I think now is as good a time as any for your humble blog-a-spondent to breakdown the candidates on both sides of the isle. This has been the most interesting election cycle in all of my life as a voter. I would advise any young person or previous non-voter, that this is the year of all years to jump in and make your vote count. It is shaping up to be a historic election and packed full of surprises.

MICHAEL DALE HUCKABEE (Republican) is the former governor of Arkansas [1996-2007] and the only candidate in the presidential primary who is "Chuck Norris Approved". Huckabee was born of modest means to a working class family and spent his early life pursuing the ministry. His years as Baptist minister has honed his skills as a speaker and his common sense approach to politics has had success in the past.

Huckabee has no chance, I believe, at becoming the next president, though. He may even screw up his vice president chances if he stays in the race too long. Mike Huckabee is an outsider, and he doesn't have the ivy league pedigree or the silver spoons one would expect from the GOP presidential candidate. What Huckabee does have is the support from moral conservatives that you would expect from a Baptist minister. The problem with him, though, is that it will take the big business, fiscal conservative support to win the nomination and the election; and he is perceived to be too weak on foreign policy, crime, immigration, and the economy. Mr. Huckabee will never unite the party, he has done a lousy job of fund raising, and he only has 217 of the 1,191 delegates it would take to win.

John Sidney McCain III(Republican) is the senior US Senator from Arizona. John McCain is the son of a navy admiral and former navy pilot. He is most remembered for being shot down over North Vietnam in 1967 and enduring a horrific stint as a prisoner of war until just after the Paris Peace accords of 1973. A real life war hero, McCain has a back-story that resonates with many Americans.

Why then, was there unrelenting vitriol aimed at McCain by all the biggest names in the conservative Talk Radio world (save Michael Medved). I'll tell you why. This goes back to the presidential primary of 2000. John McCain lost to George W. Bush and was fuming. He was boiling over the loss and resented the way president Bush's war chest was booming with dollars to the point that McCain couldn't compete. John towed the party line and campaigned for Bush, but he went right back to the senate and began working on campaign finance reform--which later passed in 2002. I would say that McCain-Feingold is one of the biggest reasons the conservative elite despise McCain. In so doing, the conservative upper crust defaulted first to Rudy G. and later to Mitt Romney as their chosen one. Try as he might, the flip-flopping, mud-slinging, millionaire mormon from Massachusetts could not cobble together enough support to warrant remaining in the race long after super Tuesday. With Ron Paul considered to be a loon by most rational thinking conservatives, John McCain is safely coasting to a victory.

The question now becomes "Can McCain solidify the base and still garner support from the middle?" The maverick senator will probably overcome his money problems now that he is the front runner; but will the straight-talk express be able to railroad past the 'gang of 14', the 'amnesty' fervor, and his opposition to the Bush tax cuts? If he could win over the base would he still be attractive to independents. Possibly, and despite our disagreements on affirmative action and the confederate flag; I think he is the only shot Republicans have at winning the Office.

Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (Democrat) is the junior US Senator for New York state. She was born in Illinois, the daughter of a successful businessman. Hillary started her political career as a volunteer for conservative pioneer Barry Goldwater. Inspired by his writings, she continued her conservative career working as an intern for the party until the Republican National Convention of 1968. Fed up with the mud slinging of Richard Nixon and the racist overtones of the convention, she left the party for good.

As a true believeing lefty, Hillary went on to graduate from Yale law school and build her connections within the Democratic party. Although she was asked several times by Bill Clinton to marry him, she finally agreed in 1975 after she failed the D.C. bar exam and passed the Arkansas bar exam.

Her political life as Arkansas first lady and "co-president" has sold enough papers to make us all a personal fortune. Somewhere between law school and the White House, the Clintons have become magnets for scandal and slicker than Nixon at avoiding prosecution. We all remember Whitewater and the list of Bill Clinton's mistresses is as long as my arm. Plus, there are some pretty heavy allegations levied in Kathleen Willey's book, Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

On the issues, Hillary Clinton is not far from the positions of Barack Obama (big shocker). I find that the two agree more than they disagree. Both are very socially liberal, so I have a big disagreement with them over the abortion issue. Although, I think this is a position that will be massaged during the general election in order to win over the moderates. Her health plan, I think, is flawed in that it mandates by law that we all run out and purchase a policy without assurances of any caps or aid on the premiums. The biggest problem with Sen. Clinton, though, is the fact that polls show that about 47% of the voters would vote against Hillary no matter who the opposite candidate was. She is a polarizing figure, that would inspire strong criticism and her candidacy would help sure up the Republican base. While I personally think there are some personal integrity issues with the Clinton's, the polls right now are saying that she would most certainly lose to McCain in a general election.

