Congressman Rahm Emanuel, from the great state of Illinois, said that Senator Ted Kennedy should not have said something to the effect that Hillary Clinton should not be on the Obama ticket. It would seem that Rahm is overly sensitive to this issue. It is Emauel who has supposedly remained neutral in this campaign because of his history with the Clintons and the fact that Obama is from Illinois. He can’t decide which one to support. A sense of loyalty or a sense of geography.

On a day when it seemed that everybody was beating up on Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton — even “Saturday Night Live” had run a skit making fun of her -– one person came to her defense on Sunday: Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, a top Democrat in the House.

Mr. Emanuel called to assail Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, for remarks he made when asked about the possibility of Senator Barack Obama of Illinois choosing Mrs. Clinton, of New York, as his running-mate.

“I have a lot of respect for Ted Kennedy, but I don’t know how the hell he comes off saying that,” said Mr. Emanuel, who has ties to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama and has not endorsed in the race. “The gratuitous attack on her is uncalled for and wrong. He is a better senator than that comment reveals.”

To the victor go the spoils (the original quote was referring to war). And to Obama the choice of who is his Vice-Presidential candidate will be an Obama choice. Not an Emanuel choice or even a Ted Kennedy choice.

Thus far Obama’s judgment has been superior. I will yield to his judgment when he picks his eventual running mate. If he picks Hillary, I will certainly support the ticket. I personally favor Colin Powell as I have posted here, because I truly believe they would be unstoppable. The way he has handled controversy after controversy, we are starting to get a strong sense of what an Obama Presidency will be like. Very strong and very focused. Reading on Walden Bookstore.

Question.  When is media coverage for a presidential primary not a good thing?  Answer: When the media coverage is focused on when you will get out of the race for the good of the party.

On the Republican side of the aisle one could argue that Mitt Romney heard an early curtain call and took a bow too soon.  Maybe his large personal campaign donations started to hurt, maybe he was hoping for the VP spot thinking that McCain will not be running again in 4 years, or even more likely he was doing the noble thing for the good of the party hoping to become a rising star in Republican Party.  Whatever the reason, I feel that had he continued he probably could have had enough support to force a brokered convention (along with the help of Ron Paul supporters) where he might have been chosen by the GOP over the largely Independent choice for John McCain.

Hillary on the other hand, seemingly doesn’t know when to leave the stage.  She is still grabbing roses meant for someone else and blowing kisses at the audience.  And so I beg the question, “What to do about Hillary?”  Theories abound on why she is still fighting for the nomination when the microphone has been cut and the lights on the stage are dimming and audience members are leaving. 

1 - Could it be because she cares so much about the country and truly believes she is the only one with solutions for issues the American people care about?  Not likely.  Most of what you hear is just Obama trashing and very little dialogue about her passion for one cause or another that Obama isn’t also supporting and addressing.  Aside from her truly Hawkish stance which is so bright and visible it must be blinding for her supporters not to see, she and Obama have very similar views. 

2 - Is it because she feels that Obama will lose to McCain but she can win and for the good of American we need a Democrat in the White House?  “Yes” and “No”.  “Yes” she brings this up quite frequently and has even recently used some very divisive language (you guessed it about race.) to illustrate this point.  The “No” response is largely because she has failed to convince or show us that Hillary voters will not pick Obama but instead will go in droves for McCain.  Actually, I think this possibility is plausible enough when you consider they are both close enough to the center from their respective parties to the point where it raises eyebrows for some and others want them out.  The other reason for the “No” response is because if she cared so much about a Democrat being in the White House, she would have ended her campaign and supported Obama by now, at least after Indiana.  There is no reasonable explanation to me how her actions could help the Democratic party in November.

3 - October Surprise?  The wedding has passed and the preacher has already declared “Speak now or forever hold your piece”  She didn’t speak.

4 - Campaign Debt settlement?  Nah.  They got the money.  Have you seen their tax returns?

5 - VP spot?  Hmmm… Of all the opinions mentioned thus far, this one has the most interesting dynamics.  Would Hillary be happy with a VP spot knowing it would likely hurt her chances in 2012.  Does Hillary think that Obama will offer her the spot to get her to shut up much like an adult pulling out a pacifier for a 2 year old throwing a tantrum?  Would it help or hurt Obama’s chances for the election?  I won’t attempt to answer these questions because I have no expertise or inside information that might make my view worth a dimes difference more than anyone else’s, but I will pose one interesting scenario.  What if Obama publicly offers the VP spot to Hillary Clinton in an attempt to unify the party and solidify his candidacy.  It is a very large bluff assuming that Hillary will not accept and also assuming that Barak dooes not want her, but think of the table stakes!  In one fell swoop Hillary would show that she is not concerned about the party, or America, because a VP spot would surely give her an excellent opportunity and realistically the only option left for her to be highly involved on the issues she cares so much about.  Declining this opportunity would show her to be concerned about one thing and one thing only, herself. 

