Sean Hannity And Bill O’Reilly Disgrace The Profession Of Journalism; Their Anti-Obama Agenda Is Shameful.

The gatekeepers at Fox News network like to boast that their news is fair and balanced: that’s bullshit. I think it is fair for me to say that Fox News network has an obvious right-wing slant that they don’t even try to disguise. And that’s okay to a point, since it’s their business. But when it comes to electing the next president of the USA, human decency should dictate that some level of fairness be considered when the principals are being reported on; and relative to how they are scrutinized and treated. Fox News network has been trying to destroy Barack Obama’s candidacy for quite some time now and it is time to stop this obvious vendetta. The world is watching.

Take the latest media craze: Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright; the former pastor of the church Barack Obama has attended for the past twenty years or so. Sean Hannity has been pushing this story for months; he has had help from the likes of Bill O’Reilly and others in the Fox family. Fine. Both Hannity and O’Reilly work for the network and are part of this anachronistic and almost all-white news club, which is flaunted everyday by those who are totally insensitive to the demands for fairness, equality and social justice, from people who are non-white. This insensitivity is the disgrace of America’s political right. It exposes them for what many of them really are: people who feel that humans who aren’t white (Caucasian) are inferior.

No one can accuse me of condoning the divisive aspects of some of Rev. Wright’s statements; I find them rather unfortunate and in some instances divisive. His choice of words in expressing his outrage at US foreign policy and such, are in some aspects: reprehensible. His analysis of various events and happenings (like HIV/AIDS) is troubling. His mind-set seems one filled of anger and venom; somewhat surprising for a Christian pastor. But this former marine- who grew up in the time of Jim Crow laws- is entitled to his first amendment guarantee of freedom of speech. This is the point to my column here: right wingers, white conservative types and those who carry water for them, are hypocritical when it comes to freedom of speech issues. They offer no sympathy, compassion or sensitivity for Wright- as a product of the racially oppressive days of Jim Crow- but give free passes to white ministers, televangelists, preachers, supremacists and demagogues, when it comes to freedom of speech issues and some of the similar things they say.

The biggest impediment to solving the problem of racism in the USA is the denial that comes from all sides of the divide. Only when this denial is confronted will we get anywhere closer to solving this seemingly intractable issue. Let’s take the latest Clinton campaign dust-up. Geraldine Ferraro- one of HRC’s big feminist supporters- made probably the most nonsensical statement of this campaign cycle so far, when she suggested that Barack Obama has gotten where he is (his success in this presidential race to date) because he is lucky to be black. This is the same woman, who in 1988 said that Jesse Jackson was only running in the presidential primary (and with some success too), because he too “was black”. Talk about double-speak/lol; or is it double-talk? This was not accidental or coincidental; this was deliberate on Ms. Ferraro’s part. This lady needs some sensitivity training; even at age 72 it can be useful.

When I said right here on the blogs, that “race” will be the “gorilla at the back of the room” in this presidential contest, I knew many felt that I was overreaching. Others felt that I was somehow exaggerating and being absurd somewhat. Go back to some of the comments made in the comment sections of some of my previous columns. I had to explain to many a person on the telephone, over e-mail inquiries, in various gatherings, and on the streets, that race is the unconscious factor in the lives of most Americans: no matter what color or genetic-nationality. I had to further explain some of the things that I have written about here -in many a column- that most Americans are in denial when it comes to racism; that there are many who walk around this country, unconscious to the fact that they have racist tendencies; seemingly oblivious to their programmed racist predispositions and /or built-in racial reflexes. This is where it starts: in the mirror that few care to look into. This is where it ends: in the introspection (and retrospection) that few care to indulge and/or confront.

On the street corners of many a black congressional district, you would often hear soul-folks saying: “no big thing but a chicken wing”. This can be heard whenever there is a fuss about something or the other that soul-people think is being overblown. On corners of white congressional districts (and by white and black, I am only alluding to where the majority of the residents are of that color; that’s all), you may hear the same sentiments expressed this way: “much ado about nothing”. Well that’s how I feel about all this super-delegate noise, coming out from many tense corners of hot and heavy political competition; like the kind taking place between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama- as they compete for the Democrat’s presidential nomination.

Look people, rules are rules. That’s it; period. Once you agree to play by the rules, then ethics dictate you are bound to abide by said rules. So here we have both camps talking all kinds of “stupid shit” about the super-delegates, in attempts at chicanery; they ought to be ashamed of themselves. And this goes for both campaigns. Both campaigns need to chill.

For sometime now the Billary Clinton’s campaign has been complaining that mainstream media has been unfair to Hillary Clinton. But is this true? Lots of supporters from both the Clinton and Obama camps, have (at various points of this marathon) attacked the media treatment of their candidate; the Clintonistas in particular have gone to great lengths in trying to drive this point across. Comedians and comedy shows have lampooned their very complaints. And yet all mainstream media is doing is nothing short of pursuing their unaltruistic everyday agenda of: sensationalism and controversy-creation. It is not only about providing information for public dissemination and action; it is also about profits.

