Waiting for the Kamala Coronation to begin

Walt is waiting with `bated breath [not "baited"; look it up. Ed.] for the beginning of the Cackler Coronation ceremonies in Chicago. I have opened a book on the number of casualties -- literally, meaning dead and wounded. You can bet day-by-day or total. Contact Dino or Mario at the barbershop.

I understand that today's opening act will include a Parade of Hasbeens, including every living Dimocrat President except Jimmy Carter. (The letter of July 23rd announcing his long-awaited passing has been denounced by Reuters as a fake. But how would we know the difference?)

 

Included in the list of participants is the one who should have been (the way she tells it) America's first female President. I refer of course to Mrs William Jefferson Clinton, who got pipped at the post by a black(ish) man and then the Orange Man.

Hellery's husband, we are told, will also deliver a few remarks. Have you seen him lately? We have a recent picture, which Ed. says was the inspiration for a beloved character who has disappeared from Family Guy. Walt wishes Slick Willy would also disappear (along with the haridan he's married to), but from the look of this picture, I'd bet on the peanut farmer to outlast him.

Hope and change? One Americanuck's view

Walt is waiting with baited breath [He's been eating cheese. Ed.] to see what Hussein Obama is going to say in his own defence when he accepts the Democractic nomination tonight. This would be a good time for some straight talk, an admission that all those promises of change remain largely unfulfilled.

Should we expect the Prez to say he failed? No. Should we expect him to admit he lied? Oh hahahahahaha... What we should expect is not "Repeat after me: yes we can!" but "Repeat after me: we did the best we could under the circumstances." (I admit I didn't make that up; it's the text of the editorial cartoon in the current Economist.)

Unfortunately for Obama, the excuse that he was just a captive of events isn’t much of a campaign platform. I didn't make that up either. It's taken from an excellent column by American-turned-Canadian columnist Margaret Wente: "Hope and change won't cut it now", in today's Globe and Mail. (The drawing above is the work of the Glob's Anthony Jenkins; credit where credit is due.)

Ms Wente says she was a big fan of Obama's back in the day, the day being about four years ago.
"He was attractive, he was smart, he was young and, best of all, he wasn’t George Bush. The United States was in an awful mess, and the world economy was teetering. The old order was finished, and everyone was desperate for change. I was ecstatic when he won. I had faith that he was smart enough to get it (whatever it turned out to be). I knew his halo would be tarnished soon enough. But I figured he could scarcely make things worse than they were."

"Today," Ms Wente continues, "the love affair is over. If I were voting in this election, I don’t know what I’d do. The main thing Mr. Obama has going for him is that he’s not Mitt Romney, who strikes me as a decent enough man who’s been taken hostage by a bunch of lunatics. Unfortunately, the fact that you’re not the other guy is not the most inspiring argument for re-election." Indeed.

Reading on... "[Obama's] greatest problem is that he doesn’t seem to know the old order is finished. He seems to think that all he needs to do is tax the rich, wait it out and soon the good times will return. That’s not a vision, or a plan. It’s a fantasy.

"Mr. Obama doesn’t seem to know there’s a problem. If only he could bring himself to say, as he did in 2009, that it’s time for 'a new era of responsibility'. That hopey changey stuff won’t cut it any more. Americans are still in crisis, and they’ll need more than happy talk to fix it."

Those are the highlights of Ms Wente's able argument. Click here to read the column in its entirety.

Democrats appeal to God... but not much

As you know, Walt was away for a couple of days. My intention was to go to one of my favourite southern cities to watch the spectacle of southern and western Democrats holding their noses for the renomination of Hussein Obama.

I was told, however, that I would be recognized -- not as a speaker or delegate but as a reasonably able, straight, white male, and a Catholic to boot, thus Surplus to Requirements. In other words, my kind is not much wanted in the Grand Conclave of the Politically Correct.

