WARNING: No minced words here. İ rake the muck of the 'other', the so-called open-minded side who's preference is to whine and distort reality. If still suckling mom's tit or warped by delusions of polıtıcally correct equality you WİLL be offended by such materıal. Welcome to Reality.

Listen to Bill Clinton's conference call

Please have a look at the politico's public channel on Share on Ovi. Just click on a thumbnail to view it on Share on Ovi!.

Play time = 4:29 mins

click here to read my article on Brother Bill

brought to you by Ovi

See more from

thepolitico's public channel

Learn more about Ovi

© 2008 Nokia. All rights reserved.
Nokia, 10900 NE 4th St, Suite 2300, Bellevue, WA 98004

Say Amen and shut up

Clergymen have no place in politics unless they actually enter politics. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr understood this. As does Rev. Billy Graham.

Politics, more so than established religion, goes after the juggler like the angel Gabriel with sword in hand. Modern America has grown accustomed to what essentially amounts to sermonized Aesop's Fables as it has grown more secular; that is to say, pass no judgment, offend no sensibilities, speak only of sunshine and preferably with the the neutral pronoun.

Since no preacher worth his salt does this he should therefore a) avoid broadcasting his sermons lest vulturish critics shout, "Look! I've proof he said something politically incorrect"; b) stop kissing up to be the "spiritual mentor"---oh brother!---of rising politicians lest vulturish critics denounce, "Look! I've proof he said something politically incorrect"; c) stay in his place in the pulpit.

Am reminded of a poem by Charles Bukowski in which he observes the priest and the bull fighter in their respective arenas.

With the voting population appearing more moronic and thin skinned and spiteful, the news media are all too happy to play up a gladiatorial spectacle where nothing less than crippling bloody vanquish is sought.

click here to see damn! hot preaching...from a priest!

The reason why many communities allow their clergymen to be the unrivaled spokesmen on political and socially economic issues is because the pastor is, not to be redundant, the shepherd of their flock. Thus the sermons he delivers each Sunday and the manner in which he delivers them are symbolically one-on-one and generally acceptable. What, do you think there's someone behind the curtain playing an applause recording?

click here to see 'ole school preaching, yessuh lawd!

Thankfully most places of worship are not non-denominational centers id est relativist spiritual yoga classes. As such however, since one's church, no matter how mega-, is no microcosm of the nation that same message warmly received by the congregation will undoubtedly ruffle feathers when put to the nationwide test. The gasps are endless: What?! He preached against big business...against welfare recipients...against Israel...against the White House...against fornication...against homosexuality...against war...against television...against sloth and avarice...against rap music...against a different religion or doctrine!! and on and on ad nauseam.

So? Is this anything new? Congregations are not bus terminals meant to accommodate every and all, and any insistence on the contrary is secular absurdity.

On that note, yes, preachers should keep fighting battles but from the pulpit and presidential aspirants should stop trying to use clergymen as pawns for more votes lest the both of them get scorched by the unrelenting fire and brimstone of public opinion.

Damn! Go on with your bad self Father Pfleger

I love this guy's reporting.
Click Amen for my article on politicians & preachers

Truly no child left behind -Pt.3

Just in: Children going home on Monday...NOT!

Texas Supreme Court countered the injustice afflicted on the polygamist sect by instructing state officials to begin returning the children to their parents on Monday.

As part of the agreement, parents must show proof of identification (after all, polygamist have convoluted blood lines), remain in Texas---as if it would be hard to spot them on the lam in, say, West Hollywood---and take parenting classes...whatever the hell that may entail.

The good news is this will be the last weekend the Yearning For Zion children will have to spend in foster care since being taken from their families over a month ago by the child protection agency [sic].

Truly no child left behind -Pt.2

Texas Supreme Court countered the injustice afflicted on the polygamist sect by issuing the return of the children to their parents. It may be hard to believe but it was over a month ago the families were broken up by welfare authorities who grandstanded historically with wholesale removal of over 400 children some of which were young mothers themselves.

Sans any evidence toward the popular prejudice of polygamy and forced marriages it is even more agreeable to conclude the sect was ransacked for its religious beliefs---just as the Yearning For Zion members have said all along.

Michelle Roberts of the AP reports, "
Under state [Texas] law, children can be taken from their parents if there's a danger to their physical safety, an urgent need for protection and if officials made a reasonable effort to keep the children in their homes. The high court agreed with the appellate court that the seizures fell short of that standard."


