Kraniak_the_Maniak's Blog

I head to DNC convention this Sunday. I am thrilled to do my part to offer some great coverage on the internet. My job as a senior web producer will be to collect the best content in terms of video, blogs, breaking news and live streams and publish them in an easy to find, user-friendly format.

One of the things my colleague (John Wise) and I plan on doing each day is offering a one-hour live blog. Think of it as a chat room on steroids. We get to drop video, photos, ask poll questions. We'll line up guests at the convention to join us and have them answer viewer questions. It's essentially a web show and it's geared toward user input. Look for that on the center of our convention coverage page, everyday at Noon EST/ 11 CT / 10 MT / 9 PT.

Another thing we plan on doing is trying to capture video and commentary from the celebrities. This made me think... If you were given the chance to interview Oprah Winfrey or Barack Obama -- who would you choose?

Let me know what you think, it may help sway our camera. My answer coming soon in another blog.

Dennis Kraniak / Senior Web Producer, WJBK / MyFoxDetroit.com

Sources tell WJBK Fox 2 in Detroit that some in Barack Obama's headquarters in Chicago are calling for their candidate to ask for embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to resign. The Obama camp in Michigan says "PLEASE DON'T!"

Political Reporter Tim Skubick uncovered the story Wednesday. Kwame Kilpatrick recently spent a night in jail for breaking the terms of his bond agreement in the case where the Mayor is facing 8 felony charges for perjury and obstruction of justice. The case is centered around text messages exchanged between the Mayor and his top aide Christine Beatty. The messages demonstrate that the two were involved in an affair, and contradict sworn testimony denying their affair during a whistle blower trial. The Mayor and the city lost an 8.4 million dollar lawsuit for wrongfully dismissing police officers.

Since then, there's been a daily tabloid about the Mayor's affair. About a rumored party at the Mayor's residence, the Manoogian Mansion, where strippers performed. One of those strippers ended up being murdered, and the murder remains unsolved. Some suspect the Mayor or his wife have something to do with the death. The Mayor is now facing two more felony charges for allegedly shoving police officers who were trying to serve a subpoena to his friend at the time. All the while the Mayor blames the media for his troubles and admits in court he can't defend himself and serve the city at the same time.

So out come the calls for his resignation.

Last year, before the Mayor's serious troubles became public, Barack Obama paid a visit to the Detroit Economic Club. He was introduced by Mayor Kilpatrick. Obama began his speech by telling the crowd that he thought the Mayor was doing a good job for the people of the city. That the Mayor was on the frontlines working to to turn the troubled city's economic future around.

You can see that part of the speech Skubick's video report.
SEE TIM SKUBICK'S REPORT HERE.

Now -- The controversy over the Mayor is making it's way to Michigan's state capital -- Lansing, Chicago, Washington DC and Jay Leno. OK -- the Leno factor is typical, just another way to poke fun at Detroit.

Congressman John Dingell has called for the Mayor to resign. Senator Carl Levin does the same. Dozens of politicians from local, county and state level from both sides of the aisle are also asking the Mayor to step down. Governor Jennifer Granholm (D) is conducting her own investigation and holding a hearing on the matter on September 3rd. After the hearing she may force the Mayor out of office.

The question is should Barack Obama weigh in on the matter? Should the McCain camp take advantage of the situation?

Skubick reports that his team in Chicago wants him to ask the Mayor to resign. They fear political attack from the McCain camp. The video and sound bite of Obama's congratulating Kilpatrick would make for a great TV ad. Kind of how the Obama campaign ties McCain to Bush in some of their ads.

The Obama camp in Michigan wants Obama to stay out of it. Governor Granholm says any attempt by the Republicans to tie this into the presidential race would be shameful.

Here's the deal: Michigan is vital to both candidates this November. City of Detroit voters are expected to support Obama in high numbers. The results could carry the state for Obama. The Obama camp fears that may lose votes from Michigan residents inside and outside of Detroit if they see Obama as an ally of the Mayor.

If the McCain camp plays the Kilpatrick card, they also could see a back lash of using a questionable tactic to get votes.

Personally, I don't think the Kilpatrick situation is a factor when people decide who they will cast their vote for in the presidential race this November. If a McCain ad surfaces, maybe.

I doubt either candidate will say anything at all.

What do you think? Does Kilpatrick present a problem for Obama? Overall, should political ads focus more on who the candidate associates with or where the candidate stands on the issues? Are the two inseparable?

Add your thoughts, I want to know.

To quote John McEnroe, "you can't be serious!"

The John McCain camp is walking a tightrope with its campaign ad strategy right now.

