Now it's a Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy

Virginia- "Obama is the fairest of them all"
Maryland- "Obama is the fairest of them all"
DC- "Obama is the fairest of them all"
NBC- "Obama is the fairest of them all"


In the wake of recent negative comments about Hillary Clinton made by MSNBC commentators, Chris Matthews and David Shuster (both of which were inappropriate in my view), Hillary Clinton is now claiming that she is the target of unfair treatment by the news media. Not just talk radio or Fox News, mind you, but the mainstream news media, particularly NBC and MSNBC, the most liberal network out there.

In Mrs Clinton's interview with Katie Couric this week, she was asked about this and answered that she is,in fact, being treated harshly by the news media.

Hillary, welcome to the world!

First of all, as I have stated repeatedly, Mrs Clinton is running for president. It comes with the game. She is no stranger to hardball; she plays it extremely well herself. But if she wants to be president, she has no business complaining.

It wasn't too many years ago when Mrs Clinton was telling Matt Lauer that she and her husband were victims of a vast right-wing conspiracy when reports were coming out about Monica Lewinsky, as if Monica was a Republican undercover agent.

Now she sees that she is not the preferred candidate of everybody in the news media. As it stands now, it appears Obama is the darling of the MSM. So does that mean that Hillary is now the victim of a vast left-wing conspiracy? Actually, Hillary can take heart that this can be a fleeting phenomena. The MSM is also supporting John McCain on the Republican side. But what if the final campaign comes down to Hillary and McCain? You can bet your bottom dollar that the MSM will turn back to Hillary and start bashing McCain.

Mrs Clinton does not wear victimization well. In reality, she is nobody's victim. On the contrary, she has left a trail of victims in her wake. As I write this, it is being reported that she has now lost Virginia, Maryland, and DC, and another Clinton assistant campaign manager, Mike Henry, has been canned.

Don't give up, Hillary. Just keep calling those super delegates and firing people.

Hillary Clinton- The Candidate of Change

"Ok, Doyle, hit the showers. Williams, we need a strikeout. Bill, head for the locker room-and stay there. And you-start crying."


Are you noticing a trend in Hillary Clinton's campaign? It seems every time her campaign hits a rut in the road (losing primaries to Obama), CHANGE happens in the campaign. Let's look at some examples.

Lose Iowa? Projected to lose in New Hampshire? Time to do something drastic-like cry-or pretend to cry. Up until that moment, Hillary was struggling with her wooden, emotionless, Cruella image. She was on her way to defeat in New Hampshire, according to the pundits and the polls, anyway. So out came the "tears" and the cracking voice. Faster than you can say "gullible", Hillary pulled out a win in New Hampshire, courtesy of voters who decided she was human after all.

Then came South Carolina, which went to Obama in the wake of charges that the Clintons had injected race into the election. Bill, as usual, kept opening his big mouth, which did nothing to help his wife's campaign. Lately, however, Bill's role in the campaign has been changed. Anyone seen or heard from him lately? No. He has been sent to his room (hopefully alone).

Then came Super Tuesday, pretty much a split, followed by the latest string of Obama victories. Right now, Obama is on a roll-expected to continue in the Potomac primaries. So now, we have a change in Hillary's campaign: a new campaign manager. Patti Solis Doyle has stepped down, and Maggie Williams has taken over. Remember Maggie Williams? She was Hillary's chief of staff in the White House. She was the one who was seen removing papers from the office of Vince Foster when it was learned that his body had been discovered in a Washington area park. All in all, Maggie ran up a lot of legal bills while serving the Clintons in the White House.

In addition, it was learned last week that Hillary has thrown in 5 million dollars of her own money to the campaign. That is perfectly legal (Romney put in about 35 million of his own money), but everyone knows where Romney's money came from. Where did the Clintons get that 5 million dollars?

To sum it up, Hillary reminds me a lot of a major league baseball manager in the late innings of the 7th game of the World Series. That means lots of pinch hitters, defensive replacements and relief pitchers. Maybe she can steal a few signs while she's at it.

Clinton vs Obama- This May be a Job for the Super Delegates

"Oh, I wish Superdelegateman was here!"


