Billy Townsend, The Tampa Tribune, December 22, 2007

LAKELAND - Public floggings hurt, even when administered by satirical sacred noodles. Ask the Polk County School Board. The panel made news last month when five of its seven members declared a personal belief in the concept of intelligent design, the religiously based explanation of the development of life believed in by many Christians. Four of those five sympathetic board members said they would like to see intelligent design taught in Polk schools as an alternative to Darwinian evolution, at a time when new state standards mentioning evolution by name for the first time are under consideration. Just like that, it appeared the Darwin wars had found their newest battlefield. Yet a few weeks later, the controversy is dying with a whimper. There's no board support for a challenge to the proposed standards. Some of the five school board members blame the local newspaper for trying to start a fight. Read More Here

Right before the Christmas campaign break it was reported that Senator Barak Obama has taken issue with a 527 run by a former campaign aide to Senator John Edwards. At issue for Obama was the idea that the 527 ads supporting Edwards were somehow shading because the 527 is run by a former Edwards aide.

Obama is taking on Edwards on this issue trying to use the former Senator's words against him. Edwards consistently rails against special interests and their influence in Washington. Obama is trying to use this to say that the 527, Alliance for A New America , run by Nick Baldick, a former high-ranking Edwards' adviser, is the same type of influence and flaunting of the election laws. For last few election cycles the 527s have spent millions of dollars for candidates and have at time played a pivotal role in elections. When pressed whether he would welcome that type of help in the general election, Obama was cagey at best,refusing to look that far ahead.

So there is the unspoken double standard. Obama isn't getting that kind of help right now in a tight race with Edwards and Clinton and he doesn't like it so he throws ethics around. But when asked if he would welcome that kind of help he doesn't say no. Seems like the good guy sheen of Obama's campaign is a might thin in spots.

It is without a doubt a tight race in Iowa and the next few days are key. Whining about some television ads is not going to bring people to the caucuses to cast critical votes. Obama need to concentrate on making his lead in the poll translate into actual caucus votes on a very cold Iowa evening in January. Otherwise Edwards and or Clinton are going to send him back to Illinois.

It has recently come to my attention that one can accurately determine the political ideology of a person or group by cherry-picking certain actions and/or beliefs of said person/group and comparing them to another person/group of your own particular choosing. By using this new form of revelatory research I have come to the conclusion and can prove beyond a doubt that the USA currently suffers in the grip of a repressive Maoist regime. Exhibit #1. a) Mao Zedong was the brains behind and leader of an agrarian based revolution in China. b) George W. Bush likes to spend time on a farm. Exhibit #2. a) Dick Cheney likes to adjourn to the farm of a friend and takes pleasure in small, specially reared birds falling in great numbers before his weapon. b) Mao Zedong liked to adjourn to his bedroom and took pleasure in small, specially reared birds falling in great numbers before his weapon. I rest my case. Thx kidz at Sadly, No!

What if the cable news channel had been around earlier in history? The Roman Empire, circa 33 A.D.: "Friends, Romans, countrymen, I'm Wolfus Blitzus and this is CNN! Breaking news in Judea, where our army has tried and executed a Jewish religious zealot who challenged the authority of our forces of liberation there." WB: "We'll take you now to Candius Crolius, embedded with our troops in Jerusalem..." CC: "Wolfus, I am standing near a hill outside of Judea's capital city, where a dangerous terrorist has just been executed and a palpable sigh of relief has gone up among our peacekeeping forces here. This man, Yeshua bar Joseph, was a threat to peace and order that a crowd of his countrymen released a convicted murderer rather than let him go free." WB: "Incredible! Didn't he claim to be divine or something?" CC: "That's right, Wolfus, his followers said he was the son of God, in defiance of the authority of Rome." WB: "You mean he actually claimed that his father Joseph, a poor carpenter from Nazareth, was a god?" CC: "No, he was apparently talking about a single invisible god who controls the entire universe." WB: "And yet he managed to attract some followers to his cause with this bizarre story?" CC: "Yes -- they are now being hunted down by the police." WB: "What is the mood of our troops there?" CC: "Let me ask this young soldier who helped in the crucifixion. Please give us your name and where you're from." PM: "Proletarius Manipulatus and I'm from South Ostia. Hi, Mom and Dad!" CC: "What was your reaction to this execution?" PM: "There was no doubt this was necessary. He had a really far-out philosophy and no respect for our leaders or our way of life at all. We don't like to crucify people, but this had to be done." CC: "Okay, thank you. I guess you'd like to get back to your dice game now. That's the way it is here, Wolfus; back to you..." WB: "Thanks, Candius. We have in the studio retired Tribune Cranius Flabbius to help us understand the threat posed to our security by these Judean terrorists. Thanks for being here, Tribune Flabbius." CF: "My pleasure, Wolfus." WB: "There have been reports that this terrorist, Yeshua bar Joseph, and his gang advocated nonviolence. Do you think this is true? Were they nonviolent?" CF: "My experience from time served in that region is that all these zealots are eventually dangerous and must be dealt with forcefully before they get out of hand. Besides, our Emperor Tiberius has proclaimed that these anti-Roman religious sects be pre-emptively eliminated before they pose trouble, so who are we to argue with that?" WB: "Certainly the Emperor wouldn't lie to us, but didn't this man speak mainly of peace, love and forgiveness?" CF: "What sane person, looking at the world the way it is -- a jungle where we are beset by enemies and must be ready to defensively strike at any moment -- would take such tripe seriously? No, I think Mr. bar Joseph was simply trying to lull us with this talk until he had consolidated his forces and was ready to attack us on the field of battle. Overwhelming power is the only thing these zealots understand." WB: "And a connection to this fanatic John the Baptist has been definitely established?" CF: "Yes, our intelligence sources indicate that this so-called 'man of peace' participated in secret rituals with this John the Baptist, and John was such a peril to Judea that King Herod had him beheaded!" WB: "I understand that this terrorist forgave his enemies before his death on the cross..." CF: "I don't find much credibility in that rumor: what normal man would forgive those responsible for killing him? By all accounts, this Yeshua was a very shrewd and crafty leader of an army of rabble who wanted to destroy all that we hold dear. Look at who he associated with: indigents, outcasts, tax collectors, even a prostitute -- the dregs of society! Is this a man of the highest morals? Quite simply, he was trying to foment class and religious warfare, and I'm glad we took him out before he could do any more harm." WB: "Thanks for being with us and for your incisive analysis, Tribune Flabbius. Next on CNN, a debate on the death penalty -- should we get rid of crucifixion and replace it with public evisceration? Join in our CNN/Rome Today poll, right after this..."