No time line has been articulated by the Court's decision on when exactly the families are to be united.

Kotecki's so craaaeeezy

Click Dr Ron Paul for my article on his wimp appeal.

The empress' new clothing!

Mrs Clinton is in it to win it. Or, rather, she is just still in it...and smelling full of it the longer she insists on "still standing". Stand down already!

As the intelligent woman she is and the gifted political team she and her husband make, it is insufferable that the Clinton campaign fails to face the music, or, rather, the math: with only 86 delegates remaining at stake and Mr Obama shy of the 49 he needs to clinch the nomination it is
mathematically impossible for her to surmount his lead. Only a deus ex machina can change the course of things and she's probably been giving us a hint of it.

It is mathematically (translation: Reality) impossible for Mrs Clinton to win even if she won each of the three remaining primaries. Some Democratic elders have spoken thus: Geo. McGovern, Patrick Leahy, Edward Kennedy, Jimmy Carter. Like the Monkey, the Clinton campaign respects these men and their dissenting views but, ultimately, she is the decision-maker.

See how she acts in the face of reality! Just like the mad Monkey.

Whether the leader has balls or not, if she is wearing the emperor's new clothes, she is still naked. Follow the math on the blackboard, Mrs Clinton. You're done!

Truly no child left behind

Did you notice how
the media convicted the polygamists without a shred of evidence...or were you, too, too caught up in casting stones to notice?

The YFZ Ranch (Yearning For Zion) fell victim to mainstream and liberal xenophobia of people who elect not to participate in our dog-eat-dog, materialistic, obese society. The group maintains male-female roles and are devout God worshipers. They dress funny---but no more so than Amish folk who actually live more amongst us---and conduct themselves to a very traditional and antiquated way of life. So what if they prefer polygamy over adultery, handmade necessities of their own labors versus retail goods at department stores and supermarkets; isolated communion over vanilla suburbs, chocolate ghettos, taco barrios, home schooling over public school mediocrity, housewives over feminists and manliness over haute couture sissies versus "partners"; Bible focused Christianity over non-denominational 'centers', or candles over Edison's bright invention?

The media (and likely you) condemned the polygamist group because they wanted to believe the worse, principally that paternal culture is evil and tortures the female sex. With that bigotry it was easy to accept there had to be distressed damsels being raped left and right, and that the men amounted to pedophiles in coveralls while the women were obviously fearful and brainwashed.
You who purport to be so open-minded, tolerant, non-judgmental conveniently forget that it is in our modern Starbucks, Blackberry, Microsoft, hip-hop world where exists campus rapes, school shootings, gossip rags, Playboy magazine, Cinemax, porn industry, deadbeat dads, teacher-pupil relations, bawdy houses, and unfunny comedians like George Lopez.

Do you despise YFZ more for escuing pop culture or for resisting feminism? Yes, feminism.

Let's see. In the sect the men control the households, provide for their families, and protect them. Wow that sounds terribly prehistoric. Wonder what the cavemen of Geico would have to say about that. Life within the church was going along its dull anti-relativist way until the law and the long arm of mainstream prejudice removed the children from their homes. All 400 of them!

Nowhere in this drama were fathers' rights given credence (and only mothers' as an unavoidable afterthought). The man, feminism has taught us, is incapable of caring and respect; he moves according to his primal sexual cravings and need to dominate. The men of the sect, per emasculated rationale, epitomized masculinity: intolerant, controlling, preying on the young and defenseless.

So the state of Texas removed offspring from progenitors and wrecked households for whose safety?

Not the children. That is merely window-dressing. Not the wives. They are content with their ways of life. And, of course, the husbands did not even warrant consideration save for suspected pedophilia and sodomy.

Texas is notorious for an aggressive justice system that often over reacts. Look at the Monkey's tract record in business, Texas, Washington...take your pick! Children were taken from their world and put on track for foster homes; husbands were villainized for being bad men; mothers were told "Shame on you!" And still no real proof of criminality, no evidence of law breaking, no materialization of the Good Sister Jane Doe caller.
But who needs right when you have might, right?

As per the reporting of teenage mothers, Oh please! Look at inner city schools from New York City to Los Angeles with their Planned Parenthood programs, high school nurseries, sex education, and pregnant unwed girls then tell me which society is dysfunctional: ours or ye óle God freaks' un-hip, un-secular, unfashionable pilgrim one.