So, to answer the question “What to do about Hillary?”, maybe the answer is for Obama to offer her the VP position.  What is the risk?

From Politico:

The founders of Paulville recently announced the purchase of the first 50 acres in West Texas on which they plan to build one of their “gated communities containing 100 percent Ron Paul supporters and or people that live by the ideals of freedom and liberty.”

One man who won’t be moving there anytime soon: Ron Paul.

“I don’t think that’s the solution,” says the still-running Republican presidential candidate. “You want to spread out and be as pervasive as possible.”

Looks like his operations will continue their impact (though others like Walden disagree), if you follow Jonathan Martin’s latest Politico article. The proof to Limbaugh that his Operation Chaos is working is that the Obama campaign has acknowledged that Limbaugh’s listeners had an impact in the election:

Indeed, an Obama spokesman sent two e-mails noting the “Limbaugh effect,” and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), an Obama surrogate, asserted on a conference call that Clinton had only won the state thanks to Limbaugh’s legion of Hoosier dittoheads.

Of course it would be in the Obama campaign’s interest to water down Clinton’s squeaker of an Indiana victory, but they weren’t the only ones to pick up on “Operation Chaos.”

John McCain wants to use “free market” principles to solve global warming. The article rambles on with excerpts of McCain’s speech that calls for nothing more than more government regulation of the market–not “free market” solutions. The problem here is a failure of understanding why pollution is even in the air. Industries pollute–there is no way around it. The market can solve pollution, but not by striving for the premise of “cleaner air”. The environment is not the end to achieve. The end is protection of property rights.

If property rights were respected by governments, then pollution would not run rampant. People would sue for company A infringing on person B’s property by the pollution. Instead, we allow pollution to occur and then try to “save the environment”. This only leads to regulation that doesn’t need to be in place, government controlling the businesses, etc. etc.. A government mandate on “you can only pollute so much” is not the same as saying “if you hurt person B’s property, you will have to compensate them and if you don’t stop, you will just have to cease operations. Their property must be protected.” People refuse to adhere to principles of property rights and instead focus on the environment–which they should not do.

While Ron Paul’s book tops the nonfiction list on the New York Times Bestsellers page and also is number one at the Amazon bestsellers list, his forces are preparing to stir up strife at the convention over the non-conservative John McCain.

But in the meantime, quietly, largely under the radar of most people, the forces of Rep. Ron Paul have been organizing across the country to stage an embarrassing public revolt against Sen. John McCain when Republicans gather for their national convention in St. Paul at the beginning of September.

I won’t be in St. Paul this September but I hope the supporters of Ron Paul and the other candidates that refuse to vote for McCain make a fuss that is worthy of remembering thirty years from now.

Rush Limbaugh is proving to be a delusional person. He said his “Operation Chaos” has been a success. “Operation Chaos” for those of you without a scorecard, is this plan that Limbaugh created in his own mind that he says will divide the Democratic Party.

What?

“One of my next objectives is to try and convince Republicans to cross over and vote for McCain down the road,” conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh jokingly tells The Politico’s Jonathan Martin a story this morning about the impact that Rush’s “Operation Chaos” effort has had on the Democratic presidential campaign.

Rush tells Jonathan that his effort to prolong the battle between Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton by telling his supporters to voter for which ever of the two was the underdog at the time, “worked like a charm. … My audience loved it, they participated in it, they had fun with it, as did I.”

The Democratic Party will come out of this process stronger and more united than ever in its history. The Presidential race is only a small part of it. Both houses of Congress will gain seats. Governorships will turn Democratic. And state legislatures will also turn Democratic or more Democratic.

“Operation Chaos” is working like a charm. I think it refers to the state of Limbaugh’s mind, with “chaos” being the keyword. And “Operation Chaos” is working but only in Rush Limbaugh’s mind. Reading on Walden Bookstore.

This graph- and this discussion- says it all:

It demonstrates that the average American- through personal decisions they have made- has continued to grow the amount of non-housing related debt they have taken on. I began increasing exponentially over the past decade since the bust of the dot com boom (where false income paid for large consumerism appetites). 

The average American has used its credit cards and personal loans to buy:

• flatscreens and electronics they can’t afford
• winter vacations and Vegas trips their incomes don’t justify
• the Escalade instead of the Caravan, the Lexus instead of the Toyota
• the boats, the ATVs, the motorcycles
• the private university instead of the public
• innumerable private coaches, lawn and maid services

The Average American has learned a bad lesson from the half-century of fiscal irresponsibility from the federal government, a level of irresponsibility the public has tolerated and supported with its votes.  The private sector has massively expanded on that lesson and grown falsely dependent on a debt-financed lifestyle.  ‘Enjoy now and pay much more later’ has grown to a point our grand-children will be suffering it as non-manufacturing debtor nation largely owned by foreigners and with a worthless currency.  The best and brightest will be emigrating elsewhere and our primary export will become military capacity and technology as a mercenary nation.

