This Guy Wants To Be President

For the last couple of weeks I've been watching the mainstream media give more and more time to the preposterous idea that Donald Trump is a legitimate contender for the Republican nomination for President. I couldn't turn on a cable news channel or broadcast news channel for that matter without seeing Trump's face demanding he be taken seriously while spouting debunked birther conspiracy theories whenever he opened his mouth. I would look at him and my first thought wasn't, "This guy would make a great president" so much as "I wonder what his hair looks like when he gets out of the shower." I don't think "Trump would be an awesome president." I think "A Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment."

And now we get to see how thin-skinned The Donald actually is courtesy of New York Times columnist Gail Collins. Last week, Collins decided to turn in a column deriding Trump for his headline grabbing ways, out-crazying the wingnut contenders by stealing the keys and taking a joyride in the Birther bandwagon. He insists on making his case with three year old debunked theories on the Kenyan-born, possibly Muslim, birth certificateless, Manchurian candidate President.  He's made his main talking point that this fake controversy is "the greatest scam in history." It doesn't matter that all these theories have been proven false. He's got people investigating and "they cannot believe what they’re finding." No details, of course, they just can't believe it. Maybe they can't believe their good fortune in being paid handsomely by Trump to investigate something that has been thoroughly exhausted; something that the Clinton campaign machine and the McCain campaign Edsel couldn't find. Something that can easily be Googled. Or maybe Orly Taitz is giving him legal advice while cleaning his teeth.

But the Collins opinion was just too much for Trump to bear, so he wrote a letter to the editor. A letter, that while insulting Collins for her "storytelling ability," sounds like it was written by a marginal high school student trying to sound smarter than he is. He then goes on to restate the whole birther nonsense, sticking to his guns, refusing to believe anyone or anything that proves the opposite.

Collins of course had to respond with a rebuttal today including other crazy shit Trump has said these last few weeks, like it was Bill Ayers who actually wrote "Dreams From My Father" or that people who went to school with Obama never saw him. She goes on to once again disprove the ridiculous statements, but no matter. At this point, Trump is all in and nothing anyone says can make him think any different. ...Maybe that's how he bankrupted his casinos.

But here's the thing: if a New York Times opinion columnist gets him so easily riled that he feels the need to write a letter, how is he going to react to the constant ridicule from primary challengers and media personnel during the campaign? You can see how upset he gets when someone disagrees with him, how emotional he becomes when he feels he's being interrupted (see the Meredith Vieira interview). How is he going to survive a year long campaign with that short hair trigger when Howard Dean was drummed out of the Democratic race in '04 for displaying his excitement after the Iowa primary results?

But I suppose Trump doesn't have to worry about that, because there's no way he'll run. There's no way he'll want to be viewed under a microscope with such scrutiny. This whole thing is a ratings ploy for his reality show, nothing more. And the fact that Republicans rate Trump second in a favorability poll combined with the antics of the fractured House majority being run by Tea Party freshmen reveals the sad state of the Republican party.

Why, Hillary? Why?

So after taking a deep breath and stepping back to look at the overall campaign situation and the history of the last couple of weeks, here's my take on the Clinton campaign going all out negative on Barack Obama: desperation.

1 - Obama has won 11 straight contests, beating Clinton by wide margins.

2 - Clinton going negative (but not all the way) in Wisconsin was viewed by their campaign as a boost for them. They've been quoted as saying the didn't lose by as much (17 points) as they thought they would.

3 - Her closing statement in the Texas debate was viewed by many as conciliatory, which probably prompted the Clinton campaign heads to work overtime to negate that view, else be perceived as giving up.

4 - The Obama mailers on health care and NAFTA caused Hillary's campaign to see red and go off the deep end.

Now, it's one thing to challenge Obama and call him out on it: "Shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public — that's what I expect from you... Meet me in Ohio, and let's have a debate about your tactics."

It's another matter entirely to mock his message and compare him to the second coming of Jeebus. And here, in my opinion, is where the flaw with Clinton's reactionary attacks get the best of her.

Does she not remember the painting of Howard Dean in 2004 as unhinged because of his overenthusiastic "YAAARRR!" during a rally that sunk him? Seeing the anger in her eyes (scary) reminds me of the Dean incident, not in seeming like a nut, but in how it may be perceived.

The latest polls show Obama beating Clinton or in a statistical dead heat in Texas and Ohio after Clinton had 20 point leads in both states just two weeks ago. The Clinton campaign is not conceding and actually turning 180° in the attacks, looking for a fight to the bitter end.

One thing's for sure: it's going to be a very interesting debate on Tuesday in Cleveland.

Maverick Skips Stimulus Vote

Republican presidential candidate John McCain skipped a difficult Senate vote Wednesday on whether to make 20 million seniors and 250,000 disabled veterans eligible for rebate checks as part of a proposed economic stimulus package.

Senate Republicans blocked the passage - final vote 58-41. The "support the troops" party decided that extra money for disabled veterans and seniors, or extending unemployment benefits is just too much stimulus apparently. (60 votes were needed to pass. Harry Reid voted no in order to be able to bring the bill up at a later time.)

So let's do the math. 58 yeas, Reid's would've been 59. 99 Senators who voted. One Senator didn't vote. Where as Mr. Straight Talk, my friend?

...Asked Wednesday morning to comment on the pending vote, McCain talked about the need to pass a stimulus measure quickly. Later, on his plane, he said he was not sure he would make the vote.

"I haven't had a chance to talk about it at all, have not had the opportunity to, even," McCain said. "We've just been too busy, focused on other stuff. I don't know if I'm doing that. We've got a couple of meetings scheduled."

Whichever way McCain may have voted, it would have been a difficult choice given his status as the Republican presidential front-runner.

Senate Democrats cleverly bundled the rebates for seniors and veterans, key voting blocs, with expanded unemployment benefits and home heating subsidies for the jobless and poor. President Bush and Republican leaders, as well as conservatives McCain was scheduled to woo on Thursday, vehemently oppose the expanded benefits and subsidies.

That put McCain in a bad political spot. Voting "no" with Republican leaders would have offended millions of Social Security recipients and the disabled veterans not scheduled to receive rebates. Voting "yes," on the other hand, risked alienating Bush, GOP leaders and conservatives already suspicious of McCain's political leanings.

Yes, that's what we need in a new leader, ducking out of difficult choices when he is most needed to make a decision. His plane landed at Dulles at 5pm. Reports say it was plenty on time to get to the 5:45pm vote. But he had a couple of "meetings." Even his own staff was confused as to whether he was going to make the vote or not.

"While he says one thing on the campaign trail, when the time came to act, John McCain was absent," said Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. "America doesn't need four more years of a president who puts what's good for him ahead of what's good for our country."