What The???????-----Obama speaks to captive audience......

Here it is, friends. The outline that will grace America's classrooms THIS TUESDAY before Dear Leader "speaks" to OUR children----without our permission.

PreK-6 Menu of Classroom Activities: President Obama’s Address to Students Across America
Produced by Teaching Ambassador Fellows, U.S. Department of Education
September 8, 2009

Before the Speech:
• Teachers can build background knowledge about the President of the United States and his speech by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama and motivate students by asking the following questions:
Who is the President of the United States?
What do you think it takes to be President?
To whom do you think the President is going to be speaking?
Why do you think he wants to speak to you?
What do you think he will say to you?
• Teachers can ask students to imagine being the President delivering a speech to all of the students in the United States. What would you tell students? What can students do to help in our schools? Teachers can chart ideas about what they would say.
• Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?
During the Speech:
• As the President speaks, teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful. Students could use a note-taking graphic organizer such as a Cluster Web, or students could record their thoughts on sticky notes. Younger children can draw pictures and write as appropriate. As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:
What is the President trying to tell me?
What is the President asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?
• Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about: What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?
• Students can record any questions they have while he is speaking and then discuss them after the speech. Younger children may need to dictate their questions.

After the Speech:
• Teachers could ask students to share the ideas they recorded, exchange sticky notes or stick notes on a butcher paper poster in the classroom to discuss main ideas from the speech, i.e. citizenship, personal responsibility, civic duty.
• Students could discuss their responses to the following questions:
What do you think the President wants us to do?
Does the speech make you want to do anything?
Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?
What would you like to tell the President?
• Teachers could encourage students to participate in the Department of Education’s “I Am What I Learn” video contest. On September 8th the Department will invite K-12 students to submit a video no longer than 2 min, explaining why education is important and how their education will help them achieve their dreams. Teachers are welcome to incorporate the same or a similar video project into an assignment. More details will be released via www.ed.gov.

Extension of the Speech: Teachers can extend learning by having students
• Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants or puzzle pieces or trails marked with the labels: personal, academic, community, country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in those areas. It might make sense to focus on personal and academic so community and country goals come more readily.
• Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.
• Write goals on colored index cards or precut designs to post around the classroom.
• Interview and share about their goals with one another to create a supportive community.
• Participate in School wide incentive programs or contests for students who achieve their goals.
• Write about their goals in a variety of genres, i.e. poems, songs, personal essays.
• Create artistic projects based on the themes of their goals.
• Graph student progress toward goals.



NOTE how many times the kids are asked to focus on THE PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!
As opposed to THE COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!

This is sick.

Now pictured on our money---Mao Tse-Tung!!

Our Treasury Secretary is OPEN to discussing a global currency led by the CHINESE??

Click the title. Good Lord.

Clear Channel, Inaugural Costs, Jack Bauer, and other things.........

Things I'm thinking about......

1) Clear Channel--my lovely former employer prepares their blood-stained guillotine for another round of job cuts, this time apparently around 7% of their workforce, or somewhere near 1,500 jobs. We're hearing ad sales will take a hit (and no offense to my friends in sales, but it's way past time this happened; the programming departments are already at bone at many stations), plus MORE programming, as the company heads further toward its ultimate goal of "national programming". The word I don't like hearing though is that some "back-office operations" will be consolidated, and that's where my best friends are.

The cuts are allegedly scheduled to take place on Tuesday, so as to allow the bad news to receive minimal publicity, what with the media world all focusing on the Inauguration that day. Only that fact has been publicly known for close to a week now. Part of me does honestly believe this whole "bury the axe-swinging on Jan. 20th" stuff is actually done on purpose, so the "Clear Channel haters" would have meat to chew on.

I don't care what is ever said by anyone in Clear Channel corporate, trust me when I say this company does not care for the majority of its employees. The suits who have the power and opportunity to be in jobs where they can improve cashflow for the company, when they DO produce positive cashflow.....they are the ones who are cared for.

Everyone under said person who creates that environment and that success is given ubiquitous emails from Mark Mays once in a while under the guise of "pumping up the troops and thanking them for their continued service despite these harsh economic times....blah, blah, blah.....".

And now, some of those people, many of them great professionals (and others, frankly, dead weight, which is found at all companies), are going to be rewarded for carrying their bosses to their bonuses by being given their walking papers, and the ever-popular "Future Endeavors Box".

