Catfight: Senator Obama and Reverend Wright take off the gloves

Andy Martin on the Obama/Wright wildfire: ContrarianCommentary.com was first to disclose the mutual admiration society of Wright, Farrakhan and Obama in a March news conference. That’s why we are the #1 blog for the 2008 presidential campaign.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

CATFIGHT! OBAMA AND WRIGHT TAKE OFF THE GLOVES

CONTRARIANCOMMENTARY.COM WAS THE FIRST TO DISCLOSE THE OBAMA-WRIGHT-FARRAKHAN MUTUAL ADMIRATION SOCIETY

(NEW YORK)(April 29, 2008) One week before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, Senator Barack and his former pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright have taken off the gloves. Yesterday, Wright called Obama a “politician.” Today Obama said he was “denouncing” Wright and said Wright was “outrageous, appalling” and made Obama “angry.”

Obama obviously condemned Wright to stem the hemorrhaging to his presidential campaign. But Obama’s remarks are going to provoke a retort from Wright; we appear to be in the midst of an escalating catfight.

But there is also back story here. What is interesting about the exchanges of the past couple of days is how the latest disclosures by Wright validate my news conference in Washington on March 28th. At that time I disclosed the hidden links between Obama and the Nation of Islam (NOI): http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/2008_03_01_archive.html

Once again we beat the mainstream media (MSM) with exclusive information that Obama had sought to camouflage. We exposed the old links between Obama and the NOI. Yesterday, Wright offered effusive raise for Minister Farrakhan, thus reflecting that Obama, Farrakhan and Wright were much closer than the public record had ever appeared and something of a mutual admiration society.

Will Obama’s denunciation allow the presidential campaign to concentrate on “you,” or “us” and not on Wright, as Obama has been asking? Not on your life. In February, 2007 we offered a psychological profile of Obama and predicted that his mask would eventually crack. The mask is falling away. Although Obama said today he is “not a theologian” and is unfamiliar with “[Black] liberation theology,” how could he be so innocent after two decades in the pews? How could he not have been aware of Wright’s great admiration for Farrakhan? How could Obambi have been so innocent?

Obama is unfortunately caught in a catfight he can’t win and Wright can’t lose. That is why we can almost guarantee more and more conflict and finger-pointing. The more the MSM publicize Wright, the more his stock will rise in the African-American community as an authentic voice of Black rage. Obama was right about that, all Wright. But since Obama already had 90% of the African-American vote he can only lose support; Wright’s ranting can only polarize the electorate further.

For the past four years ContrarianCommentary.com has been ahead of the MSM in disclosing the truth about Barack Obama. The revelations of the past couple of days confirm how, once again, we were right on the mark in Washington last month.

Where do we think Obama’s campaign heading? Early this morning, long before his afternoon news conference, we predicted that he is going to lose both North Carolina and Indiana. Our prediction is looking pretty good right now. DNC Chairman Howard Dean said “one of the candidates” has to withdraw in June. Increasingly, and surprisingly to some but not to us, it looks likely Obama will become the one facing pressure to step down. Because he won’t withdraw, and Hillary Clinton should not withdraw, the donnybrook is going to continue.

We are hoping to be able to report from the campaign trail in North Carolina or Indiana between now and May 6th.

On May 7th, the Democratic race will be a new campaign. Obama will be wounded, Clinton will be surging and the irresistible force will meet the immovable object.
------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's #1 Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

Hillary Clinton wins North Carolina, Indiana

Andy Martin predicts Clinton wins in North Carolina, Indiana. Barack Obama’s support could erode, implode if he loses on May 6th. Martin says he will lose both states, Indiana by a solid Clinton margin and North Carolina to HRC in a squeaker.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

WE PREDICT CLINTON WINS BOTH NORTH CAROLINA AND INDIANA,

DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL RACE UP FOR GRABS ON MAY 7TH

POSSIBLE OBAMA “IMPLOSION” APPEARS ON THE HORIZON

(NEW YORK)(April 29, 2008) We promised a story on our research in Indiana and North Carolina for last Friday. When the results showed Senator Clinton winning both states, we held the story and did more analysis. And, frankly, we have to get Indiana right. That is where my broadcast career began forty years ago in 1968.

Hillary Clinton still wins both states. We predict that on May 6th she will win a solid victory in Indiana and a close decision in North Carolina.

The Obama campaign has been in a backward-looking mode since February. But the race which has developed in April and May is essentially a new campaign.

Dan Balz of the Washington Post says Obama “needs a pair of victories next week in Indiana and North Carolina to kick-start his candidacy…The last thing Obama should want is to back into the nomination.” http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/28/for_obama_wright_the_latest_in.html

Obama is not going to get the wins he is expecting. The trend line is moving strongly against him.

If we are correct and Obama loses both Indiana and North Carolina, his candidacy could begin to implode in the remaining primaries, leaving a virtual free-for-all at the close of the primary season in June. DNC National Chairman Howard Dean’s demand for prompt “action” on a nominee appears increasingly impractical and unrealistic.

ContrarianCommentary.com called the real “turn of the tide” for Senator Clinton on February 20th when we told her to stay in the race and “take it to the convention.” http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home/tabid/36/mid/363/newsid363/161/Default.aspx

Our predictions were also on the winning side on March 4th and April 22nd. Thus we feel our methodology is providing solid results. Our research was the first media analysis to highlight the “Myth of the Two Democrats,” on February 20th.

Unlike mainstream media, we do not use traditional polling techniques. Instead, we employ proprietary analysis that we first developed as part of a senior thesis at the Bureau of Economics and Business Research of the University of Illinois.

The polarization which was evident in Pennsylvania is increasing in North Carolina and Indiana. Senator Obama’s percentage share of the vote has peaked in North Carolina and has begun to decline. The impression that Senator Clinton is a viable candidate has given voters an incentive to take a second look at her. We see her recent financial success as an indication she will be competitive in both states.

Conclusion: If Clinton wins both states as we predict, the Democratic Party’s presidential race is going to be up for grabs. Clinton could sweep or come close in the remaining primaries.

There are two fallacies to the “inevitably” arguments of Senator Obama and his supporters: first, many of his delegates were collected at a time when the campaign was still a multi-candidate race. He has been notably unsuccessful in the one-on-one campaign against Senator Clinton. Second, “stale” results from January and February are going to be overshadowed by the fresh tallies in May and June. The Party is going to be reluctant to nominate a candidate who has been in decline since February.

Obama began a basketball-style “stall” tactic in early February, seeking to protect his lead. The result has been precisely the opposite. The attempt to defend, rather than attack, has undermined his candidacy and campaign when confronted by the vigorous and relentless counterattacks of Hillary Clinton. Thus, while Dan Balz suggests Obama does not want to “back into” his party’s nomination, that is unlikely. Rather than being backed in, he is likely to be rejected as the candidate who blew a substantial lead and lacked the “fire in the belly” to confront the Republican candidate.

As of April 29th, our predictions for May 6th: Indiana, Clinton 55%; North Carolina, Clinton 51%.
------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's #1 Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

Andy Martin on the Chicago Tribune agonistes

Chicago Tribune embarrassment: newspaper scooped on its home turf by its own company. The Los Angeles Times scoops the newspaper of the parent company with one of the biggest stories of the 2008 presidential campaign. Why can’t Chicago’s media cover Barack Obama? Why is Obama’s corruption being covered up? Media critic Andy Martin asks the hard questions about the media’s collapse in Chicago.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

CHICAGO TRIBUNE DOWNPLAYS OBAMA SCANDAL OVER MONEY LAUNDERING AT LAW FIRM

ANDY MARTIN SAYS “SMOKING GUN” NOWHERE TO BE FOUND ON FRONT PAGES OF TRIBUNE’S WEB SITE DESPITE THE FACT STORY ORIGINATED WITHIN THE TRIBUNE COMPANY

MEDIA CRITICISM FROM CHICAGO’S #1 MEDIA ANALYST AND CRITIC

(NEW YORK)(April 27, 2008) Out of curiosity, I went looking for former Sun-Times and now L. A. Times reporter Chuck Neubauer’s explosive story today exposing Barack Obama’s money laundering when he was a state senator. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-killerspin27apr27,0,6789688.story

This afternoon I did my own extensive analysis of the significance of Neubauer’s revelations. http://www.contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/

My emphasis was slightly different than Neubauer’s, because I focused on the corruption aspects of Obama’s behavior, rather than the suspected influence peddling that was the focus of the Times’ report.

The story obviously originated within the Tribune Company and should have been front-page news in Chicago. It is a major piece of investigative writing in the midst of a campaign that has been hungry for some markers on Obama’s political past.

Coming a week before the Indiana/North Carolina primaries, Neubauer’s disclosures could/should stick a fork in Obama’s campaign.

How could the Tribune ignore the story? I did find the report by using the search engine at ChicagoTribune.com, so the story is technically available. But because I am out of Chicago this weekend I can’t check the hard copy of the newspaper. I doubt Neubauer’s expose made it into the paper itself.

I have been critical of both Chicago dailies for forfeiting leadership in the exposure of Obama’s sordid political past. As near as I can tell, Chuck is no longer based in Chicago. So someone appears to have tipped him on the Blackwell/Obama connection.

