusiasm be effected.

Observed that the Democratic National Convention never used the word Islamic terrorism or terrorism.

Here are some of his memorable lines:

“Barack Obama is the least experienced candidate for president in at least 100 years. On his experience, just this once we agree with Joe Biden.”

“He is not ready for that 3 a.m. phone call. And just this once, we agreed with Hillary.”

“Barack Obama has never led anything, nothing. Notta. Notta.”

“Change is not a destination just as hope is not a strategy.”

“Sarah Palin’s been a mayor. I love that.”

“I am sorry that Barack Obama thinks Sarah’s town wasn’t cosmopolitan enough. Wasn’t flash enough. Maybe they cling to religion there.”

“She’s got an 80% approval rating. You’d never get that in new York City.”

“How dare they question whether Governor Palin can be a mother and the Vice-President? When do they ever ask a man that question?”

2008-09-03T17:54:00.000-07:00

Carly Fiorina: “I Know John McCain”

The former Hewett-Packard Board Chair and CEO just gave her speech at the RNC. She is a bright, smart, savvy business person. The line she kept peppering her speech with was, “I Know John McCain.”

I couldn’t help but recall Lloyd Bentsen’s lines in his 1988 debate with Dan Quayle that began with “I knew Jack Kennedy” and finally ended with, “You’re no Jack Kennedy.” I intuited, perhaps insanely, that the subliminal message was, “I know John McCain. Barack Obama is no John McCain.”

I’m a mess.

2008-09-03T17:11:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Appalled At Treatment of Palin

Has the media treated Sarah Palin unfairly? You better believe it. She is not my choice. Frankly, I think she is as experienced as a Vice-President would need to be if the President would not be the oldest president ever. That said, Barack Obama’s lack of experience has not been scrutinized in two years as much as Sarah Palin has in the last five days. Not only that, the same media that intentionally kept quiet for over a year the bastard love child of John Edwards, as well as the devious plot of John and Elizabeth Edwards to buy off the bimbo and deceive the American public has disgustingly broadcasted the pregnant teenage daughter of Sarah Palin. By media, I mean the New York Times, NBC and MSNBC. Other media outlets have also cruelly said that Sarah Palin’s four month old son is actually her grandson–that she is pretending it is her son to have kept quiet that her same daughter had a prior teenage pregnancy.

Consequently, Sarah Palin will come out swinging in her speech tonight. She will charm the country tonight, on the one hand, in no small part by declaring war on the media. This hot woman who could strangle a moose with her bare hands is going to let the media know that she is perfectly fine with their wrath and rejection–that she is going to Washington to work for the rest of the people the elites look down on. These are the embittered, religion and gun clinging people, many in Pennsylvania who Obama referenced in the primary. She is also going to proverbially ring the necks of those who have doubted her experience, this would include a “just-kidding, Madame Governor” ProConPundit and slap Obama when she says, "Being a mayor is a lot like being a community organizer except that it has actual responsibilities."

I just finished watching Sally Quinn of the Washington Post skewering McCain and Palin. The far-left Quinn thinks Palin should stay home and raise her kids. She also presumes to have knowledge she, in fact, could not have in saying McCain did not properly vet Palin. Again, she was not my choice but she was McCain’s and it was his right. That he didn’t vert Palin in advance at the altar of the media is not a serious factor to me.

In 1984, then Vice-President George Bush got in a little trouble when saying after debating Geraldine Ferraro, “Well, we kicked a little ass last night.” The presumed referencing of Ferraro’s ass as little was considered sexist. No sexism here, fasten your seat belts, this smart, sexy, moose hunting, giant killing Alaskan is going to kick a lot of ass here on in. Note: she won’t be a victim.
Bill Kristol said something interesting tonight. Kristol, who is Editor of The Weekly Standard, a neo-con, and who, incidentally, was Chief of Staff to Vice-President Dan Quayle. He also worked on the staff of Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the seventies as Deputy Issues Director. Kristol has never been a fan of McCain and predicted a couple of months ago that McCain would and should pick Palin. Kristol said that John McCain, in picking Palin, has decided he will not lose this election as a courtly old Republican, like Bob Dole. Dole picked Jack Kemp and lost without surprise and without ever stirring up the race. Maverick McCain has bet the dream of his lifetime on stirring things up. He has done that. Sarah Palin has done that. A week ago, no one thought this convention would be exciting. McCain will probably win. If he loses, he will lose in his own, maverick/maddening way, making a splash and making history.

I must admit, as much as I would have favored Lieberman or Ridge, putting aside any controversy their selection would have brought, the only excitement would have been the criticism by Republicans. A unity ticket of McCain-Lieberman would have had some excitement but not much. McCain and Lieberman are both great patriots and bright leaders, but boring.

The media: NBC and MSNBC, in particular, are furious that McCain picked someone who surprised them. The larger liberal media is Clarence Thomasing her. How dare President Bush (Sr.) name a black supreme court justice who is not a totey for Jesse Jackson and the liberal left. Likewise, the liberal media and the far left is furious and running scared because John McCain had the audacity to name a woman who is not a left winger. This was expressed today on The View by Joy Behar, who said, “You Can’t Exchange One Vagina For Another.” Behar is a pig...Palin is on her way. For the record, I didn’t watch The View.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama has finally agreed to be interviewed by Bill O’Reilly tomorrow night.

2008-09-02T19:47:00.000-07:00

Thompson and Lieberman Deliver Barn Burners

President Bush:

"If the Hanoi Hilton couldn’t break him, the angry left never will."

"John McCain is not afraid to tell you when he disagrees with you.

Believe me, I know!"

Fred Thompson:

"God Bless America and God Bless John McCain!"

Joe Lieberman:

"Country Matters More Than Party!"
"God Only Made One John McCain and He is His Own Man."
"If John McCain Is Just Another Republican,

Then I am Michael Moore’s Favorite Democrat."
"Barack Obama, in three years in the United States Senate, has never reached across the aisle to accomplish anything significant."
"John McCain will be a President

our allies will trust and our enemies will fear."

The GOP convention started with some touching tributes to Presidents Reagan and Bush I. Our beloved First Lady graced us with some self-described "Straight Talk" giving touching remarks about John McCain and pointing out her husband’s many and seldom heard, even here, accomplishments these past eight years.
President Bush gave a great speech via satellite from The White House. Our President spoke touching words to his parents and spoke convincingly of John McCain. He went on to say of McCain, President Bush began the process of passing the torch from the Bush Family to the McCain’s–if they win.

Fred Thompson gave an inspiring, barn burner of a speech. Thompson said, "We need a President whose doesn’t think protecting the unborn is not above his pay grade." Thompson also got cheers for his defense of Sarah Palin in view of her being ridiculed for not being a Sunday talk show regular and Washington cocktail party hound. I agree with him. My criticisms of her are not about her being a Washington outsider.

Joe Lieberman gave a credibly incredible speech. I don’t think Republicans appreciate the hits he has taken to stand up for President Bush and now John McCain. His speech and Thompson’s, along with President and Mrs. Bush, were candidate based not party based. An ad lib addition to Lieberman’s speech were his subtle remarks that McCain will do better than Bush in dealing with other countries.
It was a great night.

2008-09-02T19:42:00.000-07:00

Jury Out On Palin-Biden Debate

Joe Biden is arguably one of the best debaters in the U.S. Personally, I think Joe Lieberman was uniquely best qualified in this respect as a potential running mate to McCain. Lieberman has ably debated Biden before on the Sunday shows, is in the same league as Biden as a debater, above and beyond him in stature and, as a Democrat would have really dealt a unique punch.

We’ll know more Wednesday after Sarah Palin delivers the speech of her lifetime at the Republican Convention and, frankly, most of America meets her for the first time. My hunch is that she’ll do much better against Biden than we are being led to believe for three reasons:
1. The bar is set low. If she doesn’t have a Quayle moment, "You’re no Jack Kennedy," she’ll be given a passing grade.
2. She’s no patsy. She may kick Biden’s ass.
3. Biden may pull a Rick Lazio and be perceived as bullying her or disrespecting her.

2008-09-02T19:21:00.000-07:00

McCain Creates Ironic Empathy
Between Limbaugh and McCain Wings of GOP

In McCain’s naming Palin, an unintended consequence happened in one fell swoop. Rush Limbaugh and all other branches of "real," "true," and "far-right" conservatives understood why people like me have loved John McCain for all these years. At that same moment, I understand precisely why they have hated him. This was a McCain-being- McCain move. Many of you have called, e-mailed and texted me in the last few days to ask what I thought and why I had done something unusual: had an unpublished thought. The simple truth is that I have been too infuriated–and still am. I will speak to the PRO’s and CON’s of the move and will first acknowledge two things:

1. I totally understand the political strategy of the pick and realize it may work.
2. It is a stupid, reckless, mistake.

In the first few hours after the naming of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as McCain’s running mate, I was delighted with the euphoria expressed by Rush Limbaugh and James Dobson, two people I don’t care for and, in the case of Dobson, someone I don’t respect. Shoring up support among people who have long, vocally and viscerally disdained McCain felt great. Several people whose instincts are solid and whose opinions I respect contacted me to give thumbs up. My response which affirmed their opinion was not hypocritical on my part. Rather, I was impressed by the euphoria even as my own thought were yet unformed.

PROS...
1. Shores up conservatives. The support of Limbaugh and Dobson reflect huge amounts of solid support in every corner of this country.
2. Game changer. This was an infusion of energy, surprise and relative youth into the campaign.
3. Palin’s limited record is impressive as a reformer, a maverick who has bucked her party, most notably beating the incumbent GOP governor and going after corruption among Republicans like Alaska US Senator Ted Stephens.
4. Her family and their *choice* to have a Down’s Syndrome baby are heart warming and a way for the GOP to bring a young family into the national consciousness.
5. There is a sense in which having a red meat conservative like Palin on the ticket "frees McCain to be McCain." The idea is that before and after the election, Palin will be sent out to keep the conservatives happy. Judgement neutral, this was the same rationale President Bush Sr. Used in naming Dan Quayle. Quayle did a good job of that despite his handful of gaffes that landed him relentless criticism.
6. Palin is discounted by the liberal press as being able to court disgruntled Hillary Clinton voters. While this largely and logically true, she only needs to attract a small number of them in a close election to make a difference.
7. If they win, the GOP will deliver the first woman to the Vice-Presidency. Unless she assumes the office, she will never be elected in her own right. Vice-Presidents seldom get elected President. President Bush, Sr., was the first Vice-President in 150 years to become President without assuming the office. She would doubtless face more formidable and credible opponents in Mitt Romney, et al.

CONS...
1. Qualifications. Sarah Palin is woefully inadequate to be the President of the United States. I have memorized the GOP talking point about how she is more qualified than Obama. That is debatable and misses the point.
I agree with Doris Kearns Goodwin who says there are only three days when the Vice-President matters:
--The day they are selected.
--Election Day. Palin may help McCain. I have two doubts. First, conservatives would have voted for McCain any way. Second, no Vice-President has ever been credited with winning the election for the President. JFK believed he needed LBJ in 1960 to win Texas. I think Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley had more to do with Kennedy winning than Johnson.
--The Day they must assume the presidency.
Palin does fine on the first two days but falls short on the third. If the Presidency is not a place for on the job training as every candidate for President, save Obama, declared this year, the same is true for the person a heart beat away from the oldest President. The man who aspires to be the oldest President in American history shows a disdain for the Vice-Presidency and the one in five Americans who believe his age is a reason to vote against him.

2. Ideology. I believe the American people would be better served if the Democratic Party was less controlled by far left liberals and if the GOP was less controlled by far right conservatives. I would prefer a Republican presidency like Eisenhower, Ford or Bush I. The Palin pick over Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman does not help that cause.

McCain should have named Tom Ridge, Joe Lieberman, Mitt Romney or Susan Collins.

PS--My concerns about Sarah Palin's extreme views...

Sarah Palin believes that abortion should be illegal under ALL circumstances, including rape and incest. In this premise, she is far beyond the American mainstream.

Sarah Palin rejects not only gay marriage but supports a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage something President Bush used as an election wedge issue but never actually believed in or promoted. 60% of Americans oppose gay marriage. However, 66% of Americans support some type of domestic partnership/civil unions for gay couples Sarah Palin does not. Here again, her views are not within mainstream America.

In 1992, Sarah Palin supported the insurgent Republican presidential campaign of Pat Buchanan.

In 2000, rejecting Bush and McCain, she supported Buchanan’s kamikaze run with the Reform Party.

Sarah Palin belongs to a church which believes the world was created in six days, interprets the Bible literally, and believes that Jesus will return via "Rapture." In this premise, which is not supported by credible biblical scholarship, the chosen will rise up into the sky with Jesus while the non-chosen remain. On top of that, the chosen will rise without their clothes and everything else will continue here. So, for instance, if a bus driver is chosen, non-chosen bus passengers would experience a bus that is still running, at least temporarily, with the bus drivers clothes on his or her chair and the bus drivers cap probably on the steering wheel. These beliefs are as far to the right as Obama’s church is to the left without anti-American rhetoric.