Little known fact, my Future Endeavors Box had been sitting half full under my cubicle for three months before I got the axe.

So, thousands of Clear Channel employees have spent the past two weeks watching the fat lady being escorted into the building and they've now heard the orchestra tune up. I'm sure Monday, where Clear Channel offices are open, there will be all the excitement of an upcoming wake, knowing that some people you see Monday, and maybe have seen for years in the office, won't be there 24 hours later.

LOTS of companies have laid off thousands and thousands of people recently (my home city is the corporate home of Circuit City, trust me, we know ALL too well), BUT, few companies "drag out the painful pre-firing show" quite like Clear Channel.

If a company really cared about people, decisions would be made privately, action would be made swiftly, with little fanfare and LOTS of compassion, complete with the best possible severance and aid packages possible for the people who are being thanked for all their unpaid salary hours, nights and weekends in the office, etc, etc, by being kicked to the curb.

A quick study of news reports and radio Web sites over the past two weeks will show you that Clear Channel does none of that. It's like they want people to know when they're going to do all this. Otherwise, why do it this way??

---------------------------------------------------------------

2) The Inauguration-----I simply cannot help but think two things:

----This is an historic event, and should be treated as such
----In light of the State of The Union, historic events need not be expensive

Remember early 2005, when Democrats were SO upset that the second Bush inaugural would go on with the usual celebrations, Inaugural Balls, etc, during a "time of war"? They felt that any celebration should be toned down.

Fast forward to 2009, and with the popular Democrat on deck to take The Oath, the Dems are already in party mode. Even with the Obama Inaugural Committee raising some $41 million to help defray costs, it looks like some $150 million (and probably more once security costs are finally figured out in hindsight) will be spent on an event that, at its heart, consists of about 20 seconds of activity.

We're still at war----and now we're supposedly on the precipice of the 2nd Great Depression, yet there will be ten Inaugural Balls? Where are Anthony Weiner and Jim McDermott now? They are the two Congressmen who wrote a letter four years ago calling on President Bush to tone down his Inauguration, saying such festivities would be undignified.

This time? We hear from former CBS/ABC News reporter, now Obama spokesperson Linda Douglass------

"That is probably not the way the country is going to be looking at it.....it is not a celebration of an election. It is a celebration of our common values."

Excuse me? What? Heh?

Let's simply be honest-----this event is historic because we are seeing the Inauguration of the first African-American President in American history. That deserves a VERY dignified and extremely positive celebration!!! But it's like planning a birthday party for your child. You can have a great celebration, but do you have to hire the live band and the inflatable train the kids can crawl through?

Historic and dignified does not equal nor demand expensive.

Five balls instead of ten, maybe? Would having five less Inaugural balls forever shatter the historic nature of this event? Ah, no.

MY POINT----This is case proof number #374410 of how liberals, when pressed to use their own solution to certain problems, proceed to ignore them and let the party keep on going.

Those two aforementioned Congressmen, in their 2005 letter, noted how FDR's final Inauguration in 1945 consisted of the Oath, a short speech, and a lunch for guests consisting of cold chicken salad and plain pound cake. In 1917, President Wilson didn't have a party, as the country continued in World War I.

OH----and the best piece of irony? Raising up to $300,000 for the Inaugural effort? A leading Obama campaign fundraiser......his name?

LOUIS SUSMAN---he just retired THIS MONTH as vice chairman of....CITIGROUP!!!
You might be aware that Citigroup posted a LOSS of $8.29 BILLION yesterday. You might also know that Citigroup has already received $45 BILLION in bailout money, and that may not be the last of it.

Just think---six former Citigroup workers who made $50K annually and now can't pay their mortgages could have kept their jobs if ol' Louis had decided to take that $300K and help bailout six struggling Americans, rather than paying for the catering at TEN Inaugural Balls, or whatever the crap his money is paying for.

Anyone for chicken salad?

-------------------------------------------------------------

3) "24" IS BACK!!!! And not a moment too soon. This review pinpoints the strengths of the first four hours of Season 7, points out how the show is evolving with the times, isn't leaning too heavily on Jack, and how, so far, there isn't a glaring "weak link" either in storyline or in character (REMEMBER PALMER'S ANNOYING SISTER????).