In the past my Lilliputian web site has repeatedly scooped all media in the city on the Obama/Rezko story. Why? Is Chicago such an ego-challenged city that major media feel a need to act as shameless boosters? And cover up the damaging truth about a hometown candidate for national office? The Obama cover-up has been embarrassing, disgusting, déclassé.

I’d love to hear your reactions.

And, who’s going to scoop the Tribune and Sun-Times next? The New York Post? Or the Idaho Statesman?

When is Obama going to disclose what “services” he provided and performed to earn $112,000? There is no evidence or paper trail of him ever doing anything to earn such a massive amount of cash. Did “Black rage” make him hide the cash in plain sight? What’s the excuse this time?

Are the Tribune and Sun-Times working on that aspect of the story? Or are they going to let me break the news for them?

Stay tuned. This one is big, big, big. And it is going to get bigger and bigger.
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

Barack Obama caught in crooked money laundering scheme

“Smoking gun” prompts Andy Martin to say Obama should withdraw as presidential candidate. Martin says “retainer” by Robert Blackwell, Jr. was classic Illinois “pay to play” and may have been criminal behavior.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

BARACK OBAMA CAUGHT IN CROOKED MONEY LAUNDERING SCHEME

ANDY MARTIN SAYS “RETAINER” BY ROBERT BLACKWELL, JR. WAS CLASSIC ILLINOIS “PAY TO PLAY” AND MAY HAVE BEEN CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

IN ILLINOIS, EVEN THE GOOD GUYS [CYNTHIA CANARY] CAN BE CORRUPTED

WHAT “LEGAL WORK” DID OBAMA DO TO EARN OVER $100,000 FROM A MINORITY CONTRACTOR?

“SMOKING GUN” PROMPTS ANDY MARTIN TO SAY OBAMA SHOULD WITHDRAW AS PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

(NEW YORK)(April 27, 2008) The disclosure today in the Los Angeles Times that Barack Obama laundered money through a law firm to conceal the source of his income while an Illinois state senator is the “smoking gun” that is going to doom his candidacy. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-killerspin27apr27,0,6789688.story

Barack Obama should withdraw as a presidential candidate. Immediately. The latest evidence of his professional corruption is going to doom the Democratic Party.

Although the L. A. Times’ reporters have tried to present Obama’s crooked deal in a fair and balanced way, there is no way you can avoid the conclusion that the substance of the transaction was intended to conceal that Obama was engaging in political money laundering to disguise the source of his income. Obama is exposed as just another corrupt African-American legislator in Illinois cutting deals for other African-Americans. Is it any wonder he became the protégé of sleazy Senator Emil Jones in the Illinois senate?

Why was Obama’s Blackwell deal “money laundering?” The L. A. Times story is not clear on that point. Laundering was involved because Obama used “disclosure” to conceal the source of his income while a public official. Obama’s game also exposes that in Illinois even good government types, such as Cynthia Canary, can be corrupted. Canary tries to whitewash something that she would strongly condemn if the practice had been engaged in by any other legislator. In other words, Obama has even managed to corrupt Canary and the integrity of her organization. It’s disgusting.

Obama’s “client,” Robert Blackwell, Jr. was also an operative in the machinations of crooked Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, http://www.eki-consulting.com/APPS/EKIHP1.nsf/Content/BE14CC6D3CE4025586256D030075A471?OpenDocument

The Times details how Obama was still “of counsel” to his former law firm, but that he was not providing any services to that entity. Then Obama made a deal with Blackwell, and wanted to conceal that Blackwell was supporting him. So Obama “laundered” the “legal fees” by running them through the law firm and then issuing a list of the law firm's clients-none of which had anything to do with Obama--to disguise the Blackwell money in a laundry list of hundreds of unrelated “clients.” This was a classic case of money laundering and business fraud. Obama wanted to conceal the large sum he was receiving from Blackwell, so he concealed that Blackwell was the source of his income by pretending he was providing services to the law firm’s other clients. Utter fraud. “Barry O” ain’t stupid, he’s slicky and tricky, and he’s a ticking time bomb for the Democratic Party.

Since the law firm had nothing to do with Blackwell, and was merely acting as a conduit for legal fees for Obama, this example shows that Obama was nothing but just another crooked Illinois politician.

Obama’s “law firm” was also guilty of professional misconduct, because the lawyers knew that Obama had not provided services through the law firm, and was merely using the firm to obscure the fact that the major source of his personal income was one client on whose behalf Obama was later to advocate (there may have been earlier informal advocacy than the senate letter which has surfaced).

Time and time again, Obama’s law firm stands guilty of being exposed for sleazy professional tactics and gross conflicts of interest. Obama’s law firm was nothing more than a college of corruption for money laundering, conflicts of interests and other inappropriate professional behavior; and a collection of crooked lawyers that were stealing and concealing at every opportunity. Is it any wonder that honest lawyers get a bad name when crooked operatives such as Obama play games and use the law to conceal the source of their income?

Since the law firm had no relationship with Blackwell, running Obama's fees through the firm was false and fraudulent. Since Obama had nothing to do with the law firm's other clients, using a list of hundreds of unrelated clients to obscure that only one of those "clients" was paying him money was federal criminal mail fraud as well as a corruption of the ethics rules in Illinois. That Cynthia Canary tries to whitewash such blatant corruption shows that she has lost all sense of ethics and legitimacy when Obama is the one stealing the money. What’s her link?

Finally, the L. A. Times article leaves unanswered the big question: what legal work did Obama do to earn $112,000? He has never disclosed that he was working half-time for Blackwell, and there is no paper trail or track record of Obama having ever done any legal services to earn such a substantial sum. Before today, no one knew of the massive Blackwell-Obama connection. So where is the evidence of providing legal services to earn the money? I am going to be asking for an FBI investigation later this week.

Barry “Barack” Obama: just one more crooked Illinois politician. He’s a disgrace to the good, honest hard working people of Illinois.

Four years ago I disclosed that Obama was a fraud artist. I didn’t know at the time just how true my conclusions were, or how expansive and extensive Obama’s corruption really was. A big thanks to the L. A. Times for providing the “smoking gun” to document just how utterly sleazy Barack Obama has been in his professional life.

Obama should immediately withdraw as a presidential candidate. The “honest graft” that Obama engineered with Robert Blackwell, Jr. is going to doom the Democratic Party in November. Any delegate, pledged, super or otherwise, who supports Obama for president after disclosure of the Barnhill/Blackwell caper, has a death wish for the Democrats in November.

[Note: this column has focused on the crass political corruption Obama engineered to conceal the source of his income, and the way “good government” types such as Cynthia Canary are providing “cover” for Obama’s corruption. The fact that Obama used his senate letterhead to gain money for his client is just one more angle of the same slimy story. Using his senate office for his client is self-evident; the use of a professional firm to launder and conceal that his major source of income was only one person, Blackwell, is not so obvious, which is why this column has concentrated on that aspect of the L. A. Times’ revelations. The “senate letterhead” aspects, however, are no less important for what they reveal about Obama’s "play to play” operations in Illinois politics.] Obama was just an African-American Tony Rezko. Is it any wonder the two were so close for decades?]

And is it any wonder that Barack Obama is now afraid to debate, given the latest sleaze cascading out of his past?

---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

Andy Martin asks: is Barack Obama a failed leader?

Andy Martin: Where are Chicago’s African-American leaders? Martin says Barack Obama is promising to cure America’s urban problems but has proven ineffective in providing solutions for his own hometown.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

WHERE ARE CHICAGO’S AFRICAN-AMERICAN LEADERS?

WHERE IS BARACK OBAMA’S “HOPE” IN CHICAGO?

IS OBAMA A “FAILED LEADER?”

(NEW YORK)(April 27, 2008) Over forty years ago when I broke into Illinois politics, Chicago was in the late throes of “Plantation Politics.” African-American neighborhoods were either under the control of Black leaders who were subservient to the corrupt Daley (I) Machine, or were controlled by absentee white leaders who used African-Americans as puppets. As a result, there was no connection between the “street” and “the Hall.” (City Hall).

Today, Chicago is a fully-integrated city. African-Americans play highly successful leadership roles in every area of civil and political life. Plantation politics is long gone. Or is it?

How are Chicago’s African-American leaders responding to out-of-control gun violence? The principal neighborhoods where handguns are killing minorities have been under Black control for decades. And yet there is no visible local leadership to stop the killing in these areas. Chicago’s missing leaders are giving the city a bad name for inadequate public safety.

African-American leaders are apparently having no success in stemming the tide of murder and mayhem in their own communities; they seem to expect the citywide white leadership to take responsibility for imposing order. If minority communities are led by minorities, why are minority leaders not expected to take the leading role in restoring public safety? The very concept of leadership implies that those closest to the problem should best know how to solve it.

After every senseless shooting we see the all-too-predictable dramas, in which one set of African-American relatives cry about the senseless loss of their child, and a second set of relatives cry out that “my baby” could not have committed the crime.

Barack Obama says he will heal racial divisions nationally and provide “hope.” Why hasn't his rise to prominence provided any hope or triggered any response in Chicago, where he lives and where he has been a prominent South Side official for over a decade? Why is the violence in Obama’s home town increasing instead of decreasing as he rises to national prominence? Is this crime wave a portent of Obama-as-president?

