Mavs out but Stars are lots of fun to watch!

Dirk Nowitzski is a great guy and player. He does not deserve another lousy finish to the playoffs. (The sting: Hornets end Dallas Mavericks' season, 99-94)

Mark Cuban is gonna go crazy and make a ton of changes. I hope that he does not trade away more young players, as he did to get Kidd a couple of months ago. The Mavs did not play well once Kidd came here. I'm not saying that it's all Kidd's fault but the team did not play well.

Let's hope that Cuban does not touch Nowitzki or Coach Johnson. This is not the coach's fault! However, I wouldn't be surprised if Cuban fires the coach any day!

On the ice, the Stars are just playing great. They are up 3-0 on San Jose with another OT win!

Go Stars! The Stars is all we have this spring!

How about an O'Reilly debate for the Dems?

The Dems foolishly skipped Fox News this election year. Why foolishly? The answer is viewers, specially the kind of white men that Dems need to win back the White House.

On any given weeknight, Keith Obermann leads the media in Bush bashing. Over at FOX, Bill O"Reilly beats him with viewers. Can you believe 3-1?

Why not bring Clinton and Obama to The O'Reilly Factor?

They won't get softballs.

Obama will have to answer questions about Rev. Wright.

Clinton will have to explain her NAFTA and Iraq War flip flops.

In the end, the country will learn that they are a couple of charlatans who can't give you specifics.

On second thought, there won't be an O'Reilly debate. The Dems can't afford to be exposed!

The Rev and BO!

Paul McCartney & The Beatles must have had Barrack Obama and Rev. Wright in mind when they wrote I'm Looking through you:

"I'm looking through you,

Where did you go?

I thought I knew you, What did I know?

You don't look different, But you have changed.

I'm looking through you, You're not the same.

Your lips are moving, I cannot hear.

Your voice is soothing, But the words aren't clear.

You don't sound different, I've learnt the game.

I'm looking through you, You're not the same.

Why, tell me why, Did you not treat me right?

Love has a nasty habit of disappearing over night.

You're thinking of me, The same old way.

You were above me.

But not today.

The only difference is you're down there.

I'm looking through you, And you're nowhere.

Why, tell me why, Did you not treat me right?

Love has a nasty habit of disappearing over night.

I'm looking through you, Where did you go? I thought I knew you,

What did I know?

You don't look different, But you have changed.

I'm looking through you, You're not the same.

Yeah, baby you've changed.I'm looking through you "

Obama claims that he does not recognize Rev. Wright anymore.

Does anyone believe that? I don't!

Did Rev. Wright really change that much? Or, is Obama acting like the politician that the Rev talked out?

What happens next is any one's guess?

Obama's "hope and change" sideshow is in the ditch.

Can Hillary Clinton stop him? The Clintons will try but Obama is the choice of the floor, no matter how unelectable he is! (Enjoy the video!)

Obama and his friends!

How in the world does Barrack Obama stand by Rev. Wright now?

Susan Estrich is right: Who Needs Friends Like Rev. Wright?

James Taranto is on target: The Great Divider

This morning, Rev. Wright had a choice: he could talk about theology or inject himself into the presidential campaign with more outrageous remarks!

He chose to go crazy again! The Rev loves the attention and he got lots of it today. The Rev is on top of the charts and will stay there for a bit longer!

Barrack Obama has two awful choices:

1) He can give another vague response, i.e. the "crazy uncle" option! Unfortunately, this crazy uncle is just too crazy!

2) He can cut ties with Rev. Wright. Is he tough enough to do that? I don't think so! I have not seen anything in Obama to suggest that he will fight against anybody. It's all "hope and change" for Obama!

The Dems have created this mess and now must live with it.

The super delegates (i.e. the unelected delegates) have to know that Obama is unelectable. He can't win! He can't even the white vote in Dem primaries.

Who is going to take the nomination away from the man who swooned the Dems for months?

He told them what they wanted to hear.

He forced Hillary Clinton to go to the left on Iraq and NAFTA.

What a mess!