In the wake of Barack Obama's primary wins in Washington, Nebraska and Louisiana, as well as his expected victories in the upcoming Potomac primaries (DC-Virginia and Maryland), the Democratic race has just gotten closer-if that's possible. Of course Hillary is looking forward to states like Texas and Pennsylvania, which have a lot of delegates and appear to be strong for her. Nevertheless, the question begs: What happens if this thing goes all the way to the convention and has to be settled by the so-called "super delegates"?

I may be way out of line here; I am no political expert, and I have to rely on what I hear on television from the really smart guys (pundits). But from what I understand, Hillary stands to get the majority of the super delegate votes, which would carry her to the nomination. The question I have is what if Obama goes into the convention with a lead, however slight, in delegates won via the primaries-only to see the super delegates give it to Hillary? What will be the reaction of Obama's supporters-especially the African-Americans who voted for him? Will they feel that they have been screwed by the Democratic Party establishment-this party that always has supposedly represented their best interests and has taken black votes for granted? Will they abandon the party in November to punish Hillary? Donna Brazile is already threatening to leave the party if such a scenario unfolds. I think it's fair to say that without a large African-American vote, Hillary won't have much chance of being elected.

The obvious counter to that is that Mrs Clinton would offer the VP slot to Obama. Would Obama accept it-especially if he perceives that the nomination was taken away from him? If Obama loses the nomination thanks to the super delegates, would he just walk away and sit on his hands in November-or even run as an independent a la Joe Lieberman? Intriguing possibilities.

For me, it would be poetic justice if the Democrats screwed Obama at the convention. That is why I hope he surges into the lead. Then let's see how the Clinton machine and their followers in the party of love and inclusion pull out all the stops to deny Obama the nomination. And make no mistake- the Clintons will pull out all the stops if necessary. They are praying right now that it won't be needed-that Hillary will capture the requisite number of delegates from the primary/caucus voters. Of course, we should not forget that Hillary wants-and needs those delegates from Florida and Michigan who, as it stands now, will not be seated due to their states moving their primaries up. Is an ugly court battle on the horizen? At any rate, it is looking increasingly likely that Hillary, if she wins, will have to "win ugly" as they say in sports.

And a lot of Democratic voters will be watching.

The "Drug Wars" (4)- Kiev, Ukraine 1994

"Vodka in the morning, vodka in the evening, vodka at suppertime...."


Subsequent to the fall of the Soviet Union, the Drug Enforcement Administration's Office of International Training received numerous requests for drug law enforcement training from the newly-created ex-Soviet republic nations. As a member of one of DEA's traveling international training teams, I was assigned to be the course coordinator for a 2 week course to be held in Kiev, Ukraine in 1994. As course coordinator, it would be my job to do an advance trip to Kiev to meet with Ukrainian officials and US Embassy personnel, arrange hotel accommodations, a training room and interpretors. This course was considered a regional course, which meant that one or two drug law enforcement officers from each of the former Soviet republics would be attending. While I had previously traveled to Eastern Europe, this was my first trip to a former part of the Soviet Union. It was a memorable experience.

Upon arrival in Kiev, I was met by the DEA attache from Vienna, who had responsibility for the Ukraine. A Ukrainian-American, he was also fluent in the Ukrainian language. Our Ukrainian counterparts also met me, and they were very hospitable. During my advance stay in Kiev, they took me around the city to choose a suitable hotel in which to stay, accommodate the non-Ukrainian students and hold the seminar. After visiting the 2 main hotels in Kiev, which were "first-class' Soviet style hotels, I decided that their seminar rooms were simply not adequate to our needs. Per their suggestion, we checked out a place called the Prolisok on the edge of town. This place had been used as a lodging site for Olympic athletes during the Moscow Olympics. It was set in a wooded area, with a separate building for rooms and another building for the seminar. It was closed for the winter, but due to open in the spring. It seemed intriguing, the seminar room was large and suitable, so I booked it for our seminar.