Barack Hussein Obama (Democrat) is the junior US Senator from Illinois.

**Yes--his middle name is Hussein. No relation to Saddam. Idiots like Mike Gallagher are trying to make an issue of his middle name as though he were a Muslim terrorist because he inherited his father's middle name. Gallagher has got to be the most un-intelligent conservative on syndicated radio (I don't count the grumpy old racist, Michael Savage). The only time Gallagher makes any sense is when he talks about football; and I hate the cowboys! Ok. I'll save the rant about this 'nincompoop', Gallagher for another day. Back to what's important...**

Mr. Obama was born to a Kenyan father seeking a better education in the States and a free-spirited, Kansas mother--one black and one white. Obama spent most of his childhood in Honolulu. He graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School. Mr. Obama was the first Black president of the Harvard Law Review. Barack was a civil rights attorney; and a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. He served in the Illinois State Senate from 1997 to 2004. He gave the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention; and is currently on the Senate committees for Foreign Relations, Veteran's Affairs, Labor, and Homeland Security.

On the issues of Civil Rights, the economy, education, energy, political Ethics, healthcare, Homeland security, and immigration; I believe Mr. Obama is on the right side of the road. My only concern would be a small caveat on the economy, in that, I feel we need to the lower corporate tax to encourage big businesses to keep their operations here rather than abroad. Also, I disagree with Sen. Obama on the abortion issue; but I believe he'll move closer to the middle after he secures the nomination.

What is interesting to me, my friends, is the fact that everyone lofted praise toward Barack and spoke of how great it was he was in the race--until it appeared he could actually win. Conservative pundits have re-focused their attacks to spend segment after segment on convincing people to vote against Obama; McCain has begun contrasting himself to Sen. Obama; and Hillary is throwing everything but the kitchen sink at this guy in terms of negative attacks. Yet, the Obama train keeps on moving forward. It's remarkable as well that Obama is raising a large amount of money from lots of individual voters who believe in him; while Clinton used donations from large single donors, special interests, or wealthy Arabs (allegedly). The point is that no one has electrified the voting public like this in years and drawn people to the poles. I believe that Barack Obama has the intelligence, integrity, and sound judgment to not only lead this country, but to unite it as well. The nation for some time now has been made up of feuding political parties, races, and religious groups. Call me sentimental, but I believe we can mend the nation if we had a leader brave enough to at least try.

I'm just the Average Black Man, and that's my two cents.
http://averageblackman.blogspot.com

Monday night, we saw a rare glimpse of the real Hillary Clinton. With wide eyes and a sharp tongue, Hillary launched lie after lie at Sen. Barack Obama. I was disgusted with what I saw. I know that to use the word lie in reference to a Clinton is blasphemy in the Democratic Party; but I'm an independent so I have no such reservations. In tirade after rude tirade, I watched Hillary tell these half-truths to the American people in an effort to tarnish public perception of Sen. Obama. I think it is obvious that the Clinton's are desperate.

I would encourage Sen. Obama to stress in the coming weeks the fact that the Clintons are mud-slingers and how Sen. Obama is refusing to stoop to their level. I think that distinction has not been made and really needs to be. The media will not stress the fact that Hillary is playing dirty pool until Sen. Obama forces them to do so. I also think that Hillary should be challenged on her so called 'experience'. She claimed during the debate that she had 35 years of experience. That is laughable! She was elected to the senate in 2000. Before that the extent of her 'experience' was as wife to Bill Clinton. As much as I like Bill Clinton, that does not qualify her to be president. I'd like to see the Obama camp draw parallels to other famous presidential wives. Is Barbara Bush qualified to be president? Is Nancy Reagan qualified to be the leader of the free world? Should we have elected Jackie Kennedy after JFK was assassinated? Then why does it follow that Hillary is somehow credited with 17 years of Bill's experience. Barack's wife is highly educated and articulate. Should she be his vice president? No. Neither is Hillary qualified to be president.