One ad made for TV and the web drops the notion that Barack Obama is just a celebrity, kind of like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. He's famous, but is he ready to lead?

Another ad used designed for use for the internet only, but don't kid yourself, it's getting plenty of play on news shows across the country. This ad uses Obama's own words, albeit obviously out of context to paint himself as "God's chosen one." The ad crescendos with a clip of Charlton Heston playing Moses... "behold his mighty hand."

SEE MCCAIN ADS CLICK HERE

Interesting the former NRA head being used for a parody, but that's another story. Give the McCain camp credit for getting lots of TV exposure without having to pay for it.

Here's the thing: Playing ads like these is risky business. Think about it, if the voter is already planning to cast his vote for you, this ad serves no purpose other than providing a laugh. If the voter is planning to vote for Obama, they are simply offended, emboldened in their cause and probably will have a laugh.

If you're going after the undecided, my guess is you're going after the undecided imbecile, because anyone with any sense sees though these shameless ads that offer no substance, just great video editing. Planting the message "is he ready to lead" has merit, but needs to come out of dealing with the issues, not personalities.

McCain is a War Hero. He's a long standing member of the Senate and has demonstrated the ability to champion non-partisan issues. Attack Obama on being green, waffling -- whatever, then offer that not only is your candidate ready to lead , he's been leading the way -- for years.

I think the current ads are ridiculous, and if I'm and undecided, you just lost my vote. The McCain camp needs to stop listening to talk radio and the ditto heads. You already have their vote. Get serious, work the issues. You're out your league when it comes to parody.

Last fall I asked John McCain -- "Leno or Letterman?" he said I don't know, then joked "but I hate Jon Stewart." Well stop producing ads that look like Stewart spoofs.

The same weekend I spoke with McCain, I asked Newt Gingrich the same question "Leno or Letterman?" He says GET SERIOUS. "Politics is a serious business. This is the problem with America today. We need serious people to deal with serious problems."

(SEE BOTH INTERVIEWS HERE)

Hey John, worried about losing your Republican base? Better raise that staff and start parting your political think tank with the political ads they create.

ADD YOUR COMMENTS TO MY BLOG, I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

McCain wants to overturn Roe v. Wade. Obama opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

Both candidates offer full details on the issue on their websites, further understating the importance of the subject.
(Read McCain Details)
(Read Obama Details)

The question is -- do you care about this issue?  Where does it rank in terms of importance for you?   Why does the issue always rise to the top of political debates? 

For me, it's way down on the list -- not even in the top ten!!

Economy, Health Care, Oil Prices, Energy, The War in Iraq, Fair Trade, Invasion of Privacy, Education, Infrastructure, Foreign Policy, Social Security and more.

Actually, abortion barely makes my list.  I will say this: leave it alone for now -- there are much more pressing issues to deal with.

What say you?  I really want to know.

I just came back from holiday in England.  So often, when I opened my mouth and exposed my American accent, someone brought up their vehement hate for George Bush.

Forget about what people would say to me when they learned that I worked for Fox News.  Here's the thing: Does it matter what the rest of the world thinks about us?

I'll answer that question and I want to hear yours, but first let me tell you about my trip.  My wife and I took our two kids to England to visit her brother and his family.  They live in the Midlands in a very quaint and old village called Dale Abbey.  Their house was built in 1300.  The village itself was settled around 1100.  Beautiful area, mostly farmland -- rolling hills.  This is Shakespeare country. 

The people are very friendly.  What's interesting is that all private property must have public access or provide a walk way through the land.  Essentially you could walk anywhere.  Most land owners designated a path to follow.  You could walk miles from one town to the next, through some brilliant countryside.

We stayed in a cottage that was first used to house steel workers from the local Stanton Works project.  The owner's of the cottage, Robert and Leslie were most gracious.  Robert is a brick layer by day, philosopher by night.  One night he and his wife came over for tea, and Robert began asking me about George Bush.  When he learned I worked in the news business, he wanted me to come to the town pub to meet his mates, and talk politics.

That night I obliged.  The Carpenter's Arms is a traditional English pub.  On this particular night the pub was packed for it's weekly edition of a table vs. table trivia game.  I met Robert there, and when I got there Robert introduced me to the entire pub.  "Everybody, this is Dennis, a media person from the states who follows politics." 