And I love the portrayal that brings to the forefront the current controversy over torture. Agent Renee Walker of the FBI (a new character) interrogates a suspect while he's in the hospital with a breathing tube. He taunts her about how she cannot use "certain methods" of interrogation.

Keith Olbermann's reply to this would be, "Oh, you're right! Need a fresh pillow, Mr. Enemy of All Innocent Americans?"

Walker's response was to crinkle his breathing tube and tell him to use his last breath wisely.

Say you have Osama Bin Laden, or Rommel, or Mussolini in that hospital bed. Who do YOU want trying to break them before thousands of Americans die?

Whenever I hear people decry "interrogation" of prisoners in the War on Terror, all I have to do is remember the sight of one innocent, hard-working American, jumping to their death from a tower of the World Trade Center to remind myself these are not "criminals", they are "war prisoners", and they'd better be glad they don't have much worse treatment given to them.

Go Jack!!!!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Lately I've "watched" Music Choice channels on my cable more than actual cable channels. I'm paying a cable bill to listen to music. That's a pretty big indictment of the complete dearth of decent television programming.

I felt like I had more choices 30 years ago, living in the country with a TV antenna, and the choice of ABC, CBS, NBC, or PBS, with an occasional appearance by an out-of-town independent station thanks to certain atmospheric conditions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Could Bert Blyleven please just get elected to the Hall of Fame already? A friend of mine, local sports broadcasting legend Terry Sisisky, and I once had a debate on this issue--------back in 1996!!!

Andre Dawson--get him in there, too. Good Lord. Baseball purists take themselves so seriously. It's a game, folks. A game.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

And to close, with my Giants now out, I turn to the true underdog and give my support to the Arizona Cardinals to do the seemingly impossible.......make it to the Super Bowl. :)

I'm White, But Have A Question......

Quite a few of my friends and neighbors growing up were black.

Big deal. I never once thought to myself, "How black do I have to be to be accepted by them?"

So, having ZERO experience understanding this apparent dynamic, I ask Jesse Jackson and his friends.......

"How black does Barack Obama have to be to be an "acceptable black" candidate? Or person, for that matter?"

His off-color comment about Obama was childish (not knowing a "mic was live" is no excuse for a man who's made a living talking into microphones), but the whole "talking down to black people" thing.

Telling men to be fathers. That's not talking down, that's just speaking the truth.

I wonder out loud when Bill Cosby went into the "not black enough" category by raising the same issues??

We'll never be a colorblind world until EVERYONE stops looking through their "insert color here" colored glasses.

Media Coverage of Clinton v. Obama.....

There are some dynamics going on here that, frankly, I'm not sure I've heard many people bring up or discuss with regard to who the media likes (Obama), who they are unfair to (Clinton), et al.

First, Barack Obama.

1) When was the last time there was a Presidential campaign featuring a fresh new face from the "outside"? Answer: 1992, when Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton burst onto the scene, and captured the Presidency in the three-way dance with Bush 41 and Ross Perot.

2) Was that campaign (Clinton '92) fairly covered? I was in the media for that election year, and it was painfully obvious that, first, Clinton was able to run against, frankly, a tired-looking President. The Ross Perot phenomenon in the Spring and early Summer caused Clinton to lose face time, much to his campaign's chagrin. But once his 15 minutes of fame passed by, Clinton returned to the spotlight.

3) So when was Clinton the media darling in 1992? Well, early on, thanks to the "60 Minutes---Stand By Your Man" opportunity, he became the "Comeback Kid" by finishing second (?) in New Hampshire. Then, the "man from Hope" got the royal treatment right here in Richmond at the Presidential debate best known for President Bush looking at his watch and the question from the pony-tailed guy....

From the debate transcript....

SIMPSON: May I--I talked to this audience before you gentlemen came and I asked them about how they felt about the tenor of the campaign. Would you like to let them know what you thought about that, when I said are you pleased with how the campaign's been going? (Audience: "No.")

SIMPSON: Who wants to say why you don't like the way the campaign is going? We have a gentleman back here.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: And forgive the notes here but I'm shy on camera. The focus of my work as a domestic mediator is meeting the needs of the children that I work with, by way of their parents, and not the wants of their parents. And I ask the three of you, how can we, as symbolically the children of the future president, expect the two of you, the three of you to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it, as opposed to the wants of your political spin doctors and your political parties?