What happens when you fall in love with a total stranger?

The amazing 2008 campaign moves on. Who could have believed any of this a year ago?

Barrack Obama is melting in front of us.

His magical candidacy has lost all of its magic.

He is nothing but another liberal who can't get middle class votes between LA and NY City.

He is Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry with a "hope and change" speech!

Where is Ross Perot when the Dems really need him?

Thomas Sowell nails Obama this morning:

"Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of "change" endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything has says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s.....Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old and too ignorant of history to have heard about it."

Wasn't he declared the most liberal senator in the US Senate? Obama is to the left of Ted Kennedy, which is a major undertaking! (Obama: Most Liberal Senator In 2007)

George Will has a few thoughts about Obama's pastor:

"He is a demagogue with whom Obama has had a voluntary 20-year relationship that implies, if not moral approval, certainly no serious disapproval.

Wright also is an ongoing fountain of anti-American and, properly understood, anti-black rubbish.

His Monday speech demonstrated that he wants to be a central figure in this presidential campaign.

He should be."

The Wall Street Journal has the quote of the day:

"Anyone raised amid the wisdom of mothers knows well the dictum that "some people just talk too much."

Meet the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr."

Yes, Wright talks too much. Or, does Obama listen too much?

How did the Dems do this? How are they about to nominate someone that most Dems don't know a darn thing about?

The answer is simple. The Dems are irrational about Iraq and suffer from a horrible case of what Charles Krauthammer described as Bush Derangement Syndrome!

For some time, the Dems' left wing base was looking for the one and only Dem who did not support the Iraq War.

Back in 2002, Obama was a totally unknown state senator from Illinois. After the Iraq War vote, Obama gave an interview to a Chicago station.

The left hitched its wagon to Obama because he opposed the war, in contrast to Kerry and Clinton who voted for it and cheered the decision to start the war. (Video) There are also many who doubt Obama's sincerity on the Iraq War. Was he always against it? It's hard to tell but this video raises questions about Obama! (Watch this video)

Nevertheless, the Dems found their anti-war candidate. They found him and everything else that comes with him.

What happens when you fall in love with a stranger? You get the stranger and all of his strange relatives and friends!

"D" does not stand for Democrat anymore. It stands for dysfunctional, which is the best way to describe what was once the party of FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ.

Enjoy this video!

This video actually comes from the UK. I saw it on Hugh Hewitt's website. I think that you need a video like this after watching Rev. Wright's performance this morning!

What if global warming never reaches Minnesota?

John Hinderaker of The Power Line Blog just got back to Minnesota. This is what he wrote:

"I've been at Dartmouth for a couple of days; spring has come to northern New England, with leaves budding, grass turning green, and temperatures up to 70 degrees.

So it was a rude awakening to return to Minnesota.

It snowed in Minneapolis today, but didn't stick. Thank goodness. A little west or north of here, people weren't so lucky." (Endless Winter, Part 2)

John then took the time to make a list of the doom and gloom predictions of recent years:

"Predictions of environmental doom have been with us for a long time, as the Washington Policy Center reminds us:

•“...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.

• By 1995, “...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

• Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

• The world will be “...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

• “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.

• “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.

• “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...” Life magazine, January 1970.

• “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

• “...air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

• Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.

• “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

• “By the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970."

I don't know about you but I gave up on the "doom and gloomers" a long time ago.

Also, why do they always make these predictions when there is a Republican in the White House?

I guess that Dems lose elections, fantasize about electoral conspiracies and then drink from the bottle of doom and gloom.

If "doom and gloomers" were professional baseball players, they'd be out of baseball for swinging and missing so many pitches.

If "doom and gloomers" were business consultants, they'd be out of business for making so many bad predictions.

In the meantime, they're still waiting for spring in Minnesota! Also, we are still waiting for US liberals to practice what they preach about global warming! They can't give up their private planes or huge homes that require so much energy! I guess that they want to keep their SUVs and force the rest of to ride a bicycle! (Huffington Concedes Her Lifestyle is 'Contradiction' to Global Warming Agenda)

Are you ready for Michelle Obama?

