Philadelphia Mayor Previews Primary

     If you get a chance, listen to my radio show tonight at six on WOND.  My guest for the first part of the show will be Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter.  The Mayor who is a supporter of Senator Hillary Clinton in the Pennsylvania Primary, will discuss his candidates chances heading into tomorrows vote.  If you miss the live interview, you can always catch my podcast.

The Company You Keep

     As Obama and Clinton go head to head tonight in the city of "brotherly love" it will be interesting to watch what happens.  It has been a long time since the two met in a debate.  You may not realize it, but since they last met on the same stage, we had Wright, Bosnian comments and the "bitter, clinging" remarks.  Even through all of that, it seems as if Obama has come out of this no worse for the wear.  However, as former Congressman John LeBoutillier pointed out on my radio show last night, we are talking about the reaction of Democrats.  By the time we get to the Fall and the general election, it could be a whole different story.  Or will all of this be "old news" by then and everyone ready to move on to new things. 

      I've always been taught you are known by the company you keep and if that is the case, Barrack Obama certainly has poor judgement in the people with whom he keeps company including his own wife!  Who know what will happen at tonight's debate and the way this campaign has played out so far, all bets are off.  But it does appear more than likely that Obama will be the nominee and I'm counting on the common sense of the American voter to realize this Fall that what we are discovering about this guy and his close associates combined with what we still don't know about him is way too much of a risk for us to take with such an important and power position as President of the United States.

PS.  If you missed it, go to my podcast and listen to last nights interview with John.

Bob Beckel Asks Stupid Question and More

Ever since this issue erupted with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Fox News Contributor Bob Beckel keeps asking the same stupid question which ironically he thinks is so clever..... and he did it again tonight on Hannity and Colmes. He asked should every child who attends Wrights church be denied a right to run for President of The United States? He asks the question with a real
"gotcha" kind of tone in his voice as if to say... Ah, see...what do you say to that, huh, huh? The answer is simple Bob. Of course a child attending Wrights church has a right to run for President. The big difference is Barrack Obama is an ADULT sitting under the hateful, incendiary speech of this man; an adult Bob! He needs to be held accountable for his judgement as an ADULT who wants to be Commander In Chief... not a CHILD who may or may not have a choice as to where he or she attends worship services. Please Bob, p-l-e-a-s-e find a new "gotcha" question to ask. You can do a lot better.
Side-note: Obama said today in a speech that he finds it hard to understand how the media and others keep taking a few comments and repeating them and not looking at the three sermons Rev. Wright preached every week for 20 years. That still doesn't discount what he did say. I don't care what else he said in the 20 years. Amazing to me how now many in the media are doing nothing but praising Barrack Obama for his speech last week addressing race as the man who dares to take on the issue and attempt to move this country forward. How does a man who sat under hate, race baiting and anti-American, anti-Christian speech suddenly become the "champion" of moving us forward. Sick logic that makes no sense to me. How about you.

The Audacity of Obama's Hypocracy - Part 2

Who said the following of talk show host Don Imus one year ago? "...But I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude." ANSWER: The man from Illinois who would be President of the United States. Oh, how quickly he backs down in his strong stance. Sure Barrack Obama delivered a flowery speech this week condemning the remarks of his former "pastor". But last year when Don Imus, (who makes a living out of sarcasm and quick wit, tongue and cheek monologue) spoke out of line, Senator Obama refused to give him a pass and called for his immediate firing saying, "He (Imus) didn't just cross the line, he fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America." If that is an accurate characterization of Don Imus, what in the world can be said of the series of incendiary comments by Jeremiah Wright.
It's not just the Jeremiah Wright comments. Now World Net Daily is reporting that Wrights church, (Barrack Obama's church) reprinted a manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group's official charter– which calls for the murder of Jews to America's Declaration of Independence.
Where will it all stop? How much more does the American voter needs to know before we collectively say, enough is enough?