SIMPSON: So your question is?

AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Can we focus on the issues and not the personalities and the mud? I think there's a need, if we could take a poll here with the folks from Gallup perhaps, I think there's a real need here to focus at this point on the needs.

SIMPSON: How do you respond? How do you gentlemen respond to--

GOVERNOR CLINTON: I agree with him.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Let's do it.

SIMPSON: President Bush?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Let's do it. Let's talk about programs for children.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPANT: Could we cross our hearts? It sounds silly here but could we make a commitment? You know, we're not under oath at this point but could you make a commitment to the citizens of the United States to meet our needs, and we have many, and not yours again? I repeat that. It's a real need, I think, that we all have.

----------------------------

"Meet our needs". Meet our needs??? Government is supposed to do that? That's called SOCIALISM.

Anyway, Clinton thrived in those situations, not to mention moderator Carole Simpson, (then of ABC News), was so into Clinton it wasn't funny.

So, lesson? Sometimes the media give you a lighter treatment.

Is the media's coverage of Barack Obama been as tough as it has been for Hillary Clinton? No way! But it's NOT really because, suddenly, everybody with a microphone, a videophone, all pundits and bloggers, voted to turn on her en masse.

In 2008, Barack Obama is the fresh face. He represents "new" at another point in history where "change" is being sought by the electorate. Go back and look at Clinton's 1992 campaign and see how the terms "hope" and "change" were utilized to his advantage. Deft political move in that kind of political climate.

Obama's doing the same thing. He's bringing people into the political process, and not just very young voters, that either had never participated or had walked away for a period of time.

Fresh face, candidate of hope and change, and, as his campaign revved up, it's become a phenomenon that the media has no choice but to cover it. And it's a positive story! It's reality, so the media MUST cover that.

So, dynamic of Obama's media coverage? New face, rallying new electorate groups, effective communicator, aligns with the individual, and has effectively made himself the poster boy for "change and hope".

Now...the dynamic of Hillary's media coverage. Establishment candidate. Her track record in the White House left at least 40 percent of the active electorate of, say, a year ago, against her. That makes it more difficult to be able to capture a general election. In spite of that, a year, six months, heck, four months ago, Hillary was THE presumed Democratic nominee!

Then she got pissed at Tim Russert over his questioning to her at an early debate (which was a poor move on her part....first, don't blame others; second, if you are the presumed front-runner, you should be able to answer questions that reporters won't spend time asking Dennis Kucinich, because we all know he's not going to win!

Then, as the Obama Phenomenon caught on, especially after his win (albeit by a small margin) over Edwards and Clinton in Iowa, the media went to the inevitable "Clinton Question".

What's wrong?

Tell ANYONE last August that she would finish third in Iowa and people would check your temperature.

Then, she triumphantly returns in New Hampshire and the game is on, again!

But then there's South Carolina....and Bill. Bill Clinton quickly becomes a liability with sound bites played everywhere. After all, he IS a former President! So, Hillary takes him out of sight for a season.

So as Obama is a rising star, his star is headed straight for, well, the Planet Clinton. Suddenly, she's not the only candidate in the stratosphere. Suddenly, she can't hold on to the money she wants to save until fall. She has to use it now!

One, two, three.....six, seven.....eleven races in a row for Obama and everything, EVERYTHING has changed.

Obama performs well in debates, is able to deflect most of her attacks and remain pretty much positive and "above the fray", which his constituents love (and rightly so).

Nothing is working for the Clinton campaign, and, suddenly, the inevitable Democratic nomination is starting to slip away from Hillary Clinton. And ever since, their chief architects seem to be either tearing each other down or living in "delusion-land".

ROB'S BOTTOM LINE:

Obama is getting more "positive" media treatment, at this time of the political campaign. Why? He's the Bill Clinton of 2008. New, fresh, with a message of hope and change. And, whereas the media gave Bill a "get away from Gennifer Free" card 16 years ago, they haven't had to do that with Obama. His entire campaign story is filled with positives. That does NOT, though, give the media "artistic license" to not ask him tougher questions and to not begin to dig into all of his past. There are dynamics to Obama 2008 that make the story of Clinton 1992 look very small in comparison.

And I never said anything about him being African-American.