It was during this trip that I was introduced to the Ukrainian custom (like the Russians) of getting drowned in Vodka. Like Russia, vodka was the Ukrainian curse. One evening, I accompanied my counterparts to the home of another cop and his family for dinner. There were about 8 of us there, and I remember the family daughter playing for us on the piano. As dinner was served, I noted that they had Moldovan wine. (Moldova was noted for its wine.) I was a wine drinker, so I drank wine with my meal. After dinner, glasses were placed on the table and the vodka came out. In events like these, it is traditional for everyone, beginning with the host, to stand and make a small welcoming speech, followed by a toast and-bottoms up with the vodka. This is expected of all men, and it would be offensive not to participate. Of course, I participated-no problem. By the time, the 4-5th person got up to speak, I was starting to feel the effects. Then, of course, I had to give my own speech, which I managed to slur out, telling them how much I had come to love Ukraine. Every night I was with my counterparts, a similar scenario played out.

On the day I was leaving for the airport, the cops drove me to catch my plane. I was pretty worn out from the obligatory vodka drinking and anxious to get on the plane. A couple of miles from the airport, the car swung into a wooded area and parked. The trunk was opened and out came bread, various meats and -vodka. So for the next hour, we stood in the woods eating and drinking vodka-so I wouldn't be thirsty on my flight home.

A couple of months later, our team traveled to Kiev in the spring to conduct the seminar. I traveled ahead a couple of days prior to make sure everything was set. I flew to Zurich to make my connecting flight to Kiev. After spending a few hours with the narcotic cops in Zurich, with whom I had previously worked while stationed in Italy in the 1980s, I went back to the airport to catch my flight-only to learn that it had been cancelled since I was the only person on the flight. Fortunately, I was able to book another flight through Vienna and call my colleagues in Kiev with my new arrival time-now 11 pm. They met me at the airport and took me to the Prolisok just in time to close the hotel bar drinking more vodka and toasting our upcoming seminar. It was then I learned that, when open, the hotel was a popular truck stop for drivers traversing Europe in their TIR (Pre-Customed cleared cargo) trucks. It had looked so charming when it was closed without all the trucks parked outside. As you might imagine, when my boss and the rest of the team arrived, they were less than thrilled. After a couple of days, they moved to one of the Soviet style hotels in town.

Then our students arrived from all over the former USSR. This included Russians, Balts, Central Asians and Belarusans. (Incidentally, it was this experience that inspired me to write my first book-on the languages of the former Soviet republics. Each of these cops had their own national language and spoke Russian as well, which was the common language. The most memorable character was a former KGB colonel from the Republic of Georgia. He arrived with two suitcases, one with clothes, the other with bottles of vodka. Virtually every night, there was a vodka fest in his room. When the festivities were not taking place in his room, everyone adjourned to the hotel bar where the vodka continued to flow. On the night my team arrived after a long flight from the states, one of our DEA guys was pretty sick and only wanted to go to bed. Nonetheless, the cop from Georgia was insistent that our guy drink vodka with him and was incensed when he begged off.

"What? Are you too good to drink with me? he demanded.

Thus it followed virtually every night. I soon realized that it had been a huge mistake to stay in the same hotel with the cops. Nevertheless, I decided to remain, even when my team changed hotels since it seemed necessary for the coordinator to be there at all times.

The seminar opened and speaking at the opening ceremony was the Minister of Interior, Yuri Kravchenko, a handsome, youthful man dressed in a colorful suit and white tie that seemed more appropriate to the Masters Golf Tournamnet than Ukraine.

During the weekend break, our counterparts arranged a boat ride down the Dnieper River to Kanev to visit the home of and Museum dedicated to the life of Ukraine's national hero, the dissident poet, Taras Shevchenko. The site is set on a hill overlooking the Dnieper, and is quite reminiscent of Mt Vernon. With a video camera rolling and patriotic music playing over a loudspeaker, my Ukraiian-American DEA colleague and I were able to lay a wreath on Shevchenko's grave. Then it was off to a restaurant for lunch and -more vodka. Our host from Kanev was a retired Soviet general from World War II (the Great Patriotic War to the Soviets). During the war, he had reportedly captured an entire German division, brigade, platoon or something by himself.

His experience in WW2 had not taken away his ability to put away the vodka. He led the speeches and the toasts and set the rules: according to custom, whenever anyone drinks to your health (HEALTH??!!), you must down the glass in one gulp. (Keep in mind, these were not shot glasses. They were more like water glasses.) Also, when you are giving the speech and the toast, you must do the bottoms up. It was kind of like those drinking games college kids play. I found myself thinking; "Now I know how he captured all those Germans. He got them drunk on vodka."