2008-09-02T18:32:00.001-07:00

ProConPundit's Record On Palin

On August 18, 2008, I listed four finalists on McCain's short list. They were:
1. Lindsay Graham
2. Tom Ridge
3. Joe Lieberman
4. Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin. This would be a good pick for McCain to shore up conservatives, on the one hand. On the other hand, McCain would make history by the GOP delivering the first woman VP. I don’t favor symbolism over substance. She is not prepared to assume the presidency.

2008-09-02T17:48:00.000-07:00

"Don’t Worry Mac–

You Can’t Pick Worse Than I Did. Right?"

George H.W. Bush

"McCain Picks

His Grandson’s Kindergarten Teacher

As Running Mate."
Michele Johnson

"Sarah Palin Makes

Dan Quayle Look Like

Thomas Jefferson."
Bob Beckel

2008-08-27T20:23:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Ready To Pass Torch

We are coming to the point where we must focus on the selection of John McCain’s running mate which will be announced Friday at 10 a.m. Chicago time. The cat should be out of the bag Thursday.

The final names being thrown around are Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and, Senator Joseph Lieberman, independent of Connecticut.
I believe Romney and Pawlenty are out of the running. Pawlenty would be a Quayle-like choice. McCain is not desperate enough to pick Romney.

My final three predictions are:
1. Tom Ridge, Former Governor, Pennsylvania and First Secretary of Homeland Security
2. Lindsay Graham, U.S. Senator (SC)
3. Joe Lieberman, U.S. Senator (CT)

I lean mostly to Ridge and think Graham has been ignored by the media.

2008-08-27T20:12:00.000-07:00

Biden Finally Makes Prime Time

I love Joe Biden. I don’t actually remember the last time we had a regular guy on a national ticket. He adores his family, still thinks his wife is hot and she seems proud of him. On top of all of that, he is well qualified to be President of the US. His speech tonight wasn’t the best speech I’ve ever heard him give and I’ve paid more attention to him than most people. (That’s not bragging.) His personal stuff was interesting. It was mostly a speech that seemed disjointed to me.

His speech was shorter than I imagined. His son Beau, Attorney general of Delaware, gave the intro for his dad which was really touching.

Biden is an emotional, heart guy. I love him. He, too, was short on what Obama and he would actually do to make life in America better.

Anecdotally, Biden never endorsed Obama until he was selected as his running mate. The families seem to have bonded well. Michelle Obama was weepy during the speech which was, well, not exactly touching, but nice.

Obama had a surprise visit at the end of the speech. Forgive me, I thought it was lame. Biden didn’t need him. Obama so often comes off as an "eat your spinach type" explaining things to us that don’t need to be explained to us...like why his speech will be in a stadium tomorrow night.

GOP strategist, Mike Murphy, was ridiculed as a guest tonight by Chris Matthews, booed by the studio audience while Keith Olbermann told Matthews to pull the plug on Murphy. Murphy had the gall to say that he thought Bill & Hillary would actually vote for McCain. Opposition to Obama is simply not tolerated. Murphy quipped, You (people at MSNBC) are so in the tank (for Obama) that I am looking for the submarine.

2008-08-27T19:46:00.000-07:00

Good Performances by The Clintons’

While I have endorsed Obama as President of any high school student council in America, I think the Clinton’s should be in the Thespian Hall of Fame. All right, I always blast them. This time, let me say good things about them.
Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton despise Barack Obama. They think he lacks experience–and he does. They think he is unelectable and if they aren’t among the shrewdest pontifical strategists, who is? Ironically, they look at him they Bush I looked at Clinton in 1992. I think the difference is that Bush underestimated Clinton. McCain is not making that mistake.

Hillary last night and Bill tonight gave great speeches and rousing endorsements. They aren’t hypocrites for going to bat so hard for someone they can’t stand. They are loyal Democrats. They are self serving and working their angles, but loyal Democrats.
I must admit it was fun to listen to Bubba once again. I have generally despised him and usually with good reason. No one can shoot that bull like he can. Rivaled or exceeded only by Ronald Reagan, Bill is the best political speaker of our time. He never lets the truth stand in the way of making a good point. He took us down one more "Don’t Stop Thinkin’ About Tomorrow" memory lane of his presidency: Peace and prosperity, denial and appeasement, impeachment and disgrace.
Back to being nice. Let no one distort this. The Clinton’s did their part. There is a lot of buzz that Bill is not attending Obama’s speech tomorrow night. Who cares? He did his part. Obama has done very little to foster a good relationship with Bill. I don’t blame Obama. I wouldn’t either. At the same time, you can’t criticize Clinton for not going out of his way.

It was humorous to watch Michelle Obama tearing up when Hillary and Bill spoke glowingly of her husband. They want him to fall flat on his face.

I also think the nonsense about a catharsis and Hillary’s supporters needing to be treated so deferentially has been nauseating. This is part of why Obama doesn’t go out of his way to cajole them.

The high points of the convention, so far, has been the tribute to Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton’s speech. So far, they’re not making a case for what they will do. They are bad mouthing Bush, though not excessively so and trying to link McCain to Bush but NOTHING about what change would actually be.

2008-08-27T19:17:00.000-07:00

The Brilliant Woman Who Is The Star of the Democrats
Caroline Kennedy: Her Mother’s Daughter

Chicago 9 p.m. CST

Caroline Kennedy gave a great introduction to her Uncle Teddy the other night and obviously did a good job vetting a running mate for Obama. Her greatest performance was later Monday night when she was interviewed by the worthless Wolf Blitzer on CNN. I was out of town and staying in a hotel near Louisville that only had CNN. Blitzer asked Kennedy about the vetting process and said, "All right, Caroline, walk us through if you will, the entire process..." of picking from the final three finalists.

With her mother’s grace she paused, sort of rolled her eyes out loud, laughed, and replied, "I’m not walking you through anything, this was a confidential process."

She was great. Wolf Blitzer is a jerk.

Cable TV is really pathetic. I was forced to watch CNN for a couple of days and, except for David Gergen, is pretty lame. I have generally favored MSNBC even though it leaned left. I liked it because of the NBC influence of Tim Russert and, because even lefties like Chris Matthews interviews good people. With Russert dead, Tucker Carlson run off the reservation and any other voices that are not far left ridiculed or extinguished, its really lame.

The latest MSNBC influence is a cable show to the far left witchyfuss, Rachel Maddox.

2008-08-25T19:46:00.000-07:00

South Side Chicago Girl Makes Her Mark

I grew up 5 miles and a million miles from Michelle Obama and her church.

People who know more than I do have described Michelle Obama as an anti-white militant black. I don’t really care for her and it pains me, I must admit, to oppose a so-called South side Chicagoan named Barack Obama for President. I doubt that another south sider will ever come this close again. Whatever I think of them, though, Michelle is really and truly a girl of the south side...she’s not exotic, not from Hawaii, not raised in Kenya. She grew up about five miles from me. She gave a great speech for her husband and the country she says she has always loved, even if only recently proud of.

Clintonesque in her embellishments, she lied when she said her husband wants to end the war reponsibly. He has been too slow to actually pay attention to what is going on or what is needed in Iraq. His entire platform has been based on voting against a war he had no vote in, while he voted present 100 times in the Illinois Senate when what he actually believed might have mattered.

So far, this convention has said nothing to white, working class, blue collar Democrats.

2008-08-25T19:14:00.000-07:00

Lion and Lamb of Democratic Party

Honored at Convention:
Kennedy and Carter make final appearances to DNC

While Democrats have gathered in the Mile High City of Denver at the Pepsi Convention Center, the ProConPundit is diligently and flawlessly corresponding to you from the Horseshoe Casino & Hotel in Elizabeth, Indiana, near Louisville. I am here on business but still tending to the important matter of giving you the finest, dim-witted, partially informed coverage and commentary that you have come to expect from me.

The opening night of the Democratic convention has been lackluster. Its been too liberal and short on substance, generally. Nancy Pelosi, Jimmy Carter and Ted Kennedy all on one night with nothing substantiative impresses me as poor planning.

On the plus side, the introduction of the video tribute to Ted Kennedy was given by Caroline Kennedy. Her very presence is touching. The video tribute, also, was touching. Whatever you think of Ted Kennedy, behind Bob Byrd and Strom Thurmond, he is the longest serving U.S. Senator and has had a tremendous impact on American life. It was not known until the last minute whether Teddy would be able to attend the convention, let alone speak. His doctor and wife had advised against it. His wife, Victoria Reggae, incidentally, is a class act and loves him dearly. She was a pal of his for many years before she married him, so she was well aware of his drinking and carousing, and married him still. They seem really caring of each other. Ted forged ahead. The next suggestion was that he simply come out on stage but not speak. Notta. Then there was a plan for him to sit on a stool. He axed the stool. He gave a characteristic Teddy Kennedy barn burner speech. It had Shrummy written all over it (Bob Shrum his speech writer.) Make no mistake, this was Ted Kennedy’s last speech at a convention. I don’t mean that callously. He is 76 and has brain cancer. I was touched by the fact that he chose to speak of the future and not the past. He has been part of a past that was glorious and tragic, brave and shameful. Yet, he made it not about him or his brothers but about the dream which continues and he past the torch to Obama. Whatever you think of Ted (I like him), whatever you think of Obama (I don’t), it was touching. It was most touching to the cold heart of the ProConPundit as Teddy spoke, the camera occasionally panned to Caroline Kennedy and Maria Shriver who were crying as they listened to their Uncle Teddy belt out his last barn burner at a Democratic convention. My heart goes out to them even as they experience something unique in their family: someone dying. They have so often been robbed of the opportunity to say goodbye and so often forced to grapple with premature death. Teddy has run his race and fought the good fight. Its nice that the Kennedy’s have been blessed with a family member living a long and vibrant (and controversial) life.

Just 30 minutes before the Kennedy event was a video tribute to Jimmy Carter’s humanitarian efforts. Following that, Jimmy & Roslyn walked the stage to a standing O, but no speaking event. This was a mistake. Jimmy Carter will be 84 in October. This is his last convention and the ProConPundit is the only one who knows it. I know a lot of my friends despise him. His presidency was a dark time and, in fact, the worst of my lifetime. He is a decent man and a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Given the sick and twisted and pathological influence of the Clinton’s on this convention, it bears mentioning that Jimmy Carter, for whatever the failings of his presidency, always intended to do well, never placed a cigar in the vagina of a fat intern and was never impeached. (Sorry for the crudeness but it’s true.). At a Democratic convention, if nowhere else, he deserves a little more respect.

The real missed opportunity as everyone waits to see how unified the Clinton’s and Obama’s are was that the Kennedy’s and Carter’s were on the stage within 30 minutes of each other. Hello? Remember the 1980 convention when Teddy refused to shake hands with Jimmy Carter? Imagine the power of Carter and Kennedy shaking hands together, hugging each other on stage tonight. Neither will likely be on the stage of a convention again. That was poor.

I agree with James Carville and David Gergen who both believe this first night, except for the Kennedy sentiment, has been a wasted night in terms of substance. Michelle Obama is next. If I stay awake...I will report.

2008-08-23T21:06:00.000-07:00

My Second Favorite State With 2 Great Senators

I am a resident of Illinois and Wisconsin. No offense to my cheddar neighbors but my favorite state after Illinois is Indiana. I love Hoosiers. I also love the two fine U.S. Senators from Indiana, Dick Lugar, Republican and Evan Bayh, Democrat. Not only do they do proud to Indiana, and trust me with senators like Durbin and Obama in Illinois, Hoosiers should be proud, these two guys are national leaders. They quietly and effectively serve on committees like Armed Services, Foreign Relations, etc. I have always thought Bayh would made a good president and wished Lugar had gone further in his run for the White House in 1996. They have both been mayors of Indianapolis and Bayh was Governor of Indiana.

My reason for bringing them up today is that Bayh’s future ambitions for the presidency have likely ended with being passed over by Obama. And on that day, Evan Bayh’s colleague, Dick Lugar had this to say of him, "I have enjoyed for many years the opportunity to work with Joe Biden to bring strong bipartisan support to United States foreign policy. ... I share the disappointment of many Hoosiers that my partner in the Senate, Evan Bayh, was not selected on this occasion, but I believe he will continue to have widespread support for higher office during many years ahead."

Two class acts from a great state!

2008-08-23T20:45:00.000-07:00

The Last Winning Democratic Ticket

Without a Southerner: 1944

2008-08-23T20:17:00.000-07:00

Welcome To The Ice Age of Biden and McCain

"Someone's gonna cry

when they know they've lost you.

Someone's gonna thank the stars above."