Mainstream media likes to stir up the pot; they like to create controversy even where there wasn’t, or even when there isn’t. This sells computers, newspapers, books, magazines, et al. This brings high ratings relative to viewership and listenership. It’s unfortunate but it is true. A political brouhaha is a gatekeeper’s orgasm. If they can’t find one, well, they fabricate it. That’s what they are doing right now with this so-called contest between Obama and the Clintons. They bend the truth to keep it alive. They twist the facts to perpetuate this media-farce. It is one big charade. It is slowly becoming a joke; eventually we will all laugh. Hopefully the joke won’t be on the obvious democratic nominee: Barack Obama. This unnecessary continuum isn’t funny; the ammo being provided for Republicans to use after Labor Day, could blow up in the faces of optimistic party-loyalists. Are they getting this?

Mainstream media should be informing and educating the general public. It should be as honest and truthful as humanly possible; but is it? It should be an edification tool, not a vehicle used only for high ratings and big profits. It should be more civic-minded and less self-absorbed. Media’s status as the fourth estate didn’t come about accidentally. Political scholars have written countless dissertations about the importance of media in reifying our democratic ideals. Unfortunately, for political-idealists like myself, mainstream media often times leaves a lot to be desired; it is why I believe the political blogs have become so popular. With all the warts attached, political blogs have gotten real close to the true pulse of the polity; even more so than the framers of the constitution envisaged.

I wanted to wait until after next Tuesday’s primary to write this, but since I am taking for granted that Barack Obama will win the Mississippi primary that day, I will go ahead with this column now. I expect Barack Obama to win the Wyoming caucus later today, if only because his campaign staff has an impressive record of bringing out caucus goers loyal to their cause; and also because I have heard from on the ground (where the boots are) that Obama has out-organized Clinton in this state; in a big way. His campaign has been on the ground here for quite some time now. But even if he loses the Wyoming caucus, that outcome has little bearing on what I want to say here; only 12 delegates are up for grabs; he will get his share no matter what.

If you look up the word “mulligan” in the dictionary, you would find that it is a re-taken golf shot; or better still: a shot that- against the rules- a golfer allows an opponent to take again. Bill Clinton is known to take many mulligans when playing friendly games of golf; his wife (Hillary Rodham Clinton) seems to have learned this bad habit quite well. It is all about changing the rules in mid game, especially when things aren’t going their way. It’s about refining techniques that give them an unfair advantage in any competitive event. It is cheap, low and crass.

If Billary were to go to any toy store to purchase a device for their pleasure, what they would find is that in near all devices sold: “batteries are not included”. So after Tuesday’s primaries (Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont), all rational Democrats need to emphatically make the case- to both Bill and Hillary Clinton- that mulligans (just like batteries) are not included in the rules of this year’s primary elections.

I must admit that I have been having big fun during this election cycle. I have been amused when watching the many “Clintonistas”, running around the talk shows, spinning deluded tales of audacious hopes for best case scenarios, while seemingly oblivious to the harsher reality: Billary’s candidacy is dead; long live the dead.

Barack Obama’s broom has been busy lately. It has been sweeping caucuses and cleaning up primaries. It hasn’t surprised me one bit, as I have been telling you guys for a while now: you are watching history unfold, folks. Okay: so I like to rub the noses of my detractors into the groundings of my political predictions come true. Live with it.

Last week I told you guys that Obama could sweep the seven upcoming races (including Maine-which everyone and his brother thought Billary would win). I said the worst he could do was win five of seven. I also said that Billary’s best shot for an upset was in Maryland; well take Maryland off the table now. I didn’t even consider The Virgin islands worthy of discussion, since there were only three delegates at stake: but then that was already in the Obama win column. Tonight, I expect Barack Obama’s broom to sweep through the District of Columbia, Virginia and Maryland. Billary will be cleaning up late tonight folks. Start calling her the “clean-up woman”; she will be doing a lot of cleaning up after Obama keeps winning. By tonight he would have won about two dozen caucuses and primaries; this is rally impressive folks: it is time to admit that you Clintonistas.

I expect Obama to win Hawaii. He will do well in Rhode Island and Wisconsin. Even if he loses Ohio and Texas (as the Clinton folks are saying) he will get lots of delegates because of the delegate-formula. In Texas the formula for delegates favor Obama in the black congressional districts as compared to the Hispanic districts. The formula is based on previous turnout, and turnout has been higher in black areas of Texas when compared to Hispanic areas.

I just wanted to get in this short emergency piece on the great Super-Tuesday post-election analysis, because “spin” is exactly that: “spin”. LOL. All through the night, many of you must have heard the spinmeisters weaving their deceptive tales about who won Super Tuesday, but what is the objective reality? Where is the truth? And when do you separate truth from spin?

In yesterday’s contests Barack Obama won thirteen states; Hillary Clinton won eight. The only state still outstanding at this point is New Mexico, and Obama is slightly ahead in the count, plus he won the exit polls. That will give him fourteen when they finish counting this morning, once the trends hold up. As of today Barack Obama has won more primaries or caucuses than HRC, up to this point in the contest. It is worst if you subtract Florida and Michigan from her win column. Remember these two states were places that the candidates agreed not to contest- but Hillary violated the agreement. She went as far as having her name placed on the Michigan ballot (while he didn’t); how crass and unethical. Now her people are threatening to go to court, in order to seat these delegates, which the Democratic National Committee (DNC) - in agreement with all the candidates- agreed not to count.