I don't see who was served well by this circus of child welfare. Truly no child was left behind in this judicial ruckus. How befitting it should occur in Texas.

"White is right"

Mrs Clinton was supposed to had found her voice in New Hampshire after being upset in the Iowa primary. But, my, how that voice keeps changing anew. She's revamping her schtick more times than Cher. Throughout this nomination race this feminist has gone from oh-gosh humility at the very thought of running---What, me a mere junior senator? she seemed to gush---and purported front-runner to contender and, now, beyond imagination, the underdog to, beyond imagination, Mr Obama.

Whilst going through the funds of her huge war chest the Clinton campaign has gone through many wardrobe changes as well.
Along with her pantsuits and tasteful pearl necklace, she has worn the hats of the Establishment (a historical success per se), Tough Guy---she'll shoot down those damn planes!---Everyman, Independence/Change, Everywoman, Underdog and, now, White Candidate. (view news clip)

Wonder if whether during his fund raiser for her last month, in which he scolded the American public for being misogynistic, Sir Elton John played "The Bitch is Back".

Ron Paul and the wimp factor

The lost cause of
the Ron Paul revolution is due to the object of its affection: Ron Paul. Bluntly put, the man is not a revolutionary. One cannot have a revolution without a revolutionary. Ernesto Guevara understood this and, consequently, put down the stethoscope and took up arms (and the ever chic beret. Nothing says avant garde quite like it). The only thing Dr Paul is taking up these days is space in the blogsosphere...like this one.

But there is a good reason why we write about the man who could be a maverick.
We believe in for what he stands. We believe in what could have been. We like to believe in what still might be.

Ron Paul has the trappings of a strong contender---indomitable spirit, steadfast conviction, free thinking reinforced by an actual philosophy, money, hardcore base of independent voters---except he is a wimp. He suffers from the wimp factor...that and he is a Republican following eight years of Monkey-Cheney. Think George Bush, the elder sans Ronald Reagan's coattails. At a recent book signing he "reaffirmed that he wasn’t going to run as a third-party candidate and replied that it was up to his supporters to decide what to do."

Dr Paul is too much of a wimp to spearhead a revolution on anything other than recommended breast feeding practicum (he is a licensed pediatrician). Did you notice him during the debates---y´know, when the camera zoomed out, that is? And the California one at the Ronald Reagan library? He came off like a codger that the University keeps on as a campus legend (but conveniently omits from faculty meetings). view clip

His "who said what, when, wh..." rant of an answer was sensible and good for a chuckle from the uptight audience but it only amounted to some comic relief from a mildly rancorous long shot of an also-ran.

Any candidate, no mater how bright or right or mighty, whose principal guidance to his followers is to "do whatever you want" is not fit to lead them to Hell. Even if a monkey can do it.

Lucky to be Obama -Pt.5 (the going of Sister Hill)

Sister Hill needs to chill.

Previously I projected desperation would move her hand to play the pink card but I was wrong. The bitch keeps bringing up feminism. In her latest bout of 'why me?' she blames misogyny and the media for not focusing on it. Miss Ferraro adds her two cents, too, suggesting she'd be hard pressed to vote for Mr Obama (against hawkish John McCain) should he get the nomination because he's behaved "terribly sexist".

(view CNN article)

I especially love the comment by Kilo Whiskey:

Sexist??? Let's see….it IS hard to remember she's technically female


Mayor McDumbass v. Mayor Pink Panther

Last month I wrote a piece on the whining and ranting that Hammond, Indiana, Mayor McDermott (hitherto referred to as McDumbass) did against neighboring chocolate city, Gary, for Gary's efforts in getting its students out to vote for the then upcoming Indiana primary.

As you'll recall the suspense was thick with who might actually win the doggone contest. Mrs Clinton or Mr Obama, Mrs Clinton or Mr Obama...? It was just too close to call and by 10p CST all analysts were looking to one square on the state map: Lake County. By 11:30p all talk between Brit Hume and his panelist (FOX) and Wolf Blitzer intermixed with Anderson Cooper's panelists (CNN) and those on MSNBC and local networks was focused on---ta-daa!---Lake County. As midnight came and went the numbers finally started coming in from the county...slowly.

Mrs Clinton had long since given her victory speech in Indianapolis although body language betrayed the fact that her slim victory wasn't yet known let alone confirmed.