The closing ceremony on our last night was, as you might expect, soaked with vodka. The Minister of Interior was there again, and after the awards, everone got sloshed.

The next morning, we were picked up by the cops for the ride to the airport. Our team leader was so eager to get on that plane; he had had his fill of obligatory vodka. But I knew what was coming. As we neared the airport, I was riding in the car behind him and watching to see his reaction as the cars pulled into the woods for that final "one for the road".

Postscript: The following year, the Minister of Interior, Yuri Kravchenko, died of an apparent suicide. He had been involved in a political scandal and had accused the President, Leonid Kuchma, of having ordered the murder of a journalist. Kravchenko reportedly died of two (2) self-inflicted gunshots to the head.

Who put the Mess in MSNBC?

"Hi! MSNBC here. I was just going through our ratings."


This week's on air comment by MSNBC talking head, David Shuster about Hillary Clinton "pimping out" her daughter, Chelsea has stirred up outrage in the Clinton camp. Shuster has had to apologize and has been suspended. In the wake of the controversy, Hillary is weighing not participating in any future MSNBC debates. (Hey, Hillary, there is always Fox!) As usual, the incident and its reaction raises all kinds of thought-stimulating questions. For example, what would the reaction be if someone like Sean Hannity had made the remark? What if Shuster had made the remark about a Republican candidate "pimping out" his wife or daughter in the campaign? But we will never know, will we?

Seriously, Shuster's remark was offensive and even more unprofessional. That is not the kind of language we should expect from a TV reporter on air. But, then again, standards have declined drastically in recent years.

The remark comes soon after Chris Matthews, also of MSNBC, made his comment to the effect that the only reason Mrs Clinton was a senator and presidential candidate was because her husband had "messed around". (Matthews also had to apologize to Mrs Clinton.) When you couple Shuster and Matthews with MSNBC's other off-the-wall commentator, Keith Olbermann, one has to conclude that this network is pretty unprofessional, to say the least. Maybe that explains why their ratings are in the toilet.

Some defenders of Shuster are bringing up the point that Chelsea is now an adult and participating in the political process; therefore, she is fair game for all kinds of commentary. I would only take that so far. Sure she is open to criticism when appropriate, but using the word pimp as a metaphor is not right. One should not use metaphors that allude to prostitution unless the people concerned are, in fact, pimps or prostitutes. (But then, in that case, it wouldn't be a metaphor, would it?)

Regardless of one's politics, I hope this latest episode is not lost on the public. NBC News has become the farthest to the left of the major networks, and the out and out partisanship of Olbermann and Matthews is obvious. Remember in 2006, when Matthews was caught in the background yelling, "yeaaa!" when another Democrat was declared the winner in some state? Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" show is nothing more than a nightly condemnation of George W Bush, Bill O'Reilly, and anyone Republican or deemed conservative. Now Mr. Shuster adds his name to MSNBC's growing list of embarrassments.

Romney Drops Out

Three days after Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney decided to call it quits, making the announcement to a disappointed audience at the CPAC convention. Romney, who has spent about 35 million dollars of his money on the campaign, apparently decided that the handwriting was on the wall. What is sad to me is that he gave a great speech today-one he should have been giving all along.

Romney's speech was absolutely magnificent, full of passion and fire. He covered issues like the War on Terror, the decline of our culture, welfare, liberal judges, corrupt unions and other topics that drew thunderous applause from the audience that was clearly hit hard when he announced that he was stepping aside.

My question to Romney is this: Where have you been the last several months? True, he ran a strong campaign, but his appearances gave many the impression that he was just a little too pre-packaged and smooth. In contrast, if he had been giving speeches like this for the past 6 months, it would be him, not John McCain sitting in the catbird seat.

Romney's speech has convinced me once and for all that he was the best guy in the race. I had been leaning toward him for months, but now I am convinced. I can only hope that he and McCain can bury their past differences. I would be very happy to see Romney as the VP candidate, though the smart money is against that possibility. More likely, we will see Huckabee get the nod-especially after that shell-game caucus in West Virginia, where McCain supporters walked over and voted for Huckabee-thus, denying the victory to Romney.

So now, barring some unforeseen development, it is clear that McCain is the one. A lot of conservatives have stated that they will sit at home on election day rather than vote for McCain. When we consider the implications of that action, I hope they will think very seriously about their position. But that will be the subject of a separate posting.

