"Billy Graham Doesn't..." What??

Note to author: Who you pray "for" is more important than who you pray "with".

How dare you insinuate this about Billy Graham.

Obama theory......

Go back in American history and you will find only a handful of Presidential elections; indeed only a handful of Presidential candidates, who are able to create two pieces of critical energy:

1) Attracting the new generation of voters into actively being a part of the political process....

2) Creating a coalition not pigeon-holed into the most populous or powerful wing of either major political party.

Think for a moment as I opine (simply my two cents' worth here):

1960: Kennedy v. Nixon. The 1950s are looked back upon as THE decade of growth and change in American life. The baby-boomer factory was in full swing, lookalike houses sprouted up in new "subdivisions" in new "suburbs". Middle America could now look forward to such heretofore thought-of luxuries as indoor plumbing, refrigeration, and television being in their homes.

So, after eight years of the Eisenhower administration, why did the country (though by a razor-thin margain) decide on the "unproven" Senator from the rich family in Massachusetts rather than the sure deal, the sitting Vice President?

After all, if you heard their debate on radio, it was clear that Nixon came across as better qualified to be our leader; experienced and a statesman.

But hold up....those who watched the debate on that new TV set thought Kennedy won. Ideas notwithstanding, the bottom line was, Nixon sounded better, Kennedy looked better.

So, a new generation arrives in Washington along with a new decade.

1980: RONALD REAGAN. This seed change had nothing to do with the election against sitting President Carter. This was about the conservative revolution coming of age with its best possible spokesman at the helm. Americans were tired, belittled, and were beginning to believe there was no hope. Inflation, gas shortages, and that pest of a nation Iran holding our people hostage.

Along comes a man with a vision to restore hope to Americans and America's rightful place in the world as the leader for freedom. There were plenty of disagreements over policy, bills, and the like. At day's end, though, the American people heard hope, voted for hope, and saw Washington respond in kind. Certainly better than they have been in the past 20 years.

WHICH BRINGS US TO.......

Barack Obama. He's the next "one", no question. Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bush 41, Bill Clinton, Bush 43, George McGovern, Jesse Jackson, Scoop Jackson, Mo Udall, Walter Mondale, Mario Cuomo, Dan Quayle, Al Gore, John Kerry, Gerald Ford......ANY of these capable speakers......put them behind the podium with the same speech that Obama gave tonight, and few if any go "gah-gah" over "change".

Obama has "it".

If the Democratic Party fails to nominate Barack Obama, the party endangers itself of becoming even more irrelevant in the next 20 years than it has been in the past 30.

Think about it:

----Record primary turnouts
----Obama captures Iowa, which is about as white as America gets
----He crushes his opponents in South Carolina
----He brings out new, young, fresh faces to the polls and to volunteer positions.
----He's got independents, young Republicans, even conservative Republicans taking note of him....very seriously.

Unless some gaffe of major proportions comes from his campaign, he's a lock for the White House.

BUT:

If Hillary and the "Establishment" win the nomination, do you think her "fiery speeches of hope and change" win excite the new? The disenfranchised? The independents? Republicans of any age?

Hillary gets nominated, and already 45% of the electorate is against her.

Obama equals coalition. Hillary equals turn-off. If the DNC doesn't see this, they are the stupidest group of politicians in the history of the United States.

Oh, and all the people whose cry for change will have gone unheard? If the Republicans can find an "Obama" in 2012......you get the idea.

Conservative Republican Ronald Reagan built a coalition that changed America. Another Republican could do the same in 2012 if the Democrats fumble this political football, and the GOP is wise enough to pick it up, and lucky enough to have "the" man or woman to lead the charge.

Because the people 18-39 will be heard from politically. The question is, whose smart enough to listen.

This, though, bothers me......

.....concerning "new" information from the late President Ford from "embargoed" interviews.

I saw the CBS 1984 interview clip Wednesday night where the President said how he really didn't want the phrase "long national nightmare" in the speech he gave immediately after taking the oath of office. That was interesting, and I could see why he'd want that saved.

But the headline on my CBS News Email at midday today talks of an interview Ford did in 2004 concerning his opposition to President Bush's decision to invade Iraq.

His opinion is fine, but, why did he want this embargoed?? He seemed to be very thoughtful and passionate about the subject, as I believe Ford would have been. He would have carefully thought it out before forming that opinion. But why embargo???

Did he not want to deal with the press, knowing they'd "use" him as a way to prove Bush wrong? My Lord, he was 91 at the time; I could see why he wouldn't want to deal with them.

Did he simply try to respect the office he once held?

For whatever reason, CBS News sure looked horrible to me today. I am sure I'm not the only person who saw this story and thought, "Dear Lord, he's not been dead two days and he's already being used as a political whip (no Congressional pun intended) against Bush."

Okay. Sorry. Just had to voice my opinion.

President Ford, a thanks.....

I'm sorry to hear of the passing of Gerald Ford, who was the non-politican President of sorts. It was perfectly fitting that he was the only President to serve and not be elected. He came up from our ranks and played a pivotal role in not only restoring faith in the Presidency, but bringing some normalcy back to American life. How?

The end, THE end of Vietnam.

No more Watergate pre-empting soap operas every day. That's NOT a smart-aleck statement. Watergate HAD to be "ended", "put behind" the American psyche. I was seven at the time of Nixon's resignation, and didn't understand a whole lot, but I liked Ford then and I better appreciate him in light of the prism of history.

I sure wouldn't have wanted the job. Think of "America-thought" in 1974.

We failed in Vietnam.
We were at the end of one cultural revolution.
Our governmental foundation had been rocked.

There were not a lot of people "waving the flag". The best two things to happen to America in the mid 1970's were Gerald Ford and the Bicentennial.

Well, the third was the premiere of Saturday Night Live, back when it was funny. :)

Thank you, President Ford, for a lesson in humility and leadership.