Michelle Obama or Cindy McCain will be our next First Lady. So what are the two ladies saying these days?

Cindy is next to McCain and does not do politics. She is happy being John's wife and lets her husband do the talking.

I guess we call that "The Laura Bush School of First Ladies"! We love First Ladies who take care of their husbands and write books about reading to your children.

On the other hand, Michelle Obama is turning into one opinionated lady. Listen to her:

"Barack Obama will require you to work.

He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism.

That you put down your divisions.

That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones.

That you push yourselves to be better.

And that you engage.

Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."

I can't wait for Barack "Zig Ziglar" Obama!

Will Obama engage us after or before he tells the nation that his Iraq War promises were just a lot of campaign hot air?

Or will he move us out of our comfort zones after he learns how capital gains taxes work?

Or will he shed our cynicism after he tells the "yes we can screamers" that the stuff about NAFTA was just pandering to unions?

Cynicism? Disillusionment?

Yes, there is going to be a lot of it when the "yes we can screamers" learn that Barack Obama is just an empty suit with a flair for good lines.

P.S. On second thought, we should thank Rev. Wright. The Rev may have saved the Republic by filling an empty vessel named Barrack!

Go Stars! Save our spring!

The Rangers finally got to 9 wins but it took 25 games. Today, Vicente Padilla gave the Rangers what they needed most: a complete game 10-0 shutout!

The Mavericks are hard to follow. They lose their first two, win game 3 and lost game 4. I'm scared of falling in love with this team. I am afraid that they will break my heart. I'm still sore over the Cowboys!

The Stars are my heroes this month. They won game 1 in San Jose, overtime! It was late at night but worth staying up for! Dallas Stars captain Brenden Morrow had the winning shot! They won game 2! They are 2-0 against the Sharks!

Let me say this. The Stars have played two unbelievable over time games in their history.

In 1999, they won the Stanley Cup in triple overtime in Buffalo! Still the greatest hockey game for me! It was Hull who put it in somehow. On the other side, Eddie Belfour stopped shot after shot! It was an amazing hockey game.

In the first round of the '99 playoffs, they played another triple time series clincher in Edmonton. I guess that staying up until 2am for hockey is good as long your team wins! They finally won when the amazing Nieuwendyk scored in the 57th minute of overtime! I can still hear it on the radio! I jumped on the bed and scared my wife to death!

The Stars are playing great. We are betting on the Stars to save our spring, specially since the Rangers are off to an awful start and the Mavericks are so unpredictable these days.

Go Stars!

One of my favorite songs!

On Sundays, we drop the politics and go musical. Today, I will tell you about one of my very favorite songs. This is a folk classic written by Pete Seeger and performed by The Kingston Trio:

This song has been recorded by just about everyone. It was also one of the first tunes that I tried playing on the guitar. The big hit version belongs to The Kingston Trio but Peter Paul & Mary also had a very nice arrangement of it:

(Pete Seeger)

Where have all the flowers gone? Long time passing.

Where have all the flowers gone? Long time ago.

Where have all the flowers gone?

Young girls picked them, ev'ry one.

When will they ever learn?

When will they ever learn?

Where have all the young girls gone? Long time passing.

Where have all the young girls gone? Long time ago.

Where have all the young girls gone?

Gone to young men ev'ry one.

When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?

Where have all the young men gone? Long time passing.

Where have all the young men gone? Long time ago.

Where have all the young men gone?

Gone to soldiers ev'ry one.

When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?

Where have all the soldiers gone? Long time passing.

Where have all the soldiers gone? Long time ago.

Where have all the soldiers gone?

Gone to graveyards, ev'ry one.

When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?

Where have all the graveyards gone? Long time passing.

Where have all the graveyards gone? Long time ago.

Where have all the graveyards gone?

Gone to flowers, ev'ry one.

When will they ever learn?

When will they ever learn?"

Judy Collins' "My father" is a great song

Judy Collins is one of my favorite folk singers. Her hits include "Both sides now", "Someday soon" and "Send in the clowns". I love her versions of "Amazing Grace" and "Turn turn turn".