Chicago police are now going to be armed with automatic rifles to confront gangbangers. http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/917216,CST-NWS-killing26.article; http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-chicago-police-assault-rifles,0,2104512.story.

The first time a white officer kills an African-American gangbanger using a rifle there will be a racial protest and “demonstrations.”

On the street level, Chicago’s Police are likely to be sorely disappointed by arming officers with automatic weapons. The recent tragedy of Sean Bell in New York proves my point. Bell was killed by three officers in an incident involving the discharge of fifty bullets against an unarmed car. The evidence showed the police were poorly trained and incapable of using automatic handguns properly. Now Chicago wants to send beat officers out with automatic rifles. The result is surely going to be a Sean Bell-style tragedy in Chicago. I will have more to say on the Sean Bell case as soon as we get a breather.

Automatic weapons are not toys. As a firearms expert I can tell you there is nothing more difficult to use properly than a powerful automatic handgun. Likewise, a high-powered automatic rife can be dangerous to the user when placed in untrained hands. Local police officers never receive enough training and enough experience to become proficient in the use of automatic weapons. That is why Sean Bell is dead, and that is why if proposed automatic weapons reach the streets of Chicago, innocent people will die and the Police Superintendent will be blamed.

[Please note: I have absolutely no objection to providing automatic weapons to SWAT teams that train constantly and become proficient in the use of these weapons. The police need to be able to deploy massive firepower when they need it, but putting powerful weapons in the hands of beat officers is not the solution.]

Forty years ago, Mayor John Lindsay walked the streets of Harlem in the wake of the uprisings after the death of Martin Luther King. Where are Chicago’s leaders to march on the South Side and West Side where the mayhem and murder are taking place? Uncontrolled gun violence is not a major problem in white neighborhoods. The crisis is concentrated in the minority community, where Black leaders are AWOL and invisible. The crisis surely does not exist on Michigan Avenue or in the Loop. Why hasn’t Obama made a dramatic gesture? Instead, he sent Mayor Daley’s office a message and said “call me,” which is surely just an excuse to say “I offered.” In other words, a face-saver.

Barack Obama has never managed anything. Obama is a product of a political system and a social system that has proven incapable of bringing peace to the streets of Chicago. Yet Obama is making extravagant promises as to how he alone can solve the urban problems of the entire United States. He wants us to make him president. He promises to be a pied piper who will motivate young African-Americans to shape up. Instead of seizing the day and making a dramatic personal statement of leadership and reconciliation in response to Chicago’s violence, Obama’s answer to the latest massacre was to “phone in” his condolences to the mayor. Some leader.

Maybe it’s time for the Democratic Party to phone Obama and tell him, “Thanks but no thanks. We saw what you have accomplished as an African-American leader in Chicago to stem the spread of violence and to motivate young men in your own neighborhood. We don’t want you to do the same for the entire United States.” Click.

---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and we can’t recall every posting or e-mail; but updated versions are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

Andy Martin challenges President Bush: “Throw open the gates of Arlington Cemetery”

Martin says we should honor our fallen heroes in public, not private, ceremonies at Arlington Cemetery. He says “fixed bayonets” have always galvanized, not diluted, public support for war.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

ANDY MARTIN CHALLENGES PRESIDENT BUSH: “THROW OPEN THE GATES OF ARLINGTON CEMETERY”

HOW THE PENTAGON BUNGLED MEDIA COVERAGE OF ARLINGTON CEMETERY AND HONOR FOR OUR NATION’S SACRED DEAD

“FIXED BAYONETS” REMIND US THAT SCARIFIES SHOULD NOT BE HONORED IN SECRET

(NEW YORK)(April 25, 2008) In 2002 and 2003 I marched against the Iraq invasion. I wrote columns protesting the insanity of invading a nation that was no threat to the United States. And the last thing I want to do now is advise the Bush Administration how to build public support for the war.

But some remarks by Dana Milbank today in the Washington Post convinced me that the Pentagon (and Bush officials) have even managed to mangle death itself. They have underestimated Americans and undersold their own policies. They have ignored the lessons of history and human nature. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/23/AR2008042303244.html?hpid=topnews

Milbank’s point is that the Pentagon obstructs access to military funerals even when the family invites media coverage. The Pentagon and Bush administration, squeamish about death, want to protect the American people from the reality of war. The controversy over photographing flag-draped-coffins coming home from Iraq has never left us.

But human psychology is exactly the opposite of what the Bushies estimated. We are losing a sanitized war; Americans would have been much more likely to support a bloody conflict.

Since the times of Homer and the Greeks, conflict has ennobled those who sacrifice for their fellow citizens. And nations since ancient Greece have honored their fallen heroes in public. There is no shame in a military funeral; there is nothing to be afraid of in a flag-draped coffin. These men and women died for us. Had I fallen for our flag, I would want to be remembered in public, not buried in private in a furtive ceremony.

Other than perhaps a few of Barack Obama’s closest supporters (William Ayers and Mrs. Ayers?), most Americans would have been outraged, not frightened, to see what the enemy was doing to our men and women. Rather than recoiling, most Americans would have been strengthened in their resolve. It is a universal human instinct to be strengthened, not weakened, by the sight of death and sacrifice. The Bush administration got it all wrong, and all backwards. (Is it any wonder they bungled the policy as well?)

The Korean War movie “Fixed Bayonets” catalogs men “left behind” for the greater good. We are drawn to soldiers who are asked to sacrifice. The subject of Milbank’s comments, Lt. Col. Billy Hall, was not only a hero who surrendered his life for every American. He apparently was a Marine who believed in the mission.

Many thousands of military men and women believe in our mission. They don’t believe in the war. They don’t believe in the ill-fated invasion. But they believe we have to clean up the mess and put things back together before we can leave. This is a very reasonable anti-war position, shared even by columnists. As David Ignatius says today in the Washington Post, “A real Iraq debate would begin by recognizing that however mistaken the war may have been, it won't be an easy mistake to fix.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/23/AR2008042302981.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 And every day we ask young men and women to volunteer to serve. So they can be buried in shameful secrecy for their ultimate sacrifice?

If George Bush had been shrewd, and if he and his civilian cohorts in the White House, the “brave warriors” I called “pasty-faced weenies” on the national security staff, had really understood the American character, and had really understood our glorious fighting men and women, they would have thrown open the gates of Arlington Cemetery and opened the doors of the transport planes to the coffins, and said “See, this is what the enemy has done.” The “fixed bayonets” of the American people would have even more heartily supported what was initially a flawed policy and what is now a policy of repair and remediate before removal. (Note: I only support “open gates” with the family’s permission.)

But because Bush & Co. did not understand the American people, and were afraid to present the face of death, they forfeited a great share of the public support that could have been theirs (thank God). The Washington Post presents a periodic running catalog of photographs of our fallen, despite that paper’s opposition to the prolonged conflict. Should we be scared of the photographs? Of course not.

Today, there are few Americans who support the original invasion. But there are very many Americans that realize however flawed the invasion was, the withdrawal must not leave chaos in its wake. That is why John McCain is a contender for the White House despite his support for a continuation in Iraq. He understands character. To begin with, in 2003? Iraq was not worth the life of a single American soldier. Today, we must respect, admire, honor and love the men and women who are literally “keeping the lid on” and buying time for sanity to germinate in the Middle East. There is no guarantee than sanity will come to Baghdad, any more than we can guarantee that sanity will return to Washington in 2009, but men and women are sacrificing their lives to the American cause. We owe them.

At the very least President Bush and the Pentagon owe these heroes public funerals and public access on family request, so that we can honor our dead. It’s scary to think how much more public support George Bush could have built for his Iraq policies if he had only thrown open the gates of Arlington Cemetery and opened the doors of the planes bringing home our honored dead in 2003. He didn’t.

President Reagan said “Tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev.” I have a challenge for President Bush and Secretary Gates: “Throw open the gates of Arlington Cemetery, and throw open the doors of the planes bringing home our heroes.” That is the least we can do to honor their sacrifice. Publicly honor them.
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. [Editing note: we make typos, and e can’t recall every posting or e-mail; corrections to a column are usually found on our blogs and web site.]

The New York Times declares war on America

Clinton or Obama? Andy Martin votes for ABC News. Andy says ABC News hit a home run with its Pennsylvania debate. The New York Times manifested extreme arrogance and contempt for the American people.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN


CLINTON OR OBAMA? ANDY MARTIN VOTES FOR ABC NEWS

THE NEW YORK TIMES DECLARES WAR ON AMERICA

HAS THE “GREY LADY” BECOME BARRY OBAMA’S MOMMY?

“MIDTOWN MUSHARRAFS” DECLARE A STATE EMERGENCY AND DEMAND AN END TO POLITICS

ANDY MARTIN SALUTES ABC NEWS FOR A “GAME-CHANGING” DEBATE

(NEW YORK)(April 24, 2008) The New York Times has declared war on America, pronounced a state of emergency and demanded an end to politics. The Midtown Musharrafs of the Times have castigated Hillary Clinton for winning the Pennsylvania primary, and for doing so in what I believe was a most ladylike manner. What gives? Has the “Gray Lady” become Barry Obama’ mommy? It appears so.