The trivia game was soon replaced by "Ask the American".  I was propped on a bar stool and began a "one on 40" dialogue with the evening patrons.  The crowd wanted to know why we elected George Bush.  The general sense is that they see him as a kind of dictator.  They view former Prime Minister Tony Blair as his puppet, and the reason for tough times in the English economy.  The War in Iraq brought out the big emotions.  This crowd clearly against the war.  Forgetting their opinions, it was interesting how well informed most were about various Bush policies, his Supreme Court appointments and the like.  They also are following the current presidential race.  They believe Obama will get assassinated if he should win.  Many in the pub think of Americans as violent, gun toting racists, not ready for a black president.  I argued.

We took many day trips throughout rural England and we spent four days down it's what called the Jurassic Coast.  Most of the places we visited are not common American destinations.  On a number occasions, after someone heard me speak and recognized that I was American, they piped up with some anti-Bush comment.  Some rude. Some of the comments empathetic "are you relieved Bush will soon be out of office?" It happens once, OK... but this happened again and again and again.  It happened at a variety of villages and different parts of the country.

I was really taken aback each and every time it happened.  The comments were not invited, and I felt stereotyped.  If I engaged in conversation, most seem to offer that they like Americans, just not our president.  I think the English feel as though most Americans do not like Bush, so it's OK to offer commentary on what they seem to feel is a "how's the weather" conversation.

Here's my take:  When I meet an English person or any person from another country, I will not immediately attack their country's politics or leadership.  Seems rude to me.

It's not lost on me however, just how important the role of the U.S. President is.  I do believe our President is in fact the leader of the free world.  We are still the most powerful nation on the planet and the world looks to us for many things, including sometimes saving their proverbial butts.  It's important that we recognize that concept in this ever-shrinking world.  With the new global economy paradigm, we cannot afford an American back lash. 

The big question:  Do we have the right to attack another nation without UN consultation? If you say yes -- consider Iraq and the giant burden that we have taken on as a nation.  The so-called coalition of the willing is very modest to say the least.  This is America's war, even if it may benefit or harm other countries.

If you say no, then what rights do we have as a country in determining when we go to war? 
Maybe the answer is to this question has less to do with the U.S. relationship with the UN, but more to do with the executive branch having too much power?

My answer to what the world thinks about us is this:  Take care of your own garden first and do unto others as you would have done to you.  We decide what we think is right using our own system of government, but not without recognizing the effect decisions we make here, affect others around the world.  Pollution, war, economic issues go beyond borders, and so should our thinking about such manners. 

What's your take?  Do you care what the world thinks?  How much should our next president care?

The warm-up bout on the fight card is over. Bring on the heavyweights. The first rule of "this" fight club is to talk about the fight club. In fact be a judge. Your scorecard, vis a vis ballot, is wanted.

Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday, based on an Associated Press tally of convention delegates, becoming the first black candidate ever to lead his party into a fall campaign for the White House.


LET'S GET READY TO RUUMMMMMBLE!

In the Republican Corner: Standing in at 5' 7".. from the The Grand Canyon State Senator John "I survived a war, how about you" McCain.

VS.

In the Democratic Corner: Standing in at 6' 2", from the Prairie State, Senator Barack " I love Oprah, how about you" Obama.

No Clinching Gentleman; like denouncing past relationships with certain pastors or presidents.

No Low Blows; like the Wright ads in North Carolina or remarks about health and age.

Go to a Neutral Corner after a Knock-Out; in other words -- admit when you are wrong, speak the truth and focus on the issues not the person you are running against.

When The Bell Rings, Come Out Fighting; debate openly, no holds barred. Hold town hall meetings, let the people's voices be heard and respond.

THE TKO's:

Who will the veeps be?

What role will the War in Iraq play?

How much of factor will George W. Bush be?

How much of a factor will Obama's church be?

Be a Fight Judge

As a voter, what are your answers to theses questions? What are your questions period? What do you think about Obama vs. Mccain? Who do you think will win the fight?

Let the debate begin. 15 round title fight. Winner resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Get a ring side seat, pay attention to jabs and blows about the issues and throw some punches in this blog.

Finally we are finishing the long-long political primary season. At this point I'm ready to write myself in as a candidate. Can I do that? No, but as a voter I feel I deserve some kind of reward for keeping up.

The Republicans made it easy with a fairly quick nomination of their candidate. Many on the Pub side of things are none too happy with John McCain, but at least they have someone to rally around. It's interesting that Democrats are painting McCain as an extension of George W. The Republican strong-hold is worried that McCain is more like -- well -- Lieberman. McCain boasts a non-partisan approach, but some like Anne Coulter quipped she would rather vote for Clinton, if she were to become the Dem's nominee. I don't think Ms. Coulter will have that chance.