My favorite song is "My father".

Later she said this about her father:

"I always sang when I was little and my father, who was a great influence on me, also had a wonderful voice.

He and my mother really encouraged me to sing and play the piano.

They were always very supportive."

Here are the lyrics:

"My father always promised us

That we would live in France

We'd go boating on the Seine

And I would learn to dance

We lived in Ohio then

He worked in the mines

On his dreams like boats

We knew we would sail in time

All my sisters soon were gone

To Denver and Cheyenne

Marrying their grownup dreams

The lilacs and the man

I stayed behind the youngest still

Only danced alone

The colors of my father's dreams

Faded without a sound

And I live in Paris now

My children dance and dream

Hearing the ways of a miner's life

In words they've never seen

I sail my memories of home

Like boats across the Seine

And watch the Paris sun

As it sets in my father's eyes again

My father always promised us

That we would live in France

We'd go boating on the Seine

And I would learn to dance

I sail my memories of home

Like boats across the Seine

And watch the Paris sun

As it sets in my father's eyes again."

Whatever happened to Bob Lind?

Bob Lind wrote "Elusive Butterfly", one of the greatest songs of the 1960's.

And then he did not record any other hits!

I understand from his website that his songs were recorded by other artists. Frankly, I am not familiar with them.

Whatever happened to Bob Lind? Is he the all time "one hit wonder"?

Elusive Butterfly
(written by Bob Lind)

You might wake up some mornin'
To the sound of something moving

past your window in the wind
And if you're quick enough to rise
You'll catch a fleeting glimpse of someone's fading shadow
Out on the new horizon
You may see the floating motion of a distant pair of wings
And if the sleep has left your ears
You might hear footsteps running through an open meadow
Don't be concerned,
it will not harm you

It's only me pursuing somethin' I'm not sure of
Across my dreams with nets of wonder
I chase the bright elusive butterfly of love
You might have heard my footsteps
Echo softly in the distance through the canyons of your mind
I might have even called your name
As I ran searching after something to believe in
You might have seen me runnin'

Through the long-abandoned
ruins of the dreams you left behind
If you remember something there
That glided past you followed close by heavy breathin'
Don't be concerned, it will not harm you

It's only me pursuing somethin'
I'm not sure of
Across my dreams with nets of wonder
I chase the bright elusive butterfly of love

Across my dreams with nets of wonder
I chase the bright elusive butterfly of love"

Pretty good song!

Demand up, supply down means high prices!

For 35 years, we have been talking about an energy policy in the US. From Nixon to Bush, we have done nothing.

Why? Because the irrational environmentalists, and their friends in the Dem party, have stopped every effort to increase supplies.

We can't build nuclear plants because a couple of cows got sick during The 3 Mile Island incident in 1979. It's so expensive to put up a nuclear plan in the US that no one has the money or inclination to pay the lawyers. Why start a business if you are going to be sued every minute of the day? (GREENPEACE founder now backs nuclear power; no proof global warming is caused by humans... )

We can't build new refineries. Yet, we have the technology to do it and protect the environment. Again, it's so expensive that no one has the money to do it! Why start a business if you are going to be sued every day because some little worm was molested in the environment?

We can't drill for oil even though we have plenty to fulfill whatever demand we may have. We have lots of oil in Alaska. We have lots of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. Again, no one has enough of legal fund to put up with the mindless lawsuits brought on by the "amblulance chasers" financing the Dem party.

So here we are.

Gas is $3.50 and it's all Bush's fault!

Yes, everything is Bush's fault!

Perhaps, we will finally have a serious debate about what happens when demand grows (Indian and China) and supplies don't keep up. (More Oil Drilling, Please) The result is high prices. Welcome to Economics 101!

McCain wins another Dem primary!

The Clinton-Obama show moves on to NC and Indiana.

The McCain show moves to another town hall meeting with real voters.

In other words, McCain is talking to real people. Obama and Clinton are calling each other names.

Obama is talking about the return of Rev. Wright!

