Open Letters To Random Public Figures At The Dawn Of A New Year.

Dear Barack Obama,

Please don't screw everything up.
Please.

Dear George W. Bush,

People are always saying mean things about you, but deep down inside, they're just jealous that you got to be president and they didn't. You're not really like Hitler, are you? I mean, you don't even have a mustache. Which, by the way, is something you should definitely consider growing. You have less than a month left in office, and everyone is shunning you. What do you have to lose? Growing a mustache would transform you into a legend, like bigfoot, or that dancing guy on YouTube. And given the complete intolerance for presidential facial hair that has prevailed throughout the last 100 years, your upper-lip warmer would strike a blow for facial freedom that would resound for decades to come. Please George, do it for the children.

Dear Sarah Palin,

A little bit of ambition can be a great thing. Too much ambition, on the other hand, can lead to bad things. Like being stabbed by your friends en-masse on the Ides of March. You don't want that to happen, do you? Alaska is a nice place. Why don't you just stay there? In Washington DC, they don't even let you hunt mooses. Heck, they don't even have mooses.

It's a hellhole, Sarah. Let the elites have it.

Dear Mike Huckabee,

I've never seen your TV show, but just thinking about the fact that you have a TV show makes me feel inexplicably happy. On a vaguely related note, you should start endorsing products. I would definitely buy Huckabee biscuit mix -- and I don't even normally buy biscuit mix! Think about it: you could be the white male Aunt Jemima of biscuits. It almost makes the presidency sound pathetic in comparison.

Dear Osama Bin Laden,

I know you don't like Americans very much, but really, we aren't that bad. Have you ever had a chocolate chip cookie? We invented those. They're basically little circles of condensed joy. Of course, they have to be fresh from the oven if you want to experience them in their full glory, but even a bag of "Famous Amos" will do in a pinch. Seriously, you should try some. And maybe rethink that whole "death to America" thing.

Dear Kim Jong Il,

Are you still alive? If not, can I have your gerbil? It would mean a lot to me.

If you are still alive, please die. You're kind of a terrible person, and I really want that gerbil. Thanks.

Dear American Capitalism,

Please don't leave. We still love you! Some may complain about your so-called "excesses," but I don't see anything wrong with a small group of people becoming very rich, and then squandering their wealth on gold-plated ice cream and bad mortgages. Without the zany antics of irresponsible rich people, the world would be as boring as Imperial Margarine. And just between you and me, I'm not a big fan of your cousin, European Socialism. He may give everyone medicine for free, and feed homeless kittens, but he's still a smug, self-righteous jerk. Don't even get me started on those taxes of his. Anyways, just hang in there. If you survive to annoy just one more French person, it'll be worth it.

Just A Little Bit Of Harmless Corruption.

When a Senate seat is vacated, it's always tough for the governor saddled with the task of finding a new person to fill it. The concerns of competing interest groups must be balanced, and possible charges of cronyism and nepotism must be avoided. For Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, the challenge was especially daunting, given the stature of the seat's previous occupant.

Fortunately, resourceful Rod drew up an elegant solution to the problem: handing out the seat to whoever gave him the most money.

The plan was almost perfect, except for two little things: it was illegal, and evil.

Now, the FBI has gone and spoiled everything. I guess he should have just stuck with the coin toss.

The Same Old Change.

In the aftermath of Barack Obama's election, partisan pundits immediately declared that the American people were on their side, and ordered the President-Elect to act accordingly. Giddy liberals crowed about the death of American conservatism. In their estimation, Obama had won a mandate to transform the good ol' U.S.A. into the socialist paradise of their dreams. Conservatives, for their part, maintained that America was still a pretty conservative place, and that Obama should play it safe.

Sorry liberals, but it looks like Obama seems to agree with the other side. Kind of.

For all his failings, Obama is smart enough to know that Americans want policies that actually work. Which is why you won't see Obama making any massive changes to the fundamentals of the current American economic system, or other such foolishness. There may be some minor tweaks -- a little more taxation there, a little less over here, a few favors for labor unions -- but at the end of the day, America will be left with the same free-market-plus-a-little-extra system we know and love.

There are, of course, other economic paths that Obama could explore. A long time ago, a bunch of people tried a radically different system. It was called communism, and it was terrible. People starved. Which is what tends to happen when you shun economic reality in favor of utopian fairy-tales. Obama may be a liberal, but his choice of relatively moderate, realistic economic policy advisors shows that his mind isn't frolicking with the marxist unicorns just yet.

And to the peaceniks, who have spent decades (centuries?) waiting for a dove to descend upon Washington: prepare for a major letdown. You swept Obama to the Democratic nomination because Hillary frightened you with her pants-wearing hawkishness. And who does Obama pick as his number one diplomat? Hint: not Dennis Kucinich. But it doesn't stop there. Not satisfied with mildly snubbing the legions of pacifism, Obama has gone for a full Three Stooges style eye-poking by letting Bush's Secretary of Defense stick around for the new administration.

Don't worry hippies. It's not personal -- it's business.

At this critical juncture in our nation's history (don't you love it when people say that?), America can't afford to be declawed. The war in Iraq may be winding down, but the battle for Afghanistan is just getting started, and the world seems to be inching ever closer to a second cold war. Flower power alone won't be enough to get America through the next four years. That doesn't mean that Obama will be galavanting around the globe on military expeditions; quite the contrary, he'll almost certainly make heavy use of "soft power". But judging by his cabinet appointments, other options will remain on the table.

However, Obama's apparent (and hopefully, genuine) moderation has nothing to do with America being a center-right nation. Even if they lean a little to the right, most Americans are fairly pragmatic. The issue isn't right versus left; it's what works versus what doesn't. To put it another way, America doesn't necessarily lean to right -- but reality does.

So, if Obama doesn't end up raising taxes on businesses, restricting free trade, and hugging terrorists, it won't come as a surprise to me. No matter how "transformational" he may be, even the chosen one can't transform the laws of the universe. 

Calories We Can Believe In.

Add this to your list of good things about Obama: his abiding love for the Hawaiian plate lunch. For those who may be unfamiliar with this magical combination of fat, starch, and protein, the plate lunch is the undisputed king of all bad-for-you regional cuisine. While variations abound, the classic Hawaiian plate lunch consists of a slab of greasy meat, two scoops of rice, and a heaping scoop of mayo-drenched mac salad, crammed onto an irresistible styrofoam platter. Translation: it's the best thing ever. And according to an article in the New York Times, Hawaii's beloved culinary creation may find itself thrust onto the national stage:

AMONG the myriad people and institutions predicted to profit from Barack Obama’s victory, why has no one cited the plate lunch?

This traditional Hawaiian meal — validated as fine fare by the president-elect when he proclaimed his longing for one during a vacation in Oahu last summer — might be poised to enter the consciousness of mainlanders in all of its fatty, greasy deliciousness.

It all seems like odd fare for a man as bookmark-thin as Mr. Obama, who seems to treasure his treadmill. “I think it is really funny he still eats plate lunch,” Ms. Philpotts said. “Because he is so healthy.”

But she strongly suggested — at least to my ears — that the plate lunch in part accounts for his strong showing in Hawaii. “I think it is because when he comes back here he is so cool, he just kind of slips back into local ways.”