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Its their last chance at the dream of their lifetime. Joe Biden will likely never be President but one shot at becoming Vice-President. John McCain, burdened by age and linking his wagon to the legacy of an unpopular Bush Administration, is within striking distance of winning or losing it all. Now McCain’s colleague and friend from the Senate becomes a most formidable opponent. Biden is a hard charging, tough fighting, skilled debater and lover of campaigning. His street smarts, foreign policy experience, domestic policy achievements, grey hair, Irish Catholic identity and ability to relate to real people all help tell the American people that Obama is "okay." There really isn’t credible precedent to suggest a running mate actually winning the election for the nominee but Obama, and McCain, need all the help they can get. Biden will help Obama.

McCain needs help. He has had the edge and may continue to. With Joe Biden a credible guy to talk about kitchen table issues at a time when John McCain doesn’t know how many kitchen tables he has is a problem for McCain. McCain not knowing how many houses he owns was his answer to President Bush I not knowing what a grocery scanner was in 1992.

The heat is on for McCain to make a good pick. Few people match Biden’s debate acumen. Two people I have watched debate him skillfully over the years on Meet The Press are Lindsay Graham and Joe Lieberman. Graham and Lieberman are the two people closest to McCain. I would pick Graham. I think Mitt Romney is a mistake now more than ever. If pro-lifers (of which I am one) are opposed to Tom Ridge (of which I am not) for being pro-choice, shouldn’t they oppose Romney for being pro-choice until he ran for President? That is my argument for Ridge, not against Romney. My argument against Romney is that he and McCain don’t like each other and running mates don’t actually deliver states. Two guys with 12 houses between them is a campaign nightmare. I would go with Ridge, Graham or Lieberman. Graham is youngest, southern, safest. In the end, McCain should have who he likes and can work well with. Anointing Romney as his heir apparent, win or lose, is a bad move. The Biden pick should also rule out McCain's choice of Bush league-ers (no pun intended) like Pawlenty (MN), Portman (OH), Sanford (SC), Crist (FL).

No one in the Senate knows McCain better than Biden. Until know they have been good friends and fans of each other. The gloves are off and one will win all, one will lose all. I can’t get the old Glenn Frey song, "The One You Love" from 1982 out of my head. "Someone's gonna cry when they know they've lost you. Someone's gonna thank the stars above."

2008-08-23T20:03:00.000-07:00

From the Vault of the ProConPundit:

Eulogy for Strom Thurmond
by Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
Columbia, South Carolina – July 1, 2003
(As Transcribed)

Nancy, Strom, Julie and Paul: James Strom Thurmond. Fritz, he was one complex guy. For what else would explain that he asked, I’m told by Nancy, a guy named Biden from the State of Delaware to be one of his eulogists. I’ll never figure him out.
And Strom, I won’t forgive you. Lindsay, I always thought I was in control, but I knew down deep that I wasn’t and I think this is his last laugh. For what else could explain a North East liberal presence as the only outsider speaking here today, with the possible exception of Vice President Cheney.
Strom Thurmond was the only man whom I knew who, in a literal sense, lived in three distinct and separate periods of American history and lived what would have been considered a full life in each of those periods, particularly in his beloved South. Born into an era of essentially unchallenged and unexamined mores of the South, reaching his full maturity in an era of fully challenged and critically examined bankrupt mores of his beloved South, and living out his final three decades in a South that had formally rejected its past on race. In each of these stages in my observation, and I was only with him the last three decades, Strom represented exactly where he came from.
There’s an old hymn that includes these lyrics: "Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide. In the strife of truth with falsehood, for the good or evil side... Then it is the brave man who chooses while the coward stands aside."
No one ever doubted Strom Thurmond’s physical courage. You’ve heard much written about it. About fifteen years ago I was reminded of this: I was coming up in an escalator with Strom going to a vote and a fella, who apparently had held a long-time grudge against Senator Thurmond, a tourist, literally interposed himself between me and Strom. And he said, "If you weren’t so old I would knock you..." and Reverend, I won’t say what he said. "I would knock you down."
And I immediately stood between them, and Strom literally took of his coat, and said, "Hold my coat, Joe."
And I looked at him and said, "No, no, no, no, no, no!"
And with that he went down and did twenty-five push ups. He had to be 88 or 87. He stood up and looked at the man and said, "If you weren’t so young, I’d knock you down."
Strom Thurmond was also a brave man who, in the end, made his choice and moved to the good side.
I disagreed deeply with Strom on the issue of civil rights and on many other issues, but I watched him change. We became good friends. I’m not sure exactly why or how it happened, Nancy. But you know we did. And Fritz could never figure it out; neither could I. Fritz is my very closest friend in the Senate.
But I do know that friendship and death are great equalizers... where our differences become irrelevant and the only thing left is what’s in our heart.
I went to the Senate emboldened, angered, and outraged at age 29 about the treatment of African-Americans in this country, by everything that, for a period in his life, Strom had represented. But then I met the man.
Our differences were profound, but I came to understand that, as Archibald MacLeish wrote, "It is not in the world of ideas that life is lived. Life is lived, for better or worse, in life."
Strom and I shared a life in the Senate for over thirty years... we shared a good life there and it made a difference. I grew to know him... I looked into his heart and saw the man, the whole man... I tried to understand him. I learned from him... and I watched him change oh so subtly.
Like all of us, Strom was a product of his time, but he understood people. He cared for them. He truly wanted to help. He knew how to read people... how to move them... how to get things done.
I’ll never forget we went down to see President Reagan. Strom and I had the Thurmond-Biden crime bill. We sat in a room with President Reagan and with Ed Meese, Jim Baker, William Smith, the Attorney General. And Strom started to try to convince the president to sign onto our bill, and he turned to me and he said, "Joe, explain it to him."
And I did my little bit, and it looked like the President was coming on and I swear in the Lord’s house that this is a true story, and with that, as Ed Meese, Mr. Vice President, thought the President might be convinced, he stood up and he said, "Mr. President, it’s time to go."
And with that the President very respectfully looked over and said, "Well, Strom, I have to go." And he had his hands on the table, and the president went to get up like this, and Strom grabbed his arm and pulled him back into his seat. I never saw anyone do that to a president.
And the president looked very sternly at Strom, and Strom said with his hands still on his arm, he said, "Mr. President when y’all get to be my age you’ll understand, you’ve gotta compromise." And the president then was about 85 years old.
Strom knew America was changing, and that there was a lot that he didn’t understand about that change. Much of that change challenged many of his long held views. But he also saw his beloved South Carolina changing as well, and he knew the time had come to change himself... But I believe the change came to him easily, and I believed he welcomed it because I saw others of his era fight that change, and never ultimately change.
It would be humbling to think I was among those who had some influence on his decision, but I know better. The place in which I work is a majestic place. If you are there long enough, it has an impact on you.
You cannot, if you respect those with whom you serve, fail to understand how deeply they feel about things differently than you, and over time I believe it has an effect on you. This is a man who in 1947, the New York Times ran a lead editorial saying, "Strom Thurmond: Hope of the South." And it talked about how he had set up reading programs and gotten better books for ‘separate but equal schools.’ This is a man who was opposed to the poll tax. This is a man who I watched vote for the extension of the voting rights act. This is a man who I watched vote for the Martin Luther King Holiday. And it’s very easy today to say that was pure political expediency, but I choose to believe otherwise. I choose to believe that Strom Thurmond was doing what few do once they pass the age of 50. He was continuing to grow, continuing to change.
His offices were next door to mine in the Russell Building, more appropriately mine were next to his. And, over the years, I remember seeing a lot change including the number of African-Americans on his staff and African-Americans who sought his help.
For the man who will see, time heals. Time changes. And time leads him to truth, but only a special man like Strom would have the courage to accept it, the grace to acknowledge it, and the humility – in the face of lasting enmity and mistrust – to pursue it until the end.
There’s a personal lesson that comes from a page in American political history that is yet unwritten, but nevertheless it resonates in my heart. I mentioned it on the floor of the Senate the other day.
It’s a lesson of redemption that I think applies today and I think Strom, as he listens, will appreciate it.
When I first arrived in the Senate, I met with John Stennis, another old Southern Senator who became my friend. We sat at the other side of this gigantic grand mahogany table he used as his desk which had been Richard Russell’s. It was the table upon which the Southern Manifesto had been signed, I am told. The year was 1972.
Senator Stennis patted the leather chair next to him when I walked in to pay my respects as a new young senator which was the order of the day, and he said, "Sit down, sit down, sit down, son." And those who served with him know he always talked like this. And he looked at me, and he said, "Son, what made you run for the Senate?" And like a darned fool, I told him the exact truth before I could think better. I said, "Civil Rights, sir."
As soon as I said it, I could feel the beads of perspiration pop out of my head and I got that funny feeling, and he looked at me and said, "Good. Good. Good." And that was the end of the conversation.
Well, eighteen years later, after us having shared a hospital suite for three months at Walter Reed and after him trying to help me in another pursuit I had, we had become friends. I saw him sitting behind that same table eighteen years later, only this time he was in a wheelchair. His leg had been amputated because of cancer, and I was going to look at his offices because in my seniority his office was available as he was leaving.
I went in and sat down and he looked at me as if it were yesterday, and he said, "Sit down, Joe. Sit down, Joe." And tapped the chair.
And he said something that startled me: He said, "You remember the first time you came to see me, Joe?" I shook my head. I didn’t remember. And he leaned forward and recited the story.
I said, "I was a pretty smart fellow, wasn’t I, Mr. Chairman?"
He said, "Joe, I wanted to tell you something then, and I’m going to tell you now." He said, "You’re going to take my offices, aren’t you?"
I said, "Yes sir, Mr. Chairman."
And he ran his hand back and forth across that mahogany table in a loving way, and he said, "You see this table, Joe?" This is the God’s truth. He said, "You see this table?"
I said, "Yes sir, Mr. Chairman."
He said, this table was the flagship of the Confederacy from 1954 to 1968. He said, "We sat here most of us from the Deep South, the old Confederacy, and we planned the demise of the Civil Rights movement."
And then he looked at me and said, "And it’s time. It’s time now that this table go from the possession of a man who is against civil rights to the table of a man who is for civil rights."
I was stunned.
And he said, "One more thing, Joe." He said, "the civil rights movement did more to free the white man than it did the black man." I looked at him, and I didn’t know what he meant, and he said in only John Stennis’ fashion, he said "It freed my soul. It freed my soul."
Strom Thurmond’s soul is free today. His soul is free.
The Bible says, "Learn to do well; seek judgement, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together... Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow."
Strom, today there are no longer any issues to debate. There is only peace, a patch of common ground, and the many memories that you’ve left behind.
For me, those memories are deeply personal, and they will stay with me as long as I live. Strom Thurmond stood by me when others didn’t, and when it was against his political interest to do so. I had been accused of something terrible, in my view, on the eve of the Bork nomination. I gathered the entire Judiciary committee, I was then Chairman, and I said to Democrats and Republicans alike, "I will stand aside as Chairman so that it will not effect this proceeding. And the first man to jump to his feet was your father, and he said: "No!" And I said, "Well, let me explain." And he said, "You don’t have to explain anything to me. You’re my chairman." And with that everyone stood up, but Strom Thurmond was the first man on his feet. He did not seek a single explanation for what I had been accused of.
And clearly, when partisanship was a winning option, he chose friendship, and I’ll never forget him for it.
I was honored to work with him, privileged to serve with him, and proud to call him my friend.
His long life may well have been the gift of his beloved God, but the powerful and lasting impact he had on his beloved South Carolina and on this nation is Strom’s legacy, his gift to all of us. And he will be missed.
The British essayist, William Hazlitt once wrote, "Death cancels everything but truth; and strips a man of everything but genius and virtue. It’s a sort of natural canonization."
The truth and genius and virtue of Strom Thurmond is what I choose to remember today.
To Nancy, to Strom; to Julie, and to Paul... to all his friends... to the people of South Carolina who knew him so well and loved him so much... America mourns with you. I mourn with you, for I knew Strom well. I felt his warmth as you did... I saw his strength as you did... I was the beneficiary of his virtues as you were. And I will miss him as you will... as we all will...
But he lived a long and good life and I know that, today, a benevolent God has lifted his arms to Strom. I just don’t know what Strom is saying to that benevolent God because you know he’s saying something.
So I say, farewell, Mr. Chairman. We stand in adjournment until we meet again.

2008-08-23T19:03:00.000-07:00

Mr. Biden Goes To Springfield

As was the case in 1988 when Michael Dukakis picked Lloyd Bentsen, in 1996 when Bob Dole picked Jack Kemp, 2000 when Al Gore picked Joe Lieberman, and, to be honest, in 1980 when Ronald Reagan picked George H.W. Bush, I found myself once again wishing the running mate was the nominee for President.