The Audacity of Obama's Hypocrisy

So now when the heat is on, Barack Obama denounces the words of his pastor of 20 years, the man who married he and his wife, baptized his daughters and preached in the pulpit that Obama has called his home church. Is Obama responsible for the comments of his pastor? Of course not. But I can't imagine why you would attend a church, consider someone a close friend and give to the ministry of someone who preaches hate, racism and division. Tonight on Fox News, Barack Obama said he was unaware of many of the comments made by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright until the last couple of days. This raises a lot of questions not the least of which is how anyone could on one hand be so close to someone (Rev. Wright) who is Obama's own words was like "an uncle to me", and on the other hand not know he held these extreme views. That doesn't say a whole lot for the judgment of the man who would be our next President. This whole issue answers other questions raised in the last couple of weeks. Hearing these statements by the Rev. Wright makes it much easier to understand where Michelle Obama has developed her beliefs about the United States of America considering she sat under the ministry of Wright.
Recently, Barack Obama delivered a stump speech where he touted the famous words of Dr. Martin Luther King, and words of the Declaration of Independence and other inspiring quotes followed by the rhetorical question, "Just Words"? Obama hammered home the ascertation that words are powerful and have meaning.
You're right about that Mr. Obama. In light of the recent revelations, my question to you is, Rev. Jeremiah Wrights sermons and messages, just words? If this had been any other candidate other than Obama he or she would have had to resign quicker than you can shake a stick. The fact that Barack Obama is still in this race is THE AUDACITY OF HYPOCRISY!

New Jersey Chamber On Board With Corzine

     Benjamin Franklin once said at the signing of the Declaration of Independence that "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hand separately." So I have to wonder what they were thinking when the New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce backed Governor Jon Corzine's plan for massive toll hikes on state highways.  The very organization in place to have the best interest of business at heart sells out to politics.  If you can't count on the Chamber of Commerce to look after you, who can you count on. And for what? 

     Hazel Gluck, Chamber executive committee member said "the Governor’s plan is the best option available on the table to us to fix the state’s fiscal problems. It is time for us to move forward and get to the business of growing the economy. The Governor’s plan will help us to achieve the goal of making New Jersey a pro-investment state.”  Grow the economy, pro-investment?  How do you grow the economy when you force businesses who use New Jersey toll roads to transports their goods to face huge increases in the cost of moving those goods?  How is it helping grow the economy when working men and women are saddled with an 800% road tax?  Who wants to invest in a state that chokes its residents and businesses with tax after tax?  Not most businesses if you read how many companies are pulling up stakes and heading out of Dodge.

     String up the noose.  I think we're all about to hang separately. 

Bill Is Burying Hill

     Did you hear the latest?  Former President Bill Clinton says what we need to do is slowdown the economy if we are to address the "serious issue" of global warming.  First of all.  The evidence is out there for anyone to see.  All this hype over global warming is just that ... hype.  Three decades ago, if you remember, we were on the verge of an ice age.  Wake up everyone.  It's all about politics.  

     And if that's not bad enough. Now a former President of the United States is advocating slowing down the economy in the wake of a recession.  Yea, that's just the signal we need to be sending the rest of the world.  Bet Hillary is throwing china across the room this morning.  Her husband, his temper and reckless statements are quickly burying her in the ashes.  Obama needs to keep hammering away at the notion of "not knowing who he is running against".  If Hillary and her ideas aren't bad enough, her husband is easily putting the nail in the coffin of a failed race for the White House.   If she is to survive much longer Hillary needs to send Bill off on a long vacation ... and fast.

   

Private Property?

     Hey taxpayers of Middle Township (Cape May County, NJ)  you better ask for your money back.  It seems the local Board of Education feels that the Performing Arts Center in your township is private property.  That's right.  You paid for and now it's private property.  So, who is the private person or persons who own it?  

     If you didn't hear already, a former candidate for New Jersey Governor, Steve Lonegan and South Jersey Attorney and WIBG radio talk show host Seth Grossman were both arrested last weekend for protesting outside of a dog and pony show Governor Corzine brought to town to explain his plan to up the tolls on New Jersey highways.  (His way of fixing the fiscal mess we are in in Trenton).  So Lonegan and Grossman were handing out flyers explaining why we shouldn't buy into the Governors plan and they held up signs reinforcing the message.  They were both handcuffed and arrested after the Middle Township Board of Educations Walter Landgraf, the school district's business administrator told Lonegan he must take the protest off school grounds."It's not public property. It's owned by the Board of Education. There's a difference," Landgraf said. "You're going to have to leave the property, please. I'd like you to leave the school board's property."

     It's bad enough that the Governor is sticking it once again to the hard working residents of New Jersey with more taxes, now a taxpayer funded Public Arts Center is being referred to as private property.  How arrogant!   How disgusting!  How dare they!!!!

Corzine's Tax Explosion!

