What more can I say…

Maybe it works. Last week I pumped up my tires and today when I had to get gas, the price per gallon was only $4.13 – down three cents from a week ago. So perhaps Barack “The One” Obama is right: The answer to the energy crisis and high gas prices is for Americans to inflate their tires.

Sure enough there’s plenty of hot air in that plan.

In what has to be one of the most painful, if not silly, expenditures of the Democrat Party’s funds, the Gotcha Guy was seen following The Lewis & Clark County Republicans’ entry in the Last Chance Stampede Parade today. It became pretty apparent early on to those of us on the train that he was concentrating on Tim Fox, so Tim, being the good sport that he is, led the geeky flunky over and around the whole parade route – back and forth – as Tim greeted spectators and handed out stickers to the supporters and youngsters on the sidelines. While a good time was had by all of the Republicans, we’re pretty sure that GG is going to be hurting bad for the next few weeks. See, he forgot about the effects of a brilliant Montana summer day. Lots of sun. No hat. His face and the back of his neck were what can easily be described as “Red State Red” as he trotted back to his car.

Well, what do you know. Our good governor has a new slogan for this campaign: Join Operation Brian Schweitzer – JOBS.

What a clever play on words/name/issue.

Funny though – the jobs that the gov’s campaign is creating?? Not in Montana. Seems he couldn’t find an ad agency in the state that was good enough or a campaign management group experienced enough to suit a man of his importance.

Schweitzered again.

Just about the time you think you’ve got a pretty clear picture of the latest political campaign, something crops up to muddy the waters.

Over the week-end there were two separate items that came to my attention: One was an email containing a column purportedly written by perpetual liberal Maureen Dowd. This piece raised interesting questions about the huge number of small donations received by the Obama campaign, claiming that many were actually from foreign sources such as China, Saudi Arabia, etc. The other item is the “satirical” cover of the New Yorker magazine.

The first item – the column – has been conclusively debunked. At least, insofar as far as it was a column by Ms. Dowd. Funny thing though – no one has actually gone so far as to refute the real issue of all those internet contributions to the Obama campaign. When you stop to think about it for a second, the idea that a few people could make literally thousands of small contributions to a candidate by contributing via the internet using fake names and thus thwarting the campaign finance laws is more than a little disturbing.

Just where is Obama’s money coming from? We were pretty much swallowing the story of millions of small contributors. We’ve heard it before and it rang true. Here in Montana in 2006, that’s what put Tester over the top, right? But c’mon and think a minute folks! How many millions of contributors are there really???? Those of us who have played in this sandbox before know how apathetic the vast majority of the electorate is until just before the election – and how hard it is to get money out of impoverished college students and struggling young families. Yet somehow we’re believing that he has been able to raise almost 300 million dollars during the primary campaign mostly from these type donors. When you stop for a second and really think about it – can you believe it? Or is it possible – probable – that millions of those “donors” may not actually exist? Remember the Clinton supporter, Hsu, who gave hundreds of thousands of dollars under the names of fictitious donors? If there is one thing that we should know about Obama it’s that he can out-Clinton the Clintons. Methinks there’s something rotten in the Obama campaign and the stink may just be beginning.

The other item – the New Yorker cover. It hasn’t even hit the streets yet but it’s all over the electronic media. The Obama campaign is, naturally, going bonkers calling it “offensive, blah, blah, blah” The magazine counters that the cartoon is “satire”. The problem with key to satire is that it has, at its core, the truth. We may not know much about the “real” BHO, but what we do know is that he is a person who is not comfortable with his own self. He is only half-black, yet he has completely abandoned the “white” half of his heritage – going so far as to term his grandmother a prejudiced “ordinary white person”. He spent twenty years following the teachings of Black Liberation Theology as espoused by his mentor, Jeremiah Wright, but, like St. Peter, when challenged about his religious leader, Obama hastened to deny his association for his own earthly well-being. Then, of course, we have to factor in his long-time association with other less-than-stellar types such as slumlord Tony Rezko and Weatherman/terrorist Bill Ayers. So is it so far-fetched to portray his Muslim heritage, his self-proclaimed disdain for the American flag together with Michelle’s radical dissertation as an accurate picture of the “real” Obama? I think not.