Barack Obama nominated MY FAVORITE DEMOCRAT as his running mate today in Joe Biden, Democrat from Delaware. In 1981 when I was attending Worsham College of Mortuary Science, I remarked to my friend and classmate, Paul Kroeger that Joe Biden was the kind of Democrat we needed as President. This was on the heels of the dismal days of the Carter Administration as the Democratic Party began its long exile from the White House, as regular Democrats, working class Democrats became Reagan Democrats. I have waited 27 years to see Joe Biden on a national ticket. That the Democratic Party could never take a guy like him seriously, instead preferring Michael Dukakis in 1988 and Barack Obama in 2008 is why, as Reagan said, "I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, they left me."

Obama made a superb choice in picking Biden. As a Chicagoan, it was fun to see the announcement taking place on the steps of the Old Capital in Springfield. Obama doesn’t do much for me, but I really love Biden. I won’t go on and on about him. I think he’s been a great champion for working class Americans, a man who has triumphed terrible tragedies, survived stupid mistakes, has been a loyal but not far left Democrat and a reasonably bipartisan guy. Here is Biden's speech, http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/08/23/transcript-joe-bidens-speech-springfield-il/

Let me tell you three things about Biden you may not know:
1. He was THE eulogist at the funeral of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) in 2003. He wasn’t one of a dozen people who spoke at the funeral. Strom Thurmond wanted one U.S. Senator to speak at his funeral and he picked Biden. I watched it at the time. It was really impressive and spoke well of both of them.
2. For all of his years in the U.S. Senate, has a net worth of $ 150,000, and except for once plagiarizing, has never so much as been accused of an ethical or moral lapse.
3. When Biden was a child, he had a stuttering problem and was once ridiculed in class by a Catholic nun. His fighting Irish mother stormed to the school the next day and told the nun, "If you ever make fun of my son again, I will rip that bonnet off your face." It reminds me of something similar that Grandma Moynihan did after a nun read a list to the class of students whose tuition, during the Great Depression, was not paid.

Biden was not Obama’s first choice. His first choice was Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia. And although Evan Bayh received serious consideration, he was vetoed by far left groups for being too conservative. Bayh opposed partial birth abortion. The so-called National Organization for Women (NOW) prevailed upon Gore to not pick Bayh as a running mate in 2000 and other left wing kooks who have a kindred spirit in Obama succeeded again. Tensions with Russia have underscored the need for an adult and an experienced one on the ticket. It was Illinois' other Senator, Dick Durbin, who pushed hard fro Biden once again proving that even a broken clock is accurate twice a day. Although Biden was chosen for his foreign policy background, his roll out speech in Springfield stressed his domestic priorities. He is a good friend of John McCain but wasted NO TIME slugging him. Biden declared, "These times require more than a good soldier. They require a wise leader." He also blasted McCain for employing the same "swift-boat" tactics that he once deplored and was, himself, a victim of by Bush-Rove in 2000.

Biden is a superb choice, the best possible choice Obama could have made. He’s a regular guy who connects with ordinary people. As much as the liberal crazed media ridicules him for talking too much and for his gaffes, his so-called gaffes often resonate right-on with the mind set of the American people. While he is well known for his endless remarks during senate hearings, his lesser known quips are priceless.

Here are a couple that come to mind:
1. "Rudy Giuliani is the least qualified person to seek the presidency since George Bush and all of his sentences contain one noun, one verb and 911."
2. When asked during a debate to say something nice about the person standing next to him, he quipped that he thought it was a stupid exercise and proceeded to tell Dennis Kucinich that what he liked most about him was his wife.

Today he said of his own wife, "Ladies and gentlemen, my wife Jill, who you’ll meet soon, is drop dead gorgeous...she also has her doctorate degree, which is a problem." It s great that the guy has a hot wife, is 66 years old and wants you to know that about her. Who does that? Regular guys–like Joe Biden.

2008-08-23T19:01:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Ready for 3 a.m. Call

Much has been said about Barack Obama’s readiness as President for a 3 a.m. emergency call. Obama has yet to prove that he is capable of receiving such a call. As of today, we know he is capable of sending a text message in the middle of the night. And the ProConPundit, believe it or not, was on the text message distribution list.
The text message came in around 2 o’clock Chicago time this morning. I felt a combination of emotions: excitement, mild irritation to be awakened, and stupidity to have asked for this.

I promised two friends, Marc Jaeger and John Olenick that I would forward the text to them. Jaeger, who only owns two homes was at the cape of Wisconsin Dells. He doesn’t have a computer there and apparently not a television, either, so he was relying on hearing from me. It should be noted that some parts of Wisconsin do actually have television sets and computer access. I did forward the text message to them but after I went back to sleep for four hours.

The text message was a good application of technology to a political campaign and a good way to include people, even skeptical ones, to the announcement.

2008-08-20T15:42:00.000-07:00

Congressman Kirk Predicts Bayh for Obama

The ProConPundit attended a small fund raiser for U.S. Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL 10th District) last night at the University Club of Chicago. Actually, I was on the host committee. Congressman Kirk is a great representative, having served since 2000. When he is not in congress, he spends free time and weekends in the U.S. Naval Reserves. He is a fine public servant, my kind of Republican and a good representative of the people of Illinois in Washington.

When asked who he thought Obama would name as a running mate, he spoke rather matter of factly that he thought Evan Bayh of Indiana would get the nod. We are all circling around Bayh-Biden-Kaine. The Obama camp has also predicted that the running mate would be predictable. Is that a little too predictable?

Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh is breathing fire threatening wrath to McCain if he doesn’t pick a running mate to Rushbo’s liking. What difference would a pro-choice running mate actually make? Well, it could help bring in swing voters and pro-choice Republicans in the fall. At the same time, the Vice-President’s divergent view on abortion would mean absolutely nothing in the administration. For whatever real and perceived grievances conservatives have against McCain, his pro-life/anti-abortion credentials are absolutely unquestionable and above reproach. He has earned the right to name whatever running mate he wants.

2008-08-18T20:05:00.000-07:00

Obama To Announce Running Mate Wednesday

The Obama Campaign has announced that it will announce its running mate as early as Wednesday and that it won’t be a surprise. Assuming that is true, then it will be Kaine, Bayh or Biden. Obama desperately needs experience and a fighter in his running mate, which leaves Kaine and Bayh out. Using that criterion, it will be Biden.

2008-08-18T15:13:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Endorsements/Predictions

for McCain Running Mate

John McCain should pick whoever he wants as his running mate. That the likelihood of his being elected our 44th president has increased significantly in the last month means that he probably won’t give in to making a selection he’d feel forced into like Mitt Romney. Likewise, I think selections like Pawlenty of Minnesota and Portman of Ohio are cosmetic selections–picking someone younger, etc.

John McCain’s instincts would be to pick the person he most feels comfortable with to take over should he die in office and to have his back while he is in office. An added factor, given his age, is to choose a Vice-President with an eye toward that person assuming the presidency or running in four years presuming McCain retires after one term.

I believe the following are McCain's favorites. The first three are my picks.

1. Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina. He has been joined at the hip with McCain every step of the way of the campaign. Many conservatives would be well pleased with him while others are off put by his support of the gang of 14 and immigration reform. His name does not come up in the media as a running mate and I tend to support surprise picks. Given McCain’s reliance on Graham, I think he may be tapping him for White House Chief of Staff or Attorney General.

2. Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania Governor and first Secretary of Homeland Security. Ridge would be a superb choice, stellar debater and would probably win Pennsylvania for McCain, which could be the ball game. Kerry narrowly carried Pennsylvania four years ago. Ridge would be a huge boost to McCain in the election, a loyal and excellent Vice-President and McCain’s heir apparent. He is pro-choice which is a deal breaker to a lot of conservatives but I think his strengths out weigh this.

3. Sen. Joe Lieberman, exiled Democrat and all around American patriot. He would be a fine, fine, Vice-President. He would bring a lot of Jewish votes to the GOP and he is the BEST, bar none, debater against Obama’s running mate! (Two Democrats debating!) That said, for all the right wing hoopla that McCain is not really a Republican, I can’t see him naming a Democrat as his running mate. McCain has reached across the aisle a lot, but this would be a real stretch.

4. Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin. This would be a good pick for McCain to shore up conservatives, on the one hand. On the other hand, McCain would make history by the GOP delivering the first woman VP. I don’t favor symbolism over substance. She is not prepared to assume the presidency.

2008-08-18T14:45:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Predictions for Obama Running Mate

Its hard to know what is believable but with the media bias in favor of Obama we risk not realizing how in jeopardy his candidacy is. Wise people in all quarters are predicting a Clinton scheme to still rob Obama of the nomination. I would not bet the lunch money that they will wrestle the nomination from him but I will bet this: they will weaken him to the point of a decisive enough defeat for him in the fall that Hillary can return in 2012.

I think Obama needs to do something surprising in his VP pick and that would be to not choose one of the three people everyone is predicting: Bayh, Biden, Kaine. Personally, to that end, the ProConPundit favors Sam Nunn or Chris Dodd. That their names have evaporated tends to make me think they are the top contenders.
When is the last time a nominee picked someone predicable?

Kerry picked Edwards and Dole picked Kemp. Those were was predictable.

But consider this:
Bush unpredictably picked Cheney.
Gore unpredictably picked Lieberman.
Bush I unpredictably and pitifully picked Quayle.
Clinton unpredictably picked Gore.
Dukakis unpredictably picked Bentsen.
Mondale unpredictably picked Ferraro.
Reagan unpredictably picked Bush I.
Carter unpredictably picked Mondale.

My money is not on a predictable choice. That said, I think Kaine would be a SUPERB choice for electing McCain. Picking a 5 minute governor of Virginia with no foreign policy experience is a ticket for disaster. I am personally VERY fond of Bayh and Biden and would appreciate either of them being picked. Bayh would bring Indiana into play for the Democrats which could mean the ball game. Either of them would be excellent Vice-Presidents and Joe Biden would be THE BEST debater against whoever McCain picks as his running mate.

No one could bring more foreign policy credibility than Biden. He is known by leaders of foreign countries and is also known by most Americans. Bayh has foreign policy experience, is not known to other foreign leaders, and is virtually unknown to most Americans.

2008-08-18T13:58:00.000-07:00

John McCain Will Become our 44th President

Because I stuck with McCain when his political obituary had been written, many of you have been asking me in the past couple of months whether I thought he could pull it off and actually win the presidency this fall. Others have asked if I thought anything could rival the Obama mania.

I have had my doubts and there have been low moments. For the first time since John McCain clinched the nomination, I truly believe that he will, in fact, win the presidency this fall.

Consider this...
1. McCain has done an effective job of showing Obama as a celebrity phenomena but not a serious person for the presidency of the United States. This premise will continue as the celebrity event/football stadium extravaganza of the Democratic convention unfolds. McCain has gotten ahead of the curve.

2. In 1988, Dukakis was 18 points ahead of Bush I coming out of the Democratic convention and went on to get creamed. Keep that in mind as we move forward.

3. The Obama Campaign has orchestrated a celebrity extravaganza for the Democratic convention. Between the Clinton speeches looming large over the convention and Hillary Clinton’s name being placed into nomination in the raucous setting of a football stadium, I think things are not moving in a good direction for Obama.

4. John McCain scored decisively over Obama in the Rick Warren interview. In the warmup interview before the interviews, Andrea Mitchell said that Obama insiders felt good about their prospects because he was really comfortable with Rick Warren and this interview while McCain, she said, was begrudgingly participating. After McCain creamed Obama, the next day Mitchell said just the opposite: that Obama’s people knew it would be a bad forum for them and a good one for McCain. The liberal intelligentsia is absolutely apoplectic over the fact that Obama is on the ropes.

5. MSNBC has finally found a way to raise its ratings–suspending all programming. For two weeks, all MSNBC programming has been cancelled in order to cover the Olympics. The ProConPundit has tended to like MSNBC because of the great interviews that take place. Little by little, MSNBC has gotten rid of any semblance of balance. There is now such a reactionary, volatile reaction to anything that criticizes Obama that cancelling their programming seems like a great cause and a sure ratings climber.

6. Thank God for Russia! Thank God that the Russian invasion of Georgia is happening now and not later. Obama’s reply was to say that the United Nations needs to take a strong stand. United Nations? Hello? The only thing united about the UN is that they stand with tin horn dictators, terrorists and thugs and that the U.S. picks up the tab. John McCain, incidentally, has reiterated what he said a year ago: that Russia should be kicked out of the G-8.

2008-08-18T13:19:00.000-07:00

ProConPundit Breaks Silence

and Embarrassment to Endorse Obama

The ProConPundit has taken a long break from the blog this summer. This has been, in part, because I have been really busy. Mostly, though, I have remained silent because there hasn’t been much to say. I have been generally non-plussed by the activity of the campaigns and pundits the last couple of months.

The other reason for my silence has been apprehension about the McCain campaign. I’ve not wanted to answer the question many of you have asked me: CAN HE DO IT? IS IT OVER? I am ready to tackle these issues now. So let me begin with my endorsement of Obama.