Clinton? Yes, tougher questions. But going from an "inevitable" nominee to an even playing field, followed by an 11-state losing streak will certainly cause the tone of the media queries to be more "what is going on?" or "what is wrong?", or "what can your campaign do to stem the Obama tide?" It's like being a football coach.

Take New York Giants football coach Tom Loughlin. I'm a Giants fan. I was screaming for his head at the end of the 2006 season. They collapsed in the second half of that season both on and off the field and played one horrendous playoff game.

Now, Tom's getting peppered with tough questions as to why the collapse occurred, if there really is infighting in the locker room, are you still able to "reach" the team.

One year later....Coughlin's team wins an improbable Super Bowl title, is the toast of New York City, and, watching his press conference the next day, I didn't hear many "tough" questions. Why? Success!

We didn't hear "why are you so tough on me?" questions from Hillary and unfair accusations against the media by Bill, complete with his signature wagging-finger, last summer or fall.....when she was "head and shoulders" above the other 11 or 57 or 108 other candidates.

But we do now from a campaign that, I honestly believe, never, ever spent one minute discussing "what if?" strategy, just in case by some weird twist of fate, one of those "other guys" happens to get some traction and begins to become a clear cut second choice in polls and gathering steam.

------------------------------------------------------

What was Bill Clinton's blessing in 1992 has become Hillary Clinton's albatross in 2008. Also NOT helping her is her past. Remember "vote one get one free!" from Bill Clinton? How about Hillary heads the Health Care effort, though she doesn't hold elective office? And, to this day, we really don't know how many "Hillary Clintons" there really are. She hasn't thrown a lamp at David Gregory or Kate Snow yet.

She's probably saving it for her next one-on-one with Tim Russert.

Who she has been (in all her incarnations) now returns to haunt her.

And notice I never said a word about "first woman President".

------------------------------------------------------

TO CLOSE (promise!)

They asked Bill Belicheck, "what went wrong?" and Tom Coughlin "how does it feel?"

Bill B equals Hillary, Tom equals Obama.

Rebuttal: The many faces of Barack Obama?

The Barack Obama picture in question from his 2006 trip to Kenya when he dressed as a Somali elder. From the Clinton campaign? Obama's?? Who knows......





Obama at a rally held last week in Youngstown, Ohio, according to Boston.com...




Obama debating Hillary Clinton last Thursday night in Texas.

One thing can be said....I don't see many differences in these faces; as opposed to the last post.

The daily faces of Hillary Clinton???

Here is Hillary Clinton on Sunday, delivering a "more-than-subtle" (and that's being nice) dig of sarcasm against the "naive hopes" of her opponent, Senator Barack Obama.



Here is Hillary on Saturday, scolding Senator Obama for his mean, shameful mailers straight from the Karl Rove School of Dirty Politics.......



And here is Hillary at the end of last Thursday night's debate......

Wonder what face we get when tomorrow night's debate begins?? It would be sad if it weren't so contrived. The "faces" of Hillary that she could hide in the White House all those years that we knew existed, are finally in plain view.

One Kennedy yes, the other....????

I think Caroline Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama in the op-ed section of Sunday's New York Times is one of the most important endorsements of any Presidential candidate in a long time. She's not a politician, does not like "fame", doesn't spend time in public.....

...so for her to write what she did, I'm standing up and taking notice.

Meanwhile, Ted Kennedy?

Not so much.......it was funny to see Obama and Kennedy talking and smiling during the President's entry tonight for the SOTU address.

Then, even funnier a few minutes later, was the camera shot of Hillary Clinton, who, if looks could kill, we'd all be dead.

P.S.----Didn't watch much of Bush's speech; he's a lame duck. He could ask for everything and know it can't happen but he looks good.

Obama tonight----at his best, friends.

Tonight, Barack Obama looked more Presidential than he has at any time.

Did you happen to see the two African-American young guys behind Obama to the camera's right? The two who people would have assumed would have been at the club or something on a Saturday night?

Instead, they're celebrating a political win for a candidate they believe in?

Whoa.

Obama is bringing together an impressive coalition. And he absolutely destroyed Hillary (AND BILL) Clinton in his speech, never had to name a name, and the crowd was going crazy.

I was born after JFK, was in diapers the year we lost MLK and RFK. I remember the hope and coalition Reagan presented in 1980.

If the Democratic Party doesn't nominate this guy, they'll risk losing the White House for another 20 to 40 years.