If only Obama would use his stature to encourage L&L to expand into the midwest. A slight bump in national obesity levels would be a small price to pay for so much food-induced happiness.  

Idea Roundup 11-10-08

- Nobel prize winning economist and liberal gadfly Paul Krugman urges Obama to learn from FDR's mistakes -- by throwing caution to the wind and implementing massive government programs that would make the New Deal weep.

- Harvard economics professor Greg Mankiw spies a connection between the great depression and high taxes, and politely asks Obama to pay attention to economic realities.

- National Review editor Rich Lowry thinks the GOP needs fresh ideas to recapture moderate voters. Meanwhile, National Review contributer Deroy Murdock calls Bush a "weak bumbler", disses Newt Gingrich, and calls for a return to Reaganism.

- Some guy at the Huffingtonpost is betting on John Kerry for Secretary of State.

- A Politico ideas piece argues that Palin's frontier mindset leaves her out of touch with mainstream America. And yes, she'll be back.

- Also, possibly the most awkward meeting ever:

The Election Summarized In A Tacky Photo Montage:

Great Scott!

Today at noon, Democratic Senate candidate Scott Kleeb held a town-hall meeting on the UNL campus. I'm usually in class until 12:30, but in honor of Halloween, my Spanish professor graciously decided to let class out early -- leaving me free to bask in the glory that is Scott Kleeb.

"Young" and "energetic" are the two adjectives people seem to use the most when they describe Mr. Kleeb. Unfortunately, those qualities didn't seem to rub off on today's gathering. For an on-campus event, there was a startling shortage of students -- an ill omen for a man banking his entire campaign on his charismatic freshness. Not that you can blame the students for being uninvolved; they undoubtedly had more important matters to attend to. After all, it does take a lot of time and effort to prepare for a night of holiday debauchery.

Still, even in the absence of youth, the spirit of the season was visibly present in the room. One middle-aged woman in the small audience was decked out in full witch regalia -- fitting attire for Halloween, but perhaps not the best thing to wear if you want to win over a crowd's sympathy with tales of healthcare woe.

How did the candidate himself measure up?

Imagine skimming the vague rhetorical cream from the top of Obama's political philosophy, and attempting to mold it into a living, breathing human being. The result would probably end up looking something like Scott Kleeb. At times, his constant stream of numbing clichés was a bit hard to stomach.

I'm still trying to brush all the little particles of hope and change off of my jacket.

Kleeb informed the crowd that "we can do it, but we can only do it together", and that change was on its way because "people have faith in themselves and are checking in." As proof of this unstoppable tidal wave of hope, Kleeb repeatedly referred to the fact that 350 people had signed his pick-up truck. We, the gathered faithful, were also invited to make our mark on the hope-mobile.

He was really into the truck thing.

But what makes Scott Kleeb so different from politicians in the past? The candidate was happy to lay out at least one key difference. In the past, Senators have been given free, tax-payer funded healthcare. Scott Kleeb would also receive this generous healthcare plan -- but with a catch: he plans to pay for it after he gets it for free! As Kleeb explained, families across the state have to write a check every month to pay their healthcare bill. To share in the struggles of these salt-of-the-earth folks, Kleeb will write a check every month as well, even though he doesn't have to. 

Verily, a sacrifice that would make Gandhi weep. 

Although most of his pitch was copied directly from Obama's playbook, in the spirit of bi-partisanship, Kleeb also borrowed some key lines from John McCain. When I asked him about what he would do to help fix social security, Kleeb rattled off McCain's familiar anecdote about Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan getting together to fix social security in the '80s, and the need for a similar getting-together today.

"I don't want to sound too harsh," I mildly retorted, "but isn't saying that you're going to solve the problem by getting together and solving the problem kind of a cop-out?"

In a slightly annoyed voice, Kleeb assured me that it wasn't a cop-out.

Deciding to take a different approach, I refined my query: "When you get together to solve the problem, what do you think the solution will look like?"

As it turns out, the solution has something to do with balancing the budget. And hey, we all like balanced budgets, don't we?

---

It is very likely that Scott Kleeb is an intelligent, thoughtful person. But in his slapdash attempt to hitch a ride on Obama's wave of change, Kleeb comes across as a crude caricature of charisma -- a smile with a haircut. 

If Nebraskans decide to send him back to his beloved ranch on election day, I won't shed too many tears. 

VOTE FOR OBAMA AND WIN A FREE IPOD!!!!

In recent weeks, endorsing Barack Obama has gained popularity as a simple, flavorful way for conservative pundits to spice up their faltering careers.

Never one to buck trends, I feel strangely compelled to join in.

So, here's my friendly election advice: if you vote for one presidential candidate this year, make it Barack Obama.

Please?

Yeah, I know he's the most liberal guy in the Senate. I'm also aware of the fact that he hasn't really accomplished anything beyond winning elections. And sure, he's on the wrong of side of the biggest moral issue facing our country.

Those are all important things to take into consideration, of course.

But not the most important things.

Whenever you size up two presidential candidates, there's only one question you really need to ask yourself: who's going to give me more stuff?

As far as I'm concerned, the answer is clearly Barack Obama.

Senator Obama shares my outrage over rich people making so much money. Why should some evil, cigar-chomping CEO get a million smackers a year, while noble students like myself live below the poverty line? Clearly, this abominable gap between the haves and the have-nots must be eradicated. I may not actually contribute anything to the economy, but I still deserve a larger slice of the American pie. Obama will gladly serve it to me on a biodegradable, corn-based platter.

As a native of the American university system, Obama also understands the deep injustice of college tuition payments. In a modern nation, college should be free, like rainbows and laughter. I shouldn't be forced to toil within the bowels of academia for half a decade, only to be handed a bill at the end. Obama promises to remove this oppressive financial burden from my shoulders, and banish it to the realm of darkness forevermore. Yes, there is such a thing as a free lunch -- and it's incredibly delicious.

Does Obama want to spread Joe the plumber's wealth around?

Maybe.

But as long as I get a decent chunk of it, you won't hear me complaining.

Vote Obama: if you're not rich, he'll give you lots of shiny things.

Say It Ain't So, Joe.

In little more than two weeks, our country will choose its next president. 

Big things are on the line:

Global security.

Economic health.

Entitlements.

Supreme Court justices.

And a lot more.

Unfortunately, none of those things can hold a candle to a plumber named Joe. 

 After enduring the scrutiny of the national press, we now know that Joe is not a licensed plumber, and owes back taxes. Democrats -- including Joe Biden -- have attacked his credibility, while McCain continues to use him as a campaign centerpiece. 

"Joe the plumber" confronted Obama with a provocative question regarding taxes, and there was nothing wrong with McCain picking up on it to illustrate a larger point. But when an illustration becomes a distraction, it's time to move on. 

Thanks for yet another mindless media circus. 

Can we get back to the issues now?

It's The End Of The (Financial) World As We Know It, And I Feel Fine.

Stocks are falling.

Banks are failing.
The government is in crisis mode.

But despite the prevailing mood of doom and destruction, it isn't all bad.

Listening to the rhetoric being spouted by any given politician, you'd think that the entire financial disaster was engineered by a handful of greedy Wall Street executives. In reality, this is little more than a populist bedtime story. While it's true that Wall Street shoulders a certain amount of the blame, corporate greed is only part of the equation.