If the prize hinged on the voters of Lake County, it was thought, then conventional assumption tipped the state in favor of Mr Obama.

And, boy, did the thought of such a reality not gel with Mayor McDumbass.
He went on CNN and laid plain his complaint against the handling of tally numbers which was handled by Gary mayor, Rudy Clay who is also the county Democratic chairman (hitherto referred to as the black Pink Panther).

It was comical to watch Mayor McDumbass' exasperated scowl as CNN's efforts to get a straight answer from Mayor Pink Panther's goobidy-gob explanation of the late tabulation yielded nothing beyond a repetition of power words like overwhelmed and disenfranchisement and phrases such as "never before", "thousands of absentee ballots", "first time voters", et cetera. (view clip)
At one point Mayor Pink Panther took three seconds to emphasize "thousands" as if the number was just too astronomical for Hoosiers' comprehensions.

However, by the fourth or fifth---I was giggling too hard to recall---reiteration of the same simple question of why didn't Lake County release the numbers from the various machine totals as they were reported by districts and polling stations, it was all too clear the chairman mismanaged or miscalculated and bungled the process.

Mayor McDumbass suggested corruption was afoot.

Others saw it as Mayor Pink Panther's ego in play.

What is clear is that Lake County, Indiana---little 'ole Indiana---had the national spotlight in this tightly fought presidential race and came out sounding more like loser phenomenon William Hung than Battle Hymn of the Republic.

Porn prejudice - Zion in the house? (Part V)

The adult entertainment industry is more years behind than its procurers will ever admit. Its industry thrives on and perpetuates sexism and racism. Click here for Part 1.
But could it be yet another trapping of those haggling huckster Jews? One GOP candidate thinks so.

You may now kiss the mustachioed bride

"Unconstitutional," ruled California's Supreme Court, and with that rendering there were men dancing with each other in the streets of San Francisco. More so than usual. Homosexuals took boisterous delight and joy in the Court's ill judgment against the ban on same-sex marriage. The majority opinion read in cadence with the gay agenda.

Limiting the designation of marriage to a union 'between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute," wrote Chief Justice Ron George.

Oh? Playing house just got bigger.

That the Bay Area and its Supreme Court dissed democratic rule and the mandate of the California voters is something that won't go unchallenged or unfelt across the nation. Like Californians, the rest of America does not accept marriage as anything other than the legal matrimony (or long standing co-habitation) betwixt man and wife. This is our society and it is a societal norm that oughtn't be manipulated to appease a sexually alternative (sub)culture.
As goes San Francisco does not go the rest of the country.

My foresight on the controversial ruling is that it will do squat to engender tolerance for the homosexual lot, which is largely what it boils down to---being accepted as normal, equal, all right---because the ruling threw contempt to the voice of the people and forced a grotesque distortion of marriage into reality. From a lot that claims inherent openness (my book) and prattles on against imposing one's mores onto a people I find it near unbelievable the jubilant homosexuals do not see the gross irony in all of this. Then again, a hedonistic, narcissistic lifestyle is principally concerned with instant gratification.

Now, since the 'one man, one woman' rule is "unconstitutional" and undignified in its rigidity does this mean polygamy is fair game again...and without me having to live with God freaks out in the middle of nowhere? Hmmm, maybe there is something to this after all....

More to come!

Civil unions ain't enough for Bay Area queers

Living are we in
a day and age where marriage between men and women is considered "controversial" or so enough San Francisco folk think to impress the nonsense on California's Supreme Court which will rule on it this morning.

At question is the constitutionality of amendment Proposition 22 which unambiguously explains
"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
Relativists pretended stupidity and asked for a clear definition and, to their chagrin, got one. With this common sense made redundant every non-idiot understood what premised a marriage, namely one male and one female. NOT one man and three to a few women, nor one man and a female minor, nor one female and a male minor, nor a man with another man, nor two dykes.

But the latter group, considered by some to be God's mistakes, feel left out or, to use the more litigious term, discriminated against.

While still shocking, it is by now common awareness that same-sex couples do openly exist; and that said couples are granted many rights associated with opposite-sex couples including hospital visitations, company benefits for family and spouse, and, horrifically enough, even child adoption (since Nature prevents men from impregnating other men no matter how much they profess love and devotion).

