Kraniak_the_Maniak's Blog

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.

Strike up the music the band has begun
The Pennsylvania Polka
Pick out your partner and join in the fun
The Pennsylvania Polka

This primary is pointless if you do the math
The Pennsylvania Polka
No matter who wins here, there's no end to the path
The Pennsylvania Polka

Here's the deal:

Right now Obama has 1648 delegates (including latest est. on Super-D-s)
Clinton has 1509 delegates (including latest est. on Super-D-s)

Needed to win: 2025

This translates into Clinton needing to win 94% of the remaining primary votes
or Obama needing to win 68% of the remaining primary votes.

Neither will achieve the number before the convention. Unless one of the candidates concedes, how do you declare a winer?

Clinton will argue that she's won the big states; important to a general election.
Obama will argue that he's won more votes, more delegates and that in the end  is what will take to win the general election.

For her Clinton to support her argument, she must win Pennslyvania. She loses here and she has a much harder time wining the big state argument. The only states remaining are Indiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Oregon, Kentucky and Montana. There's also Guam and Puerto Rico. The question is, will she concede if she loses in Pennsylvania?

If she doesn't, then she clearly is hurting her party and the party's chances of winning in November. If she only wins by a small margin she also places her party in danger of losing the big election. Why you ask?

The negative campaigning that has reached a fever pitch in Pennsylvania is only going to get worse. A drawn-out drama in Denver at the convention will not help the Dems either. In spite of grabbing the headlines for the duration of the summer, the only publicity is good publicity does not work here.

The Pubs can point to the disarray of the Dems.  The splitting of voters between Obama followers and Clinton followers may take more than a few months to mend.  Right now the two Dem camps are focused on each other, and rising animosity is palpable.  It may be hard for loyal followers to throw their support to what they currently see as the enemy camp.

The sooner the party's nominee is decided, the better the chance of healing and full support.  Obama is not the one who should concede at this point because he is clearly in the lead.  It comes down to Clinton, and it seems clear to me the only way she can win is to argue her way to the title.  She is a lawyer, and a good one.  But what's legal is not always right.  What's procedure is not always proper. The fall out could mean a McCain win.

Advice to Clinton:  Listen to the Pennsylvania Polka.  If the bands not overwhelmingly playing your tune (say a 56% or greater victory) then get off the dance floor for the good of your party.

What's your take?

And then McCain said, "We can be slow as well to give greatness its
due, a mistake I made myself long ago when I voted against a
federal holiday in memory of Dr. King. I was wrong and eventually
realized that, in time to give full support for a state holiday in
Arizona."

On the 40th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's death, Senator John McCain made those remarks from the balcony of the Lorraine Motel, the place where King was gunned down.

McCain admitted that he made a mistake. It's hard for anyone to say how genuine that is given our mistrust of politicians, but it was a very smart move for someone who is running for president.

McCain can now move past this issue that was certain to come up on the campaign trail. He can say he admitted it was a mistake, that he shows he can change and that this is just the reason someone like should be elected president. No politics and an ability to show compromise or admission of wrong doing.  In step with his non-partisan approach.

Sincere or not, this should play well in the days leading up to November. Of course his retractors will say what the hell took him so long.

What's your take?

This post has been edited by an administrator

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life — longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land. So I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything, I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. — the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

King delivered these prophetic words the night before he was assassinated. People inside his inner circle say in the days leading right up to April 4, 1968, that he often spoke of his own death.  The night he gave this speech in Memphis, many of them cried as if he was delivering his farewell address.  King frequently received death threats. It's amazing to me that he would deliver this speech the night before he died.

It seems as though King delivered the perfect words on the eve of his death. A wonderful entrance into the next world, forgetting what caused his exit from ours and how much this world could still use Dr. King's leadership.  A wonderful message to leave behind for the rest of us.

There are many prophets in the bible, and I think if it were still being written today, King would be considered a prophet.

If the criteria for prophet is: standing up against hate without using violence and your message of love is for all people. If what you do changes the world in which we all live. This is grounds for being called prophet.

From where I'm sitting there are two prophets from the last century: King and Ghandi.

King did not get to the promise land with us, he got there before us. It's our job to find him there by doing what he did, Love thy neighbor as thyself.

For more on Dr. King check out the View from a Mountain Top website.

Who do you think is worthy of being called a prophet?

This post has been edited by an administrator

The husband of U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow told police he used the Internet to make a date with a prostitute and paid her $150 for sex at a hotel, according to a police report.

Thomas Athans, 46, co-founder of the liberal TalkUSA Radio network, was stopped by police who were investigating Internet-based prostitution at the hotel, according to a police report obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press under the state Freedom of Information Act.

Henry Kissinger said "power is the ultimate aphrodisiac." Then why the hell do these guys have to pay for sex. Here's the thing with Athans, his wife is the one with the power. I wonder if she will stand by her man on the podium as he publicly apologizes, the way that Eliot Spitzer's wife did, Kwame Kilpatrick's wife did and Bill Clinton's wife did.

My guess is NO WAY!! First of all how stupid do you have to be make arrangements on the internet, with a cheap prostitute no less. $150 is a deal compared to what Spitzer paid.

Secondly my wife would cut my you know what's off if I hired a hooker. I think that's what's been talked about the most around the office water cooler. Why do these women stay with their man? We'll see what the good Senator does. Let me ask you what you would do if you caught your spouse cheating? Would you stay wit that person?

What message is being sent to society when these women stay with their cheating man?  Is it one of forgiveness and a great example of the life-long commitment of marriage or do these women come across as victims attracted to power? Since Senator Stabenow has the power in the family it will be interesting to see how she handles this. 

What's your take?