The Democrats after a long, not so bitter battle between their two choices have essentially left the nomination process to be decided by who can argue their case better in front of the party chair and committee. If Clinton somehow got the nod, I would be shocked but not surprised. I think this will not happen. A smart anti-Clinton argument would be that she would lose Obama supporters because publicly he has the most delegates, therefore he should be the nominee. If Obama fails to get the nomination many will feel cheated and fail to show-up to vote in November, or worse as far as the Dems are concerned, vote for McCain. The reverse is not true for Clinton supporters. They know their candidate is behind in the count and it's easier to rationalize a loss. Her followers heal and vote the party line.

An argument for Clinton is that she won the big states vital to winning in November. Another is that she has momentum in the second half of the primary season. And this... Obama's star has lost some luster because of The Reverend Wright and a Catholic priest at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Obama quit the church, but he can't quit the controversy that is sure to come up a lot from now through election day. In the end the real numbers will be at the center of the debate, and Clinton's odds of winning are not good.

All I know is this. Let's get on with it. They say democracy is the most inefficient form of government and I believe it. It's only June, I love politics -- but I am already growing weary of the process. With that said, I am glad to live in a country where we have a choice. Freedom is not free. People, including my relatives, have fought and died for the right to vote, to choose, to be free. So enduring this long primary process is a small price to pay.

But again as Michael Buffer puts it -- LET'S GET READY TO RUUUMMMMMBLE!! Let's get to the real prize fight. The Big Time wrestling match needs to end. The question is, who will step into the ring? Who will their tag partners be? (the veeps) and what knock-out punch has yet to surface that will win the election for either party?

I don't know, but I want a ring side seat. "Cut me Mic", I want to see this thing go the distance.

THROW SOME JABS OF YOUR OWN -- ADD YOUR THOUGHTS. WHO'S GOING TO BE ON THE FIGHT CARD THIS NOVEMBER?

This post has been edited by an administrator

"Rasmussen Reports will soon end our daily tracking of the Democratic race and focus exclusively on the general election competition between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama."

The MyFox family of web sites has an agreement in place with the Rasmussen Reports where we get weekly, sometimes daily poll results from this very credible and unique organization. Today Rasmussen deemed that the race is over for Hillary Clinton.
(read below)

From Rasmussen Reports: Senator Clinton has remained close and competitive in every meaningful measure, she is a close second and the race is over. It has become clear that Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee.

At the moment, Senator Clinton’s team is busily trying to convince Superdelegates and pundits that she is more electable than Barack Obama. For reasons discussed in a separate article, it doesn’t matter. Even if every single Superdelegate was convinced that the former First Lady is somewhat more electable than Obama, that is not enough of a reason to deny him the nomination.

With this in mind, Rasmussen Reports will soon end our daily tracking of the Democratic race and focus exclusively on the general election competition between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama.

Kudos Rasmussen. Let's get the game on. I have written many times in my blog about how Hillary cannot mathematically win her party's nomination. She can only negotiate her way to the title. This serves no one but herself. No one can question her resolve or toughness, but she is dividing the Dems, and the longer she stays in the race, the better the chances of McCain grabbing swing votes in November.

If you're a McCain fan, this may please you. And don't worry about the the Dems getting all the highlights right now, the damage being done by two intra-party delegates going after each other far outweighs the heavy publicity. I'm sure the McCain campaign is probably itching to get into to it with someone right now. Having one candidate to focus on will make life for the strategist much easier.

When you plan a campaign there are two things to consider: Getting YOUR MESSAGE out and attacking the opponent by pointing out where you stand differently on the issues. Where it gets dirty is when it gets personal and has no bearing on the issues. That's a topic for another blog. Right now, I for one am looking forward to a new fight, some real debate between two candidates from two different parties with many different stands on the issues.

Hillary is in the way now. It's time to say goodbye and support Obama. She can do a lot of damage to McCain by getting back on Capital Hill and using the Senate Floor as her bully pulpit. In a sense this would be a means to attack McCain on his home turf. There's some free advice from a political junkie to the Dems.

Bottom line is this: Obama has the delegate lead that cannot be overtaken, period. Hillary needs to step down for the good of her party so that everybody from both parties can engage in what may be the best election year since Kennedy vs. Nixon. So many issues with the Iraq War, the economy, global warming and health care.

Rasmussen is working to focus on the issues that matter. Hillary get out of the way please, so the rest of us can do the same thing.

What's your take?

This post has been edited by an administrator

The special counsel to the Detroit City Council has released it's report on how the council should proceed and deal with Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick's civil lawsuit and subsequent undisclosed confidentiality agreement that spelled out how much money the city would pay out to former police officers. The amount 8.4 million dollars. The scandal: seems limitless if you believe everything you read.