Thank God for ABC News.

In a vitriolic editorial “The Low Road to Victory,” the Times “did not get the big win in Pennsylvania,” (she did) and that “Voters are getting tired of it,” (despite the record turnout). Alone among major media the Times refused to round off Clinton’s win to “10%.” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/opinion/23wed1.html

Not surprisingly, Barack Obama fled Pennsylvania before the vote was counted so that he could salute “Evansville” (Indiana) and its local officials on national TV. All Hail Evansville.

The liberal script for the 2008 election is being shredded by, of all places, ABC News.

First, a little context and perspective. The 2008 primary election is not “over a year old,” as Obama likes to claim. And he has not really “debated” over “twenty times.” For almost a year, the Democratic presidential campaign was a carnival, in which Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel were equal participants. And, of course there was always the “unity” clown, Bill Richardson. In other words, the real primary election did not begin until mid-February when the sideshows closed and the main event began. The first seventeen or eighteen debates were forums where a long line of pretend candidates answered pretend questions and played pretend dodge ball with each other.

Indeed, the “early” campaign lulled Barack Obama into measuring for drapes in the White House. He decided he really was a presidential candidate, and probably even the president-to-be. “If my mommy the Gray Lady is for me, who can stand against me,” Obama may have thought to himself. Despite “endorsing” Clinton, the Times’ coverage was heavily slanted in favor of Obama. Just count the front-page stories and the vacuous “news” about Obama that found an excuse to appear in the newspaper.

The entire media world played “pretend politics” and anointed the great presidential pretender, Barack Obama—he of the killing fields on the South Side of Chicago—as the next president. Then reality intruded.

Hillary Clinton begged to differ. Mrs. Clinton is not a ”pretend politician.” On March 6th, Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal said “Hillary Clinton’s comfort zone has two modes: attack and counterattack.” Truly. Mr. Henninger may have written the best slug line for Barack Obama’s professed purpose in life, to “attack Washington” and enact “change.” Except that he can’t use it himself. Pattycake Obama has never “changed” anything in Springfield; his cohorts are currently on trial in federal court. He has not “changed” anything in the U. S. Senate.

Barack Obama is a charismatic speaker, from a teleprompter, and a decent fellow, if an extremely leftish one. But he is not someone you can count on to attack or counterattack [cue Osama’s picture]. Hillary is the one who would attack the problems in Washington or around the world. Dan Henninger is right about that. She may not look transformational. But her personality is.

Who is Obama going to put in charge of the Pentagon? Maybe William Ayers? (Or even Bernadine Dohrn?) When has Barry Obama ever “attacked” anyone or anything in his public life? Never. He is the safest percentage player in the game. A Babe Ruth he ain’t. And so when Obama finally came face-to-face with a real opponent in a real format, he wilted. He imploded. Imploded.

Enter ABC News. ABC news has been unfairly criticized for producing the best television of 2008, or perhaps the best of last twenty years in American politics. The Palm Beach Post on April 22nd criticized ABC for covering “Internet issues.” Lordy, lordy. The big, bad Internet.

Well, I happen to be on the Internet, and millions of voters are on the Internet, and we have a say in this race, a big say. The “Mainstream Media” (MSM’s) no longer dictate to us. And the MSM’s hate us for our freedom and independence. I am best known as someone who has questioned Senator Obama, and increasingly known as Senator Clinton’s only media champion, but I am not supporting or opposing anyone. I call ‘em the way I see ‘em.

And I don’t like what I see at the New York Times. That newspaper hates Americans. And it hates our way of doing things. The Times prefers the “pretend politics” of the past, dominated by MSM’s, to the unruly campaign in the present, where the people are in the driver’s seat.

What is pretend politics? Well, the Democrats love pretend politics. They pretend they have solutions for sickness (“quality health care”). They pretend they have a solution for the mess President Bush created in Iraq (“immediate withdrawal”). And they pretend the Democratic Party is just one big happy family (hint: “it isn’t”). So why are they pretending?

In my home town, an unrepentant anti-American terrorist and his wife are pillars of Mayor Richard Daley’s Chicago. Where else would confessed bombers, whose only regret is they didn’t bomb enough federal buildings, be part of the “elite” of the City? My colleague John Kass at The Chicago Tribune devoted a little shoe leather to breaking a story on the Ayers family that has not yet hit New York, despite the New Yorky origin of the events in question. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-kass-23-apr23,0,3364134.column It isn’t pleasant.

As for Reverend Jeremiah Wright, well Reverend Wright is having a “coming out” party in Washington on April 28th at the National Press Club in Washington. Fasten your seat belts. Obama may want to be in Evansville again when Wright is in Washington.

Why are the personalities of the candidates so critical? It’s the presidency, stupid. Yes, the White House. What kind of a person are we being asked to elect? The Democrats largely agree on the issues. And so, in Marketing 101, when products are identical, you use advertising/marketing to sell the product on its perceived differences. Clinton’s most controversial ads have never even mentioned Obama’s name. Negative ads? Come on. Good ads? Great ads.

Since Obama has endorsed all three remaining candidates for president (as “better than Bush”), and Mrs. Clinton has endorsed herself and Senator McCain on national security, may I hazard my own views? Like Daniel Henninger, I see Mrs. Clinton for what she is. And guess what? She has had to make a lot of compromises and eat a lot of dirt to get to where she is today. Surprise, surprise. Any junior executive, let alone the head of a major corporation, would have the same battle scars as Mrs. Clinton. And a lot of dirt in their past diet.

But at the end of the day, if John McCain loses and the D’s take the White House, yes, I would sleep better knowing HRC was wandering around the White House at 3:00 A.M. instead of BHO, Ayers and Wright.

And, frankly, although I am a registered Republican and proud of it, I see major deficiencies in the platforms of both political parties (which probably explains why I am a better columnist than candidate). Neither party has a monopoly on virtue, or wisdom, or compassion. Or anything. But I do believe the competitive two-party process will produce better policy than a diktat from the editorial page of the New York Times or Palm Beach Post.

And yes, politics is messy, disorderly, and nasty. Democrats have become the effete party; no nastiness there. Well, Clinton and Obama (he under protest) are giving Dems a wakeup call on the real world. Instead of crying like frightened schoolgirls about the Republican onslaught, Dems should realize that Washington will never be an easy place to do business. Being a real leader is rough work, not prettiness and certainly not pretend politics.

ABC news covered the issues which really matter to voters. Sorry, but that’s the truth. Americans are very hypocritical about their viewing habits. If people weren’t hypocrites, the “vast wasteland” on commercial television could not survive and endure. People are interested in people, interested in personalities, interested in what makes others tick. And, yes, interested in “gotchas.” Mrs. Clinton does not like to back off or back down, but she was forced to eat dirt on national television, thanks to ABC News. Obama? Well Obama really had no explanation for the rogue’s gallery of characters in his life. Or his insouciant attitude towards everyday Americans (“guns and religion”). Pâté anyone?

“Late deciders” broke for Mrs. Clinton on Tuesday. I’m not surprised. On balance, she had a better debate.

What is really outraging the MSM’s and raises the hackles of the “Gray Lady” (New York Times) and the other MSM’s is that ABC News hit the jackpot. 10,000,000 pairs of them. Eyeballs. Gibson and Stephanopoulos hit a home run in the eyes of the public. They stripped the bark off both candidates.

And the anti-ABC brouhaha? In a word: jealousy. Olbermann and Matthews (he of the liquid leg when Obama enters the room) and Brokaw and Russert and Williams were just plain jealous that ABC did what television is supposed to do: expose. Create controversy. Confrontation. Unpleasantness and uneasiness. Mike Wallace made his media “bones” that way. A long time ago.

Although I began writing in print media at the Daily Illini, forty years ago I entered the world of broadcasting. I have produced programs, produced commercials, run campaigns and done just about everything there is to do in media. And so unlike writers/columnists who have spent their lives in only one dimension of the communications galaxy, I have lived in all of them. Multimedia man. What have I learned? Viewers want to see real people face real questions and confront real problems. It may not have been pretty, because in the world of “pretend politics” ABC News rapidly became a pariah. But what ABC accomplished was gripping.

The ABC News debate was a game-changing event. Trial-by-combat may not be easy to watch. Blood sports never are. That’s why we outlaw them in this country. But ABC’s debate was genuine. The Times editorial is unreal.

ABC News has my vote for the best debate of 2008. A real debate. Between two candidates fighting for their lives. Real television. Real politics. Powerful television.

As for the Midtown Musharrafs at the Times who want to declare an emergency, suspend politics, silence powerful TV advertising and anoint Barry Obama president….Barack Obama? President? Stay tuned to ABC. ABC may be MSM, but Charley and George proved they live in the real world. The editors of the Times do not.