Can this be prevented?  Extremely doubtful, because the problem exists in the habits and denial of the vast majority of Americans.  Of course, many will try to blame anything but their own lifestyle: the government (which is precisely the way they tolerate it), certain foreign countries (all of which seem to practice better public and private fiscal responsibility than we do), their neighbors (but not them),  But, as in alcoholism, the individual that denies their problem cannot be helped.

Myself?  We bought half the house of people with like incomes and are paying off the 15 year loan early, have not carried ANY credit card debt for 23 years, haven’t had a car payment in 4 years (paid cash for the last new one).  In short, we have lived below our means for decades to gain wealth.  And if you think my family is going to stick around and turn our money over to people who take out second mortgages to pay off credit card debt, then pile up another $20K on them, you are sadly mistaken.  We fortunately have international options and will make use of them, rather than stick around and pay for the stupidity of the majority.   As much as I love this country, it cannot be saved from itself when it doesn’t want to be.

After a long season of ‘deadlocked’ primaries, the media is finally conceding that Obama has effectively won the nomination. Though no one will outright say it, today’s headlines tell the story.

MSNBC: “Team Obama Preps for Battle”
MSNBC: “Analysis: Where Clinton’s Campaign Went Wrong”
CNN: “Obama catches Clinton is race for superdelegates.”
CNN: “Aide says Clinton ‘willing’ to lend more money.”
ABC: “Bring on the Campaign: McCain, Obama Say They’re Ready to Rumble”
BBC: “Justin Webb on when and how the Clintons will back Obama “

Even Saturday Night Live turned against her in a recent skit where mock-Clinton described herself as having “no ethical standards.”

Tonight, only Fox news is straying from the pattern with this front page story: “Clinton Leads Mother’s Day Charge.” Perhaps they’re latching unto Limbaugh’s old strategy that supporting Clinton’s campaign will mean a weaker Obama candidacy in the general election.

The upcoming primaries may provide some fleeting energy to Clinton’s terminal campaign, with victories expected in West Virginia and Kentucky, but at this point in time it’s definitely too little too late.

This news isn’t being thrown around in the main stream so I think it is necessary to put it out to folks.

Reuters

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Russia’s deployment of extra troops in the breakaway Georgian region of Abkhazia has brought the prospect of war “very close”, a minister of ex-Soviet Georgia said on Tuesday.

Separately, in comments certain to fan rising tension between Moscow and Tbilisi, the “foreign minister” of the breakaway Black Sea region was quoted as saying it was ready to hand over military control to Russia.

“We literally have to avert war,” Temur Iakobashvili, a Georgian State Minister, told reporters in Brussels.

Asked how close to such a war the situation was, he replied: “Very close, because we know Russians very well.”

“We know what the signals are when you see propaganda waged against Georgia. We see Russian troops entering our territories on the basis of false information,” he said.

At a banking event in Madrid, Vice Finance Minister Dimitri Gvindadze said the Georgian economy was holding up despite the tensions. However ratings agency Fitch said a conflict would likely hit Georgia’s ratings but not immediately Russia’s.

“Obviously if we have an unfreezing of the conflict that will be extremely negative for the country (Georgia) and would lead to negative ratings action,” Fitch’s Edward Parker told Reuters in London.

Georgia, a vital energy transit route in the Caucasus region, has angered Russia, its former Soviet master with which it shares a land border, by seeking NATO membership.

Russia has said its troop build-up is needed to counter what it says are Georgian plans to attack Abkhazia, a sliver of land by the Black Sea, and has accused Tbilisi of trying to suck the West into a war — allegations Georgia rejects.

Tensions have been steadily mounting and escalated after Georgia accused Russia of shooting down one of its drones over Abkhazia in April, a claim Russia denied.

An extra Russian contingent began arriving in Abkhazia last week. Moscow has not said how many troops would be added but said the total would remain within the 3,000 limit allowed under a United Nations-brokered ceasefire agreement signed in 1994. Diplomats expect the reinforcement to be of the order of 1,200.

SECURITY GUARANTEES

Russian soldiers acting as peacekeepers patrol areas between Georgian and Abkhazian forces but handing full military control of the breakaway province to the Kremlin would alarm both the Georgian government and its allies in the West.

“Those 200 km (120 miles), the distance between the Psou and the Inguri rivers, are all Abkhazia. We agree to Russia taking this territory under its military control,” Sergei Shamba, “foreign minister” of Abkhazia, told Russian newspaper Izvestia.

“In exchange, we will demand guarantees of our security.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow had not received an official request from Abkhazia for its military to take control of the region.

Iakobashvili urged EU states to take a more active role in the region, with options including the deployment of border monitors or a police mission.

Diplomats said EU President Slovenia was studying sending a delegation at the level of state secretaries to Georgia as a gesture of solidarity, but a number of ex-communist EU states were insisting it should be a full-fledged ministerial visit.

(Additional reporting in Moscow by James Kilner; Editing by Dominic Evans)