I have vacillated many times on endorsing Obama. I endorsed him early on in a Democratic debate when he was asked how he would respond to an attack on the U.S. He responded by saying he would call Civil Defense people, talk to local responders, etc. It was then that I issued an endorsement of Obama as mayor of a mid-sized city like Indianapolis or Peoria.

When he spoke in Berlin of our imperfections as Americans, then I came close to endorsing him as President of the European Union. But after his lackluster, if not dismal, performance in the interview by Rick Warren, I am now clear and unequivocal in my endorsement of Barack Obama.

Therefore, once and for all, the ProConPundit issues an unconditional endorsement of Barack Obama to be PRESIDENT of ANY high school student council anywhere in the U.S. or any other country he holds allegiance to.

When Rick Warren asked Obama to name three close advisors he would rely on as President, the first two were his wife and his grandmother. GRANDMA? Yes, GRANDMA. The next time planes fly into buildings, its reassuring to know that the President can rely on Grandma to see him through. McCain’s first response was David Petraeus.

Rick Warren is pastor of Saddleback Church and author of mega best selling book, PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE. The first line of the book is "IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU." The book is generally a great rebuking of the baby boomer credo that the world revolves around us. In answering one of Warren’s questions, Obama rambled on and on and finally said he came to realize that "its not all about me." Warren quipped, "I am always glad to hear that." The entire congregation (audience) erupted into laughter while the self-absorbed Obama didn’t get why they were laughing. He considers himself a friend of Warren and even the most cursory background or prep work on being interviewed there should have informed him about the premise of this book. Obama looked silly and uncomfortable through the entire interview.

My endorsement stands: any time, any high school: Barack is our student council prez.

2008-06-29T12:06:00.000-07:00

Great Words About A Great Conservative

It's nice to see that one can have nice things said about them publicly without dying.

Except for being a Cubs fan, I love this guy.

George F. Will Has Eyes on the Nation

As he gets older, George F. Will admits to seeing things differently
June 29, 2008

BY HILLEL ITALIE

George F. Will, the conservative columnist and pundit, seems too young and young-looking to be anyone's ''elder statesman.'' He is 67, his hair still boyishly parted, his face hardly lined, his wire-rimmed persona that of a graduate student whose idea of a vice is skipping class to catch a ball game at Wrigley Field.

But Will has been a presence in print, and on the air, for more than 30 years. He has written thousands of columns and reviews and spent thousands of hours on television, mostly as a panelist on ABC's ''This Week.'' He has also published more than a dozen books, his latest, One Man's America, the first to come out in a world not shared by his late friend and hero, William F. Buckley Jr. ''Bill was a founder of the conservative movement and his task, beginning with 'God and Man at Yale' and the National Review [in 1955], was to make it acceptable," Will says. "That's long been achieved, vastly simplifying the work of people like me.''

Interviewed recently on a sunny afternoon, Will works out of a brick Georgetown town house that could easily be converted to a flea market for baseball, with its bats and posters and pictures, and its CD of songs about the Chicago Cubs.

Age has relaxed Will and the subtitle of his new book, The Pleasures and Provocations of Our Singular Nation, reflects a man who has seen enough history not to be shocked by current events. The writings collected include little about the Iraq war but a great deal about baseball, old friends such as Buckley and Ronald Reagan, and a surprisingly affectionate portrait of Beat poet-publisher Lawrence Ferlinghetti.
''You get older and you see a lot of error and folly. If you keep your mind open, you think about things differently and see things differently,'' says Will, who won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1977. ''I don't get quite as excited about things. Washington's a town where everything that dominates every eight-hour news cycle seems so important.''

Will was born in Champaign, Ill., in 1941, his parents so liberal that they voted for socialist presidential candidate Norman Thomas in the 1930s. Will supported John F. Kennedy in the 1960 election, but time spent in England helped turn him off the welfare state. In 1964, he was back in the United States and at the founding of the modern right, the disastrous presidential campaign of Sen. Barry Goldwater, who lost in a landslide to Lyndon Johnson but anticipated the successes of the next four decades.

''You can't imagine what fun it was to be for Goldwater,'' Will says, ''because it was kind of naughty.''

After receiving a Ph.D. in political science, from Princeton University, in 1967, Will taught briefly at the University of Michigan and the University of Toronto, then joined the staff of Sen. Gordon Allott, R-Colo. By the mid-1970s, Allott had been voted out of office and Will had become a syndicated columnist and TV presence.
He met Reagan in the late '70s and his affection for Reagan brought him the rewards and follies of power; Will was a visitor at the Oval Office and Reagan dined at the writer's home. But in fall 1980, speaking on ABC's ''Nightline,'' Will praised candidate Reagan's performance in a debate against President Carter without fully revealing that he had assisted Reagan during preparation.
''I got into magnificent trouble for that,'' Will says. ''I wouldn't do it again, if only because you wind up 20 years later, still talking about it.''
Like Buckley, Will is more loyal to the ideals than to the leaders of the Republican Party. He famously referred to the first President Bush as a ''lap dog'' and scorns the current Bush administration's foreign policy, commenting that a government that can't run Amtrak is equally unfit to run Iraq. He has often criticized Sen. John McCain and said he will ''hold his nose'' and vote for him in the fall.
''Journalists love him and I don't,'' he says of the Republicans' presumptive nominee. ''I admire him. He's a brave man. He's got strong views, strong if incoherent.''
Will has been wrong, and knows it. He once swore the Berlin Wall would not come down, but it did and he now says he was unduly pessimistic. Asked to cite an issue on which conservatives erred, he quickly answers ''civil rights.''
''They were absolutely right,'' he says of civil rights supporters. ''The transformation in this country that we've had in the past 50 years -- it takes your breath away.''
Will has praised Sen. Barack Obama in ways Will has been described by his own admirers. He has written that the presumptive Democratic nominee is ''refreshingly cerebral'' and ''an adult aiming to reform the real world rather than an adolescent fantasizing mock-heroic 'fights' against fictitious villains.''
''I'm not advocating this, but there is something to be said for a market cleaning mechanism,'' Will says when asked how he would feel if the Democrats triumphed in 2008. ''The political market does enforce cycles, up and down, and it wouldn't be an unmitigated disaster for that to happen this year.''
AP

2008-06-23T15:44:00.001-07:00

Obama Lies Away Good Decision

Barack Obama was completely correct to reject public funds for his presidential campaign. Had he accepted those funds, he would be limited to them. At the time he said he would only use public funding he had no idea how much money his campaign would raise. It would be stupid to limit himself. It makes good business sense–and in every other way to use his own funds. His mistake was to not simply state that no one could have imagined the unprecedented amount of money his campaign has raised as part of a movement. People would understand that. Instead, he has lied and talked about the flawed political system that he is boycotting. It was a lame move.

Obama is the guy who went on Meet The Press in 2005 and categorically said he would not run for president in 2008. In 2007, he returned to Meet The Press where Tim Russert prepared to grill him on the flip-flop. Obama stunned Russert by saying, "I have changed my mind." He is also the guy who, when Hillary Clinton and John McCain called for the insipid gas tax holiday, had the political courage and call it what it was–a symbolic but meaningless move. Obama has proven that the truth works. It’s a shame he didn’t tell it this time.

2008-06-23T15:02:00.000-07:00

Meet The Future

of Meet The Press

Tom Brokaw will be the Interim Moderator of Meet The Press through the November election. Although this is a safe, chair warming pick on the part of NBC, I think it speaks poorly of what everyone at NBC and MSNBC has been calling the legacy that Tim Russert left for them to follow. Picking Tom Brokaw says they aren’t ready to name someone. The life work of Tim Russert was grilling politicians. One of the central things he interrogated presidential hopefuls was about preparedness for office. This issue is always paramount in the selection of a vice-presidential running mate. God forbid, if a president died, the vice-president must be prepared to carry on–right now. Why should it take NBC 6 months to figure out who they will name?

Let me just put out the ProConPundit two cents on who should and should not be considered.

First, NBC will separate Russert’s two positions and fill them separately. Tim was Washington Bureau Chief and Moderator of Meet The Press. These positions will be filled by different people.

NO...
Brian Williams–He has his hands full with Nightly News
Tom Brokaw-He’s semi-retired and would be too nice.
Chris Matthews- I love the guy. I think Hardball has him too typecast to take over Meet The Press. He would do a good job. He and Russert were cordial and generally liked each other, but they were rivals. Russert’s sway from the grave may keep Matthews out of the running.

George Stephanopolous- He is a smarter version of David Gregory, but he would be a rejected transplant.

ABSOLUTELY NOT...
Keith Olbermann–He is on record as stating that he is unqualified. I have never agreed with him before, but he is correct. He is not even being considered.
David Gregory- This clown will lobby heavily to get it. He doesn’t have it. He’s a self-absorbed jerk.

My two/three picks–
BRITT HUME–He would be superb but NBC is too liberal to consider him.

ANDREA MITCHELL AND CHUCK TODD.
I think Meet The Press has to change to survive. Any one person will have a rough time trying to fill Russert’s shoes. All of the Sunday political shows are hosted/moderated by men. Now is a good time for NBC, in this year of glass ceilings being shattered, to pick a woman. There is no one more qualified than Andrea Mitchell.

CHUCK TODD is arguably Tim Russert’s hand picked successor and protege. Russert made him political director of NBC. Todd is a brilliant political analyst–in the strictest sense. He can crunch the numbers. Like Russert, he has an uncanny handle of facts, trends and stats. Just like Russert, he is a masterful political clinician and statistician. Unlike Russert, he doesn’t have the connections, relationships, access.
If you put Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd together–you’ve got a great team.
I would have a format where the first half hour one of the two of them does interviewing and the second half hour is the other one moderating a press panel.
They would be a good team and the naming of them would do justice to Russert’s legacy.

Brian Williams moderated Meet The Press Sunday. I wondered how he would handle Russert’s signature closing. "If It’s Sunday, It’s Meet The Press." If he said it, I thought it might seem copy cat. If he didn’t, it would feel like we were missing something. He did the precisely appropriate thing. He closed by saying, "And as a great man said every week, "If its Sunday, It’s Meet The Press."

2008-06-23T15:00:00.000-07:00

Controversies Surrounding
Russert’s Death and Coverage

There are two controversies that have operated sub-rosa since Tim Russert’s death. The first is that NBC was not the first to break the story. Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report (www.drudgereport.com). Broke the story approximately ten minutes before NBC and MSNBC did. Some have criticized NBC for not breaking the story first. Others have criticized Drudge for beating them to it. Keith Olbermann, who I detest, made a statement the day after Russert’s death stating that NBC and MSNBC held off making the announcement because they wanted to be sure that Russert’s family (wife, son, father, three sisters) had all been informed before they went on the air. He was harsh toward those who went ahead with the announcement.

This is (yet another) case where the ProConPundit is able to convey the simple logic of the situation. NBC was correct to hold off. They were also waiting to get Tom Brokaw in the studio. Brian Williams was in Afghanistan and they wanted Brokaw to make the announcement. I think that makes sense. It wasn’t a tornado warning, time was not of the essence to those of us hearing the news. At the same time, Drudge was completely correct to break the story.

The other controversy is that the coverage of Russert’s death was excessive or over the top. Bullshit. CNN, Fox News and MSNBC say the same things over and over again all the time, anyway. What was the harm in using the airwaves for a few days to remember someone who contributed uniquely to American culture and life.

2008-06-23T14:39:00.000-07:00

Russert Buried at Rock Creek Cemetery

It was quite a send off. A closed casket wake was held last Tuesday at St. Alban’s School, the exclusive boy’s high school located on the campus of the National Cathedral. A particularly touching scene was when President and Mrs. Bush held hands with Maureen Orth and Luke Russert in front of Tim’s Solid Mahogany casket and prayed together.

The funeral Mass was held Wednesday morning at Holy Trinity Church in Georgetown, among one of the places I predicted it would be held. Russert was then buried privately at Rock Creek Cemetery in the northwest quadrant of Washington, DC. Rock Creek Cemetery is a ministry of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church. Simply put, it’s the DC cemetery where prominent people not eligible for burial at Arlington National Cemetery are buried. These links are for the cemetery and for a list of other notables buried there:

http://www.rockcreekparish.org/cemetery/

http://www.findagrave.com/php/famous.php?page=cem&previousJumpTo=&previousFameFilter=&FScemeteryid=104448&jumpTo=1&fameLevel=very

Later in the afternoon a memorial service was held at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The family basically held two funerals because they had goals that were mutually exclusive. They wanted a funeral Mass and Russert was a member of Holy Trinity Church. That church was not large enough to accommodate the number of people they wanted to include in the memorial service. The objective of the memorial service was to convene as many people as they wanted to have and to allow 10 eulogists to speak. Given the ever increasing tension in the Catholic church for eulogies it seemed impractical to accomodate all of their needs in one ceremony.
Some Catholic churches and or priests do not allow eulogies at all during a funeral Mass. This rises out of a tension between what Catholic liturgical terrorists believe the purpose of a funeral is. Liturgically, they do not believe that a function of the Mass of Christian Burial is to have it personalized around the life and personality of the person who died. Most people believe that the funeral is about the person who died and the comfort of those who grieve. There are times when eulogies are excessive, over-the-top, or more about the person giving the eulogy than about the person who died. These unfortunate incidents only add fuel to the fire of trashing eulogies by Catholic priests and liturgists.