Supporters of gay rights applauded the creation and recognition of civil unions. Now those same people complain that civil unions amount to nothing. They demand to be married. Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

San Francisco chief deputy city attorney Therese Stewart told reporters, "If the state says that this is a marriage, it may be that some other states would not recognize it, but it would be sending the message that California considers its lesbian and gay couples equal."

From here the slippery, sloppy, sodomitic slope continues. No sooner than California gives homosexuals the green light to claim normalcy, they'll zip over to Utah, Indiana, Nevada, Washington, etc. to open up an organic tea shop or pet boutique or gay retail store or gay hardware store---as a married couple. Why leave California? For the sole purpose of agitating change in non-gay communities. Liberals like to classify this heterophobia as furthering "diversity" and "dialogue".

The several hundreds of homosexual couples who co-habitate and do everything else together will be no less in love or happy with themselves if the Supreme Court upholds common sense and tradition---or will they? I've long believed against casually applying 'gay' to this group of people on the argument that it is a misnomer and that these so-called gay people aren't as happy with life and themselves as they are festive, flamboyant, dramatic ad nauseam.

Residents of San Francisco are really arguing---whining---for acceptance from the very God-fearing mainstream they lambast as "closeted", "Kansas", "vanilla". If marriage is what is desired, then find a willing mate of the opposite sex...just like every heterosexual does. It's not a complicated formula.

But then again, simple is just oh too Kansas.

Lucky to be Obama -Pt.4 (the coming of John)

Just in: John Edwards has finally spoken and he speaks Obama.

For the past few days---ever since the Indiana primary, to be honest---I have been imaging John and Elizabeth Edwards gnawing over the pros and cons of Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama. Like a dream the dialogue and details remain vague but I always saw them leaning towards Mr Obama (although Mrs Edwards is not part of the official endorsement, which makes little difference since she was only a candidate's spouse. Since when did we start putting great emphasis on 'the-other-half', anyway??) Now, if only I could pick winning lottery numbers!

I am thrilled by the endorsement. Obamanites are super thrilled. Mr Obama even more so than all of us put together. Mr Edwards, for his grand part, made a historic move that was unimaginable a year ago to say nothing of twenty years ago: a prominent white southern politician endorsing a Negro for president of the United States of America. (And, boy, I can't wait for the Monkey to get out of office. I much prefer to write president with a capital 'P' but felt it was more than agreeable to go along with contemporary grammarians in light of the current president's arrogance and incompetence.)

San Drugego State U.

With the huge drug bust on San Diego State University campus the nation was confronted with a couple of thought-provoking facts: One, smart students, who no doubt went through the national D.A.R.E. program, do drugs; two, white children do drugs...and deal them, too! Alright, so that's three facts instead of two. Still that is better than the one fat lie the media and penal system perpetuates about drugs being an inner city (translation: black) problem.

For years, statistics disagreed with popular prejudice that black youth funneled, dealt, and did drugs while their white counterparts hit skateboard parks, held study groups, and just said "No!" Oh sure, there are the isolated incidents of white children who foolishly turn to drugs because of that heavy metal or gangsta rap music or because of the stress of a family divorce, failing an exam, et cetera BUT the reality, the naysayers remind us, of drug related incarcerations proves that black men commit the crime more.

It is true that de facto discrimination has more of us behind bars since the Courts penalize white offenders less often even though squeaky clean Chip and Britney break drug laws in significant numbers, which brings me back to San Diego State.

This month over 80 people---only twenty percent were not affiliated with the school---were arrested in the drug bust dubbed Operation Sudden Fall. Seized were some 300 Ecstasy pills, illicit prescriptions (easy Rush Limbaugh!), mushrooms for psychedelic gourmands, hippy cigarettes aka 'it's-not-a-drug' marijuana, two kilograms of cocaine, and even firearms.

Authorities also confiscated $60,000 cold hard cash. Hey, text books ain't cheap, momma!

The majority of those drug dealers belonged to the Greek system. Oh those frat boys! Who knew they snorted and smoked (video)?! My hunch is that the students are largely white. Why?

For one, they are fraternity lads and fraternities are basically a robust microcosm of the stereotypically stale country club. For another---and this is more telling---the perpetrators' faces have not been plastered all over the newscasts. As any black person can tell you, a black face will not go un-publicized if it's related to the crime in any way. If this is news to YOU, then do pay attention the next time you watch the morning news...five o'clock news...ten o'clock news. Hello.