The "Rev is back" is Obama's worst nightmare, specially since the candidate can not explain how he sat in this church for 20 years.

How can you say that you are tough enough to stand up to terrorists when you don't have the courage to stand up to your racist reverend?

How can anyone sit in a church and allow his children to hear what Rev. Wright was saying about AIDS and the US government?

Why didn't Obama quit after the 9-11 sermon?

Obama either slept at church or did not attend the services.

Or, he is a wimp who can't stand up to anyone!

The Obama-Wright connection will go a long way toward painting everything red between LA and New York City this fall!

It does not help to hear this from the Obama camp: Plouffe: McCain has the racist vote

Over at the Clinton camp, Hillary Clinton is trying to keep her husband under control. (He's Back: Bill Clinton gives his wife's campaign new momentum as he seizes a bigger role)

Former Pres. Clinton is giving the nation a preview of what a Clinton-Clinton White House will look like.

She can not control him!

Can you imagine what a First Spouse Bill Clinton will be like when he is running around on public planes raising money for his Foundation and Library? The WSJ had a good editorial about this: Clinton Foundation Secrets!

Bill Clinton is not going to sit back and play second fiddle to his wife!

Is the nation ready for two presidents in the White House?

I don't think so!

Do you understand now why Howard Dean is having such a bad case of indigestion?

McCain is enjoying an incredible amount of good luck. Beyond that, McCain is also reaping the rewards of a very distinguished public career.

Let's face it: McCain is exactly the kind of war hero and public figure that most Americans respect.

You may not agree with him. At the same time, he does not read polls to tell you where he stands.

Over and over, McCain has been willing to take unpopular positions.

Again, you may disagree with McCain. However, you don't need a translator to tell you where he stands.

Rasmussen Reports has an extensive report on issues and candidates:

Economy:

"Given a choice between McCain and Clinton, 47% trust McCain more while 42% prefer the former First Lady. Given a choice between McCain and Obama on the economy, 46% trust the GOP nominee while 39% opt for the Democratic frontrunner."

Iraq

"However, when it comes to the War in Iraq, McCain is trusted by more than either Democrat. Fifty percent (50%) trust McCain over Clinton while 40% hold the opposite view. Forty-eight percent (48%) trust McCain over Obama while 39% prefer Obama."

National Security

"When it comes to national security, McCain is trusted more than Clinton by a 54% to 34% margin. With Obama, McCain’s advantage is 52% to 31%."

Taxes

"McCain is trusted over Clinton 45% to 36% and by a 41% to 38% margin over Obama."

Yes, I know that it's only late April.

Yes, I know that the election is 6 months away!

However, no one can deny that McCain is doing quite well.

To be fair, some of these numbers will change when the Dems finally choose a nominee.

The Dems will come together to a point. However, the nasty primary has taken a toll on voters.

Will blacks support Hillary Clinton if they feel that the party took the nomination from Obama? Probably not! It's tough for the Dems (who usually get 90% of the black vote) to win if blacks stay home!

Will those older white voters in PA and Ohio vote for Obama after the San Francisco comments? Probably not! Obama is exactly the kind of liberal that has cost the Dems so much trouble in recent years!

Again, I don't think that McCain's success is totally due to the Dems' fight.

Clinton and Obama are both suffering from a very bad case of vagueness.

On the economy, their entire plan is to "tax the rich" and pitiful "class warfare".

This kind of rhetoric may work before the "yes we can screamers"!

It does not work in front of real people who actually pay income taxes.

On free trade, they are both pandering to unions.

Obama and Clinton have crossed the line of demagoguery and irresponsibility on NAFTA and the Colombian Trade Pact.

Wonder if Pres. Calderon is looking forward to a Clinton or Obama in the White House? Wonder how the Canadians feel?

On Iraq, McCain has been very consistent. Clinton & Obama have been very vague.

Obama can not explain why his foreign policy advisers continue to contradict him in public.

Clinton has been all over the map on Iraq. She once supported the war. She is now against it.