My commentary on that, next time.

"Ut--"O"?"

As in "zero"??? Really??

I couldn't believe the results from Dixville Notch, the first of the first to vote in this year's primaries. 17 residents; 100 percent turnout. From the Concord Monitor, the results:


Obama, McCain carry Dixville Notch

Submitted by Primary Monitor on Tue, 2008-01-08 00:10.

Dixville Notch got the voting under way. The results:

John McCain 4 votes
Mitt Romney 2 votes
Rudy Giuliani 1 vote

Barack Obama 7 votes
John Edwards 2 votes
Bill Richardson 1 vote

When they didn't call Hillary Clinton's name, I immediately shouted, "WHOA!". Good thing wifey didn't wake up!

GOOD NEWS FOR HILLARY THOUGH-----Dixville Notch has a not-so-stellar record of their victors going onward to big victory.

I had to get up and post quickly before going to sleep; I couldn't believe my ears or my eyes.

Will these men speak at podiums Election Night in November?

What do you think? Wins that will fall into the "They won Iowa, but they didn't get their party's nomination"?

Or will we see them on the ballot when November comes?

I will say this---if change is really the impetus of 2008, Hillary's dream will not be realized. No one can present themselves as "change" with a former polarizing President standing on the podium with her.

Though, I must say, I never dreamed Clinton's replacement could be even more polarizing, but President Bush sure has done it.

If Clinton wins in November, you do realize that the United States would be led in the White House by either a Bush or a Clinton for 24 years.

That's change?

Unfortunately for her, it looks like this election may not allow a candidate to trumpet both experience and the ability to change. You're either in Washington, or you're not.

BUT WAIT! Obama, Clinton and Edwards are all close to the same experience-wise in the Senate! True, but I forget who said this on TV tonight, but the person recognized that tonight, two Senators with over 50 years experience on Capitol Hill combined, and a former Governor who also was Ambassador to the U.N. (loads of experience to tout) were all basically swept aside.

The "big three" don't have that much "gravitas". Remember how important that was when Bush 43 became the nominee in 2000?

Remember when being "just" Governor of Arkansas was not a stumbling block to becoming President, but people now are bringing up the point that a Governor of Arkansas "lacks the foreign policy experience" to be President? Huh?

The more things change, the more they stay the same.....

Which is why I see a true "torch change" (generation change) coming. Who is the least "Washington" of the three Democrats still viable?

Who can not only bring policy change, perspective change, and direction change, but HISTORIC change?

Look up top. Mike Huckabee looks like a great guy who I'd love to have as a neighbor, my pastor, my Sunday School teacher.

Barack Obama (AND his wife, Michelle, who I see as a huge asset).....that picture looks like it says "Future First Couple".

---------------------------------------

On a personal note, I am conservative (though less conservative than, say, eight to ten years ago), and there is nobody in the race for President that I am jazzed about in any way, shape or form.

The only "bias prism" I have looking at the 2008 campaign is that I pray Hillary Clinton doesn't come even close. I personally think it would be poetic justice that someone who has been proven to be not believable, who answers to the winds around her and not principles, and actually had the gall to run for Senate in New York after living in D.C. for eight years and Arkansas for God knows how long before that.....who has been planning her power rise for decades, ends up the historic symbol of "the end" of a political generation.

And there are so many people like me with Clinton fatigue STILL (and now there's certainly Bush fatigue....more like Bush disgust; why do you think Jeb never gave running a thought) that you would think long-time Democrats from officials and spinmeisters to the working class Joes and Janes in Sioux City, Iowa, will finally realize that this is THE most important Presidental election for the Democratic Party in decades, and that the cry for "change" is so loud from the electorate that another Clinton just won't do.

Barack Hussein Obama. Can't wait to hear Al Jazeera's take on this, and, moreso, if he wins in November, what Osama says on video. I know, I know....doesn't matter what Obama's name is, he's still American so he's still an infidel.

And, just wondering....if I'm an "infidel", what is a "fidel"?

Good night from Virginia (wondering why Iowa deserves all this power every four years....)

Just a brief political thought......

......maybe Hillary Clinton is giving Sen. Barack Obama some moments in the spotlight........

......so when she accepts the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination, she has a natural running mate poised and ready to go.

Thinking like this "THIS" early, you say?!?

Wouldn't surprise me.