     Here we go again.  Stick to the residents.  Jon Corzine's proposed toll increase is ludicrous.  My question is, if the state is in such a terrible fiscal condition, why are we waiting until 2010 to implement the toll hikes?  I'll save you the guesswork.  Politics.  Elections.  That's why.  When are we going to learn in this state that liberal, tax and spend politicians are not the answer to our problems... THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.  I'm tired of hearing how we got here and how it's too late to go back.  The solution is ALWAYS more taxes, more fee's.  How about we cut the state workforce.  How about state legislators take a major salary cut.  Don't hold your breath.  And you know when the money starts to come it from the toll hikes, it won't be enough.  It's NEVER enough because politicians can't help themselves.  They are robbing us blind and we sit by and take it.  You know 200 years ago we had a Revolution in this country over less than this. 

No Woman Is Illegal?

     Talk about gratuitous.  When Democratic Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton was visiting a Las Vegas neighborhood, a man told Mrs. Clinton that his wife is illegal and she compassionately responded that no woman is illegal.   What does that mean?  As President of the United States, Mrs. Clinton, I assume would raise her hand and pledge to uphold the Constitution and I do believe the laws of the land (enforced or not) do state that there are circumstances when people in this country are considered illegal and one would assume at least some of those illegals are women.  If this is how Mrs. Clinton views the issue of illegal immigration,  I have no faith in her ability to even come close to addressing this crisis.

     Then she said of failed mortgages and vacant neighborhoods, "We treat these problems as if one is guacamole and one is chips, when ... they both go together," she said.  I guess she was trying to relate to the neighborhood as she stood by taking notes and eating tortilla chips.  Forgive me if all of this causes me to choke on my chips.  Maybe next week when she visits Little Italy she'll compare the issue to spaghetti and meatballs or in Chinatown she'll talk about Kung Pow Chicken and Soy sauce.  Somebody stop me!! Now I'm hungry.

      The sad thing is politicians in general think this is the way to relate to the people and then they play on the fears of these people and all too many people buy into it.  Hillary Clinton can no more relate to these people in Las Vegas then you or I can relate to what it's like to be the Queen of England.  

Sorry For Slavery?

     So our state legislators vote to apologize to people who weren't alive when an injustice occurred on behalf of people who had nothing to do with what the legislators are apologizing for without those they are supposedly apologizing on behalf of ever asking them to apologize in the first place.  And that is supposed to accomplish . . . what? 

     Ironic isn't it; these same legislators who spend their time apologizing for the injustice of enslaving a people two hundred years ago refuse to find a way to free the citizens of New Jersey of all races which they (the legislators) enslave in debt, high taxes, levies, laws and fees that everyday force native sons and daughters out of this state.  Actually ironic is a nice way of putting it.  In reality, it's unconscionable and it's the members of the New Jersey State Senate and Assembly who should be ashamed of themselves and apologize to us for the shackles they place on all of us in 2008, not 1788.  On second thought.  Don't apologize.  Just do something about it.  That's why you were elected. 

      Just makes you shake your head in amazement doesn't it.

Watch Out! Here Come The Thought Police

     When the New Jersey State Assembly meets in its final session this coming Monday legislators will vote on a measure which if approved, will go a long way toward eroding our First Amendment rights.  The sad fact is, most people won't even pay attention and those who do take note most likely won't even understand what's at stake.   The legislation is A-4591, a measure designed to toughen hate crimes laws in New Jersey.  The State Senate already voted in favor of the companion measure last Thursday.  

     So what in the world could be wrong with being opposed to hate crimes.  Well, for one hate crimes legislation in general is severely flawed in its logic.  We've all heard the argument.  Someone kills an individual.  During the course of prosecution, we discover the murderer committed the crime because of their hate for the victim because of their race, gender or sexual orientation.  Oh, really.  Now we really have to punish the murderer.  I don't get the logic.  The victim is dead.  Does it really matter what the assailant was thinking when he or she committed the crime.  The crime is horrible enough.  I've never understood what difference it makes what the person was thinking when they intentionally committed the crime.  The result is still the same.  The punishment should be to the fullest extent of the law.  I don't care if the murderer was thinking, "Gee, I really hate this person" or "Gee, I have to kill them because if I don't they'll identify me to police when I leave the scene of the crime."

     As I see it, it's really all about "feel good" legislation.  We'll really give it to the murderer because of the hate.  That will make us all feel better.  It's ridiculous.

     This latest addition to the proposed legislation as written, strongly suggests that any expressed disagreement to homosexual behavior, "gender identity or expression" could be construed as bias intimidation.  In fact the bill specifies that if found guilty of "bias intimidation", the guilty party will be forced to attend "sensitivity training" which could have the effect of indoctrinating you to accept homosexuality or other "gender expressions" and reject your sincerely held beliefs.