FRIDAY: ANDY TELLS IT LIKE IT IS ON
INDIANA AND NORTH CAROLINA; NEW PREDICTIONS
AND UNIQUE INSIGHTS
WEEKEND: THE STRANGE CASE OF LARRY SINCLAIR
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

Andy Martin and ContrarianCommentary.com become the #1 political blog of the 2008 campaign

Andy Martin on Hillary Clinton’s victory in Pennsylvania. ContrarianCommentary.com has been handicapping the Democratic presidential race better than the mainstream media. Better even than the Democrats themselves. Why? Andy Martin gives his explanation.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

AMERICA’S #1 POLITICAL
BLOG ON THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

ANDY MARTIN ON THE PENNSYLVANIA PRIMARY

CLINTON WINS PENNSYLVANIA; CONTRARIANCOMMENTARY.COM SCORES A GRAND SLAM AS THE #1 POLITICAL BLOG OF THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

WHY THE MEDIA ELITE ARE SUCKING EGGS IN 2008

(NEW YORK)(April 23, 2008) On February 20th of this year I went out on a limb, a very lonely limb. Based on our proprietary research, I came to radically different conclusions than the mainstream media (MSM) about the future course of the Democratic Party’s presidential race. http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home/tabid/36/mid/363/newsid363/161/Default.aspx

I wrote:

But the idea that Clinton and Obama are interchangeable candidates as presidential nominees is utterly wrong…. The “chatter” I receive tells me two things: (1) MSM have not played the role they should have; (2) “Clinton” Democrats are not necessarily going to line up behind Obama when McCain is the Republican option… Are Clinton and Obama interchangeable nominees? Not at all. You read it here first. ContrarianCommentary.com… My advice to Hillary? Honey, talk it up. Tough it out. Take it to the convention. And tell it like it is. And start doing this tomorrow. Not on March 5th.

Sixty days later, my predictions have been vindicated. It has taken the MSM two months to catch up with ContrarianCommentary.com and to awaken to the reality that Clinton voters will not necessarily be Obama voters in November.

Why does ContrarianCommentary.com get it so right, over and over again, and why do the MSM get it so wrong? Because we are genuinely objective. Eons ago (last year) I did a column in which I stated that because of the heated Republican race (I am a registered Republican) I would concentrate on analyzing the Democrats. And I have. I don’t come to the table with the emotional investment, or baggage, of the Olbermanns, Matthews’, Russerts and the rest of the liberal NBC/OBC (Obama Broadcasting Company) commentators. Likewise for CNN. They don’t like Hillary Clinton either. They all want to bury her.

Tuesday morning (April 22nd) at an ungodly hour I filed my story “The Hillary Clinton I know.” I then turned to Richard Cohen in the Washington Post who was all but screaming “liar, liar, pants on fire” at Clinton. With a headline of “Clinton in the Wilderness,” Cohen called an MSM poll a “damning indictment.” I slept soundly. I knew I was right and he was wrong.

But why was Cohen so cold, and why was I so warm and positive? (I hesitate to say “Midwestern values.”) It is because we analyze candidates and politics and elections from different perspectives. I have actually been in the arena. The MSM commentators have not.

We saw what the MSM could not see. That Obama would weaken in the stretch, and that his “base” was not a base that could withstand a frontal attack from an aggressive opponent. Obama thought he had “won” the nomination when he cleared the field of weak opponents. That was when I predicted Clinton could win.

As long as Hillary was on the stage with the other bloviating nitwits of the primary season (Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel, Richardson, Biden, Edwards) she could not attack Obama or even effectively campaign against him. Her hands were tied. Now she has trained her fire on Barry O, and Obama is going down. He staked $10 million on stopping Hillary in Pennsylvania and failed. His wall of impregnability and inevitability has been breached. As long as Obama could hide in the crowd, his financial base gave him cred. Now that his real “base” is exposed for what it is, and he is slowly being exposed for who he is, he will not survive.

Watching the bloviators comment on Clinton’s double-digit win Tuesday night I was stuck by how far removed from realty the MSM still remain. The media army is in retreat, full retreat. They are praying that Indiana or North Carolina will save them. Don’t count on it Mr. Olbermann. David Gergen was probably contemplating eight years in Guantanamo, in a cell next to Bill Richardson if Clinton prevails.

As for myself, I am looking for a convention room in Denver. Can anyone put me up? I don’t want to have to bunk in with Olbermann and his crowd. Fat chance.

Today I would also like to claim a victory. Based on an extraordinary batting average, ContrarianCommentary.com is the #1 political blog of the 2008 campaign. Bar none.

On February 20th, when I told Hillary to “take it to the convention” I was a very lonely columnist. I am still a lonely columnist. The MSM will not admit what is in front of them. Or as Reverend Jeremiah Wright might preach, “There are none so blind as those who will not see; none so deaf as those who will not hear.” It is amusing, almost, that it takes a Republican to tell the truth about the Democrats.

And Hillary is still my “honey.” You go girl. Last month I celebrated forty years in broadcasting. I know Senator Clinton won’t bake me a cake; I saw her 60 minutes remarks in 1992. But maybe she could relent, just a little bit, and scare up a few homemade cookies? For the #1 political blog in the 2008 campaign?

THURSDAY: THE NEW YORK TIMES DECLARES WAR ON AMERICA
FRIDAY: ANDY TELLS IT LIKE IT IS ON
INDIANA AND NORTH CAROLINA; NEW PREDICTIONS
AND UNIQUE INSIGHTS
WEEKEND: THE STRANGE CASE OF LARRY SINCLAIR
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

Andy Martin on “The Hillary Clinton I know”

Andy says Hillary’s “manifesto” was lost in the fog over “Bittergate.” Martin suggests Clinton was “born on the 12th of April.”

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

ANDY MARTIN ON “THE HILLARY CLINTON I KNOW”

HILLARY’S “MANIFESTO” WAS LOST IN THE FOG OVER “BITTERGATE”

“BORN ON THE 12TH OF APRIL”

(CHICAGO)(April 22, 2008) Shortly after she announced her candidacy Hillary Clinton or one of her supporters was quoted as saying Clinton was one of the best known women in the world, and still an unknown person (I searched but can’t find the article).

Barack Obama’s greatest strength as a candidate is that he makes people feel as though they do know who he is. Hillary’s greatest weakness is that she lacks Obama’s natural flair for the conversational; she remains an unknown quantity in the midst of the crowd. Clinton also suffers from the frustrating inconsistency that she made it to high office on the coattails of Bill Clinton. But to make it into the White House on her own she has to be seen as her own person, not an appendage of Bill’s. That is not an easy contradiction to overcome.

Some months ago I began researching Clinton. I started where she began, in Park Ridge, Illinois. I promised a column but in the midst of all the madness on the primary season a searching inquiry into who Hillary really was got put to the side. And then, on April 12th, the pieces fell into place for me. Hillary finally told me who she was. Unfortunately, her manifesto was lost in the noise over “Bittergate.”

Hillary’s weakness is that she may not know anymore who she is. But, to paraphrase a classic Clintonian expression she is who she is. In the past her campaign lacked a theme. Who is she? The answer was not clear. She began parroting bromides and talking points. She failed to see the looming threat from Obama. And, yes, “Clinton fatigue” was a real part of her own challenge.

Today, Hillary is all but abandoned, forgotten, rejected by the media elite. In the Wall Street Journal Peggy Noonan says “nobody is listening [to Clinton] anymore.” Richard Cohen in the Washington Post says “Clinton left Kansas along time ago,” suggesting she is not who she says she is.

None of these columnists and commentators understands Clinton. Because they have never been to Park Ridge. It is true that Hillary remains “unknown” while being superficially known to the world. Part of the problem, the challenge, the paradox is the great success that the Clintons have enjoyed as a couple. Ordinary people from modest backgrounds, they rose to the highest office, with Bill being elected twice.

Bill Clinton displayed extraordinary promise, and ultimately succumbed to self-destructive impulses that diluted his legacy. He humiliated his family. No one could live though such an era and not be changed. And yet, in changing, we remain unchanged. Hillary is still who she was. She remains what she is, from whence she began, in Park Ridge. Hillary was an accomplished young woman before she met Bill Clinton. No one will ever know if she would have succeeded on her own, because that was not her fate. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, Hillary’s pudding was destined to have a different theme.

I went to Park Ridge because that is where she began, and where her character was formed. Clinton seldom makes a point of Park Ridge. We know her from Arkansas, the White House and the Senate. Park Ridge has faded into the past, into obscurity, into seeming irrelevance. And yet Park Ridge today still reflects who Hillary Rodham was when she grew up there. It may be a place from which Hillary wanted to escape. Maybe she still wants to. But she can’t.

On April 12th Hillary finally issued a manifesto that told us she understood who she is, who she was and who she would be:

“I am the granddaughter of a factory worker. I grew up in the Midwest. Born in Chicago, raised outside of that great city. I was raised with Midwestern values and an unshakeable faith [in] America and its promise.”

This is who Hillary really is, and who she cannot escape being, any more than Barack Obama can escape eternally being the confused child of his own two very confused and self-indulgent parents.

Ironically, it was not until Obama expressed contempt for ordinary people in Pennsylvania that Clinton roared back with a clear statement of her own essence: the product of generations of America’s hard work, Midwestern values, and—she should have added—Midwestern constancy. It was the Midwestern values with which she was raised in the 1950’s, and that she thought she rejected in the 1960’s, that made her marry Bill and stick by him in the 90’s. It is these “Midwestern values” that have made her stick it out, scheme and bring herself to the pinnacle of political prominence. People can say she “wins” by being a “victim,” but victims don’t rise to the top in presidential campaigns. Hillary Clinton is much more than a victim. But to understand why she is so formidable you have to understand the Midwest: it’s values, virtues and, yes, it’s limitations.