Banks were unwise to give out mortgages to people who couldn't pay them back -- but the same could be said of the people taking them. For decades, the American consumer has subscribed to the notion that something can be had for nothing. As far as notions go, that's a pretty bad one.

And following it has consequences.

We've seen our national savings rate dip into negative numbers. We've seen people drowning in debt to maintain their lifestyles. And now, we're seeing the financial sector crashing down under the weight of all the loans that people simply can't pay back.

Thanks to the greed of Wall Street and Main Street, our economy is feeling the squeeze. Millions of Americans will almost certainly suffer through financial hardship.

So what "isn't all bad" about this?

In short, the crisis gives our country a chance to transform itself. And I'm not speaking in purely political terms. The financial crisis should serve as a wake up call to people in every segment of society. In government, business, and at home, Americans have held a view of money that stands utterly detached from any sort of reality. Although the phrase has become something of a cliché, people have been "living beyond their means". Now that the bubble has finally burst, the economy has a chance to start over again. 

Painful? Yes.

But sometimes, you have to learn the hard way.

Shattering The Elite Elitism Of The Elites.

If you've been paying any attention to the conservative pundit-sphere recently, you've probably heard quite a few things about elitists. Elitists are mean people with college degrees who live on the east coast. Unlike real Americans, elitists have a bizarre attachment to local produce, and enjoy listening to NPR shows such as "All Things Considered" and "This American Life". Rarely will an elitist be found at a patriotic tail-gate party, downing six-packs with Joe. Instead, elitists prefer to participate in "culture", a vile assortment of abstract art, indie films, critically-acclaimed television, and expensive cheese.

But worst of all, elitists refuse to be charmed by Sarah Palin.

They dare to question her experience.

They have the gall to hint at her lack of knowledge.

They even ridicule her folksiness.

Oh, those gosh darn elitists!

The elitists are too blind to see that Sarah Palin doesn't need a degree from a fancy-pants school like Harvard to be smart. She also doesn't need to read newspapers, know the names of important military commanders, or actually answer questions. Most of all, she certainly doesn't need that whole "understanding of foreign policy" thing that elitists seem to drool over.

Sarah Palin -- bless her heart -- is special just the way she is!

Deep down, everyone knows that experience, knowledge, and the ability to communicate are insignificant chocolate chips in the giant cookie of leadership. The wholesome folks down on Main St. thirst for a different set of qualities. They want someone with big hair, an insatiable hunger for moose-flesh, and a pregnant teenage daughter.

They want someone like Sarah Palin.

Elitists can sit in their tastefully decorated condos and whine all they want about Sarah Palin's role in "the assault on reason". As much as they try to mask it with smart-sounding words, their hatred of Sarah Palin is clearly just another manifestation of their hatred of America, freedom, and professional wrestling.

They want the terrorists to win.

A vote for Palin-McCain can help stop them

Clash Of The Titans!

Everyone was waiting for it:

The big slip up.
The game-changing performance.
Anything that would alter the dynamic of the race.

It never arrived.

The first presidential debate was intense, but neither candidate managed to score a decisive victory.

Naturally, America's current economic crisis was given the seat of honor at the debate. Contrasting opinions about the solution were remarkably absent. Both candidates generally agreed that the $700 billion bailout should be passed, assuming that appropriate measures are added to protect "main street".

Even when it came to diagnosing the root cause of the problem, there was little fundamental disagreement. Barack Obama was quick to pin the problem on too little government regulation in corporate America. McCain didn't use the same wording as Obama, but he made it clear that he believed "corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that" were the biggest villains in the crisis.

However, McCain also delivered a scathing -- albeit familiar -- indictment of wasteful government spending, including Barack Obama's own earmarks. Obama voiced general agreement with McCain's call for earmark reform, but attacked McCain's plan to cut taxes for the wealthy. McCain responded by attacking Obama's plan to raise taxes on businesses. You can probably fill in the blanks from here.

Trying to nudge the discussion into more specific territory, moderator Jim Lehrer asked a thoughtful question: which of their proposed programs would the candidates give up due to the $700 billion dollar bailout package? Both Barack Obama and John McCain had the same answer: none of them. Apparently, nearly a trillion dollars of unplanned deficit spending isn't big enough to trigger budget cutbacks elsewhere. You could almost hear logic and reality weeping backstage.

The most pointed remarks of the night came during the foreign policy portion of the debate. McCain bluntly referred to Obama as "naive" about the nature of the world, and constantly referenced his own years of experience in international affairs. For his part, Obama harped on McCain's support for the Iraq war, and delivered the expected tirade against Bush's foreign policy. Heated arguments, but certainly no surprises.

Notably absent from the debate was any mention of Sarah Palin, whose very existence on McCain's ticket would seem to undermine the whole "experience matters" thing he likes to talk about so much.

So, that's my take. For your reading pleasure, I've included some of the tastiest quotes from the debate below. Enjoy.

John McCain:

"I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong. And we fixed it and we killed it and the people ended up in federal prison"

I'm glad they fixed the bill before killing it. Somehow, killing a broken bill always feels less than satisfying.

"I've got a pen, and I'm going to veto every single spending bill that comes across my desk. I will make them famous. You will know their names."

Whose names? Who's going to be famous? I'm both scared and confused.

"the American people know me very well and that is independent and a maverick of the Senate."

Um, yeah.

"By the way, North Korea, most repressive and brutal regime probably on Earth. The average South Korean is three inches taller than the average North Korean, a huge gulag."

Short people are evil.

Barack Obama:

"What I've called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent. And that means that the ordinary American out there who's collecting a paycheck every day, they've got a little extra money to be able to buy a computer for their kid, to fill up on this gas that is killing them."

Truly, people need to buy more stuff that will kill them.

"Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he's absolutely right. Here's the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world."

Like Barack Obama, I too am personally outraged and appalled that our business tax rates are actually really low. 

"We've got to invest in science and technology. China had a space launch and a space walk. We've got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science."

Hasn't America been doing that whole space thing thing for about fifty years now? 

The Other White Guy.

Amidst all the commotion over pigs wearing makeup, bridges to nowhere, and teen pregnancy, it seems that one little fact has been lost in the shuffle:

Barack Obama also has a running mate.

His name is Joe Biden. Remember him? He's the guy who called Barack Obama "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy". This is a big deal, because, as Joe Biden put it, "that's a story book, man."

Indeed, Joe Biden is an awesome person, and not just because he says hilariously inappropriate things. For starters, he's old and white -- just like McCain! He also sits on a bunch of Senate committees, and can often be seen talking about important stuff on C-span.

In other words, he's a part of what Obama likes to call "the broken Washington system".

But don't worry: Biden is a good part of the bad system. As a Democrat, Joe Biden is clearly free of the tainted politics of the past. Partisanship is a Republican invention, created by the neo-con overlords to hide their diabolical schemes from the eyes of the American people.

Democrats, including our beloved Joe Biden, never bought into it for a second.

Instead, they've spent their years in congress fighting for down-to-earth blue collar folks who live in trailers and work in coal mines and/or toothpaste factories. Those are the hard working Americans that lie at the heart of our nation; the people you sometimes see in National Geographic photo essays on the American spirit.

Those are the people that raised Joe Biden.

