ADMIRAL FALLON HAS FALLEN

The Commander of the U.S. Central Command, Admiral Fox Fallon, resigned Tuesday, March 11. The reason was he spoke his mind and challenged presidential judgment once too often although, for the Bush people, once is always too often when it comes to questioning this administration’s judgment. The White House pressured and Defense Secretary Gates wouldn’t take his calls and the Admiral had to go. Among his wild and crazy ideas included the thought that a pre-emptive war against Iran would be “ill advised” and . . . that we had taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, becoming obsessed with war with Iraq instead. Where have we heard that before? His cardinal sin then obviously was taking on the President in public, and that is the only way you’re not ever allowed to criticize this President, ever, other than in private.

WOULD ELIOT HAVE BEEN CONVINCED BY VINCE?

In the 1960’s the National Football League’s Green Bay Packers were coached and led by the legendary Vince Lombardi. In those days, a typical player’s salary was $50,000 to maybe $70,000 dollars a year, different times, but men were boys and were breaking curfew – as in these times, to be with ladies at odd times. With his Packer team beginning their path towards greatness and the play-offs looming, Coach Lombardi held a meeting and issued a threat his men knew he would keep. He told them that there would be, from that time on, a five thousand dollar fine for any violation of the team curfew, even for one such offense. Those in attendance recalled the shock as their coach made his exit, but it was mixed with laughter moments later when Lombardi stepped back in the room and asked his players for a favor. They said, “Sure Coach, what is it?” to which he replied, “Gentlemen, if you meet a woman worth five thousand dollars a night, will you bring me along so I can at least see her.”
Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer probably never met Vince Lombardi, but he could have used some good coaching. And even allowing for inflation, what Mr. Spitzer paid for his dalliances doesn’t compare with what it cost him.

HILLIAM AND BARACK TO THE FUTURE: BI-POLLING CANDIDATES

In the ABC News Washington Post this past week, Americans were asked three questions. The first was how did they feel about having the first black president and they were a solid plus eight (8) percent. Next they were asked what they thought about the prospect of a first woman president; answer: plus nine (9) percent. The final question was their feelings on electing the first seventy-two (72) year old (plus) president and this one was a minus, as in a negative of twenty-three (23) percent. Does this serve Senator McSame well, as to how well he can serve? Remember, he’s yet to release his medical records, and he has unfortunately battled Melanoma and other issues. This question is becoming a constant for political insiders and the apparently (rather impolite) remarks of one of our contributor’s Charles Sanders about Mr. McCain’s VP choice being that of a political living well may prove to be another instance of a Faux writer plagiarizing in advance.
A final thought (until the next one) on aging, can even the remnants of the Karl Rove spin machine for the ages work on that particular challenge for Mr. McCain. Perhaps given the age of the Republican base (only 14% are 30 years old or younger according to the Florida Republican primary) they can evolve a concept converting that of “dog years” into one of “Republican years” – hey, it’s no longer in dispute that a number of insiders knew Ronald Reagan was showing signs of Alzheimer’s before running for a second term, but…they hope we’ll forget that.

FRIDAY FAUXLOSOPHY

It can be most challenging to instruct another in a discipline which is your strength but not theirs.

MUCH TO DO ABOUT SOMETHING: MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA THAT IS

Item: Because both Michigan and Florida moved up their primaries over when they were previously scheduled, their validity was challenged by both the DNC and the RNC (as opposed to New Hampshire, which did the same with no penalty), so what then to do with delegations from those states at the actual Democratic Convention?
Howard Dean, leader of the DNC, is now being asked (and expected) to lead and, resolve the issue of Michigan or Florida as to delegating delegates from the Faux primaries in Florida and Michigan, which don’t “count”, but repeating the people in those states who do count. Have other contests(?), that does make some sense but who will pay for said primaries, since both parties agree having the tax payers fund it won’t be square. So by June 10th something vote-worthy has to be resolved or re-resolved because some feel if the primaries end in a dead heat, the Democrats could also be dead – as to being a unified opposition to the Republicans in November.But to reiterate you can’t ignore delegations from either of those two very major states.
Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan) says that since state law in Michigan does not allow a second primary, a mail-in caucus might be doable, but if Hillary wins that (as she did the first disallowed primary) will we get “mail-order bride” jokes?
The Florida elections might (this time anyway) be less Faux because all candidates were on the Florida Democratic ballot, as opposed to Michigan where Mr. Obama’s people took his name off. The Republicans are smiling, the people in Michigan and Florida are wondering, and the clock is running. And that’s what the Democratic candidates should keep in mind regarding new primaries, run them so they don’t run you.