The Dems basic problem continues:

First, you can't win an election by blaming everything on Bush. At some point, voters need to hear a position rather than another cheap shot at Bush.

Second, the Dems have a "male problem".

LBJ was the last Dem to win the white male vote and that goes back to 1964. The Dems had no problem with the "male vote" when they nominated men like FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ.

Today, men are more likely to vote Republican. Why? Men do not feel that the Dems are tough enough to defend the country.

Bush beat Gore and Kerry because he won big with white men! Bush also did very well with the so called "security moms" or married women with children!

Perhaps the party needs a little Viagra!

Third, you can't win if you engage in "tax the rich, class warfare". Most Americans are smart enough to know that "tax the rich" usually ends up taxing the middle class.

Class warfare may work for Lopez-Obrador in Mexico but has never worked in the US.

It's early but McCain looks strong. He must be eating his Lucky Charms every morning! Wonder what Howard Dean is taking for indigestion?

What happens when our cars eat the corn?

Deroy Murdock is with The Hoover Institution. A few days ago, he reminded us that we are watching a problem created by government not free markets:

"Eager to ride the ethanol gravy train, wheat and soybean farmers increasingly switch to corn. Thus, hard wheat is up 86 percent, while soybeans cost 93 percent more." (Global Food Riots)

The ethanol experiment has backfired. It's time to take another look at it! (Food Crisis Starts Eclipsing Climate Change Worries)

Ed Morrissey has a good post on all of this. I agree that it makes more sense to feed people than our cars:

"Every fill of the tank with ethanol uses the same amount of corn a child would eat in a year, and let’s not even talk about the amount of potable water used to grow the corn in the first place.

Given the above, which is the better use of the corn?

If we produce ethanol from waste — such as with switchgrass, which shows promise — then no ethical problem would exist, although certainly the efficiency issues would remain.

Until then, we should end the push to turn food into fuel, driven by the global-climate-change hysteria and pandering to the agricultural sector.

Feed people ahead of cars. Is that really such a difficult concept?" (Feeding cars instead of people)

What do we do? There are no easy answers, specially with the price of oil at $120 a barrel. At the same time, it's hard to put corn in our cars and watch people go hungry around the world.

No doom and gloom in this blog!

We are not into "doom and gloom" in this blog.

We appreciate the fact that we live in the most prosperous, generous and greatest nation in the history of the world.

We don't dwell on negatives. We are not obsessed with looking for every negative and turning it into another opportunity to take a cheap shot at Pres. Bush!

What happens when you hear that everything is a "crisis"? I guess that you have a very uneven view of the US economy or the challenges we face.

The Sky's Not Falling By John Stossel put the mortgage default crisis in some perspective:

"And are we really experiencing a mortgage-default "crisis"? No. The Mortgage Bankers Association's 2007 fourth-quarter survey reports that foreclosures came to 2.04 percent of all mortgages.

Many of those were speculators seeking flip profits rather than homeowners losing a dream house. During the quarter, only 0.83 percent of homes entered the foreclosure process.

It may get worse -- in March, "foreclosure filings, default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions rose 5 percent," Reuters reports.

But let's keep things in perspective:

Ninety-eight percent of borrowers are not in foreclosure.

Only a small percentage of them are even late in payments."

What should you do?

Step back and see the big picture. The sky is not falling.

Obama doesn't have a plan to end the Iraq War!

As I continue to say, McCain is the only one telling the truth about the Iraq War. (Also NAFTA but that's another post!)

Clinton and Obama are playing with their voters. They are telling their voters what they want to hear.

A few years ago, Clinton had a responsible position on the war. Since Obama started moving up, she dropped it and started rushing to the left wing corner.

Today, we have two candidates promising to end the war. What we don't have is a clear idea of how they will end the war.

The anti-war movement is fit to be tied with the Pelosi-Reid Congress over Iraq. They will be even more angry when Pres. Obama or Clinton doesn't do anything to end the war as quickly.

Michael Crowley is a senior editor at The New Republic. Today, he brought some reality into this debate with Barack in Iraq (Can he really end the war?).