In Russert’s case, if a Funeral Mass and the Memorial Service held later were combined into one ceremony, it would have lasted 2 and a half hours which would have been labourious. Unfortunately, because the religious ceremony was held separately, there was absolutely no symbol or inclusion of faith in any way at the Memorial Service. So much so that there wasn’t even an invocation ro benediction. I thought that was poor.

I was surprised that Russert was buried in Washington and not Buffalo, was also surprised that he was waked at his son’s high school. For an Irish Catholic to be waked at an Episcopal school and buried in an Episcopal cemetery seemed strange to me. However, he was a boomer and boomers chart their own course. The funeral, memorial, and burial all reflect how people today are making decisions that forge new customs and traditions.

The eulogists at the Memorial Service were incredible. Tom Brokaw kicked it off saying that it would be an Irish celebration: laughter, tears and the occasional truth. It was really a heartening event. Maria Shiver and Mario Cuomo were great.

Here are some memorable quotes:

From Tim’s 7th grade teacher who put made him editor fo the school newspaper to get him to stop spitting spit balls and, according to him, launched his career as a journalist...

I hear God talking to little Timmy Russert: You’re in heaven now, Tim, where every day is Meet The Press. Welcome Home. Sr Lucille Socciarelli, RSM

His role was to be the Citizen Journalist to speak for those with no voice, to hold public officials accountable, to fulfill the role that I have always thought as the highest calling of a citizen in this country–to be a patriot. –Tom Brokaw

My dad was a force of nature and now his own cycle in nature is now complete. But his spirit lives on in every body who loves their country, loves their family, loves their faith, and loves those Buffalo Bills. I love you, Dad, and in his words, let us all-GO GET ‘EM. --Luke Russert

2008-06-16T19:26:00.000-07:00

Al Gore Delivers Barn Burner

Endorsement of Obama in Michigan

Al Gore formally endorsed Barack Obama in Michigan tonight. He delivered a better speech than I have ever heard him give. I never liked Gore but I respect his statesmanship in staying officially neutral in the primary. He privately favored Obama and despised Hillary Clinton but stayed out of it. He showed better decorum than Jimmy Carter. Gore also learned a lesson from 2004 when he endorsed Howard Dean, slapping the face of several people who had long supported him, like Dick Gephardt and John Kerry, to say nothing of his former running mate, Joe Lieberman. Gore made a fool of himself as he endorsed Dean just before Dean crashed and burned. I actually think Gore would have been nominated had he run this year. And, as much as I don’t like him, I would prefer his experience to Obama’s lack of it. Gore can help Obama. Obama is in trouble in Florida and Gore has residual support there.

2008-06-16T19:16:00.000-07:00

Will Ron Paul Run on Libertarian Ticket?

The Republican Party and John McCain have made a terrible mistake in ignoring Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX). He has been a faithful Republican and his Libertarian views garnered him tremendous support in terms of fund raising and support. You may think his support could not be great if he only got 2% of the delegate vote. True enough. More Republicans voted for him in primaries than the total number of Libertarians who will vote in the fall.
In a close election this fall, his supporters going elsewhere could cost McCain a state. He has been sloughed off by the GOP as though he was a kook.

Former Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) is the presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party and he hopes Paul’s supporters will transfer their enthusiasm and their tremendous financial support to him. So much so that, supposedly, Barr is trying to woo Ron Paul to be his running mate. Barr is not much loved by the ProConPundit. His claim to fame was that he was one of the House Managers who tried the Clinton impeachment. Georgia has been a reliably Republican state in presidential elections. They gave Clinton a shot in 1992 but rejected him in 1996. They supported Jimmy Carter, he was their former governor. They were one of very few states that went with Barry Goldwater in 1964. If Obama can make inroads with the 600,000 eligible but unregistered African Americans in Georgia and/or he taps Sam Nunn as his running mate, and/or Bob Barr siphons off some votes, McCain could lose Georgia’s 15 electoral votes.

Ron Paul’s Libertarian views put him at odds with McCain’s stand on the war and at odds with Obama’s big government stand. If he becomes Bob Barr’s running mate, John McCain will lose. I like Ron Paul. I disagree with him on some things but his voice deserved to be heard. McCain should show him--and his supporters-- a little respect.

2008-06-15T12:58:00.000-07:00

The ProConPundit is already on record as predicting the election will not be close in November. Kuhn offers some solid and some subjective analysis as to why the odds are against McCain. They are. McCain has always done well when he is counted out.

Many historians see little chance for McCain
By DAVID PAUL KUHN www.politico.com

One week into the general election, the polls show a dead heat. But many presidential scholars doubt that John McCain stands much of a chance, if any.

Historians belonging to both parties offered a litany of historical comparisons that give little hope to the Republican. Several saw Barack Obama’s prospects as the most promising for a Democrat since Roosevelt trounced Hoover in 1932.

“This should be an overwhelming Democratic victory,” said Allan Lichtman, an American University presidential historian who ran in a Maryland Democratic senatorial primary in 2006. Lichtman, whose forecasting model has correctly predicted the last six presidential popular vote winners, predicts that this year, “Republicans face what have always been insurmountable historical odds.” His system gives McCain a score on par with Jimmy Carter’s in 1980.

“McCain shouldn’t win it,” said presidential historian Joan Hoff, a professor at Montana State University and former president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency. She compared McCain’s prospects to those of Hubert Humphrey, whose 1968 loss to Richard Nixon resulted in large part from the unpopularity of sitting Democratic president Lyndon Johnson.

“It is one of the worst political environments for the party in power since World War II,” added Alan Abramowitz, a professor of public opinion and the presidency at Emory University. His forecasting model — which factors in gross domestic product, whether a party has completed two terms in the White House and net presidential approval rating — gives McCain about the same odds as Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and Carter in 1980 — both of whom were handily defeated in elections that returned the presidency to the previously out-of-power party. “It would be a pretty stunning upset if McCain won,” Abramowitz said.

What’s more, Republicans have held the presidency for all but 12 years since the South became solidly Republican in the realignment of 1968 — which is among the longest runs with one party dominating in American history. “These things go in cycles,” said presidential historian Robert Dallek, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles. “The public gets tired of one approach to politics. There is always a measure of optimism in this country, so they turn to the other party.”

That desire for change also tends to manifest itself at the end of a president’s second term. "Only twice in the 20th century has a candidate from the same party as a two-term president won the presidency, most recently in 1988, when George H.W. Bush replaced the term-limited Ronald Reagan, who was about twice as popular in the last year of his presidency as President George W. Bush is now.

But the biggest obstacle in McCain’s path may be running in the same party as the most unpopular president America has had since at least the advent of modern polling. Only Harry Truman and Nixon — both of whom were dogged by unpopular wars abroad and political scandals at home — have been nearly as unpopular in their last year in office, and both men’s parties lost the presidency in the following election.

Though the Democratic-controlled Congress is nearly as unpopular as the president, Lichtman says the Democrats’ 2006 midterm wins resemble the midterm congressional gains of the out-party in 1966 and 1974, which both preceded a retaking of the White House two years later.

One of the few bright spots historians noted is that the public generally does not view McCain as a traditional Republican. And, as Republicans frequently point out, McCain is not an incumbent.

“Open-seat elections are somewhat different, so the referendum aspect is somewhat muted,” said James Campbell, a professor at the State University of New York at Buffalo who specializes in campaigns and elections.

“McCain would be in much better shape if Bush’s approval rating were at 45 to 50 percent,” Campbell continued. “But the history is that in-party candidates are not penalized or rewarded to the same degree as incumbents.”

Campbell still casts McCain as the underdog. But he said McCain might have more appeal to moderates than Obama if the electorate decides McCain is “center right” while Obama is “far left.” Democrats have been repeatedly undone when their nominee was viewed as too liberal, and even as polls show a rise in the number of self-identified Democrats, there has been no corresponding increase in the number of self-identified liberals.

Campbell also notes that McCain may benefit from the Democratic divisions that were on display in the primary, as Republicans did in 1968, when Democratic divisions over the war in Vietnam dogged Humphrey and helped hand Nixon victory.

Still, many historians remain extremely skeptical about McCain’s prospects. “I can’t think of an upset where the underdog faced quite the odds that McCain faces in this election,” said Sidney Milkis, a professor of presidential politics at the University of Virginia. Even "Truman didn’t face as difficult a political context as McCain.”

2008-06-15T12:08:00.000-07:00

Russert Funeral Arrangements Still Pending

Funeral arrangements for were still pending this afternoon for Tim Russert. The ProConPundit was the first to report anywhere which funeral firm is handling the funeral, Joseph Gawler’s Sons, Washington, DC. The Funeral Service will be a Catholic Mass of Christian Burial and I have speculated that it will be at Holy Trinity/Georgetown, St. Joe’s on Capital Hill or St. Matthew’s Cathedral. It would be most unusual for a funeral Mass to take place at the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. Located on the grounds of Catholic University of America, it is a towering symbol of the Roman Catholic Church’s presence in the U.S. Weddings and funerals take place in the lower, smaller, Crypt church but generally not in the upper shrine church. Second only to The National Cathedral, it would be the largest seating capacity in D.C., to my knowledge. The National Cathedral would be a great and appropriate place for the service except that it would doubtless need to be a Catholic service. The National Shrine at Catholic U would be very appropriate in size and symbol

2008-06-15T12:00:00.000-07:00

Friendly Rival Pays Tribute to Colleague

Remembering Tim Russert
Saturday, June 14, 2008
by Chris Matthews

He was a character right from Mark Twain. You know, the first kid to go barefoot in the summer, the first to wear shoes in the winter. He was a colleague, a role model—and let’s be honest this day—a rival. You couldn’t keep up with the guy. He heard it first. Better yet, saw it first. Saw what it meant and saw the path where this new bit of news led.

Like Huck Finn, Tim Russert knew things about life that were in nobody’s notebook. He got the story first because he just “got it.” That’s how he exposed David Duke as a racist by simply asking him to name the leading employers in the state. This guy had been trying to say his campaign for governor was “about economics.”
He saw that Clarence Thomas would make it past the confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court because his accuser—Anita Hill—testified in the afternoon and Thomas got to testify in primetime.

He knew on that horrid morning of September 11th that the hijackers had grabbed the transcontinental flights because they’d have enough fuel to melt the girders of the World Trade towers.

He was like that other Mark Twain character, Tom Sawyer. He got us to think it was fun to whitewash the fence because he was having so much fun “doing” it. As a newsman, Tim managed to make Sunday morning a hot news spot. As a fan, he made Buffalo cool.

He was, of course, Irish. Being Irish, he tended and fought for his turf always with pride whether for his hometown team or his show. “If it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press”—you can’t do better than that.

More than that, he defended his country. It was something watching him catch the pretense behind the pander, the trace of charlatan that graces the best as well as the worst of our politicians. And because he could, we could see the truth behind that well-guarded hedge.

People ask me, will now ask me as long as I live, what was he like?
To them, to you right now, I say: Trust your instincts. He was the guy you saw—tough, regular, hardworking, delighted with what he was doing, and something else you probably figured: great company. We will miss him, this man of sterner stuff.

2008-06-14T16:58:00.000-07:00

Irish Wake Via Cable TV and Internet

Chicago-7 p.m. CST

UPDATED 8:15 p.m.

It’s been an incredible 24 hours. I’ve been pretty glued to the TV watching the various and continuous tributes to Tim Russert. I must say I have never seen anything like this and have never felt this way about the death of a celebrity. First of all, I never considered Russert a celebrity. I think he’d take that as a compliment. I’d like to share a few observations and reflections....

1. Tim Russert was always introduced as Washington Bureau Chief for NBC News and Moderator of Meet The Press. I knew that the Bureau job made him the boss of all of the reporters and corespondents covering the White House, Capital, Defense Department, etc. It really was more of a COO position than I realized.

2. When you watch the old clips of Meet The Press you realize the difference between Meet The Press and what Bob Novak once called, Meet The Russert. Prior to Tim Russert’s tenure as Moderator of Meet The Press, and for some time after, Meet The Press was a show where political leaders and others went to be interviewed by several members of the press. As Russert resurrected Meet The Press, he did away with the other members of the press. He was the sole interviewer. Given his unique skills as a lawyer and journalist, he was able to pull it off. I think it created a more seamless and serious endeavor. Under Russert’s leadership, the pols came to be grilled by Tim and the press would come to have round table discussions with "Little Russ."