At this point in time, Barack Obama is ahead in terms of combined vote totals, and he is going to be slightly ahead with HRC amongst committed delegates (once you subtract the flexible super-delegates). Yes, this is all factual despite Clinton’s big wins in New York and California. Still, media spinmeisters are trying to suggest that Hillary Clinton is leading and winning. So using the immortal words of Bill Clinton; I say: “gimme a break”. This is a fairy tale if I have ever seen one LOL.

I didn’t want to do a pre-Super Tuesday column; I really didn’t. I am so tired of all the bullshit on these blogs, coming from anonymous attackers not wanting intelligent discourse- but just wanting to get their rocks off (and aimed at me of course)- that I thought about taking a pass. However, I have had so many requests for such a column, that I couldn’t wait till next week (to do my now deliberate: one a week column); so here I am; a few days early.

One hundred and ninety three years ago, Napoleon Bonaparte of France fought a battle against the British, and lost at Waterloo; this signaled the beginning of the end of Napoleon’s colorful reign. On Super Tuesday, Bill and Hillary Clinton will meet their Waterloo, when they go into political battle with Barack Hussein Obama in about two dozen varied states. At the end of the night, it will be clear to near everyone (bar the die-hard Clinton-fanatics) that the Clinton dynasty is coming to an end.

Super Tuesday (Feb.5th, 2008) will leave Hillary Clinton gasping for oxygen, in trying to keep up the delegate pace with Obama. Sure she will win the popular vote in some of the states up for grabs; and sure she will win some of the delegates up for grabs; but at the end of the night: she will still be lined up behind Obama in the delegate count. This is where the end for Billary begins. Super delegates will be rushing into the Obama column after Tuesday; like a bargain-hunter at the day after Christmas sale.

Okay; now for some predictions.

The history of the USA is littered with victims; people who have been victimized for one reason or another, from some time period to another. Amongst these groups you could find Native Indians; indentured servants, negroes and other slaves; some ethnic minorities; African Americans in the post-civil war era (especially males); members of a few nationalistic groups - which in the short term suffered discrimination, scorn and the like; and American women in general-women of all races, ethnicities, nationalities and religions.

The one group that will find it difficult to make a comprehensive case for victimization here, is Caucasian males; and despite there being a few individuals from this group, who may be successful in making such a case; for the most part: white males have overwhelmingly run the show since the pilgrims first landed at Plymouth Rock. They have always held power in their hands; power that dominated the social, economic, political, religious, military and other institutions of the country; power that has dominated the every fabric of what is called: “Americana”.

This is the objective reality that many white males love to try to deny. They shouldn’t; since most of the demands coming from alternate quarters have been for power-sharing, not for obliteration; there is a difference. They are somewhat lucky in this regard; given some of the shit they have done to others: non-white male. I don’t hear any opposing group in the USA, looking for revenge- in this world where grievances could last for a millennium or beyond. That is fascinating folks; truly.

The problem with male white-power in US society has been the painful reality left for others: that this power has been abused at times; and in so doing been abusive to many. Even white women have felt the abuse. So it was not surprising to many a student of history, that in 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was formed. Its main mission was to advocate for equality. That was a good day for women all over the world- given America’s universal influence on most things.

Say what you want about our mayor and his modus operandi but he has gotten a few things right over his tenure. I am not a big fan of his but I don’t dislike him either. He was absolutely correct with his ban on cigarettes in certain public establishments; taking the flack in order to get that policy into law. He was correct in putting public education on the front burner; even though I feel that his successes in this area were somewhat exaggerated: but you can’t deny that he has genuinely tried to deal with the issue. I think that in principle he was correct to suggest some type of congestion pricing formula for Manhattan’s traffic congestion problem; hopefully the details would be worked out before pigs grow wings. His positions on the issues surrounding illegal firearms (guns, gun shows, gun sales, etc.) are sensible and timely; and there are other things I could commend him on. Of course there are also many others that I could critique him on, but that’s not the issue here. You can always view my column in the archives (where I called him a leprechaun), to get a better sense of how I felt about him just a year ago.

Lately, the issues surrounding “term limits” have reared their ugly heads again. And maybe some intrepid reporters like Azi Payabarah, Ben Smith and/or Helen Klein, could one day dig deep enough, to find out whether or nor Speaker Christine Quinn did promise to overturn term limits (legislatively), when trying to secure supportive votes during her speakership bid. You see, if she did make some open (or “wink-wink”) promises, then she has reneged on her colleagues. Yesterday, Christine Quinn came out fully against overturning term limits. Did someone say: mayoral bid coming? In recent past Christine had been quite vocal in her opposition to term limits. Did the Angel Gabriel suddenly appear out of her mayoral dreams, with a convincing argument? Or was it intense polling on the issue?