Mrs. Clinton may be a little embarrassed by this column. She says her main qualifications are her experience, her travels around world, her worldliness. But I suspect people who respond to her and people who will vote for her in Pennsylvania on Tuesday subliminally know the real Hillary better than she knows herself. Her April 12th manifesto distilled what she was, what she had been, and what she would be as a candidate.

On February 20th, I wrote a column that predicted Clinton would persevere: “Barack Obama and the Myth of the ‘Two Democrats;’ Why Clinton Goes to the Convention.” At midday on March 4th, while the polls were still open, I suggested how Clinton should restructure her campaign. She has followed my game plan to a “T.” Thank you. And on April 12th she finally told us who she was, in just a few short, simple lines.

She is a flawed woman with many faults. But people do not rise to the heights of American politics by being flawless. No doubt she has learned from her mistakes. And Hillary finally told us she understands who she is on April 12th.

Now if only she would let the American people know who she is, with the same directness and simplicity, and hammer the “theme” of that “pudding” home over and over again, Democrats would have a real horse race for the nomination. Obama has given her the opening. Will she capitalize on his errors? My bet is on Hillary. Yup. Midwestern values. Finally.

Born on the 12th of April.
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He is a chronicler of all things Midwestern and the authentic Voice of Middle America. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

Andy Martin catches Barack Obama in Philadelphia debate lie

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

OBAMA CAUGHT IN ANOTHER LIE

(NEW YORK)(April 17, 2008)(Exclusive) Senator Barack Obama was caught in another lie Wednesday, April 16th when he denied ever having made a statement refusing to wear a flag pin:

On April 16th, Obama said (excerpt from nytimes.com transcript):

I have never said that I don't wear flag pins or refuse to wear flag pins.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/us/politics/16text-debate.html?pagewanted=all

On October 4, 2007 Obama stated:
Obama Stops Wearing Flag Pin, Says He'll Show Patriotism Through Ideas
By DAVID WRIGHT and SUNLEN MILLER
Oct. 4, 2007 —
An eagle-eyed reporter for the ABC affiliate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, noticed something missing from Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama's, D-Ill., lapels.
"You don't have the American flag pin on. Is that a fashion statement?" the reporter asked, at the end of a brief interview with Obama on Wednesday. "Those have been on politicians since Sept. 12, 2001."
Catch David Wright's report tonight on "World News with Charles Gibson."
The standard political reply to that question might well have been, "My patriotism speaks for itself."
But Obama didn't say that.
Instead the Illinois senator answered the question at length, explaining that he no longer wears such a pin, at least in part, because of the Iraq War.
"You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest.
"Instead," he said, "I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism."
In Iowa, some Obama supporters applauded the candidate's fashion statement. Said Carrie Haurum of Waterloo: "He doesn't need to wear that flag on his lapel. He wears it in his heart."
But talk radio and cable news quickly pounced on the issue.
"It just shows you he's not ready for the big time," conservative Laura Ingrams opined on Fox News.
Said Sean Hannity: "Why do we wear pins? Because our country is under attack!"
The Obama campaign declined to expand on the senator's statement. Spokesman Bill Burton said, "His comments speak for themselves."
But, Obama responded to the mini controversy.
"I'm less concerned with what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart," Obama said Thursday while campaigning in Independence, Iowa.
"You show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those who serve. And you show your patriotism by being true to your values and ideals. And that's what we have to lead with, our values and ideals," Obama said.
Of course, if he had said that in the first place, he might have avoided any controversy.
Obama is not alone in not wearing the Stars and Stripes pin.
Most of the candidates do not wear them. The one big exception: former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is rarely without one.
Democrat John Edwards almost always wears his late son's Outward Bound pin.
Hillary Clinton tends not to wear the flag pin, although ABC News off-air reporter Eloise Harper has found several images where she does.
"Well I think there are so many ways that Americans can show their patriotism," she said. "Wearing a flag pin, flying the flag, pledging allegiance to the flag, talking about the values that are important to America, teaching your children about what a great nation we have, standing up for those values, speaking out, there is just so many ways that one can demonstrate patriotism."
Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, wears a Hillary pin.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3690000
I am indebted to one of my readers, designsforher@aol.com, for the research on this.

------------------------------------------
Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

Andy Martin on the Democrats' "debate" in Philadelphia

Andy Martin on the Democrats "Day of Rage" in Philadelphia. Chicago's number one news analyst, Andy Martin says the Democrats "debate" showcased the weaknesses of both candidates.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

THE DEMOCRATS "DAY OF RAGE" IN PHILADELPHIA

"SUDDENLY, IT WAS 1969 ALL OVER AGAIN," SAYS ANDY MARTIN

CHICAGO'S NUMBER ONE NEWS ANALYST SAYS THE DEMOCRATS "DEBATE" SHOWCASED THE WEAKNESSES OF BOTH CANDIDATES

(NEW YORK)(April 17, 2008)(Exclusive) Well, I watched the Democrats' debate in Philadelphia. Whew. The Weathermen's "Days of Rage" are back in the news. Only it was Clinton and Obama raging at each other this time. Who won? Neither. The "debate" showcased the weaknesses each candidate brings to the presidential campaign.

As for myself, suddenly I felt as though it was 1969 all over again. The "Days of Rage" were back.

First, a thumbnail history lesson. In 1969 Chicago became Ground Zero in opposition to the Viet-Nam War. Federal prosecutors led by potty-mouthed Thomas Foran tried to prosecute anti-war demonstrators from the 1968 Democratic National Convention (also held in Chicago). The criminal charges were a farce. The result was courthouse chaos. I was there. The Chicago Seven (originally Eight) trial became a circus.

In the midst of the judicial carnival the "Weathermen" launched their "Days of Rage," on the way to bombings and other terrorist acts. Among the radicals was Barack Obama supporter William Ayers.

During the "Rage" melee, Richard Elrod, an obscure City attorney was paralyzed in a fracas with Weatherman Brian Flanagan. Elrod went on to become Cook County (Chicago) Sheriff. You see, Chicago isn’t such a dull place, is it?

Wednesday night Obama tried to obscure his relationship to Weatherman William Ayers. Obama took a campaign contribution from Ayers on April 2, 2001 and, after 9/11 never returned the money. Barry O has been to the Ayers' home. Ayers and his wife, the former Bernadine Dohrn, are part of the left-wing royalty in Hyde Park, a liberal enclave in Chicago. Ayers and Dohrn have never apologized for what they did as antiwar radicals. In Hyde Park, taking a campaign contribution from Ayers was an honor, not an embarrassment.

Wednesday's debate segued seamlessly from Ayers to Reverend Jeremiah Wright. What's to add there except that Wright is also unrepentant for his "Black Rage" and his attacks on the United States, which are more recent than Ayers' bombings. Wright has now identified a new Archenemies of the People: Fox News, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. At Gene Pincham's funeral last Saturday. Pincham would have loved it. "Rage" at a funeral!

No one around Obama seems to want to repent, and they are all still angry, forty years later. And they all seem to hang around Barry Obama to varying degrees. As Chicago's late star columnist Mike Royko used to say, "If you lie down with dogs,…"

Obama would be an exceptionally poor witness in a trial. Obama admitted Wednesday night he asked Wright not to officiate at Obama's announcement for the presidency, because of "newspaper articles" he had seen about Wright's sermons. But, apparently, unlike the rest of the American people, Obama was not in Church in 2001 after 9/11 and never heard Wright blame the United States for Al Qaeda's attacks. If Obama was not in Church on September 16th, where the hell was he?

Strangely, for someone who called himself a "person of faith" during the debate, Obama was never in church when Wright was preaching his heresies. Bottom line: Obama's credibility on escaping the continuing invective of Reverend Wright is absolutely zero. Obama read the "newspaper articles" about Wright but no one thought to check the sermons being sold in the church's gift shop? Puhleeeeze.

In no particular order, the debate also questioned Obama's loyalty to the American Flag. I have not yet seen a transcript of the debate but I believe Obama made a serious misstatement here. Watch for the coming corrections. When he stopped wearing a flag, Barack made a very supercilious claim that the pin reflected false patriotism or words to that effect. I am searching for the links to his 2007 comments.

Finally, Bittergate. Obama tried to recharacterize his secret remarks in San Francisco. He now tries to claim that he was only suggesting that people who face adversity turn to traditional comfort zones such as religion, guns, bigotry and xenophobia. That’s not what he said in SF. His remarks in SF were very clear that religion, guns, bigotry and xenophobia were opiates of the masses.

The Pennsylvania primary is very interesting for a reason that few have noted: it is a closed primary, that is, only Democrats, and not Republicans and independents, can vote. This limitation cuts both ways. Obama has done poorly in closed primaries. He depends on independents to sustain his momentum against Clinton. On the other hand, Obama's Four Horsemen of the Electoral Apocalypse (Bittergate, Ayers, Wright and the Flag) may not play as emotionally to Democrats as they will during the fall campaign against the Republicans.