There's is so much to digest, and you can find everything on this web site about the Mayor's scandal that your heart desires of you simply search the word "Kilpatrick." Here's what I think matters right now, and then I want to get your thoughts.

1. Q: Does the City Council have enough evidence and the authority to remove Mayor Kilpatrick from office?

A: The answer is probably yes, but the problem is that the process of doing so could take many months and cost millions because the Mayor's spokesperson Anthony Adams says they would fight such action in a court of law. SEE THE ADAMS INTERVIEW HERE

2. Q: The Mayor and his administration say they are not distracted by the ongoing scandal and that they simply continue to work toward moving the city forward. How can that be?

A: Look, there is now way that business leaders in the city and business leaders who are thinking about doing business in the city cannot consider the ramifications and trustworthiness of Kilpatrick and his administration. Fox 2 has spoken to several business owners who may feel compelled to give to the Mayor's defense fund in fear of retribution of getting shut out of deals if they don't. Some say he is waving his $300-million dollar city enhancement package as a carrot to business leaders to support him in order to get a piece of the pie. This is not a good way to do business, and what company not already involved in the city would want to get involved knowing this type of strong arm bureaucracy tactics. 

The Mayor and his staff say they are not distracted by the scandal and that all they will do and continue to do is work to move the city forward.  Kudos.  I hope that's true.  I find it hard to believe.  This attitude should have been expressed during the state of the city speech, which was awesome until the end when Kilpatrick went on his personal tirade -- dropping the N-word, going after Ken Cockrel and blaming the media for his problems.  Fair or not, I don't know how anyone can look at the Mayor and not immediately think about the scandal.

Moreover, I don't how the Mayor and his legal team and PR folks cannot spend countless hours working to defend the accusations.  They do.  How is that not distracting.

At the end of the day the City Council probably has the grounds to dismiss the Mayor, in spite of an ambiguous city charter.  The thing is if they pursue dismissal, it will likely cost millions of dollars and countless hours of legislative time that the city just cannot afford.

The only way this mayor leaves office is if he resigns, loses next year's election or gets convicted on perjury or misconduct charges.  The odds:  50:50 at best or worst depending on your point of view.

SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT OF VIEW?  LET ME KNOW.

This post has been edited by an administrator

Right now the North Carolina Republican Party is running an ad on their web site and soon on broadcast television, showing an excerpt from former the pastor of Presidential Candidate Barack Obama, one of Reverend Jeremiah Wright's so called hate speeches, then adding a voice over and graphic saying that Gubernatorial candidates Bev Perdue and Richard Moore are supporting Obama and therefore support Wright and therefore the duo is too extreme to get elected in North Carolina.

GOP Candidate John McCain says the party should not run the ad.  See if you agree with him, watch this tripe, then read my take and add your own please.



Here's the deal: I'm not weighing on what's he's said in the past, I'm weighing in on those who would capitalize on the hype of this man.

Yo North Carolina GOP, what a stretch to imply that Bev Perdue and Richard Moore support the Reverend Wright because they support Obama. Given that philosophy... the millions who voted for Obama thus far in the primaries and caucuses also support Wright. WRONG. If a candidate is Catholic, does that make me Catholic? This is pure exploitation and a distraction from real issues. It may be fair to question Obama about his relationship with Wright, but it is not fair to link all that support Obama to Wright. Ridiculous.

This Sunday in Detroit, Reverend Wright will be the keynote speaker at the NAACP Freedom Fund Dinner, part of annual Freedom Weekend event the organization uses to raise funds and awareness about itself and its agenda.

53rd Annual Fight For Freedom Fund Dinner
Theme: "A Change Is Going To Come "
Keynote Speaker: Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr.
5:00pm Cobo Conference Center

Yo NAACP. Surely you could have found someone less divisive to speak your fund raising dinner or does the hype help you sell tickets? What is the point of having this man speak? I am not black, but I can understand the points the Reverend makes in the speeched that have garnered so much attention, but I am not black and I have not lived in this country as black person, so what do I know about it? I do know this... this is not the way of Dr. King. Any talk of hate -- only begets hate. An eye for an eye -- and we all go blind. This does not mean be a victim. Stand up. Protest. But lose the hate, it serves no one. How will having the Reverend Wright speak at the dinner help the NAACP? Would he have been asked if there was no controversy surrounding him? How is this moving people forward?

SOMEBODY ENLIGHTEN ME -- I WANT TO KNOW.