     My concern and the concern of many others is that this legislation could dramatically impact free speech and freedom of religious.  How so, you ask?  What if a pastor decides to address his congregation on his Biblically held views regarding homosexuality?  Will he be hauled off to jail or sensitivity class?  We're not talking about someone advocating violence against any group.  We're talking about expression of deeply held beliefs.  What if someone asks your opinion about a certain group of people or issue, are you free to express that opinion without fear of being reported to the "thought police." This is very dangerous.   Our ability as a free people to openly express beliefs is a fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution.  Don't let that right be taken away. Call your Assembly representative and urge them to vote NO!

Loosing Ground

There is an old saying in politics.  "He who slings dirt, only looses ground."   I emphasize the word old because it apparently doesn't apply to todays climate.  I may sound crazy, but current research shows that the more negative a politician goes, the better his or her chances are of actually winning.  Worse than that, is that much of the "negative" in advertising literature and commercials doesn't even have to be true or substantiated.  The hard, cold facts are that even if an opponents accusations are challenged, by the time they are refuted or corrected, the damage has been done.  With one day to go until Election Day, I am tired of hearing the radio and tv ads touting all the horrible and disgusting things a candidate for office has done; running that persons name through the mud over and over again and then having the nerve to end the commercials by saying, "that's why that individual is running one of the nastiest campaigns in history."  What?  Telling us nasty things about a person and then claiming that very person is himself running a nasty campaign. How twisted is that?  And are we the electorate buying it? Apparently so.  Why?  Because we are sound bite, catch a comment here and there, disconnected people who do little to study the issues or the candidates, vote my name recognition alone or how someone looks or simply party line or in many cases, not show up at the polls at all.  And then we complain over and over again about what we get.   It's not the nasty politician loosing ground. We, the people are the ones loosing ground because we are digging our own graves.

I've Changed My Opinion

Having spent over 25 years in journalism, one of the first questions I still get from people who find out my background is, "Tell me, does the news media have an agenda?  Is there really a bias in the newsroom?"   

Until recently, my answer was two fold.  First of all in the mainstream media there is an overall bias and it leans decidedly to the left.  But I was always quick to add that the bias was not necessarily intentional.  My point being that reporters by and large don't get together each day before they head out to cover the news and say, "Gee, how can we slant today's coverage?"  It's just that most of the people working in journalism (for whatever reason) come from a liberal background.  So, they look at the world through liberal eyes, so to speak.  After all, every one of us comes to our jobs with preconceptions and sometimes they  interfere with our news coverage.  The stories we choose to cover, the way we approach stories and filter the information is going to be influenced by our past.  The goal is to (as best we can) remove those bias's from our coverage.  I've always felt most of time journalists tried their best reach for that goal.

But I'm changing my opinion.  A new poll at journalism.org clearly shows a strong bias in the media and it is decidedly to the left.  I'm afraid that many of journalists today are more interested in activism than journalism.  With the strong influence of cable news and "opinion" based shows disguised as straight journalism, the line is not only blurred, it's in many cases erased.  It's across the board in broadcast, cable, print and otherwise, the bias by the mainstream media is as left of center as it's ever been and getting worse.  The evidence is all around us to point to a vast majority in the media who intentionally slant coverage and interject their own opinion into stories that are broadcast and printed under the banner of objective news.  

The problem is not every consumer of news realizes this.   They hear the commentary and opinion and take it as journalism, not as editorial.  It's amazing that we live in a world where more information than ever is available at our fingertips and yet the electorate is less informed than ever before.   We get our news in short sound bites and sensational copy vying for our easily distracted attention.  Unless the American people wake up to this reality, we will find our nation heading even farther down a path of propaganda difficult to work our way out of.

MoveOn - Hillary, Chris & Barack

No doubt you heard about the U.S. Senate vote which overwhelmingly denounced an ad that appeared in the New York Times sponsored by the radical, left wing group, MoveOn.org. The ad was headlined: “General Petraeus or General Betray Us? Cooking the books for the White House.”

I just wanted to make sure you knew that while 72 Senators voted to condemn the ad, two of the Senators who want to be your next President refused to condemn it. Surprise , surprise . . . they are Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Christopher Dodd. How about Senator Barack Obama, well he just didn’t vote at all, although he cast another vote only a few minutes before.

Are these the kind of “leaders” we want in the role of Commander In Chief? I think not.