What was amusing throughout the debate was the sheer paranoia that Democrats have about the Republicans' future campaign tactics. After the debate, on MSNBC's Keith Olbermann show Countdown there was agreement that the entire debate had been animated by fear of eventual Republican counterattacks. The "D's" (as some Republicans call them) live in terror of those forthcoming attacks. It is almost like a slasher movie. We lack only the 3-D eyeglasses of the 1950's horror flicks to complete the picture of panic. Screech. The R's are watching. And they’re coming for you! I have never seen one political party so paranoid and apoplectic about its opposing party.

Now Clinton.

Clinton did a workmanlike job Wednesday night. She handled herself reasonably well.

But Clinton has one fatal flaw. She can't land a knockout punch. If ever there was a debate when she could and should have dispatched Obama, Wednesday was the night. She hit hard, but she could not land the knockout punch. When called on to comment on Bittergate, her lawyerlike response diffused and confused the issue rather than clarifying what had happened and why Obama was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors against the People of Pennsylvania.

Clinton was never an effective courtroom lawyer. You can see why now. She knows the facts, cold. She's bright. But she has no feel for the jury. She, like Obama, is a classic "second chair" in the courtroom. Competent. But lacking the killer instinct. (Obama brags of being a courtroom litigator, but he has never litigated any significant trial matter.)

Wednesday's Washington Post had a column from President Clinton's former pollster Douglas Schoen saying Hillary had to go negative or die. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/15/AR2008041502664.html She's not dead, but she didn't make Obama die either. To paraphrase the movie Patton, "You have to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." Clinton seems incapable of sticking the fork in Obama. She lacks the killer instinct.

Bottom line: the Democrats are locked in endless battle because neither Clinton nor Obama can defeat the other. And, probably neither should defeat the other. Because, honestly, neither appears capable of defeating the Republicans. Fasten your seat belts. For a party that thought winning the White House in 2008 would be a "piece of cake," they are sure terrified of the yeast the other party brings to the bakeoff. Come to think of it, any D who thinks winning will be a piece of cake should ask President Bush about the last time he was told he had a piece of cake on his hands. It was 2003. He still has the cake on his hands. Or on his face.
------------------------------------------ Chicago's Number One Internet columnist, broadcaster and media critic, Andy Martin, is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

Andy Martin says British author J. K. Rowling is a judicial terrorist

Andy Martin says Harry potter's "mommy" is a witch. Martin says Rowling's lawsuit filed in a federal court in New York is an insult to the intelligence, and the law. "We need a British judge sitting in court with a pile of horsehair on his head, to call Ms. Rowling's claims horse manure and give her a sound thrashing," Andy suggests.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

J. K. ROWLING: ARROGANT, PETULANT, GREEDY AND A JUDICIAL TERRORIST

HARRY POTTER'S "MOMMY" IS A PSYCHO

BILLIONAIRE AUTHOR FILES FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT IN NEW YORK FEDERAL COURT

(NEW YORK)(April 16, 2008)(Exclusive) Great Britain's latest export to the United States is judicial terrorism. A lawsuit has been filed in federal court in New York by a psychotic egomaniac. She also happens to be billionaire J. K. Rowling and author of the Harry Potter series.

Ms. Rowling has been quoted as saying that Harry Potter "saved my sanity." (N.Y. Post April 15, 2008) Sadly, that is not the case. Ms. Rowling is still nutty as a loon.

Rowling and Warner Brothers have sued a hapless fan of Harry Potter for compiling an online compendium of characters in Potterland, which the fan now wants to publish in book form.

Rowling claims that her own frivolous lawsuit has "decimated her creative work" over the past month. In other words, she claims to have shot herself in the foot over anguish at her own legal claims. Sure. If she were any nuttier, the trial would have to be suspended to allow her to be hospitalized. The billionaires psycho travels surrounded by "so many lawyers and bodyguards in tow, it looked as if she were expecting an attack…" (N. Y. Post, April 15, 2008). Paranoia anyone?

Rowling claims she has been planning a Potter encyclopedia for a decade, and has had plans to distribute profits to an undisclosed charity. But she has done nothing for ten years. This is the first time I am aware that inchoate "plans" to do something have precipitated a lawsuit against someone who has actually taken action.

Along came "librarian" Steven Jan Vander Ark to compile his online "Lexicon" which, in Rowling's own words merely listed characters in alphabetical order while adding no commentary or analysis (NYP). Rowling claims that Ark's compilation is "sloppy" and "lazy." Then why is she filing a federal court lawsuit to block publication of something that can't succeed? Oh, Rowling admits to having used Mr. Ark's material herself, because of its usefulness. Maybe Ark's work was not as sloppy and lazy as she testified in federal court.

In her rather insulting claim to "Britishness," Rowling appears to assert that residents of the United Kingdom do not cry. Really? This is testimony in a U. S. federal court? Rowling not only claims to own the copyrights to her own books, her testimony seems to suggest she owns her readers as well. Rowling not only wants to control Ark; she wants to control the purchasing decisions of millions of Potter fans.

It is obvious that Rowling is still very mentally unstable, and that she is protected from reality by a gaggle of high-powered and high-priced handlers and bodyguards who insulate the poor loon from the real world. Does she have a psychiatrist? She needs one. Instead of filing a lawsuit, she should have asked Harry Potter to intercede.

Why is Rowling's lawsuit nutty? Because even material that is copyrighted can be used in "fair use" ways. I can quote from the New York Post, for example, formally attributing longer quotations and grabbing a word or two with quotation marks in a short piece. The New York Post is copyrighted. I can compile a compendium of newspaper articles, all of which are copyrighted, without violating the copyrights.

Rowling's travesty of the juridical system is indicative that even with a billion dollars in her pocket she is still unstable and, it appears, insatiably greedy and manipulative. The opening statement of defendant Ark called her a megalomaniac and control freak (NYP) and she is at least that and probably worse. But then no one ever said authors or creative people had to be nice people. They usually aren’t.

Rowling claims her work is being "exploited" and that is her reason to file a frivolous lawsuit in federal court in New York. Rowling's lawyers do establish one principle, however. If you are a billionaire, even a nutty client and a nutty claim can get to trial before a federal judge. If an ordinary person had a similarly vacuous argument he or she would have been dismissed long ago. Merely because of who she was, Rowling became entitled to "justice" in New York.

The United States Supreme Court in Feist v. Rural Telephone, 499 U. S. 340, 111 S.Ct. 1282 (1991) seems to have come close to addressing Rowling's argument, and rejected the claim. Thus, Rowling knows she probably won't win in the end. She probably filed her lawsuit to harass, intimidate and financially break a fan. Disgraceful. We need a British judge sitting in court with a pile of horsehair on his head, to call Ms. Rowling's claims horse manure and give her a sound thrashing.

I have a pretty good track record of predicting which way litigation is going to go. And, while I don’t want to hex Mr. Ark, I think he should win his lawsuit. Rowling is filing an arrogant, petulant, mean-spirited lawsuit in the hopes of terrorizing Mr. Ark and other admirers of her work.

As for me, far be it to invoke Harry Potter. But if I could, I would ask Master Potter to cast a spell on Ms. Rowling, and restore her sanity. She is a complete nutcake.

I hope she doesn't sue me for this.
------------------------------------------ Chicago-based Internet investigative columnist, broadcaster and media critic Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with more than forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.

NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE: Obama expert Andy Martin predicted Rezko trial chaos

Andy Martin takes a "New York bow" for exposing Barack Obama. Martin has been exposing Obama as a liar for four tears, while the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times sought to cover up the presidential candidate's links to Illinois sleaze. "How did 'Barry O' forget meeting one of the richest people in the world? A man who ended up helping finance his own home purchase?" Martin asks.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE April 15TH

CHICAGO'S NUMBER ONE NEWS ANALYST AND OBAMA EXPERT ANDY MARTIN "TAKES A NEW YORK BOW" FOR REPEATEDLY PREDICTING THE EXTENT OF OBAMA'S "TONY REZKO PROBLEM"

MARTIN PREDICTED REZKO TRIAL WOULD EMBARRASS OBAMA; NEW LIES BY "BARRY O" ABOUT AUCHI DOOM HIS CANDIDACY

ANDY MARTIN MADE PRESCIENT CLINTON DIRECTIVE

"HOW DO WE GET IT SO RIGHT, AND CHICAGO MEDIA GET IT SO WRONG?" ASKS ANDY MARTIN

(NEW YORK)(April 15, 2008) Chicago's Number One media analyst, Obama expert and Internet columnist Andy Martin will hold a 4:00 P.M. New York City news conference today, April 15th, to condemn Senator Barack Obama's latest prevarications and "lapse of memory" as reflected in the Tony Rezko trial.

"In November, 2006," Martin will note, "We stated that Obama had far more extensive links to Rezko than he was acknowledging. At the time Obama was saying Rezko was 'someone he knew.' Obama was lying. On February 22nd, we said that Obama had clay feet and told Hillary Clinton to 'take it to the convention.' http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home/tabid/36/mid/363/newsid363/161/Default.aspx

"In other words, we were the first analysts to predict that a future Obama implosion would open the way for Clinton to wage a convention fight, and that she should. (Not to mention we told her to dump Mark Penn.)