The Natalee Holloway Case in Aruba

For the past two years, I have followed the story of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway in Aruba with more than a passing interest. I have visited the island of Aruba twice. The last time I was there, I was researching my book on the history of the Papiamentu creole language, which is the language of the natives of Aruba (along with the neighboring islands of Curacao and Bonaire.) I have also been acquainted with a few of the Aruban Police, at least one of whom was involved in the investigation, another of whom was the head of narcotics investigations for the island. In addition, during my research trip to Aruba while working on my book, I had occasion to interview Jossy Mansur, the Editor of El Diario Newspaper. Mr Mansur is a very influential figure in Aruba and has been interviewed countless times by Greta van Susteren on her Fox News show regarding the disappearance of Holloway. (No, I don't possess any inside information on the case.)

Sadly, I cannot say that I have been impressed by the quality of the investigation by the Aruban and Dutch police and prosecutors. I should qualify that by adding that while in the Drug Enforcement Administration, I was a drug investigator, but never a homocide investigator. However, it is telling that if the truth has finally come out about how Ms Holloway died, it is through the efforts of an investigative journalist-not the Dutch Police.

My reaction to the recently released videotapes of Joran van der Sloot's conversation with an undercover operative is one of revulsion. At the very best, it shows van der Sloot to be a cold, heartless sociopath. If his words are in fact true, he and another person disposed of the young girl's body without any thought of calling emergency responders-or even making 100% sure she was dead. He referred to her in the tapes as a "bitch" and a "whore", showing no concern for her as a human being. Then, he talked about filing legal action for his prosecution to make a bundle of money.

It is still possible that there was more to the story than what van der Sloot told his "friend" on tape. It is still plausible that he (and the Kalpoe brothers) may have put a "date rape drug" into her drink at the bar where they met (Carlos and Charlies). That aspect of van der Sloot has been whispered about during the investigation. If that is the case, and Natalee did, in fact, succumb to some sort of seizure on the beach, then murder is still a possible charge. In addition, can we discount the possibility that Holloway was the victim of some sort of violence that caused her death? Those possible scenarios may explain why he didn't call for emergency help. Unfortunately, we will almost certainly never have a body to provide that sort of forensic evidence.

I can only hope that, whatever the truth is, van der Sloot and whoever else was involved meet some form of justice. Of course, under Dutch law, it won't be much. The whole Dutch system is so liberal that one wonders what they consider a serious crime. The sad fact is that Natalee Holloway probably made a youthful mistake that put her in the path of a sociopathetic young man-or men who cared only for his/their own gratification. The result was that an 18 year old girl lost her life, and her family will probably never know any real peace.

Joran van der Sloot should be grateful that Natalie Holloway was not my daughter.

Tale of Two Rallies- LA-Boston

"Hey Deval,anybody ever tell you you look like Osama?"


This past weekend, I had the "opportunity" to watch two rallies on TV. One was a rally in East LA for Hillary Clinton. What was so striking about this one was that on the stage with her was virtually every rotten politician that has run California into the mud in recent years. There was LA Mayor, Tony Villaraigosa (her national campaign co-chair) fresh off his revealed love affair with Telemundo reporter, Mirthala Salinas. There was State Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, under a very dark cloud for his extravagant travels around the world on various boondoggles. There was Maxine Waters, Congresswoman from the LA area and one of the more obnoxious members of Congress. Left-wing activist Ron Dellums, former congressman and now mayor of Oakland, presiding over one of the nation's worst murder rates was there as well. State political hack Gloria Molina was there-even drawing some well-deserved boos when her name was mentioned. Worst of all, ex-governor Gray Davis was there. This was the guy who was recalled by voters a few years back after he nearly bankrupted the state with his liberal, out of control spending. (Of course, now Governor Schwarzenegger is carrying on the grand tradition.)

Then there was Hillary, who gave a long "stemwinder" promising everything from free government cheese to a cure for restless leg syndrome. She was at her oratorical worst, loud and shrill-but the crowd loved it.