COADD, THAT’S A LOAD

Note to Raymond Coadd; The NY Times not only featured the obvious headlines on Governor Spitzer failings but broke the story first on Monday, March 10, 2008. They also were the prime source for 95% of the Bill Clinton – Monica Lewinsky stuff, a fact acknowledged by the Wall Street Journal, so for people like you that means it must be true, right? Besides, such a scandal, a man cheating with a woman could and has happened in both political parties; its just if its man with man that you can be sure it’s a Republican. And its invariably a conservative one.

IM A MIFFED SIR, AT SPITZER

Why is anybody shocked or surprised that a typical NY liberal type like Democratic Governor Elliot Spitzer is also liberal with his morals? Its amazing the NY Times even reported this at all.

WISHING WELL FOR ELLIOTT

We are saddened by the problems and travails NY Governor Elliott Spitzer is now facing. It’s a shame on many levels. I have met Mr. Spitzer, he’s an accomplished, charismatic gentleman; often well intentioned but obviously complex and conflicted in many ways. I hope this resolves as well as possible but his prospects seem daunting

HILLIAM'S COMEBACK, AGAIN, IS HER THIRD TIME A CHARM?

After we were told, by William Clinton, that Hillary Clinton could be viable only if she won Ohio and Texas, durn, she went and did. But, for all her success in public perception, she only gained five (5) delegates.
What then if Mrs. Clinton wins in Pennsylvania, she will have won every big state, but still not have the lead in delegates? At the risk of being bi (or tri) pollers, we (as always) who may not be right but we’re always sure, have an election strategy to suggest. And that is that state by state polls be done by the DNC to determine the electoral versus the popular comparison of each candidate against Senator McCain, and resolve that, that way before the convention.
Oh, bye the bye, each Democratic candidate has already received more votes in the primaries than any Democratic candidate in history. And history is what we’re watching, but now or at least soon, the DNC and John Dean have to do some serious participating.

THE THURSDAY'S CHILD OF REASONING; THE FAUX WHY OH WHY DEPT

Oh why faux why do so many Americans vote the economic interests of their financial betters? Do they think they (the bosses) will reciprocate? And on the subject(s) of taxes (and thinking as well) both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton favor tax cuts, decent ones in fact, for only those making $250,000 a year or less , while John McCain (now you know why we call him McSame) wants to make the “temporary” Bush tax cuts which provide “relief” for those making over $250,000.00 permanent. These bye the bye, were the same tax cuts Senator McCain twice voted against as unfair; guess he checked with his donor’s base, and … his wife’s income tax return as well. So while we understand why he benefits himself, why are so many Americans, (to reiterate) reluctant to do the same for themselves, and…their families.
Submitted by Norman, 3 days late

FRIDAY FAUXLOSOPHY

Better the person with bas intentions not preface them with kind words.

FAUX FOOD FOR THOUGHT

In Brooklyn there grows more than a tree, there grows the seeds of unrest planted by the pillars of the modern political right; making classic use of the complete sentence as opposed to the complete truth. First, the sentence which is on a billboard proclaiming “Louis Farrakhan supports Barack Obama: would you?” Again this sentence, however complete, leaves more facts than the number of commandments some right wing Congressman can recite. Consider this, it’s similar to a number done on Hillary Clinton when she reflexively hugged an hysterical Sutha Arafat (Yassir’s wife) for all of 2 or 3 seconds. Consider that to this day, Bill Clinton is revered in the State of Israel. Consider that Ann Coulter, a much more commercially successful anti-Semite then Farrakhan could ever be, said she’d vote for Mrs. Clinton instead of John McCain. The surprised Mrs. Clinton just said, “that’s a surprise” while making no further comment. Consider that Reverend Jerry Falwell whose life work included extensive commentary on the defects of Jews and their religion, was embraced and way back in the year of 2006, was honored in speech and deed by Republican nominee John McCain. And consider that Mr. Obama condemned Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism, and to those who felt that wasn’t sufficient, rejected his support.
What then would make the sentence on the sign in Brooklyn, a sign of honesty? How about this, “Louis Farrakhan supports Barack Obama; it was rejected, Ann Coulter supports Hillary Clinton, she was surprised, and Jerry Falwell supported John McCain, it was embraced. What would you do?” Complex, huh, but as those of us who studied the Bible, the Talmud, or history should so well know the truth just about always is.

PORTENTIOUS NEWS FOR JEWS, BARACK MAY ACT LIKE A . . .