Unlike John McCain, who was born into a life of luxury, Joe Biden started life as a wretched Irish kid in Scranton PA. Yes, that Scranton. Throughout Biden's childhood, his hard-working parents instilled sturdy American values into his young mind. He would never forget his mother's creed:

"No one is better than you. Everyone is your equal, and everyone is equal to you."

These are the redundant words that drive Joe Biden to fight for equality, people being equal, and everyone being treated the same. And you can bet your weight in rusty quarters that Vice President Biden will bring this good fight to the highest corridors of power.

No, Joe Biden isn't a woman, and has never field dressed a moose. 
Yes, most people don't seem to care that he's on Barack's ticket. 

But that doesn't make Joe Biden any less of a winner.

He may not have Sarah Palin's "buzz". He may not draw Sarah Palin's crowds. But he has something that she'll never have:

Hair plugs.

Verily, the true meaning of the American dream.

Sarah Who?

The list of contenders had been discussed for weeks.

Tim Pawlenty: the base pleasing evangelical.
Mitt Romney: the native son who could snag Michigan.
Joe Lieberman: the independent wild card.

We waited and wondered. Which one would John McCain give the nod to?

Today, we know the answer: none of the above.

In a few weeks, McCain-Palin '08 bumper stickers will show up in parking lots across the nation. Hopefully, people will have recovered from the shock by then.

Who the heck is this person?

Sarah Palin is the governor of Alaska. Like Hillary Clinton, she happens to be a woman. Unlike Hillary Clinton, she happens to be a strong social conservative. McCain is probably hoping that bitter Hillary supporters ignore -- and evangelical supporters notice -- that last part. She's younger than Barack Obama, and has five kids, including one with downs syndrome.

I could go on.

But there's only one thing you really need to know about Sarah Palin. A profile in the Times of London included this gem:

"As a child she regularly got up before dawn to go moose-hunting with her father"

Moose-hunting. Seriously.

This election just became awesome.

Black (Political) Gold!

The merits of offshore oil drilling are heavily disputed. Plenty of smart people have pointed out that the economic benefits of offshore drilling would be non-existent in the short term, and hardly noticeable in the long term. On the non-economic front, environmentalists are jittery about the possibility of oil spills soiling the feathers of baby ducks and other photogenic animals. If that weren't enough, both environmentalists and smart people have argued that our ultimate goal should be to phase out fossil fuels completely -- making any move to expand our supply of oil counterproductive.

Logically speaking, some of those arguments may be partially valid.
Politically speaking, none of them matter.

Right or wrong, the public wants offshore drilling. Democrats in Washington would do well to take notice -- if they want to keep their jobs.

Here are the raw numbers (taken from Rasmussen Reports):

64% of Americans support offshore oil drilling
67% recognize that Republicans support offshore drilling.
77% say that the issue will affect how they vote for congress.
61% want congress to return to Washington to lift the ban.

With such widespread support for offshore drilling, Democrats who oppose it are playing right into a classic liberal stereotype: the elitist, condescending professor, arrogantly lecturing the poor, ignorant people about what they ought to believe.

Clearly, this is a cause for great feasting and celebration in the land of the GOP.

After years of setbacks, Republicans have finally found a populist issue that they can successfully hammer the Democrats with. Some have even attributed John McCain's surprising buoyancy in the polls to his outspoken support for offshore drilling.

Responding to these gale-force winds of public opinion, Barack Obama has already signaled his willingness to compromise on the issue. Nancy Pelosi and Harry "oil makes us sick" Reid should consider following suite.

A flip-flop? Maybe.

But at least it's a change that 64% of Americans can believe in.

A Face You Can Trust.

John Edwards, conqueror of corporations, defender of the impoverished, and possessor of the golden haircut, is now watching helplessly as his public image is dismantled, piece by piece. All of his illustrious accomplishments are slowly being overshadowed by his scarlet mistake. No one cares about who John Edwards was, because they can only see him for what he is now: a guy who cheated on his dying wife.

Sure, John Edwards made a mistake -- but should that be allowed to tarnish a shining career of heroic heroism? In the midst of the overblown controversy, I think we should all take a little time to remember the real John Edwards.

Born the son of a middle-class mill supervisor, John Edwards grew up with the knowledge that poor people existed somewhere. He would never forget this. After graduating with a law degree from the University of North Carolina, his career options were endless. He could have easily taken a selfish corporate job, lining his pockets by oppressing the downtrodden.

Instead, he became their defender.

Doctors, hospitals, and the makers of cheap swimming pool accessories quaked with fear as John Edwards held them to account for their sheer depravity and evilness. In the blink of an eye, his legal career rose to stratospheric heights -- but he refused to use his talent to enrich himself. When it came time to purchase a house, Edwards chose to dwell in a modest 28,000 square foot home, even though he could have afforded at least 30,000.

The forsaken poor of our nation looked up at this pillar of justice, and saw their dreams reflected in the glistening strands of his righteous mane. He was their savior, the man who would break the chains of systemic injustice, and lead them into a new century of prosperity and unbridled joy. They were his people -- and John Edwards could not deny them.

In the Senate, John Edwards began his greatest crusade for the poor. The path was lonely, and covered in little spiky rocks that really hurt when stepped on. But he refused to abandon the little man. The fight had to be fought, as no one had ever fought the fight before.

A nation had to be awakened from its greedy slumber.
John Edwards had to run for president.

Traveling from sea to shining sea, Edwards became the voice of the voiceless. His message was simple: poor people exist, and they must be made un-poor with the help of copious amounts of government cash.

At first, his efforts were met with confusion. Many had never heard of such things. Who were these "poor"? Wasn't "poverty" an unpopular flavor of ice cream during the '90s? Why did these things need to change? Like infants using their eyes for the first time, the flabby bourgeois of the nation simply stood in place, blinking at the pure light of truth.

He didn't win. But he didn't quit either.

Four years later, he tried again -- and failed again.

The cynics out there might tell you that John Edwards never really made a difference in the political world. They couldn't be more wrong. No, he didn't become president, but he did something that no one else had ever done before: he talked about poor people. As anyone who watches Oprah knows, healing can only happen through open, honest talk. John Edwards gave that to our nation. Because of his campaigns, we now know that poverty is a problem that must be solved. We also know that the solution has something to do with well-groomed hair and lawsuits. Now, the rest is up to us.

That's the real Edwards legacy. Not a legacy of deceit, adultery, or ludicrously expensive haircuts, but a legacy of hope. In our darkest hour, John Edwards was a light. In the midst of our ignorance, he gave us the sacred knowledge. 

For that, both Americas should be forever grateful.

Inserting Race Into The Race.

John McCain isn't a racist. In the weeks to come, you might see McCain attacking Barack Obama for flip-flopping, being inexperienced, or being wrong on the issues. But there's one thing you absolutely won't see: McCain attacking Obama on the basis of his blackness.

When you turn on the TV, you're not going to see an ad with a narrator intoning, "Obama is a black man, and he wants your vote -- but aren't black people mainly criminals and rappers? John McCain: the white choice."

In fact, you'll see quite the opposite from the McCain camp. Republicans will go to ridiculous lengths to make sure that nothing they say can be possibly construed as racially insensitive. As Bill Clinton learned the hard way, race is a touchy subject. Even the slightest racial error on the part of any candidate -- or a candidate's surrogate -- has the power to create an instant media feeding-frenzy.