Meanwhile, back in Boston, Teddy Kennedy, "fresh" from his trip to the West Coast, presided over a campaign rally for Barack Obama. His speech began at 11pm (and you know what that means.) Yes, Teddy was pretty much feeling no pain as he rambled on about his trip out west. What was really cool was how he kept referring to Obama as Deval Patrick (the African-American governor of Massachusetts), who was also on stage. I counted at least 3 times Kennedy used Patrick's name in referring to Obama. In the crowd behind Kennedy were 3 or 4 black guys who cracked up every time he did that. At least he didn't call him Osama bin Laden.

In the case of the LA rally, one would have thought that any sensible voter would have taken one look at the rogue's gallery on stage with Clinton and gone straight out to vote for Obama. Not a chance. Hillary carried California comfortably, which pretty much shows you in whose hands this state lies.

In the case of Massachusetts, the endorsements of Kennedy, Patrick and John Kerry were not enough to give the state to Obama. But hey, when you have a drunk leading your pep rally, you can't expect great results.

Super Tuesday Hangover

As I headed home from work yesterday, our LA-based talk-jocks, John and Ken (KFI) were reporting that early exit polls back east were showing Barack Obama on a roll. Ah yes! The good ol' exit polls. As it turned out, Hillary Clinton basically "held serve" as they say in tennis, splitting states and delegates with Obama and maintaining her lead. On the Republican side, McCain cemented his status as front-runner, while Huckabee rebounded at the expense of Mitt Romney, who now appears to be fading. Things seem to be crystalizing-at least on the Republican side.

If you live in the conservative blogosphere and talk radio, you would think that there is a massive revolt against McCain's candidacy from the conservative base. Maybe there is, but it doesn't seem to affect his ability to win primaries. If something doesn't change soon, McCain is going to be the guy for the Republicans.

Something seems to be missing from Obama's coalition of blacks and younger voters caught up in the emotional wave. No doubt, Hillary had the support of California's Hispanics notwithstanding the endorsement of La Opinion (the local Spanish newspaper)for Obama. (Since I, as an independent in California, could not vote for a Republican, I did the next best thing and voted for Obama- against Hillary.) It was the first time in my life I ever voted for a Democrat.

More important to me were the California ballot measures, which I had to vote against. A couple were blatently dishonest, cooked up by our corrupt politicians in Sacramento-people like Fabian Nunez and Don Perata. Proposition 93, for example was worded as a term limits measure, when in reality, it was designed by Nunez and Perata to extend their own terms in office since they are scheduled to be term-limited out after this year. Fortunately, this fraud failed-barely.

Then there was LA measure S, cooked up by Mayor Tony Villaraigosa to save his 10% telephone tax, which was about to be thrown out by the courts since it was passed without voter approval. So Villaraigosa and his boys came up with propostion S and labeled it as a cut to 9%-at the same time telling taxpayers that it was necessary to save fire and police services!! Can you imagine asking voters to reduce a tax to save police and fire services? But the dumb voters in LA were fooled and approved the 9% tax. The 10% tax lawsuit now is a mute point.

Sadly, I am gradually coming to the conclusion that demographically, we conservatives are becoming a minority. It seems that between the young folks who vote with their feelings (as opposed to reason) coupled with those who depend on or look to government to get them through life are starting to outnumber the everyday tax-paying folks who will have to pay for all these big programs that the Dems promise.

But, the main point of this article for me is the prospect of McCain being the Republican standard-bearer in November. Like many conservatives, I am angered by his immigration stance, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, Gang of 14 and his dismissive attitude toward our concerns. I hear so many conservatives and Republicans talking about staying home in November rather than vote for McCain. As this election process unfolds, and the prospect of Hillary slowly increases, we conservatives and/or Republicans are going to have to do some serious thinking between now and November.

Giants 17 Patriots 14

Is this what it looks like when a New England Patriot lays an egg?


I was planning to write an article prior to the Super Bowl. Thank God I didn't. I had it all planned out including my prediction (New England 42 Giants 14). For years, I have been pretty cynical about the game-even though I am a football fan (Steelers). The truth is that if the Steelers aren't playing, I really don't care much about the game. I am defintely turned off by all the hoopla that has become a staple of the event-before during and after.

I had planned to pan all the pre-game nonsense-the interviews of players and coaches who all say the same things year after year:

"We just gotta go out and play 60 minutes of football."
"There's no tomorrow."
"We got a great bunch of guys on this team."