"On February 22nd, we again stated Obama was lying about the extent of his relationship to Rezko. http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html

"On the first day of the Rezko trial, we said 'The worst is yet to come for Obama:'

http://contrariancommentary.blogspot.com/2008_03_01_archive.html

Andy Martin on Barack Obama and the Rezko trial, Day OneFriday, March 07, 2008
Andy Martin looks at the first day of trial for Barack Obama’s fundraiser and confidante Tony Rezko. Martin says Rezko could walk from the criminal charges he faces in Chicago; federal prosecutors presented a dispirited opening day of evidence and argument. Legal expert Martin analyzes the complex issues involving the presidential candidate and his former supporter. Andy says the worse is yet to come for Obama.

http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home/tabid/36/mid/363/newsid363/171/Default.aspx

"How do we constantly get it so right and Chicago's competing media always get it so wrong? When Obama issued a news release saying the Rezko trial was 'not about him,' we said it was on March 7th:

Indeed the case is very much about Mr. Obama.
The Chicago media have sold the nation the biggest pig-in-a-poke in recent political history. They have sold Obama as the great savior, the Teflon “hope,” when Obama is merely just another glib Sammy Glick, who challenged the Chicago Democratic Machine until he got his own slice of the pie, and then quietly slept with Emil Jones and the other slimy machine hacks in The Party.
If there was such a tort (legal wrong) as journalistic malpractice, all of Chicago’s media should be put on trial and charged with defrauding the American people about Barack Obama. They wanted him to win, because he was a good story, and a great local story, and they engineered his ascent while fully aware of the cancer behind the curtain.

"Obama recently went to the Tribune and Sun-Times and promised to make a clean breast of 'everything.' And he lied all over again. How did he just manage to forget he had been an ornament at a Rezko soiree at which the guest of honor was one of the richest men in the world?

"Can anyone seriously believe that both Barry O and Michelle Obama forgot meeting one of the richest men in the world, after their lifetime together cultivating wealthy personages? Can anyone suggest Obama's staff did not 'prep' him with the fact that questions about Auchi would come up at the Trib and S-T? Mr. Axelrod was silent?

"Once again, Obama lied to the Chicago media, and these media in turn unquestioningly accepted his lies and brandished them to the world as part of the sordid 'truth' they have been peddling about Obama for the past four years.

"Hillary was pilloried for forgetting something that happened 12 years ago in Bosnia. Obama says he forgot he met Auchi four years ago, and now pleads bad memory. Whose memory is worse?

"Barack/Barry Obama has been lying to the American people for four years. He is on the brink of lying himself into the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. As someone who has been associated with the Republican Party, I am delighted to see Democrats preparing to go over Niagara Falls in an Obama. As an analyst/columnist with a reputation for fairness, accuracy and integrity, I am duty bound to sound the alarm, once again, and to warn the American people that Barack Obama is a fraud and poseur who has no business being in a presidential campaign. Keith Olbermann are you listening?

"Obama has now fooled over one million 'contributors,' and he is on the brink of fooling the entire Democratic Party. Whoa," Martin will state. "I predicted the worst was to come, and it has arrived. Obama's 'dream house' was financed by money provided by an Iraqi wheeler-dealer that Obama says he forget he ever met. How convenient. How pathetic. Stay tuned to ContrarianCommentary.com, not Chicago's media, for the truth about Obama."

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

WHO: Chicago Internet Columnist-editor/media critic Andy Martin

WHERE: Southeast corner of Park Avenue and 50th Street,
New York City

WHEN: Tuesday, April 15, 4:00 P. M.

MEDIA
CONTACT: (312) 440-4124; cell (917) 664-9329

WEBSITE: ContrarianCommentary.com

E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com

---------------------------------------------------------

Chicago-based Internet journalist, broadcaster and media critic Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639.

Andy Martin calls Barack Obama “the first anti-American candidate for president of the United States”

Andy Martin slams Obama for “hicks in the stix are nixed” remarks. Martin says Obama must end his “secret campaign” for the presidency in which Obama meets in private with wealthy liberal extremists to malign America and spew anti-Christian propaganda.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CHICAGO NEWS CONFERENCE APRIL 12, 2008

OBAMA: HICKS IN THE STIX ARE NIXED

OBAMA IS THE FIRST ANTI-AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN U. S. HISTORY

SMALL TOWN SUPPORT FOR THE MILITARY, TURNOUT IN 2008 ELECTIONS SHOW REVERENCE, NOT BITTERNESS, FOR AMERICA

“OBAMA IS NOT A TRUE CHRISTIAN,” SAYS ANDY MARTIN

MARTIN DEMANDS THAT OBAMA END HIS “SECRET CAMPAIGN”

(CHICAGO)(April 12, 2008) Chicago-based Obama expert and Internet columnist Andy Martin will hold a 1:00 P.M. Chicago news conference Saturday, April 12th, to condemn Senator Barack Obama for suggesting that small-town America is “bitter” about America and that Americans “cling” to “guns” and “religion” as an outlet for their bitterness.

Martin will also demand that Obama end his “secret” campaign in which the presidential candidate uses meetings that are closed to the media to raise money from wealthy liberals by privately disparaging ordinary Americans.

“In listening to Obama depreciate and disparage small town America,” Martin will say, “I am reminded of the New York tabloid headline about ‘Hicks in the Stix.’ Obama has denigrated small town America. In Obama’s eyes, Main Street in Middle America is ‘Macaccaburg.’ Obama believes ordinary Americans are the real Macacaas.

“While others are focused on the politics of Obama’s outrageous comments, I want to zero in on what his remarks tell us about his religious beliefs and values. And I want to demand that Barry Obama end his ‘Secret Campaign,’ where he attends fund raisers at the homes of wealthy liberals and depreciates American values and out constitutional rights.

“Obama seems to think that people turn to religion out of ‘bitterness.’ That has not been my experience. Christians are optimistic people, not bitter. Maybe Obama and his soul brother Jeremiad Wright are bitter, but America is an optimistic nation.

“For Obama to suggest that people turn to Christ and attend church out of bitterness devalues every Christian around the world. Obviously, after converting from Islam and after twenty years of the distorted racist theology of Reverend Wright, Obama still has no conception of Christian theology. People do not seek Christ out of bitterness; they seek His church out of grace. Obama may be a ‘Christian’ out of political expediency, but his remarks in California reflect contempt for the Christian message.

"Fundamentally, Barack is the first Anti-American candidate for president of the United States. He has been running down America in secret séances with wealthy liberals. Now we know why Obama and is wife hold closed-to-the-media fund raising sessions with wealthy contributors. They want secrecy so they can spew out their message of hate and contempt for the American people. They want secrecy so they can run a public campaign of piety and concern for American values, and a private campaign of elitism and condescension and contempt for the United States. The Secret Campaign has now been exposed for what it is by the ‘San Francisco Tape.’ The Secret Campaign must end. Obama must open fund raisers to full media scrutiny. Senator Clinton must do the same.

“Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times was the first, I think, to make an issue of Obama’s ‘secret’ campaign schedule and Michele’s closed campaign appointments. Sweet also pursued Obama’s secrecy to southern California mansions where Obama delivered his ‘real’ message to wealthy, anti-American liberals in Hollywood. Now Obama is spreading his virus to northern California.

“I demand that Barry and Michele end their ‘Secret Campaign,’ and stop holding clandestine meetings with wealthy contributors, where this pair stomps on Americans and ridicules our values. We now know from the San Francisco Tape that Obama uses these secret meetings with elite contributors to give liberal extremists the ‘Real Obama,’ and to deliver his real message of ‘hate and contempt for Amerika.’

“For Obama to suggest that small town America is ‘bitter’ is really a reflection of his own bitterness, and his wife’s bitterness. With all they have been given, this couple expresses a sense of arrogance and entitlement that is truly amazing. And very un-Christian. They especially condescend to the very people that have been bamboozled into voting for Obama in the primaries. His message seems to be, ‘Thanks, sucka.’

“Small town America` is the backbone of our military. Small town Americans reflect patriotism and optimism, not bitterness.

“Liberals are bitter because they want to devalue America and adopt defeatism as our foreign policy. Small town Americans are not prepared to disown this great nation. Only the wealthy, elitist supporters that Obama meets in secret salons share his despicable plan for the destruction of the United States.

“Four years ago I began to strip the bark off Barack Obama’s phony image, his distorted message and his shameless ability to denigrate even his own family for political manipulation and advancement. In the four years since then, the mainstream media have barely begun to catch up with ContrarianCommentary.com.

“Americans are slowly coming to know the ‘true’ Obama that I first exposed way back in 2004. I have fought against the efforts of Chicago newspapers to whitewash Obama and to conceal all of his corruption and condescension. This man is someone who has been coddled all of his life by the establishment, and his payback is to run as their ‘elitist’ candidate for the White House. Obama says in his defense, ‘I’m in touch.’ I’ agree. Obama has been ‘putting the touch’ on the American people for the last four years.”

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

WHO: Internet Columnist-Editor/media critic Andy Martin
WHERE: Southeast corner of Huron and Wabash Streets, Chicago

WHEN: Saturday, April 12, 1:00 P. M.

MEDIA
CONTACT: (312) 440-4124

WEBSITE: ContrarianCommentary.com

E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicago-based Internet journalist, broadcaster and media critic Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of http://www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Add'l media contact: (866) 706-2639.