Of course, Barack Obama knows this. He just chooses to deceptively attack McCain on the race issue anyways. Speaking in Springfield MO, Obama made this regrettable comment:

"Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name, you know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

In other words, Obama is politely accusing John McCain of running a blatantly racist and xenophobic campaign. Naturally, he has no evidence to back up this assertion. Obama has sunk to a brand new level of slimy politics: conjuring up the thought of an opponent's non-existent scare-tactics as a scare tactic. McCain wouldn't dream of attacking Obama on the basis of race, but Obama doesn't think twice about openly labeling McCain as a bigot.

This is a statement that the media needs to hold Obama accountable for. In a fair contest, the race card shouldn't just be off-limits for the white guy.

You Won't Like Me When I'm Indicted.

Incredible hulk tie?
Funny.

Infamous "the Internet is a series of tubes" comment?
Funny. And kind of disturbing.

$250,000 worth of corruption?
Eh, not so much.

Fortunately, the situation isn't a total disaster. We can still count on saintly Senators like Larry Craig and David Vitter to uphold the GOP's gold standard of ethics.

Double Take:

Der Messias kommt.

On Thursday, Obama gave a speech in Berlin, in front of an audience of swooning Berliners. The swooning was partially due to the fact that Obama-ism has now become the official religion of the EU, but to be perfectly honest, the speech was pretty good too. At least, pretty good for a major deity. It was full of grandiose, historic-ish imagery that drew upon America's enduring brotherhood with the German people, and little themes like world-wide peace and justice. Needless to say, there was a lot of clapping.

But does it matter?

We all know Obama's popularity is sky-high overseas. Clearly, if this were an international election, there would be no contest. However, this isn't an international election. In order to get elected, Obama only has to win over the populace of one country: the good ol' USA. Does anyone on this side of the Atlantic feel touched by Obama's highly publicized Euro-trip?

Speaking in Berlin was an obviously symbolic move, intended to conjure up images of Reagan and JFK. But almost two decades after the end of the cold war, Berlin seems like an oddly irrelevant backdrop. The typically eloquent speech was certainly far from a gaffe, but whether or not it resonates back home is yet to be seen.

The Avengers.

Even as Bat-mania sweeps across the nation, some residents of Gotham aren't waiting for a creepy guy in a rubber suit to bail them out. Depressed about the direction this country's heading in? Read this story, and let the healing begin.

The New Old Politics.

Americans have long had a love affair with contradictory goals.

We want to eat more, but weigh less.
We want to work less, but make more.
We want small taxes, but big government.
And so on.

Deep down inside, we probably know we can't have our cake and eat it too. But who cares? Reality tends to be a downer. It's more fun to dream.

Politicians have never been in the habit of waking people from their pleasant dreams. In business, the customer is always right. In politics, the voter is always right. Even when they're wrong.

So, it doesn't come as a surprise that two of the biggest items on Barack Obama's agenda are contradictory.

The first item? Combatting global warming. As anyone with a television knows, global warming is a big deal. The ice caps are melting. Adorable polar bears are drowning. Poor people are in poverty. Bad weather is happening. And according to leading scientists in the field of appearing in documentaries, our nasty habit of burning fossil fuels is to blame. In order to restore the north pole to a bear-friendly state, the good people of our land are told that they must stop driving their Hummers, and start walking, biking, taking the bus, and when necessary, driving tiny euro-cars.

In other words, they have to use less gas. The ultimate goal is to quit using it all together.

So what's wrong with rising gas prices? Isn't the high price of gas playing a valuable part in nudging people away from the diabolical liquid? Aren't people driving less, buying more fuel efficient cars, and taking mass transit when feasible? Isn't this the stuff we've been told that we must do in order to save our poor, ailing mother earth?

Yes, it is.

But it also happens to contradict the second big item on Obama's agenda: battling our current economic woes -- which have been largely caused by rising fuel prices. It appears that the majority of voters, despite the fact that they claim to be highly concerned about global warming, don't enjoy cutting back. They want cheap gas again. Which puts Mr. Obama in a pickle. Despite how fashionable the green movement is right now, "pocketbook issues" like this have almost always decided the fate of presidential elections in the past.

Logically, it would appear that there our nation is faced with a tough choice:

(1) We can choose to believe that global warming, caused by human carbon emissions, is a serious threat to humanity, and make drastic economic sacrifices (at least in the short term) by cutting into our consumption and production of fossil fuels -- not to mention our consumption and production of just about everything else.

(2) Or, we can choose to believe that man-made global warming is not a massive global threat, and try to lower our fuel costs by expanding oil production at home and abroad.

These choices are mutually exclusive. We can't move away from fossil fuels without feeling any sort of economic pinch. And we can't expand the supply -- and thus lower the price -- of fossil fuels and expect people to use less of them. A decision has to be made.

Not that you'd be able to tell that from listening to Barack Obama.

In the magical realm of Obamaland, the entire energy infrastructure of our country, as well as the energy sector of our economy, will be gutted and rebuilt without consumers feeling the slightest bump. In fact, by harnessing the power of change, and $150 billion taxpayer dollars, Obama hopes to raise the economy to new heights by creating "5 million new green jobs". This will actually happen. And what about the current economic problems caused by rising fuel prices? Obama believes strongly that they are indeed problematic, and bad. They are also Bush's fault. How will fuel prices go down if the country switches to sources of energy that must be heavily subsidized to even begin competing with fossil fuels? You just have to believe, and the enchanted pixie of clean energy will make it so.

An adoring article in TIME magazine once labeled Barack Obama "The Candor Candidate". But when it comes to the environment and the economy, there's not a scrap of straight-talk to be found. Obama won't dare ask the grouchy American people to make sacrifices for the planet's greater good. But he's not about to tell his poorly-groomed, eco-hippy supporters to take a hike either. Instead, Barack Obama has nobly chosen to travel down a third road: political, pragmatic pandering.

Clearly, this is change we can believe in.

Victory is Sweet, Slightly Tangy, With Just a Hint of Smokiness.

Feel free to stop paying attention to any of that tiresome news about our presidential election. The polls. The speeches. The sound-bites. None of it matters.

The race for president ended today, and Barack Obama is now officially our Dear Leader.

This is not speculation; I'm not jumping to conclusions. I have tangible, concrete proof, from an incredibly reliable source: the American public. The people -- through an Associated-Press/Yahoo News survey -- have spoken, and there can be no other interpretation of the hard data that is now shining forth from my laptop's crisp, perfectly-callibrated LCD monitor.

What sayeth the good people of our land?

On the most crucial issue of our time -- summer barbecues -- Obama holds a jaw-dropping seven-point lead:

(Associated Press)
People would rather barbecue burgers with Barack Obama than with John McCain.

While many are still deciding who should be president, by 52 percent to 45 percent they would prefer having Obama than McCain to their summer cookout, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo News poll released Wednesday.

Having Obama to a barbecue would be like a relaxed family gathering, while inviting McCain "would be more like a retirement party than something fun," said Wesley Welbourne, 38, a systems engineer from Washington, D.C.

That's right. John McCain is simply incapable of bringing the kind of barbecue-related vibrance and zest that voters have come to expect from their elected leaders. America thirsts for a young, energetic President; a man with the ability to eat multiple burgers -- perhaps topped with bacon -- without showing signs of barbecue fatigue.