3. The ProConPundit has confirmed that Joseph Gawler Sons Funeral Directors in Washington, DC, is handling the funeral. Gawlers’ were founded in 1850 and handled the funerals of Abraham Lincoln, JFK, Gerald Ford, most presidents in between, and as their website says, "Supreme Court Justices, Senators, Congressmen, Military leaders, Foreign Dignitaries and many other notable Americans." They can add one more notable American to their files. Their website is www.josephgawlers.com

I am curious as to which church the funeral will be held at. My hunch would be Holy Trinity in Georgetown, St. Matthew’s Cathedral, or St. Joe’s on Capital Hill. I would also bet the milk money that he will be buried in a small, Catholic cemetery in Buffalo. No doubt on a lot where Big Russ will some day be buried.

4. A seldom disclosed fact is that Tim Russert’s mother, Elizabeth, died a few years ago after a short battle with cancer. She divorced his father after the kids were raised.

5. Its been incredible to see and hear the words of love and tribute offered by Russert’s colleagues and friends, dignitaries from church and state. Everyone from Joe Lieberman to Newt Gingrich, from Archbishop John Foley to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

6. As a passionate funeral director and irreverent minister, times like this remind me of the well-intended but foolish things people can say. Theodore Cardinal McCarrick is the retired Archbishop of Washington, DC. He arrived to the Washington Bureau office of NBC News after Russert’s death and offered an impromptu prayer service for the friends of Tim Russert. Later last night when he was interviewed on MSNBC he spoke eloquent words of tribute to Tim’s life. He’s a great man. He summed them by reflecting on how much Russert meant to everyone on earth but that "God wanted him now." Well-intended, but terrible. I can’t tell you how many times, though the years, I have heard someone tell a grieving family member that the death of their loved one was God’s will.

I’m really not aware of any theological premise anywhere, in any religious tradition, that enables any one of us to think we know that someone’s death was God’s will. Catholic theology has traditionally held that everything that happens is either a part of God’s ordaining will: things God specifically wills; and God’s permitting will: things God allows to happen that may not have been God’s intention. In that sense, God’s permitting will may be employed to explain death. For instance, if someone drives their car over a cliff and God does not stop them, one can be stretched to understand why an omnipotent God didn't stop them. With all due respect to that teaching, isn’t God’s permitting will just a coping mechanism, a way for us to explain what we don’t and cannot understand? My criticism of McCarrick is affectionate but I think it is a coping mechanism and, what is sometimes called in theological circles, cheap grace. Cheap grace is dismissing ultimate concerns with the tritest of explanations. Sometimes we have to wrestle with the complex and, other times, we have to be honest about what is real.

Tim Russert was a hundred pounds over weight, over worked, sleep deprived, and under extreme pressure, not the least of which was in light of budget cuts at NBC News. Look at pictures of him. He has aged dramatically in the last two years. We cannot dismiss his death as God’s will. God may have greeted Tim yesterday by saying, "You’re 30 years early." God may have wanted a healthier Russert to continue doing the work that he did so superbly and uniquely. In death, we should celebrate people’s lives, absolutely. But we shouldn’t explain away their death in ways that keep us from, as the great Apostle Paul said, running the race so as to win.

7. Tom Brokaw will convene an awesome Meet The Press tribute to Tim Russert tomorrow with seven of Tim’s nearest and dearest colleagues. As a great touch, Russert’s chair will remain vacant.

8. I was a huge fan of Russert’s and am a huge fan of Chris Matthews–for very different reasons. They were good colleagues and friends in a professional sense. But they were not friends. My hunch is that Matthews resented Russert and that Russert didn’t care so much for the raucous nature of Hardball. I was, therefore, eager to hear Chris Matthews yesterday. He happened to be in Paris, as was, oddly enough, Bob Schieffer, of Face the Nation. I gave Matthews a lot of credit. He spoke of how much he admired Russert and relied on him and trusted him. But he made a point of saying, "You’re hearing a lot of tributes from people who were close friends with Tim. I was not part of that group. We had a good working relationship." I really appreciated his integrity in being sincere. That’s more than I can say for the WORTHLESS Keith Olbermann who emceed the MSNBC coverage of Russert’s death yesterday. I think that was because Matthews was out of the country. Olbermann is just a wind bag and horse’s ass. I can’t stand him. I do credit him yesterday when observing that Russert was a real pro at being non-partisan or trans-partisan in his conduct. Olbermann, referred to that quality in Russert and said "That is a skill I don’t even pretend to be able to exude." Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

9. My heart really goes out to Tom Brokaw, Andrea Mitchell, and proteges: Norah O’Donnell and Chuck Todd. Their words and efforts to stay composed even caused some congestion among the cold hearted ProConPundit. Also, Mike Barnicle, someone I alternately like and dislike, was one of Russert’s best friends. He was at the hospital when Russert was pronounced dead. He was on last night and this morning. I really feel sorry for him.

10. NBC was not the first news outlet to report Russert’s death yesterday. Russert would hate not breaking the story. NBC was holding off until they were certain that Russert’s wife and son, father, and three sisters were informed. Big Russ just entered an Assisted Living facility a week ago.

11. Tim Russert's life proves why John McCain should be the next President and NOT, Barack Obama. Oh yes, my mission takes not a holiday. Tim Russert was 11 years older than Barack Obama and I. He had far less opportunity in life than did Barack Obama and went to the pinnacle of his desires: personally and professionally. And what did he say about that? WHAT A COUNTRY! Yes, Russert always invoked the phrase of his garbage truck driving, WWII veteran dad. In every blessing he knew, he gave thanks to God for being an American. No silly machinations about protesting hand-over-heart during National Anthem.

One of the things a President does is represent the country and speak for the country in times of tragedy. Obama's remarks upon Russert's death underscore his inexperience. He first met Russert four years ago and, concluded some silliness by saying that he "considered him a friend." Get over yourself.

12. Two other touching tributes came from Newt Gingrich and Jack Welch. Gingrich used two words I had never heard used before and never thought I would hear him say: BRILLIANT LIBERALS. Those were the words he used to describe Russert’s former bosses, the late, great, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) and former Gov. Mario Cuomo (D-NY). Gingrich said that Russert worked for “arguably the smartest senator of his generation, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and arguably the smartest governor of his generation, Mario Cuomo.” He said Russert benefitted from a “pedigree of practical, hard-nosed politicians who were idealistic and practical, cynical and glorious.” He referred to Moynihan as both “liberal and, perhaps, the first neo-conservative.” They may have been a tremor at Arlington National Cemetery at that moment. He recalled Cuomo as having invented work-fare in New York State as an alternative to welfare. Moynihan, like McCain, was well respected by colleagues in both parties and was adept at negotiating compromises for the sake of getting something done beyond staking out ideological grounds.

Jack Welch, former CEO of GE was a mess. He could barely stay composed. GE owns (or owned?) NBC. Welch was responsible for Russert’s promotion to Meet The Press. Impresses me as micro managing, but what do I know? Welch was beside himself with grief. He said that he received more e-mails and telephone calls yesterday regarding Russert’s death than at any other time for any other reason.

I must pay tribute once again to my friend and former classmate, Ed Hanson. I mentioned yesterday that Ed and I used to watch Meet The Press together on Sunday mornings circa 1998. I forgot that he, in fact, converted me to, what he called, “Meet The Depressed.” I didn’t watch MTP—thought Russert was too young. God forgive me. I was a devotee of THIS WEEK WITH DAVID BRINKLEY. I loved Brinkley. Brinkley retired in 1996. He announced he would retire at the end of 1996, following the presidential election. On the night of Bill Clinton’s re-election, Brinkley was asked by a colleague how he felt about Clinton’s re-election. Thinking they were off the air, don’t you love it already, he said, "The next four years will be filled with pretty words, and pretty music, and a lot of goddamn nonsense!" I did say I loved him, right? I was depressed myself watching THIS WEEK WITH SAM DONALDON & COKIE ROBERTS. Ed converted me to Russert. Thank you, Ed.

2008-06-13T13:48:00.000-07:00

America’s Premier Political Journalist,

"Explainer-In-Chief," Has Died

Kenosha, WI - 3 p.m. CST

But first. A vacationing ProConPundit was watching MSNBC when I got an e-mail from Paul Kroeger who informed me that Tim Russert died. I thought what a horrible thing to joke about. Just then, that most serious television sound began to play: The NBC Special Report music, which is also the theme song of Meet The Press. With that, a grim faced, tear-eyed Tom Brokaw appeared, my eyes welled and I gulped.

Tim Russert died in his office this afternoon, apparently of a heart attack, at age 58. Details are very sketchy at this point but it must have happened very quickly. NBC News is reporting that he was stricken at 3:25 p.m. EST. I got word of this just ten minutes later. Seems hard to imagine things happened that quickly.

Russert was first an attorney before becoming a journalist. He was the longest serving moderator of the longest running television program, Meet The Press. He was also the Washington Bureau Chief for NBC News and host of the Tim Russert Show on CNBC. He was a proud Irish-Catholic and devoted Buffalo Bills fan, clearly a man of great faith. Russert was also a one-time chief of staff to the late, great, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY).

I never miss Meet The Press. I usually have to record it and watch it later. My fondest memories of watching Meet The Press were during the years I lived in Washington, DC. It was during those years that I would watch it with my good friend and classmate, Ed Hanson. Ed sent a text message and e-mail shortly after Paul this afternoon. It was ten years ago that Ed and I shared Sunday mornings watching Meet The Press together. Ed was more conservative then and I was less. We enjoyed debating each other and have evolved through the years in directions different from where we started. Russert, however, stayed the same...reliable, steady and always putting politicians words on the screen. In recent years, I have enjoyed Russert’s phone interviews on MSNBC early in the morning. Often on the treadmill at the health club, I watch Morning Joe and, before that, Imus in The Morning. Those were new experiences for me to get in touch with a lot of Russert’s lighter side.

Much else will be said so I’ll cut to the chase. He was like no other. He annoyed me when he turned his back on Don Imus a year ago. Conservatives thought him too liberal. His own instincts and sensibilities were liberal but I never saw anyone get anything less than a thorough Russert grilling on Meet The Press.

This is a huge loss for American political journalism. Russert ran a more solid political show than anyone else. He was tough and fair and could pierce the pretense and pomposity of any politician. He did it as a shrewd lawyer but always did it with dignity and always, always, avoided the cheap shot.

Russert took over Meet The Press in 1991 at a time when it, and all of the Sunday morning shows were on the decline. He reinvigorated it and, as a result of that, the other networks and later cable stations improved–but never surpassed him.
He was the boss of all of the other political people on NBC and MSNBC, generally speaking. He was beloved by them and its hard to imagine how hard they’ll have to work to come close to the mark Russert delivered and mentored.

This is a terrible, unfathomable tragedy. I cannot imagine not having the benefit of Russert’s interviews and also, especially on election nights, enjoying his endless anecdotal stories of politics and politicians. Even watching this, one can’t help but think as different people come on the air to speak that Russert will be on and give us the straight scoop. What a void.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, (ID-CT), gave Russert perhaps his best title today: EXPLAINER-IN CHIEF. Heartfelt prayers and deepest sympathies go out to Maureen and Luke Russert, and, of course, his greatest role model, Big Russ.

If it's Sunday, it's Meet The Press.

In Respected Memory
Timothy John Russert, Jr.
May 7, 1950-June 13, 2008

An Irish Proverb

May dawn find you awake and alert,

approaching your new day with dreams,

possibilities, and promises.
May evening find you gracious and fulfilled.
May you go into the night blessed, sheltered, and protected.
May your soul calm, console, and renew you.

2008-06-11T19:39:00.001-07:00

Nunn Softens Opposition To Gays

As part of his vetting process, Sam Nunn, former U.S. Senator (D-Georgia), has softened his opposition to gays in the military. Nunn has been out of the Senate for 12 years and is a top contender to be Obama’s running mate. He would be a superb choice as he balances Obama with impeccable credentials in foreign policy and had a reputation as a bi-partisan.

As chair of Senate Armed Services, Nunn vigorously opposed any plan of Bill Clinton’s to lift restrictions on gays serving openly in the military. As a negotiator and one willing to compromise, Nunn ultimately endorsed "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." 20 of the 25 countries in NATO allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military. Most Americans and most military people are not opposed to gays and lesbians serving in the military. The Clinton policy was a well-intentioned policy that has done more harm than good.

Nunn told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week that the issue should be revisited. Wanting to avoid the flip-flop tag, Nunn added, "I'm not advocating anything -- except I'm saying the policy was the right policy for the right time, and times change. It's appropriate to take another look." Nunn’s comments make sense (Nunn-sense). The issue hasn’t been revisited since 1992, he’s been out of public service for a dozen years and public opinion has changed.