The Winds of Change Tuesday, December 18, 2007 By: Richard H Collins The Clinton's time may finally be up The great irony of the Democratic primary is that Hillary seems to have won the battle but lost the war. Voters believe she has the best experience to become president but she still can’t get a majority to vote for her. People may respect her accomplishments, or have fond memories of her husband, but that doesn’t mean they like her. Lacking a clear message or rationale for her campaign, and the charm and personality to connect with voters, Hillary now seems intent on winning by going ugly. Thanks largely to the inexperience of her chief rivals, Hillary has amazingly sold voters on the idea that eight ineffective and scandal plagued years in the White House and seven bland pork barrel years in the Senate make her the most qualified candidate. Her veteran and dedicated campaign staff, and her ability to raise outrageous amounts of money, led most in the media to anoint her the frontrunner. And she rode her husband’s popularity and her celebrity status to large national leads. The media, however, failed to consider a few crucial issues: voter’s dissatisfaction with the status quo and Hillary’s utter lack of a compelling message or winning personality. Hillary’s strongest message has always been that she is the only one tough and tested enough to make it through both the primaries and the general election. Her “experience” argument really meant that she has been battling the “right-wing attack machine” for years and so would know how to fight back. She hoped to combine a liberal platform, strident promises to end the war she voted for, and a reputation as a fierce competitor to win over a liberal base leery of her perceived centrism and opportunism. The problem, however, isn’t that voters don’t believe Hillary has enough experience; it is that she fails to inspire or excite them. Hillary spent months convincing people that she knew her way around Washington and only to find they were fed up with Washington. This is where her experience has undermined her campaign. Over the years, Hillary’s private, almost secretive, nature and introverted personality has been magnified by the perceived slights and scars of her many battles. Her highly competitive nature has led to an instinctive reaction to fight hard and do whatever it takes to win. But there is a reason campaign managers and staff doesn’t run for office. You need an inspirational leader as candidate; someone to put meaning into the campaign. It is this meaning that Hillary lacks. She has no central reason for running or a clearly communicable theme to her campaign. Her campaign is nothing more than personal ambition writ large. When you combine this with her off-putting personality, and related reputation as an overly ambitious and calculating politician, the result is an inability to win the hearts of primary voters. For the last six weeks, Hillary has flailed about trying to find a tactic that could make up for this underlying deficiency. Her first reaction was to try and play the victim as she did in parlaying Monica into a Senate seat. This was mostly ineffective as no one really believed that the clear national front runner was being attacked for her gender. Her next reaction was to go negative but she bumbled this by focusing on issues that highlighted her own weaknesses. Was Hillary going to win a debate about who was overly ambitious in plotting to become president? She recently moved from silly to ugly, however, when her New Hampshire co-chair Bill Shaheen raised the issue of Obama’s past drug use by claiming that Republican’s would use it against him. Hillary was quick to deny knowledge or involvement - and went so far as to offer a personal apology - and soon dumped Shaheen. But it is hard to believe someone as controlling and knowledgeable as Hillary, and someone as experienced as Shaheen, acted without any communication. Hillary quickly returned to asking for sympathy, running ads with her daughter and mother in a desperate attempt to soften her image with female voters turned off by her negative attacks. This week the attempts at image softening continue with ads, web pages, and staged events. Voters, however, seem to be realizing that Hillary offers little more than empty promises and the ugly politics of the past. Despite her claims of strength, when pushed she turns negative, ugly, and increasingly brittle. Despite her claims of experience, she has traded on the political success of her husband to attain what power she has and lacks a signature accomplishment of any kind. There was a time when, despite all their faults and baggage, it was foolish to bet against the Clintons. Recent events offer hope that this time is coming to an end.