The Clinton machine is expertly skilled at destroying the character of opponents, and I think it's time we all see that for what it is. I despise character assassination in politics and I don't appreciate the way the Clinton's are distorting the facts. Again, Sen. Obama must expose this to the people, so the national distaste for this kind of politics will be recognized.

Would an Oprah special television event help? Maybe a special sit down with Oprah to address all the lies in a cordial, calm way; and show the private investigators Hillary hires and highlight the way they are conducting themselves. The only way to fight the politics of personal destruction is the same way Dr. King fought for civil rights--by the peaceful presentation of the facts in a forum where you won't be cut off or shouted down.

I'm the Average Black Man and that's my two cents.

http://averageblackman.blogspot.com/

--Stay tuned for the Average Black Man's Candidate Break-down coming soon...

 

As the average Black man, I'm obligated to comment on the recent police shootings across this great nation. This type of thing has been going on since I was a young boy back in Prichard, Alabaman and it is sad that it continues unabated today. Let's review.

In New York city, an unarmed Black man named Sean Bell was gunned down outside a strip club in a barrage of 50 gunshots. Bell, who was to be married that week, was in his car with two friends who were also seriously injured. An undercover cop was in the strip club and claims he heard an associate of Bell's remark of going to get his pistol. The undercover followed the men outside. Somehow, after the men were in their car, the cops drew their weapons on the threesome. Witnesses report that the police never identified themselves and no weapon has been recovered.

In Atlanta, Georgia the police shot a 92 year old woman. They entered her home under a "no-knock" warrant because they claim bought drugs there earlier. The elderly woman had been robbed on several previous occasions and afraid to even answer her door. She had old revolver that she had for protection. In full riot gear, they claim the old woman was enough of a marksman to shoot an officer in the face before they killed her. Most believe this was a case of police serving a warrant on the wrong house, killing the old woman, and creating a fantastic story to cover. We're supposed to believe that this fearful old woman, who walked with a cane, managed to get the jump on three officers in vests and riot shields. Not likely.

In Ft. Lauderdale, Florida the police unloaded into a stolen SUV of unarmed suspects. Even if the car was stolen and the men inside were the dregs of society; we can not condone cops being the judge, jury, and executioners.

This comes down to one thing kids-- fear. Cops are so afraid when it comes down to dealing with minority suspects that they draw down at a moments notice and shoot first, ask questions later. What is it about police training that makes cops feel that deadly force is the first option when dealing with minorities. Now, my friends on the right would have us believe all these incidents are coincidental and have no bearing on race. I reject that whole heartedly. This is not coincidence. How many times has an unruly soccer mom been pulled over and shot. How many unarmed, young college-aged white men have been gunned down mistakenly. Not too many. Let's admit the cold, ugly truth America and weed out this trashy element in the police force that our tax dollars pay for. After all, these people are supposed to protect us.

 

That’s right kids. The Tooth Fairy doesn’t exist; the Easter Bunny is a load of crap; and now we find out that quirky Kramer (Michael Richards) from Seinfeld is bigot. I was driving home from work Monday afternoon listening to Al Sharpton’s radio show when I heard what happened. For those of you who live in a cave—or don’t have a computer, TV, radio—yours truly, The Average Black Man, will run it down for you.

Michael Richards was doing a stand up spot at the Laugh Factory in Hollywood, CA and being heckled. Richards was totally unprepared to deal with the heckling, and flew off the handle spouting racial slurs and offensive epithets to one of the Black hecklers. It would have went unnoticed if not for a young woman in the audience who video taped the whole disgusting display with her cell phone.

Now here’s my two cents.

Kramer (Michael Richards) called this young man a ‘n!gger’ more times in 60 seconds than I have been in my whole life as a Black man. It was wrong. It was offensive. It was appalling. You will of course have a few Blacks crawl out of the woodwork and try to defend this guy, but what he did and said was indefensible. What he did that night basically amounts to hate-speech and it should be taken seriously. He is no better than Trent Lot’s pandering to old southern Red-Necks or Mel Gibson’s drunken anti-semitic rant. There is no justifying this and it is an indication of a deeper hatred that he had previously been able to mask. This man should be black-balled from the mainstream, but I am confident that he won’t be. There’s too many of his ilk in this country who believe that is totally justifiable to use ‘n!gger’ if they are angry enough with a black man who “steps out of line”.