Nunn’s departure from politics continued the movement of the ProConPundit away from the Democratic Party. He’s a good man and a rare find as a conservative Democrat. He could help Obama get elected and, if his voice and wisdom were given due credence, could help Obama govern well. He is not remembered by huge chunks of the looney left and rejected by others, which will help Obama get the votes of moderates who are skeptical.

Could the ProConPundit support an Obama-Nunn ticket? No. I am with McCain. A McCain-Nunn ticket would get my attentiion! My belief and my hope is that, unlike 2000 and 2004, this year’s presidential election margin of victory will not be razor thin. It will be substantial, possibly landslide. Our country needs a decisive victory and then the country needs to get behind whoever wins. I won’t root for Obama but if he wins, I’ll take pride as a Chicagoan...it would be Illinois’ first president since Lincoln. Having a credible running mate will help. Nunn is arguably his best choice.

If Nunn is on the ticket, he could help to bring Georgia into the Democratic column. A running mate has not brought a state to the electoral college that would not have otherwise supported the nominee since LBJ delivered Texas in 1960. Nunn wouldn’t be able to singularly bring Georgia. However, there are 600,000 African Americans in Georgia that are eligible but not registered to vote. If registration drives are successful and Nunn is on the team, Georgia’s 15 electoral votes could go Democratic for the first time since 1992. Interestingly, Georgia went for Clinton in 1992 but Dole in 1996.

2008-06-11T19:35:00.000-07:00

Seismic Obama Defections

In a presumably must-win state for Barack Obama, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland sent a stinging message to Barack Obama during an NPR interview yesterday. Strickland was a fervent supporter of Hillary Clinton in the primary and endorsed Obama following her eventual withdrawal from the primary last Saturday. When most people are asked if they have an interest in being asked to be a running mate, they demurely say they have no interest. These folks consist of people who want and don’t want the job. There is a significant number of wannabees who say they don’t want it but will serve in any way the nominee asks. Then there is a sliver of people like Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney who eagerly admit they would be honored to serve. Its very rare for someone to come out, as Strickland did, and categorically tersely, irreversibly say they wouldn’t do it. Strickland even used Shermanesque verbiage: "Absolutely not. If drafted I will not run, nominated I will not accept and if elected I will not serve." The press is giving this little attention but it’s a sign of trouble and a huge slap in the face to Obama. Strickland stood at Hillary’s side during some of her most bombastic criticism of Obama. So its part payback. More than that, he knows that Obama will not play well in Ohio. Party loyalty says he’ll endorse him but this remark was totally unnecessary. Anyone under consideration could privately communicate that they are not interested. This public rebuke of Obama means he wants to make it perfectly clear that he will not tie his own reputation to Obama.

Meanwhile, Democratic Congressman Dan Boren, of Oklahoma, referred to Obama as "the most liberal senator" in Congress and declared that has no intention of endorsing him. He did state that he would cast his delegate vote for him at the convention, vote for him in November, and celebrates the "testament to the Democratic Party" in nominating an African American. Stressing economic issues and foreign policy challenges, Boren said he cannot endorse Obama.
Hillary Clinton carried Boren’s rural district by 66% in the primary. Boren considers himself a centrist but describes his district as conservative. Boren should not be confused with his father, David Boren, who is the President of University of Oklahoma, former governor and senator.

Here is what makes Boren’s refusal to endorse Obama unimportant. He is the only Congressman in Oklahoma that is a Democrat. Oklahoma’s 7 electoral votes have not supported a Democrat since LBJ in 1964. What’s important about it is that it reflects attitudes among like-minded Democrats in states that could conceivably go Democratic: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, West Virginia.

The media is in love with Obama. He's in trouble.

2008-06-11T19:00:00.000-07:00

Creator of Vice-Presidents Ferraro & Edwards Resignation Not As Humiliating As His Appointment

The resignation of Jim Johnson as co-chair of the VP search and vetting committee is a conundrum. Johnson accepted this voluntary position a week ago along with Caroline Kennedy and Eric Holder, former federal prosecutor. Johnson was the "vetter" that made running mate recommendations to Walter Mondale and John Kerry. He resigned amidst controversy over his preferential sub-prime loans from Countrywide Financial while working for Fannie Mae, a.k.a. The Federal National Mortgage Association. This is not to be confused with Fannie May, a Chicago based chocolate confectioner.

Johnson’s defection is an embarrassment. Here’s the conundrum, is it more embarrassing that the person you pick to vet your VP choice resigns a week later or that you hired the person who gave us Vice-Presidents Ferraro and Edwards? I mean, really. Why would you want the person who helped select running mates who contributed only to defeat?

2008-06-06T16:42:00.000-07:00

Forty Years Ago Today

June 6, 1968. I nearly leaped out of bed with joy that morning. It was on the south side of Chicago and it was the last day of school, first grade. When I came out of my room, I was surprised because my mom was usually in the kitchen with the radio on, WIND. But she was in the living room with the TV on. I knew that “Bobby” Kennedy had been shot the day before and was in the hospital. We had prayed for him at bedtime the night before. As I got closer to the TV, I saw that my mom was crying. Bobby Kennedy died. My frame of reference was when Martin Luther King, Jr. died two months earlier. My school closed because of riots and racial tension. There were no riots this time. No noise. Just quiet. School didn’t need to close–it was over. That wasn’t all that was over.

My dad was a retired active duty Air Force career man but still in the Reserves. He was a Chicago Democrat and a precinct captain. He was happy when LBJ decided not to seek re-election and we hung an RFK sign in the window. The sign stayed–for a time and was eventually replaced with a Humphrey sign. But it was over. It was the third in the trilogy of American assassinations and piercing symbols of how wrong things were and how far off the tracks things seem to have gotten. It was, in my opinion looking back, the death of the Democratic Party in many ways.

Chris Matthews spoke on Hardball today of the life and death of RFK. As a Funeral Director, I naturally pay very close attention to funerals. Matthews mentioned how different RFK’s death and funeral was from JFK’s which piqued my interest. He later explained that although the deaths were similar in their tragicness but that the death of JFK was like the death of a prince and the death of RFK was the death of someone that common people connected with more.

I don’t normally use this blog for personal reflections and have not used it before to express religious views. I felt this significant, sad, anniversary warranted a word of memory. I close with the Newman Prayer which I recite at every funeral I direct or preside at:

In Memory of

Robert F. Kennedy

1925-1968

Oh Lord, support us all the day long,

until the shadows lengthen,

and the evening comes,

and the busy world is hushed,

and the fever of life is over,

and our work is done.

Then in your mercy,

grant us safe lodging,

the holy rest,

and peace at the last,

through Christ our Lord. Amen.

2008-06-04T17:18:00.000-07:00

Obama Makes First Excellent Decision:
No Hillary On Ticket

The Wall Street Journal is reporting tonight that the Obama Camp is letting it be known that there will be no Obama-Clinton ticket. This really isn’t news. There was NEVER a chance that he would ever consider her. But the media has been pushing that for months and now the Clintons’ were starting to push it. Lanny Davis today rolled out some silly online petition to pressure Obama to put Clinton on the ticket.

Obama has taken a preemptive move to quash months of inane and futile speculation about putting Hillary on the ticket. Its not going to happen and he is to be credited for putting her and her minions on notice that the spoils do not go to the loser.

He’s got a lot of challenges ahead of him but he’s demonstrated good leadership by ruling out Hillary as a running mate from the get-go.

2008-06-04T17:06:00.000-07:00

Hell Freezes Over–Meet The Iceman

Hell has officially frozen over. Hillary Clinton will finally end her campaign for President, concede to Barack Obama and endorse him on Friday. It was, in the end, a publicly irritated and privately infuriated Charlie Rangel who told her to get out. Rangel represents the smallest geographic congressional district in the country, encompasses slivers of Queens and Manhattan, including Harlem and Spanish Harlem. Rangel has represented this district since 1971. Rangel is significant in that he is THE PERSON who first suggested to Hillary Clinton that she run for the U.S. Senate in 2000 to fill the vacancy, but not replace, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of NY. A main argument Rangel used to get her to run for the Senate was that she ought to have a legacy of her own as something other than Bill’s wife and the victim of Monicagate. Fittingly, I supposed, it was Rangel today who told her that her legacy, her career and her husband’s legacy were all going down the drain. Unlike Rep. James Clybourn of SC who get expletives hurled at him by Bill Clinton months ago when Clybourn chided Clinton for incited racial tensions into the primary, Hillary treated Rangel with great respect. She thanked him, told him she understood his concerns and assured him she would do the right thing. He assured her she needed to do it fast.

Clinton apologists, including Lanny Davis (a jerk), Joan Walsh (who I like but never agree with) and Lisa Caputo (a bright but misguided pro)have been all over the airwaves today trying to make the argument that she needed time to absorb the end of the campaign and prepare her supporters for the end. Get over yourself. Do what Al Gore did. Make a magnanimous speech, then go off, gain a hundred pounds and win a Nobel peace prize. Others have made the argument that it has been sexist and misogynistic for people to “dismiss” her by suggesting she get out of the race. The race is over. She lost. It has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her outrage and her, understandable, disbelief that this inexperienced neophyte beat her. But beat her he did. Hillary and Bill, their campaign insiders and longtime loyalists have consistently made up the rules as they have gone along, moving the goal post, lying and manipulating. Clinton apologists and loyalists are not the only ones lending great sensitivity to Hillary. Even Pat Buchanan and Paul Kroeger have been curiously calling for more time.

Hillary's departure is tantamount to hell freezing over. Kudos to Charlie Rangel for playing the Iceman and, incidentally, wrestling that title from John Olenick, possibly the only registered Republican in the Bronx.

Memo to Lanny Davis and the gang: Hillary won’t have the kind of leverage she thinks.

2008-06-03T19:34:00.000-07:00

Ford & Carter: At It Again

McCain...
John McCain gave a partially stirring speech in Louisiana. He held himself out, saying, I am an imperfect servant of America, but I am her servant, first, last and always. He also spoke to how America did not get to know him yesterday. We know him well. He spoke of how he has put his values and convictions ahead of his party, his friends, his self-interest. He spoke of his own revulsion that our war in Iraq has been such a tortured event in the fabric of our nation. He also exampled the many ways in which a McCain presidency is not a third term of the Bush presidency. I know the Ditto heads disagree with that strategy but it is essential for his victory in November to chart a course that is a MODERATION: a place between Bush and Obama. Pitifully, he used his speech as a negative jab, CONTINUOUSLY, at Obama. It was a good jab that McCain said Obama wants to meet with leaders of Iran, North Korea and Cuba but won’t go to Iraq or meet with Petraues. He needs to speak positively about what he will do to bring our country out of the peril we find ourselves in. He fell short. VERY SHORT. He was pitiful. He has a lot of work to do if he wants to beat Obama in the fall.

Obama...
Good speech. Good strategy to have give his speech at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul where the GOP Convention will take place in August.

He gave good homage to Hillary Clinton.
He tributed McCain with the slap, “I honor his accomplishments even if he chooses to deny mine.” He retorted McCain’s slap that Obama will go to North Korea but not Iraq, as anyone would have predicted, by saying that McCain should visit Iowa, Pennsylvania or even New Orleans where McCain previously spoke this evening.

His speech was mostly a stringing together of his stump speeches. High on energy and inspiration, low on detail.

2008-06-03T19:02:00.000-07:00

Hillary Clinton: Despicable and Pathetic

The ProConPundit is not one to kick one when they are down. But Hillary Clinton isn’t down. She’s just scheming and lying. I am watching her ridiculous speech at Barach College in which she congratulated Obama for the race he has RUN, instead of the race he has WON.. She said, “I will make no decisions tonight.” She also asked her followers to inform her so that she could decide what to do next. Hello? She is making no decisions tonight but the Democratic Party has decided. She lost. She’s done. Nothing to think about. Its not sexism or misogyny to dismiss her now–SHE LOST. She doesn’t need a listening tour from her followers.

I am a big McCain fan. But Barack Obama is a smart gentleman and he isn’t suffering this silly fool gladly. She’s done. Over. Toast.

Her biggest mistake, perhaps was taking per place with George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole who each lost dismissing Bill Clinton. How ironic that a Clinton would lose underestimating her inexperienced opponent.

2008-06-03T17:42:00.000-07:00

Deal In Place

Here it is. Clinton doesn’t want to run for VP but wants to be asked and is willing to decline on the proviso that she is asked. Obama is wiling to ask her with the proviso that she turns it down. There were conversations going on yesterday between the campaigns and Obama’s people were open to a telephone conversation where Obama would offer it to her. The Clintonistas wouldn’t agree. They want an in-person, high drama, ceremonial offering to her of running mate status. With the Obama camp non-plussed at that, Hillary forged ahead with a conference call today where she expressed an open-ness to being his running mate.

Uhm. Hello? I don't remember ANY presidential nominee asking someone to be their running mate who was their 2nd choice. It sets up him for failure if he asks her and she declines. He will never ask her. She needs to get a grip.

Its not over.