About an hour ago, a radio call-in show on WLS-AM here in Chicago was discussing the notion of small town values since Sarah Palin has talked about small town values.  Sure enough, a caller gave his opinion that since most small towns are largely white, appealing to small town values is another example of racism.

I guess it should surprise me that it took less than 24 hours for somebody to prove me right, but it doesn’t.  Maybe I need to start keeping a tally of the number of things that are deemed to be racist by Democrats.  I have a feeling that the list is going to start growing.  

“Lipstick on a pig,” said Barack Obama during a recent speech, raising a national debate about his intentions.  Was this a simple mistake by Barack Obama or was he making a veiled reference to Sarah Palin?

Defenders of Obama sound reasonable enough.  Even though Palin famously made the “lipstick on a pit bull” remark during her Republican Convention speak and now “lipstick on a . . .” is clearly associated with her, Obama was indeed using an old adage.

However, in almost every major election, Democrats at some point accuse Republicans of communicating in code, just as Republicans are now accusing the Democrats.  Here are a few examples:

·        The elder George Bush made an issue of the Massachusetts prison furlough program in his race against Michael Dukakis in 1988.  The GOP used a clear example of the flaws of this system by discussing the case of furloughed criminal Willie Horton.  Discussions of the prison furlough program in general and discussions of the Willie Horton case in particular were loudly lambasted by Democrats as racist.  Democrats accused Republicans of appealing to the supposed inherent racism of the American public by the mere mention of the prison furlough system or the mention of a criminal who happened to be black.  In essence, according to Democrats, Republicans were sending a subliminal code to the public to stoke their racist fears.  Accusations of coded racism are a recurring theme among Democrats for many years now.

·        In one of the most bizarre incidents to grow into a national debate, Republican several years ago put out an ad criticizing their Democrat opponents.  As part of the ad, the word “Democrats” flashed across the screen from right to left in a split second.  Since r-a-t-s are the last four letter of the word “Democrats”, those letters appeared first.  Democrats accused Republicans of calling them “rats”.  Of course, the letters zipped across the screen so quickly nobody watching noticed, so Democrats claimed this was a case of subliminal advertising, another coded message sent to the American public to sway an election.

·        Earlier this year, Republicans found they cannot even refer to Obama by his actual name.  Since Obama’s full name is Barack Hussein Obama, they claim that using his own middle name is yet another appeal to racist fears among Americans, yet another coded message.  This complaint occurred even though Democrats have mocked Republican candidates in the past because of their names.  I clearly recall Michael Dukakis derisively referring to “George Herbert Walker Bush” and “J. Danforth Quayle” in an effort to make these Republicans seem more patrician and distant from ordinary Americans.

Democrats believe in codes.  Since they clearly think that coded messages and inferences are part of campaigns, is it reasonable to think that Obama is aware that his words could be interpreted this way?  Is it reasonable to suspect that Obama may have intended his “lipstick” remark as a slap against Palin?

I think it is.    

The latest buzz on radio talks shows is about the weakness of Joe Biden as a vice-presidential candidate, and the possibility that he will be replaced by Hillary Clinton.

This idea brings to mind many questions, mostly of the legal and procedural kind.

Are there rules or laws governing the possibility of a vice-presidential candidate dropping out before Election Day?  How is the democratic vice presidential candidate legally chosen?  Is it done by the delegates to the Democratic Convention?  Vice-presidential nominations are normally procedural ‘voice acclamation’ votes, a mere technicality, endorsing the presidential candidate’s choice. Is such a vote by the delegates legally binding upon the party?  Can Barack Obama or Joe Biden simply ignore the delegates’ will?  Could the delegates have another vote via mail?  Is this matter governed by federal law or by party rules? 

Some might remember the race for the New Jersey Senate seat a few years back.  Democratic nominee Robert Torricelli, mired in corruption, was such an unpopular choice that he dropped out of the race after he could legally be removed from the ballot.  Faced with the possibility of a nominee who no longer wanted the job, the courts relented and allowed the Democrats to replace Torricelli with the popular former Senator Frank Lautenberg.  In this case, laws meant nothing and were easily brushed aside by compliant judges.  Are there rules or laws governing the possibility of a vice-presidential candidate dropping out before Election Day in a move similar to Torricelli in New Jersey?  Can these laws be circumvented?

In light of the New Jersey precedent, the question is not only what the laws will allow, but what the courts will allow candidates to get away with.

Chicago--The front of the “Perspective” section of the Sunday, September 07, 2008 Chicago Tribune featured an interview entitled “Q&A with Tio Hardiman: Organizing a Response to the GOP”.  In it, former community organizer Tio Hardiman defends community organizing.

About community organizers, he admits “some have organized against particular candidates”.

This is a shocking admission.  Most nonprofit organizations that employ community organizers have tax exempt status.  To engage in overtly political actions such as taking part in a campaign to support or oppose a candidate is blatantly illegal.  Such an organization could, and should, lose their nonprofit status.

To be fair to Hardiman, he refers to this as something others have done and does not admit to breaking laws himself.

I am not shocked that this sort of illegal activity happens; I am just shocked that somebody so openly admits that it happens.  Since I have worked in the Chicago nonprofit community for many years, I know how politicized things can be.  Politicians rely on social service organizations to reach into communities and those organizations rely on politicians to access tax payer dollars.  It is a circle of corruption. 

This is the corruption world that spawned Barack Obama.  This is why I fear the corrupt world he will lead us into as President of the United States.