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.