(One great exception this year was listening to Michael Strahan of the Giants, who is obviously destined to be an announcer after his career is over.)

I also was going to question why we have to have all this publicity in the week leading up to the game. I was going to complain about the two hour pre-game show breaking down every possible way that one or the other team would probably win. I was going to make some sarcastic comment about the jets flying overhead during the National Anthem. The half-time show was going to a special target of my biting sarcasm, with the usual 5,000 college kids running out on the field and playing grab-ass while Tom Petty and the Headachers (probably) lip-synced their way through 3 or 4tunes while smoke bombs went off leaving clouds of smoke to plague the players half-way into the 3rd quarter. (I have to admit that the guitarist was quite good.)

Finally, I was going to make my "expert" prediction (Patriots 42-Giants 14). I was also going to predict that, in spite of recent reports and studies, I was not going to beat my wife or have a heart attack on Super Bowl Sunday. If the Steelers haven't given me a heart attack in 52 years of living and dying with the black and gold, it wasn't going to happen this year. (Now the Cubs may yet give me a heart attack, but that's another story.)

Anyway, something unexpected happened; not only was it a great game, but a great upset. Personally, I was happy to see the Patriots lose the Super Bowl and their undefeated season. Now, no one is calling them the greatest dynasty ever. (That would be my Steelers, thank you.) It was gratifying to see their abrasive, cheating and mumbling coach lose. Hats off to the Giants, a team that played harder and deserved to win.

And just to clarify one point: I did not beat my wife.

The Democratic Debate in LA

"How's Tony?"

"Great! He said, Hi"


This week, while the Republican candidates battled it out at the Reagan Library, the Democrats (Clinton and Obama) held a love fest in LA's Kodak Theater. Attending were many of Hollywood's "glitterati", taking time off from their parties, drugs and having babies out of wedlock to come in and gush over Hillary and Barack. Expectations were that this might be the most explosive debate yet. Unfortunately, the candidates apparently decided-or were told by the DNC-that a repeat of the South Carolina foodfight would not be in either's best interests. (Maybe it was because they both now realize they have a mutual friend-Tony Rezko.) Anyway, this debate took on the appearance of an Oscars presentation, with everyone telling everyone else how wonderful they all were-and how bad the Republicans were.

Both candidates (hungry for John Edwards' endorsement and/or votes)bent over backwards to pay tribute to the Great Man from North Carolina, who had just dropped out with his now very important 15% support.

As usual, most of the debate was centered around who had the best plan for setting up a nanny state, especially health care. It is obvious that the two biggest issues of our day- Terror and Illegal Immigration- are not that big a deal to Democratic voters. No, they want to know who is going to give them the most opium to get them through the pain of everyday life in medieval Amerika. The candidates did not disappoint, yet they made it clear, as always, that when it comes to the issues, there is very little difference between them. Hillary, of course, is shrewd enough to recognize that, which is why she is always touting her experience- "35 years of making a difference in peoples' lives" (especially those women who had the misfortune of getting involved with her hootchie-koo hubby).

As for the War on Terror and illegal immigration, it all comes down to the same old lines- "bring the troops home from Iraq" and "comprehensive immigration reform", which means amnesty. (Now let's get back to discussing health care.)

So to sum it all up, the choice of the Democratic voters comes down to whether you want a woman president or a president of color. Apparently, the "open-minded, inclusive, compassionate" Democratic electorate is breaking down neatly along race and gender lines. Blacks favor Obama, while women favor Hillary, and Hispanics are also going to Hillary (for some strange reason- I just can't figure out why they don't like Obama).

Seriously though, it's not that Obama isn't making an effort to reach out to Hispanic voters. He has learned to say "Si, se puede!", and he even dragged in "El Gabacho Borracho" (The Gringo drunk), Teddy Kennedy, all the way across country to wow em' in East LA with a few words in Spanish. "Moochamas grasas a todos!!" or something like that. Teddy must have lost track of the time zones, figured it was time for happy hour back home and ordered up a few shooters before speaking. Nevertheless, Obama doesn't figure to get many Hispanic votes in a race that is unfortunately pitting two competing minority groups against each other.

So Tuesday, we have our primary here in California, and off the candidates go to torment some other poor state. Hey, I can't wait for the next debate.

Political Correctness in Action

(Thanks to actioninengland)