Time and again, McCain has failed to lead when it comes to eating delicious grilled foods. Our Nation can no longer tolerate this shortcoming. Obama may not have as many years under his belt, but his unique ability to create a positive change in the general atmosphere of outdoor cook-outs across the country is unquestionable.

We are at a crossroads in our nation's history. We can choose to go forward, and create a land full of perfectly cooked meats, rich sauces, and enjoyable conversation; or we can go backwards, and suffer through dull neighborhood gatherings, full of flavorless meat and overcooked vegetables.

In our hearts, I think we all know which choice to make in November.

Tim Russert (1950 - 2008)

In an era of increasing media fragmentation, with dozens of personalities jockeying for attention, there are few living journalists with the professionalism and integrity to rise above the fray. Today, our country has lost one of these rare individuals. I never knew Tim Russert. But I do know that he was one of the best political minds on television, with an unmatched gift for holding powerful men and women -- regardless of their political affiliation -- accountable for their words and actions. Tim Russert was not the first host of Meet the Press, and in short order, his vacant seat will be filled by someone else. But he will always be an irreplaceable figure in the realm of American politics.

Twilight.

For months, Hillary Clinton regularly disparaged the chorus of pundits who painted her failure as inevitable. While they proclaimed that the numbers just couldn't add up, she proclaimed with equal certainty that the will of the people (white, middle-class people) would defy all expectations and carry her to victory. Even when the last of the primaries came and went, still leaving her over 200 delegates behind Barack Obama, she confounded the nation by refusing to formally concede. Apparently, Hillary Clinton really wanted to be president. Who knew?

There's a fine line between hopeful and deranged; the Clinton campaign happened to cross it around a month ago. Fortunately, all bad things come to an end. Hillary finally found the inner strength to recover from her ambitious stupor last Saturday. But the damage has already been done.

Not damage to party unity. Despite what certain people say, I have a hunch that even the most ardent Hillary supporters will have enough sense to support their party after eight years of oval office exile. No, in the Clinton's desperate battle to get back to the white house, the biggest casualty was the Clinton's standing in the political power structure of America.

If you had compiled a who's who list of Democrats two years ago, Bill and Hillary Clinton would have been at the top of the pile. They may be easy targets for conservative commentators, but Democratic admiration for the power couple has remained strong for over 16 years. He was the charismatic president who presided over the prosperous '90s, and held the white house for two full terms -- something no Democratic president had accomplished in over forty years. She was his activist first lady, and afterwards, a high-profile senator representing one of the largest states in the country. The Clintons were winners.

When Hillary entered the fight for the Democratic nomination, she was the obvious favorite.

Then something happened. Bill and Hill, who once made "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow" their refrain, began to look very yesterday. Barack Obama was fresh, new, and exciting. Young voters flocked to him in droves. People wanted change, and for some reason, giving a couple who had already spent eight years in the white-house a return trip didn't seem to fit the bill. The soap-opera baggage that came with the Clinton name alone looked like it could potentially stain the new leaf party activists wished to turn over. Hillary's pragmatic record, particularly her vote in favor of the Iraq war, remained a thorn in her side for the duration of the primary race.

All of this seemed to come as a surprise to the ridiculously confident Mrs. Clinton. On December 30, 2007, Hillary triumphantly boasted that the race would "be over on February 5th". February 5th passed; the race continued. Obama proved that he could face Hillary head on and manage to hold his ground.

At this point, Bill Clinton did what any loving husband would do in this sort of situation: he went nuts. Lashing out at reporters. Ranting about unfair treatment. Making racially charged remarks. Bill Clinton unwittingly became a sideshow freak in the biggest media circus on earth.

Unsurprisingly, right-leaning outlets such as the Drudge Report were quick to jump all over Bill's outrageous remarks. But the left-wing grassroots wasn't about to rush to defend his honor. Instead, key liberal hubs like the Daily Kos, and the Huffington Post began to rival Rush Limbaugh for sheer contempt of all things Clinton.

A new generation of internet-savvy Democrats had taken the reigns, and their message to Bill and Hillary was clear: t3h shun!

The Clinton image was rapidly falling apart. After years of being treated to largely positive coverage focusing on his philanthropic ventures, Bill submerged himself in the muddy waters of politics, and came out looking like a buffoon. Hillary just couldn't come to terms with the fact that she was losing -- and desperately tried to claw her way to the top once more. As things so often happen, she also came out looking like a buffoon.

Now, the fight is over. Most Democratic voters will try to forget about their differences with one another, and unite behind Barack Obama. There will be no Clinton dynasty. The times, as Bob Dylan once said, are a changin'. In these times, there may be a place for Hillary and Bill Clinton. But starring roles? Not a chance.

How Could She? Did She? Who Cares?

Even by modern media standards, the reaction came hard and fast. What began as an article in the New York Post tabloid ended up as a lead story in the New York Times and the Washington Post, as well as every national cable and network news broadcast in the country. In the blogosphere, conservatives and Obama supporters alike raised their voices in unison to cry for the blood of the offending candidate. In short order, the Obama campaign called for an apology, and the mortified Clinton campaign was all too eager to offer one.

Hillary's alleged crime? Ruthlessly hinting that Obama could be assassinated, handing her the nomination on a silver, bloodstained platter.

For some, it didn't take a stretch of imagination to believe in the charges. Hillary is, after all, widely suspected to be on friendly terms with the forces of darkness, including, but not limited to, vampires, ogres, and those little buttons at crosswalks that don't seem to do anything, but that you still feel the compulsive need to press multiple times. What political tactics could lie beneath such an obviously diabolical personage?

Insinuating that her opponent could be assassinated, for one. Her words may have been poorly chosen, but there was no ambiguity about what she was actually trying to say. And unfortunately for all the sensational headline writers and rabid bloggers, what she was actually trying to say was perfectly normal.

But I think Hillary's words should speak for themselves. These are the words behind the firestorm, from an interview Hillary gave with the Argus Leader in Sioux Falls:

CLINTON: Between my opponent and his camp and some in the media there has been this urgency to end this. Historically, that makes no sense, so I find it a bit of a mystery.

EB: You don't buy the party unity argument?

CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation...

In order to justify her efforts to prolong the race, Hillary tried to point out that the Democratic nomination process typically runs through June. She brought up two historical cases to back up her point. And yes, one of them involved someone getting shot. But the assassination wasn't the point -- the attention was meant to be placed on the fact that the 1968 primary race was still going in June. Given the larger context of Hillary's statement, it's absurd to read malicious intent into what was simply a clumsy statement.

Beneath all the layers of contrived controversy, there lies a fact that has gone almost completely ignored: Hillary's historical argument for extending the race is just plain stupid. In both of the presidential races she cites, the California primary was held in June. For people who need a refresher course in American population demographics, California is a big place where lots of people live. Thus, the California primary is generally considered to be a big deal. However, due to changes in the primary calendar, the 2008 California primary took place about three months ago. Montana and South Dakota are the only states left in the primary process, along with Puerto Rico, our friendly lil' territory to the south. Needless to say, the primary contests in these areas aren't exactly going to be game changers in the race.

In other words, the game is over, Hillary lost, and the media is desperately clawing for juicy scandals to boost ratings and/or circulation. In times like these, I'm proud to be an American.

The End of the Beginning.