There is a valid question on the table: Just who the hell is Barack Hussein Obama? The more we know about him, the less I can see him as our President. When it comes right down to marking the ballot, the American voter seems to get the right perspective.

Well, we’re now fully into election 2008. Obama vs. McCain. And I’ve already about had it with the fairytale expectations of the electorate. Especially the over-thirty-somethings who should have a little firmer grasp on reality. I cannot believe the number of people who are buying into the slogans and political promises like they really believe that one man can wave some sort of magic wand and make everything all sunshine and roses. They should know better. The world isn’t going to wake up on January 22, 2009 and suddenly the price of gasoline will be $1.00 a gallon, the mortgage crisis will be a distant memory, the Middle East will again be the Garden of Eden, and all mankind will sit around a metaphorical campfire singing Kumbaya.

No matter who is elected President, the world on January 22 will be exactly the same as it will be on November 4. This isn’t to say that things won’t change after the new president is inaugurated. For certainly they will. If the majority of voters put more faith in “Hope” than “Stark Raving Reality” things will change – but not for the better.

I remember a really cute picture calendar from several years ago. It had a picture of an absolutely adorable little golden kitten sitting in a dresser drawer, a sock hanging precipitously over the edge. The text read, “Here I am inside your drawer, I’ve thrown your socks out on the floor, And now I’m waiting patiently, for you to come and rescue me.”

That’s the attitude that seems to pervade the mentality of the American voter right now. We’ve made a mess and we’re waiting for some sort of Prince Charming to ride in on a white horse so we can all live happily ever after.

Earth to Voters!!!!! When you head for the polls this fall, I suggest you have a pretty realistic idea of what you want the world to look like in 2012 before you mark your ballot for president. The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy were casualties of the last economic downturn – and the Messiah has already come and gone. We have to get ourselves out of this mess in a realistic, honest, and pragmatic way. Allowing ourselves to be deluded by artful fantasies of what we want to believe will just make the next four years a nightmare. This election should not be about the Audacity of Hope. What we need is the Boldness of Purpose. Not just “Yes, We Can”, but “By God, We Will”. Because we are responsible for our own endings – happy or not.

So now the dust has settled a bit from the primary election and the Ron Paul folks can stop patting themselves on the back before they break their arms. They have a bit of a challenge in front of them.

While they couldn’t get their big guy enough votes to grab the Montana delegation for the national convention, these passionate political newbies in their fervor for their cause, have achieved a couple of the secondary goals they set for themselves: Knock off Koopman-identified “socialist republicans” in the Montana Legislature and make Bob Kelleher the Republican senate candidate. How fun! How powerful! How juvenile!

Now what guys? The Montana House wasn’t conservative enough for you in 2007 – so now you hand the Democrats HD84 and a probable majority and somehow you think that you’re making things better? Conventional wisdom holds that Max is a shoo-in, so you gave us a certified nut-job instead of a credible candidate who can at least force Max into a real debate on important issues. What’s the end-game strategy on that move?

Confusing “principals” and “political reality” is generally a really stupid political strategy. Let me explain by using HD84 as a perfect example. HD84 is made up of northern Lewis & Clark County and a part of western Powell County. The majority of voters are in L&C County – not exactly a conservative stronghold. John Ward has been a moderate, pro-business, pro-growth representative who has been able to appeal to independents and conservative Democrats and therefore has been able to garner enough support to win the district. In a good year, uber-conservative Mike Miller couldn’t get elected Dog Catcher in that part of the district. This year, the “republican” vote will be split between Miller and the Libertarian candidate, leaving the liberals a clear shot to the winner’s circle. Ergo – the Republican efforts to regain the Montana legislature have been set back, to say the least. Can someone explain to me how a Democrat-controlled legislature helps advance the “conservative” cause?????

I’m not going to even ask how the now-guaranteed Senate debacle is supposed to be good for conservatives. Having a joke for a candidate doesn’t seem to have any upside in my opinion.

While the Ron Paul Montana coup d’etat may have had a couple of little victories, the celebration will be short lived, and the orchestrators of this silly little comedia dell’ arte must redeem themselves if they expect to be accepted by the mainstream party faithful. I don’t know how they plan to do it, but if they don’t come up with a great “Plan B” they can kiss any hope of long-term credibility and acceptance by the party faithful good-bye. Big time.

They asked for it. They got it. What are they going to do with it?