Seems, though, that a few Christians snuck in the door, and exerted sufficient pressure to persuade the Dems to change their convention platform to add one (1) mention of God. Following criticism from the GOP, who got God into their platform twelve (12) times, the Democrats reinstated language from their 2008 platform that said "we need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

This very small and wet sop to religious Americans -- now shrinking to minority status, at least in Obama's party -- was not unopposed. Convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa called three (3) times for a vote on the motion to amend, before declaring it approved without a vote being taken. His ruling was met with a loud chorus of booze ["boos", surely! Ed.] and cheers ["jeers", surely! Ed.] and cries of "God is dead and we hope he hears us!"

Having pacified the Christians, the Democrats also decided to get the Jews onside. (Not that there was ever much chance of their backing a Mormon and a Catholic!) In a paradigm of pandering, the party declared that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

What's interesting about that move is that it's said to reflect Obama’s personal views on the city claimed as holy by Jews, Christians and Muslims. [In that order, too. Ed.] If that be the case, does it mean that Obama's America would go to war -- against Iran, let's say -- to preserve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of the Zionist entity? Just asking.

"Ron Paul woke us up; we won't go back to sleep!"

A couple of days ago, Walt predicted that the Republican convention will be the "Holiday Inn Convention" -- no surprises! Mitten Romney's attack lawyers ensured that by getting the Republican National Committee to strip Ron Paul of his Maine delegates. Here's a 5-minute Reality Check from Fox.



What's going on here? Why would you have rules if you're not going to follow them? As Ben Swann explains, the real problem for the Romneyites is that they're shit-scared that a lot of delegates pledged to the Inevitable Mitt don't really like him, and might just switch their votes to Ron Paul, when the big moment comes.

Until this week, Ron Paul was the only wild card left in the Republican deck. Only Paul had enough delegates in enough states to be nominated from the convention floor. But that "threat" has now been eliminated, ensuring that Romney holds not just the strongest hand but the only hand, once the storm lets up and the convention starts.

Until this weekend, Congressman Paul’s young and strongly committed supporters still hoped to at least make things interesting by getting their (and Walt's) man on the ballot, and seeing how many of the Romney delegates might break ranks. At the very least, a Paul nomination might have injected some life into what promises to be a huge snore-fest. But now, fuggedaboudit.

Now Mr. Paul won't even get to make a speech. His third and (probably) final run for the presidency will end with a lame "video tribute". The puppeteers with their hands in the Mitt say they would have let Paul speak, but with strings attached, just as securely as they are to their own candidates. Mr. Paul’s words would have to be vetted by "Team Romney" and include a ringing and unqualified endorsement. Unsurprisingly, Ron Paul said no.

Mr. Paul told the New York Times, "It wouldn’t be my speech. That would undo everything I’ve done for the last 30 years. I don’t fully endorse [Romney] for president."

Here are the reactions of a couple of "Paulistas", as quoted in the Toronto Star.
"Where is our democracy? This is shaping up as the Old Crony Convention, changing the voting rules for seating delegates midway to shove Mitt Romney down our throats. I don’t know what to do with my vote now." (Melissa Swetich, Orlando)
"He threw a wrench in the system, talking about auditing the Federal Reserve and closing down foreign military bases. [Ron Paul] achieved something real. He woke up a lot of us. And we’re not going to go back to sleep." (Cory Peterson, Minneapolis)

So what happens next? There's been talk of asking Paul's supporters to switch their allegiance to the official Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, though Johnson lacks Paul’s unscripted, blunt-talking appeal.

Others are waiting to see what happens at this afternoon's "We Are the Future" rally, to be held at the University of South Florida Sun Dome from noon until 5:00 p.m EDT. Congressman Paul will speak at or around 4:00 p.m. and will be introduced by his son, US Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky.

According to Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton, "Ron Paul’s rally will enable supporters, the public, and media to further witness the ideas and people that are the future of the Republican Party."

But if the Republicans don't want Mr. Paul -- or aren't allowed by their "leaders" to choose the candidate they really want -- don't discount the possibility that he might yet run as an independent.

Will you support Ron Paul if he runs as an independent? Click here to sign the Grassroots Pledge! It's NOT too late!