Barack Obama’s attitude towards all things Jewish is being questioned by some people in the Jewish community. To be balanced, some of those questioning have become reflexive voters on the right, which is their right but others are independents and Democrats and given the history (world wide and in this country) of attitudes and treatment towards Jews, such questions are reasonable. And they’re more reasonable when the behavior of a fair number of U.S. Presidents and Presidential candidates is to put it mildly, concerning.
First on past presidents: there have been incidents of anti-Semitic tirades by the President himself in the Oval Office. Sitting U.S. Presidents, have by their appearance in an official capacity, paid homage to the genocidal murder of Jews. In one telling instance, a president threatened Israel’s solvency if under attack she did not do as told. Also relevant to the dignity and respect of Israel when an Arab country insidiously blamed “the Zions” for terrorist attacks in their own capital, (by Arab fundamentalist suicide bombers of course), the U.S. President at that time due to timidity, avarice or cowardice, take your choice, said all of nothing.
When a series of major best selling novels (over 70 million sold) told of a prophecy which marked among other things, the end of Jews; one third converted, two thirds destroyed, the President at the time was anything but disapproving, saying in fact the stories left him feeling “stoked”.
As candidates a number of eventual and would be presidents also in the words of an old spiritual “were weighed in the balance and found wanting”. One such candidate kicked off his (successful) presidential campaign at the locale where two Jewish civil rights workers had been tortured to death; echoing the locals attempted efforts to thwart an FBI investigation with the magic words “State’s Rights”.
Another candidate for our highest office embraced the endorsement of a man who said Jews were “deficient”, and were “not deserving of Heaven”, going so far as to speak at the commencement of the University this bigot founded.
If you haven’t guessed the identities of those “gentlemen” whose conduct we've questioned, we’ll enumerate. The anti-Semitic tirades were courtesy of Richard Nixon who claimed the only problem with the Mai Lai massacre (many of us thought the massacre was the problem) was the “dirty rotten Jews of New York”, his exact words. The president who paid homage to the genocidal killers of the Holocaust was Ronald Reagan who visited Bitburg cemetery in Germany in 1985 and, despite full knowledge of the dozens of S.S. members buried there, layed a wreath in their honor. It was Bush ’41 who threatened the Israeli’s loan guarantees if they dared counter attack in any way while Saudi missiles fell on their cities in the first Gulf War, and while Arabs cheered in the streets. And it was Bush ’43 who was "stoked" about the “Left Behind” novels, (which based on the one third, two thirds “solution” to Jews doesn’t leave much wiggle room), and remember this is a man who doesn’t read much.
It was candidate Ronald Reagan who, in 1980, began his first presidential run at Philadelphia, Mississippi, the same of the 1964 torture murders of three civil rights workers, two of whom were Jews. This was long since the FBI had published the mantra of the KKK meeting planning this crime (and many of these same folks were in the audience wildly cheering Mr. Reagan) was “we’re going to get us some Jews tonight”.
In 2000, the then and current Republican candidate John McCain condemned Reverend Jerry Falwell (as well as Louis Farrakhan) as “agents of intolerance” but that was before he realized the beat to which so much of the Republican base marches, and happily accepted an invitation to be commencement speaker at Falwell’s Liberty University in 2006.
Imagine then gang, if any of the aforementioned behavior were attributed to Mr. Obama what would, could, or should the American Jewish community do? To start, they would, could, or should know just what history, behavior, and attitudes he was emulating, namely that . . . of so many, many Republicans. Oh, note to the reasonable, we don’t see even one-third chance of that kind of conversion by Barack Obama.

THE GOP NAME GAME, STILL THE SAME GAME

One of the “fun” things about rightwing politicians is that when their spokesmen, appointed or at least gladly tolerated, engage in bigoted code words they always “had no idea”. The old, or should we say earlier version of John McCain used to be aware of this when he called Jerry Falwell and Louis Farrakhan “agents of intolerance” but . . . that was in 2000 when the “Straight Talk Express” dared express itself against the hard right turns of the Republican road, or code map take your choice. So when Cincinnati talk host Bill Cunningham, whose show is on 300 stations nationwide, “warmed up” the audience at a McCain rally this past week, we got a cold dose of reality as to how far backwards the Republicans have come. For those unaware, Mr. Cunningham parodied Barack Obama’s middle name, Hussein, and Mr. Obama as a religious figure, whose election would bring joy to terrorists. John McCain did apologize and assured people that his (Republican) campaign would not do that again. OK, but isn’t this the same Senator McCain who in 2006 gave credibility and honor to Jerry Falwell by speaking at his Liberty University commencement, the same Mr. Falwell who said Jews are inferior and not worthy of Heaven? And again, for the record, it turns out the McCain people who engaged Cunningham for the rally were familiar with his “act”. We don’t yet have the answers but we got a few questions: Are these people still in charge of McCain rally “entertainment”? And does any Republican candidate since and including Ronald Reagan (but excluding Robert Dole) ever err on the side of tolerance? Remember McCain and the Republicans emphasize their experience, we agree but have to question just what they’re experienced at.

FRIDAY FAUXLOSOPHY

Should you, however inadvertently cause another person loss or inconvenience they’ll appreciate remedy way more than sympathy.