Barack Obama has Already Sunk his own Cause.

As I analyze the month by month goings on in this years democratic election, I find Barack Obama has never failed to choose mathematically elevatng his chances of becoming president, even if the mathematical tactics alienate tens of millions of voters. All along, at every bend where Barack Obama could manipulate a result in his favor, he and his handlers have taken the opportunity and run with it.

Knowing that he would lose in both Michigan and Florida, Barack agreed to "not let those states count". Somehow the media actually gives Barrack Obama kudos for nobly agreeing not to let two huge states votes count, states that he was going to lose in. Pundits actually think that Barack did some kind of amazing gesture by taking his name off the ballot in Michigan. If Hillary Clinton had done that, the pundits would be laughing at her and her lack of judgement. But Barack Obama does it and it is lauded as a pro party act. Why didn't Hillary take her name off of the ballot back in January? Why did Barack? Barack did because any state that he won't get a majority vote in is a state that shall be called "denial".

Never mind that Barack Obama ran cable televison ads a week or two leading up to the elections in Florida. This tactic by the Obama camp has become known as the "Hedge your bet" maneuver. The Obama camp is constantly hedging their bets. Anything that favors Hillary MUST BE DENIED or called racist, and anything that favors Barack Obama is due to hard work and planning, and never to his outspending Hiillary in every state they compete in, or to cheating of the kind that went on in the caucus states.

After Barack Obama decided to let the votes of Michigan and Florida only count when they can no longer have an affect on the outcome of the race, came the caucuses of February. In as many as four or five caucuses, Barack Obama received a 30% margin of victory in states that were virtually tied in the polls that preceded the votes. Once again, the math matters more to Barack Obama then the disenfranchisement of millions of democratic voters who simply want their vote fairly represented in the caucus states.

Then came Ohio and Texas, in which Barack Obama was able to lose the popular vote in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, but gleefully chortle that Hillary barely made a dent in the delegate race because of the caucus shenanigans of Texas.

Next was a solid Pennsylvania win for Hillary Clinton, with the Obama people claiming that since Barack drove down a 20-25 point lead to 10 points, it could hardly be called a victory. Never mind that Obama outspent Hillary 3-1 in Pennsylvania. Then the exact opposite situation happened in North Carolina.

North Carolina ended up being a virtual identical rehash of the Pennsylvania race, but in reverse. But once again the media and Barack uses math to somehow claim that his victory in North Carolina was a back breaker, even though Hillary won Indiana, which had been deemed the tiebreaker several weeks earlier but suddenly it was as if that had never been said by Barack.

Then came a shockingly huge win in West Virginia for Hillary Clinton, in which once again, Barack Obama tried to overshadow the results by playing the John Edwards card. Time and time again the media and Barack Obama have played the numbers card, this time equating John Edwards and his 18 delegates as more meaningful than Hillary's win in West Virginia.

The perpetual use of numbers in an attempt to obfuscate the reality that Barack does not have a true democratic majority will probably just alienate many middle aged and older democrats. Don't be surprised if many of the young, thuggish internet egg heads that helped steal the caucus state vote for Barack Obama while also rationalizing not counting Florida and Michigan actually alienate many, many long time democrats in this years fall election.

If there was still time, Hillary Clinton could probably run as an independent this fall, and gain the most votes of any of the three candidates.

Did Obama really make fun of the Temporary Gas Tax Repeal???

Did Obama really make fun of the Temporary Gas Tax Repeal???

Barack Obama has attempted to ridicule the temporary gas tax repeal even as he outspends Hillary Clinton in Indiana and North Carolina by 3-1. Does anybody see the hypocrisy in outspending Hillary Clinton by 3-1 in the state of Indiana and North Carolina while ridiculing Hillary Clinton for trying to save citizens of these two states a morsel of their own money?

I just don't think Mr. Obama understands just how elitist he can be at times. "You can't have your miniscule temporary gas tax repeal, but I get to outspend my opponent 3-1."

Is it wise for Barack Obama to ridicule Hillary Clinton and the citizens of Indiana and North Carolina for favoring the saving of a small amount of gas tax money for a temporary period of time even as Big Bucks Obama outspends Hillary Clinton 3-1 in both Indiana and North Carolina? I personally find it unnacceptable that for Obama to outspend Hillary Clinton by 3-1 in Indiana and North Carolina to influence voters, yet look down on a temporary gas tax repeal that lets these same voters keep a portion of their own gas tax money.

I believe it is possible that when the government gets a taste of it's own ineffectual medicine, they may actually do something about it. Repealing the gas tax for a short time reminds the government that they have failed on several fronts when it comes to our addiction to oil. It's called backlash, and the economists forgot to add it into their equations when trying to judge Hillary Clinton's proposal.

Obama gets a head start in Indiana, I call it another Elitist Move.

Obama gets a head start in Indiana, I call it another Elitist Move.

Barrack Obama was already in Indiana getting a head start over Hillary Clinton in their upcoming Indiana Primary even before the voting had closed in Pennsylvania. Of course Hillary had to stay in Pennsylvania and thank Pennsylvanians for her win, that was the right thing to do. In the past, Hillary has also left a state early if she lost. But there is a difference this time. Barrack spent an obscene amount of money in Pennsylvania and then hinted that they may have caught Hillary in the polls just a day or two before voters went to the polls. How can Barrack Obama declare victory in a state that he lost by 10 points yet not stay around for the finish to thank those who supported him? Just up and leaving the state of Pennsylvania the way that Obama did was not the politically correct thing to do. In my opinion, you don't blanket the state with a huge amount of television commercials and then just disappear the night of the actual vote. It was wrong, it had a twinge of elitism to it.

You don't spend double or triple what your opponent spends and then head out before the votes are tallied while still declaring victory. To make matters worse, Obama lost in Pennsylvania even and then spent more than twice as much time talking on television during his concession speech than Hillary Clinton spent speaking as the winner. Obama seems to double up on everything. Obama spends double the money as compared to Hillary Clinton in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and loses. Then Barrack Obama spends double the amount of time talking after a primary defeat compared to his victorious opponent. The only change I am seeing in Barrack Obama is one of largess.

To top it off, Obama's speech wasn't even a concession speech. To those who insist that the Clinton side fights dirty, what Obama did was leave the finish line known as Pennsylvania before crossing it, and I consider that to be another act of disrespect and elitism.