With the exception of those still under 18, I fail to see the protocol behind leaving this sting virtually faceless; save, of course, to save face from being pegged "black". Of the dozens of drug dealers arrested in the DEA bust the closest viewers got to a "face" was the lone Theta Chi Fraternity and all because a house brother was considerate enough to send out a text message promoting their upcoming cocaine sale.

"Faithful customers" could get high at a low price! Booyah!

Theta Chi was not the only fraternity caught red handed and, more, it was evident to investigators that the racket was, well, organized. "Undercover agents purchased cocaine from fraternity members and confirmed that a hierarchy existed for the purpose of selling drugs for money," the DEA said. Among the good boys gone bad were four Phi Kappa Psi members, plus at least two who were studying criminal justice and law enforcement. Hello!

A segment of Lou Dobbs Report did feature a face. It belonged to an illegal Mexican immigrant who acted as the liaison between his San Diego street gang, which in turn got its supply from Tijuana, and the SDSU students. Thank goodness Homeland Security sucks near the Mexican border or else the Dobbs program wouldn't have had that brown face to broadcast. With the setting of San Diego, California, anyone with a quarter of a functioning brain already knows the illegal drugs are coming from Tijuana, Mexico and damn if a dealer can get drugs and guns wholesale sans a couple of bona fide Mexican connections. Duh.

If any of this had gone down on a historically black college, or involved a historically black fraternity or black students, then the nation would have immediately been shown mug shots of the malefactors. When it comes to a black criminal or suspect the news media does not censor. Also missing from this drama are the questioning of academic justice. Since the campus drug ring involves non-blacks we hear no cries about 'forced admissions' and 'unqualified students'.

Yet, had the wayward students been black, Affirmative Action would be Public Target #1 with that nasty undercurrent of 'I told you so'.

Will the Court penalize these cocaine/hash/gun entrepreneurs just as it does black offenders...or give 'em the routine stern warning with community service (and then welcome them into the fold upon graduation)? We'll see.

Lucky to be Obama -Pt 3 (Brother Bill)

Hyperboles are the stuff

of short sight and sports commentators. We speak big when the present appears permanent. After losses, Richard Nixon vowed never to return to the arena ("You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore") only to become president years later; Margaret Thatcher declared that a woman would never serve as British Prime Minister and certainly "not during my lifetime"; Geo. Bush promised no new taxes; Toni Morrison anointed Bill Clinton as the first black president.

In each case retrospection stirs us to shrug the shoulders and coo, Who knew?

Who knew that along would come a slender Negro senator from the Middle West with the very black name of Obama. Barack Obama?

Not I. And not the Clintons.

Mr Obama was supposed to be a flash in the pan and already out of the running for Mrs Clinton's historical win; a noble, if not premature, gesture in the belief that anyone can grow up to be president of the United States of America. He was supposed to wait his turn like the ever cautious, cajone-less Senator Bayh. Mr Obama was not supposed to usurp Clinton's black clout. But then reality set in and set in hard with votes and money donations: Mr Obama is black. Mr Clinton is not.

That this fresh energetic black politician of Ivy league tumblings and street credentials is attracting loyal Clinton supporters (black voters) en masse is turning up the heat in the kitchen and that is one place with which the former Miss Rodham is unfamiliar! Bill Clinton is not pleased with the unhinging of this dependable bloc in their democratic platform because he wants his wife to win and because he likes to be liked. He even accused the Obama campaign of playing the race card...on him!

Black folks still like him but just not as much as the brother man. In fact if Bill Clinton were running for office we would be all for him over the junior senator from Illinois. But such is not so. It's a case of the figurative versus the literal first black president, and the literal one is looking a whole lot more attractive.

Meanwhile, the former president's reaction to this is looking a lot less political than personal. Unbelievably he, of all people, has forgotten a cardinal tenet of coolness and popularity, namely that being accepted as part of the gang is a privilege. And privileges are mighty revocable.

In the wake of Bill Clinton's stumpings, which are sounding more and more like sour grapes (and an ungracious return for our steadfast defense of him and the party), he is losing blackness and looking mighty white. A mighty white southerner, at that. I think the ebbing of the black vote steams him more so than pro-Obama colleagues and delegates like Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, former DNC Chairman Joe Andrews, or Governor Bill Richardson.

Look for Mrs Clinton to revamp hardcore appeal to gays. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the next card they play.

Funny that Bill Clinton should lose sight of that most southern of sayings: You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...