I'n not sure if most Dems have the courage to read it or believe it:

"What he is offering is a basic vision of withdrawal with muddy particulars, one his advisers are still formulating and one that, if he is elected, is destined to meet an even muddier reality on the ground.

Obama has set a clear direction for U.S. policy in Iraq: He wants us out of Iraq; but he's not willing to do it at any cost--even if it means dashing the hopes of some of his more fervent and naïve supporters.

And, when it comes to Iraq, whatever the merits of Obama's withdrawal plan may be, "Yes, We Can" might ultimately yield to "No, we can't.""

If Obama or Clinton wins, then the anti-war movement will be reduced to say that "Obama lied, people died".

Also, the anti-war supporters will finally realize that the world's problems are a lot more complicated in the Oval Office than at the "yes we can" rallies.

Again, McCain will win this election. Obama (or Clinton) won't have to deal with the idiocy of their campaign rhetoric.

After McCain's victory, the Dems will go back to the bleachers and blame everything on McCain!

What's new about that? The Dems have a PhD on blaming everything on the guy who beat them in the election!

"Operation Chaos" is the greatest radio stunt since Orson Wells!

Back in 1938, Orson Wells' "The war of the worlds" drove drivers off the road and people to jump off their roofs. Everybody thought that the Martians had landed somewhere near New York City.

For many of us, Rush Limbaugh is a wonderful lunch companion. I laugh hard with Rush. He is the best radio host in the country. He understands how radio works better than anybody else. I guess that 20 million listeners can't be wrong!

Rush Limbaugh has gotten into the Dems' heads with "Operation Chaos".

How many Republicans switched to vote for Clinton in PA? Probably not many! I just don't think that most people would do it!

Nevertheless, Limbaugh has the Dems in a state of panic. Last night, the media was speculating over the impact of Clinton winning PA because conservatives switched to vote for her. It also impacted exit polls!

Again, my guess is that Operation Chaos had a small impact. Yet, we can not deny that Obama is having trouble connecting with so called Reagan Democrats.

This fall, those Reagan Dems are more likely to vote for McCain than Obama!

Some thoughts on the PA primary!

My prediction was pretty good. I said 53-55% for Clinton. So far, she is leading Obama, 54-46% with about 76% of the vote in.

What does it mean?

First, the fight moves on. Clinton will be re-energized to move on to NC and Indiana.

Second, Obama can not close the sale. He is like the salesman who looks the part, makes a wonderful presentation but doesn't get the signature on the application.

Third, Clinton has a honesty problem with Dems. I saw an exit poll that a plurality of Dems don't think that she's trustworthy.

Can Clinton convince super delegates to take the nomination from Obama? I don't see it.

Obama will be the nominee. As a McCain supporter, I'm very happy about that!

Obama can't avoid debates (or his past)

Did I hear that right? Obama has cancelled a debate with CBS News!

Unlike McCain, who is doing a ton of town hall meetings and press conferences, Obama has decided to avoid questions.

Frankly, this is a mistake.

Also, where is the media outrage? Where are the reporters screaming that Obama is refusing to talk to them?

Obama had a terrible debate a week ago. He had trouble with questions about his past. He had even more trouble with questions about current issues, like taxes. He came across as someone who does not understand capital gains taxes. Rick Moran has the day's best line: "But his handlers have scrapped the idea of any more debates and the candidate himself is dodging the press as if they all had ebola."

Don't misunderstand. Clinton has her problems, too. I agree with Ed Morrissey:

"Democrats have discovered an ugly truth: neither of the two candidates left will unite the party, and for good reason.

They’re both lousy candidates.

People like Obama more on a personal level, but both carry significant negatives now, and both candidates have contributed to them.

Hillary Clinton’s Tuzla Dash will guarantee her defeat in November, and if not, Bill Clinton apparently will. Hillary now gets less of the African-American vote than Republicans — only 8% in Pennsylvania.

Obama can’t even buy a victory despite having more money than Croesus, and he has lost every big state the Democrats need to win in November."

Let me say it again: How did John McCain get so lucky?