Of course Hillary will try to spin it, but the truth is pretty obvious. Last Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton lost. Badly. And this time, there may not be a chance to make a comeback.

Hillary has had a few recent victories, but none of them were able to effectively cure her chronic case of delegate deficiency. She needed a miracle -- more specifically, a miracle in Indiana and North Carolina. With Obama entangled in a messy PR crisis over his bombastic pastor's troubling remarks, the timing seemed just right.

It wasn't. Although Hillary technically won Indiana, the home of one of her closest political allies, her astoundingly slim margin of victory turned it into an effective defeat. In North Carolina, Obama's massive 15-point victory crushed any hopes Hillary may have harbored of closing the pledged delegate gap. Now, only one question remains: is the Clinton campaign finished?

If this supremely unpredictable election has taught us anything, it's the fact that in American politics, nothing can be accurately predicted. Hillary Clinton is a remarkably resilient politician, and a vicious fighter when cornered. But this time, the sheer mathematics of the situation look pretty hopeless.

For over a month, the pundits have pointed out that, barring divine intervention, Hillary will reach the convention with fewer pledged delegates than Barack Obama. The Clinton campaign shifted its strategy accordingly, hoping only to narrow the gap significantly enough to entice the majority of the unpledged superdelegates to cross over to their side.

In the aftermath of Tuesday's primaries, that strategy appears to be dead. Not only has Barack Obama been able to expand his lead in both the number of pledged delegates and the popular vote, but once-timid superdelegates are boldly pledging their allegiance to Mr. Hope. For the first time ever, Barack Obama can claim the lead in every single column of the primary ledger.

Is it possible for Hillary to win? Yes. The superdelegates are free to cast their vote for any candidate they choose. In a freak twist of fate, they could all have a sudden epiphany and decide to vote for Hillary -- making her the nominee. But within the realm of reason, Hillary's chances aren't so good. If the party elites decide to arbitrarily snub the candidate that the majority of Democratic voters have chosen, it's a pretty safe bet that more than a few disillusioned Democrats will stay home on election day. After humiliating presidential defeats in 2000 and 2004, it seems doubtful that the Democratic leadership would plot a course straight towards a massive party schism.

According to multiple sources, the Obama campaign will declare victory on May 20th, following the Oregon and Kentucky primaries. For all practical intents an purposes, he might as well do it tomorrow. The news media is already slowly fading out its coverage of Hillary Clinton, silently acknowledging the end of a hotly contested race. A few outlets, such as Time magazine, have taken a less subtle approach.

And why shouldn't they?

We can't be completely certain about anything until after the convention. But we can be reasonably certain that Barack Obama will walk away from Denver as the Democratic party's nominee. In other words, phase one of the presidential race is over.

Phase two is just beginning.

Paradise Lost.

There is perhaps no one more hated by conservatives than Hillary Clinton -- but it's not an unpleasant kind of hate. Hating Hillary Clinton, as well as her husband Bill, is more like a form of political recreation. It's kind of like golf: you don't really have anything personal against the ball, but smacking it across the field still feels really good.

Conservatives may dread the thought of a Hillary presidency, but deep down inside, they know that a second Clinton presidency would mean a ridiculous amount of fun. The awesome jokes. The legitimate talk-radio rants. Lurid stories of White House scandal and power-grabbing you can finally feel good about. Just like the '90s, only with more YouTube, and less pets.com.

It's not as if Republicans are that worried about Hillary becoming president anyways. Things may be looking down for the GOP, but if any Democrat can lose in November, it's Hillary. Polarizing. Unappealing. Mired in the past. Hillary Clinton is a familiar target, and for over a year, Republican strategists have been looking forward to the prospect of shooting her down in the fall.

But for a while, it looked like Barack Obama would spoil the fun. As Hillary faded from the lead, and the possibility of Obama's nomination began to loom over the political landscape, Republicans were forced to come to two sad realizations:

1. The general election might be incredibly hard to win.
2. Obama isn't that fun to hate.

Or so it seemed. Due to his status as a relatively new player in Washington, Barack Obama was an unknown quantity. All anyone knew about him was that he looked -- as Joe Biden stated -- "bright, clean, and articulate". Oh, and really liberal. Unfortunately, a clean liberal is kind of hard to vilify. There was, of course, the issue of his suspicious middle name (Hussein -- like the Iraq guy!), and a baseless rumor about his secret adherence to Islam, but as far as tangible character flaws, things were pretty slim pickins'.

Luckily for the GOP, it turns out that Obama is less than a political saint. The first chink in Obama's armor appeared with the re-emergence of a story about the candidate's questionable relationship with indicted slum-lord Tony Rezko. It wasn't enough to start a mass exodus from the Obama camp, or even significantly dent his standing with the general public, but it was solid evidence that Barack Obama was just as flawed as the next guy.

Obama's kind-of-scary wife provided more red meat for Barack's growing crowd of detractors. Specifically, she broke the first and greatest commandment of the American religion: be really proud of thy country, all the time. Everyone involved in politics says things that are twisted around by their opponents for political gain, but Michelle Obama's comments didn't leave her much wiggle room. Essentially, she said that during her husband's campaign, she began feeling proud of her country for the first time in her adult life, with the obvious implication being that she's been ashamed of her country for the last 25 years. And this wasn't exactly an isolated incident: a lengthy profile in the New Yorker painted a detailed portrait of Michelle as an aspiring first lady with more than a few negative things to say about her country.

Mrs. Obama's comments sparked the flames of doubt about her husband's patriotism -- but his pastor's comments fanned the flames into a bona-fide firestorm.

Maybe the comments were taken out of context. Maybe Jeremiah Wright is actually a sweet old man who loves children and puppies. But let's face it: the phrase "God damn America" probably won't be showing up etched on folksy, country-store souvenirs anytime soon. The sheer vitriol of Pastor Wright's words shocked people. It just didn't add up that Mr. Nice Guy would choose to attend a church run by Rev. Nut Case. People wanted answers. Obama, with his typically persuasive rhetoric, delivered them -- sort of. Obama's I'm-not-my-pastor's-keeper speech was good, or at least, good enough for Democratic primary voters. Things could be a little different in the general election.

After the Rev. Wright controversy broke out, Republicans were overjoyed. They finally had the ammunition they needed to deflate Obama's Mr. Smith-like image. It was the kind of stuff that could really ruffle the feathers of the GOP's center-right, common sense coalition, and hopefully prevent a wide-scale desertion of the party in November. Who could ask for more?

Nobody asked for more. But Obama was kind enough to give it anyways. Speaking in San Francisco, Barack Obama made a few remarks about small-town voters in Pennsylvania. Remarks that seemed less than flattering. In Barack's estimation, small-town voters have become bitter because of the floundering economy. Due to this high level of bitterness, "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Naturally, the media -- along with Hillary and McCain -- raised the expected amount of ruckus, and Obama gave his expected response. Apparently, when Obama said that people cling to religion and guns, he meant it in a "I will cling to the old rugged cross" sort of way, not in a demeaning sense. I guess he also meant that small-town voters cling to "antipathy to people who aren't like them" in a positive way as well.

Obama is no longer the spotless paragon of virtue he was once thought to be. Some polls even show that a considerable percentage of Democrats will desert the party if he gets the nomination. An invincible candidate? Think again. He's made mistakes in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. And you can count on John McCain to exploit them in the general election.

Even better, conservatives finally have another Democrat they can feel good about despising. His elitist comments about small-town voters, paired with his America-dissing wife, and America-cursing ex-pastor, are the perfect ingredients for a lovin' spoonful of constant talk-radio/blog furor. Heck yes.

Enough Already.

After months of endless speculation, petty bickering, and contrived media circuses, the Democratic presidential primary is starting to make me sad. It's not that I'm particularly concerned about the amount of damage the messy infighting will have on the party. In fact, the sight of the two remaining Democratic gladiators disemboweling each other is the only thing heartening about the current political situation.

No, the problem is much deeper than that. When you get right down to it, the Democratic race just isn't fun any more.

Maybe it has to do with the lack of real news coming from the field. Since the March 11th Mississippi primary, no one has cast a single vote for either candidate. Essentially, the race has become a stagnant puddle of meaningless speculation.

Of course, there have been a few interesting scandals in the meantime, but they've only served as small breaks in the overall tedium. By now, the shock of Obama's Pastorgate has all but faded, Bosniagate is a memory as dim as Hillary's own, and the goldfish-like minds of American voters have returned to a moribund state of equilibrium. Now it seems that the only thing left to do is wait for the scandal reruns of the general election. Meh.

And please, don't even try to give me that stuff about the Pennsylvania primary. If Hillary wins that thing, it doesn't change anything. If she loses, it probably won't change anything either. Hillary is the female, non-pastor Huckabee of the Democrats. Who cares if it becomes statistically impossible to win? That's what miracles are for!

When Obama compared the race to a movie that's gone on for too long, Hillary retorted that she likes long movies. I like long movies too -- but only long movies that happen to be entertaining. Right now, this race is kind of like "Gods and Generals": a slow, preachy, overwrought clunker that leaves you with the terrible feeling that several irreplaceable hours of your life have been stolen forever. No offense to people who actually liked that movie.

As a patriotic American, I don't demand honest political contests, or decent candidates. But when politics ceases to be even slightly amusing, I feel that I have the sacred duty to demand change.

The race needs to end immediately. Howard Dean can decide how to work it out; it doesn't matter how he does it:

Rock-paper-scissors.
Coin-toss.
Arm-wrestling.
Thumb-wrestling.
Bloody-battle-to-the-death.

It's all good.

Please Howard, just make something happen. If you can't end the race, at least make a spectacle of yourself in public. You know, something like attacking a homeless person, or biting off a reporter's ear. Again, your choice. You may never achieve your dream of becoming the president, but you can save the American public from boredom. Sure, it's not much, but it should give you an edge over Jimmy Carter.

Lousy peanut farmer.

Moses Is Gone...

... and suddenly, the NRA is a lot less cool.

Like Those Guys, But Less Fab.

Grassroots movement. Grassroots effort. Grassroots support. At the mere sound of these ubiquitous buzzwords, political operatives everywhere begin to salivate uncontrollably. Everyone wants a grassroots something.

Which makes perfect sense. For political candidates, a strong grassroots simply means: a bunch of people who give you money and campaign for you without asking for anything in return, besides a slightly creepy handshake and/or extended hug. In short, a strong grassroots is a pretty sweet deal.

Unfortunately, like all sweet deals, the devil's in the details.

Campaigns focus an incredible amount of energy on the herculean task of controlling their message. In the era of cable news, YouTube, and the Drudge Report, the slightest misstep, inconsistency, or gaffe is shoved into the unforgiving meat grinder of public scrutiny. Great pains must be taken to ensure that the candidate, and everyone affiliated with the candidate, follows the official script. Yes, this results in boring television, but it sure beats losing an election.

Grassroots supporters, on the other hand, are somewhat lacking in the script department. This isn't usually a bad thing; the unpolished, real-life advocacy these supporters bring to the table is their strongest asset. But, unfortunately, strong grassroots movements can easily take on a decidedly religious aura. The supporters become dogmatic and obsessed, completely sold on the idea that their candidate is a political messiah. Like all religions, these movements are exhilarating for participants, but outsiders are generally repulsed by the fanaticism of their adherents. Gradually, it becomes impossible for observers to mentally separate the secular deity from his followers, tarnishing his image permanently.

The ill-fated presidential campaign of Texas congressman Ron Paul is the textbook example of this concept in action.

While a Republican, Ron Paul's views are more in line with the Libertarian party. This fact alone places him on the fringe of political discourse. Still, there are well-respected libertarians out there, and certain libertarian ideas are appealing to large segments of society. In other words, libertarian politicians aren't always dismissed as nut-cases.

Ron Paul, however, was dismissed as a nutcase, and it wasn't just because of the candidate himself. Early on in his presidential bid, Ron Paul attracted a relatively small, but fanatically loyal core of followers. Most of them were nut-cases. About 50% of them were tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy freaks, 35% were angry students who didn't actually understand what Ron Paul stood for, 5% were members of the KKK, and 10% were normal people -- the least visible group of all. They began flooding YouTube, blogs, and internet forums, singing the praises of the infallible Paul, and attempting to overwhelm anyone who disagreed with a flurry of angry comments. And everywhere they went, these supporters mixed their support of Ron Paul with a heaping tablespoon of conspiratorial nonsense, paired with anti-establishmentarian raving.

Thrilled to have a following, Ron Paul embraced his loyal acolytes. His campaign became one of the most decentralized campaigns in history, totally depending on grassroots activists to spread his message. He raked in tons of money. He was in the lead in every Internet poll. And then, predictably, he lost.

He never had a chance in the first place, but Ron Paul's rabid fans didn't help. To everyone else on the Internet, they were "Paulbots", zealots who attempted to cram pro-Paul propaganda into every nook and cranny they could find. Some forum administrators got so sick of it that they started blocking Ron Paul supporters altogether. Every candidate has unsavory supporters, but these unsavory supporters were the core of Ron Paul's campaign. Everything was fueled by grassroots spontaneity -- a wonderful concept on paper, but something that can turn ugly when it completely replaces a focused campaign organization.

In recent months, some Barack Obama supporters have also crossed the thin boundary between enthusiastic and just-plain-crazy. The grassroots video below, created by will.i.am of Black Eyed Peas fame, is proof. "Yes We Can", an earlier pro-Obama video from the same source, was inspiring. This one is scary. Supporters describe the utopian dream of an Obama presidency, while repeatedly chanting O-ba-ma, in a fit of spiritual fervor brought on by the holy spirit of progress.



Again, this kind of thing excites voters who are already in the Obama camp, but everyone else sees it for what it is: another manifestation of the growing Obama personality cult. Obama's words may unite, but his fanatical supporters tend to leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Rational people know that a politician can't deliver the perfect society with a few pen-strokes. If this kind of worshipful behavior continues, it will only widen the gap between common-sense voters and Obama's nebulous campaign, a terrible liability in a race against John McCain -- the epitome of down-to-earth American spirit

Grassroots supporters are an essential part of American democracy; every campaign needs them in abundance. But when they take the spotlight from the campaign's official message, and become synonymous with the candidate himself, bad things can happen. Politicians can't solve our problems, or usher in an age of global tranquility. When the average voter sees a candidate surrounded by people who seem to think otherwise, they can get suspicious, and an otherwise decent message can be drowned out by a mob of political true-believers.