Archive for PC Fugitive

By now you have probably heard about the questionnaire that the Obama team has put together. Anyone wanting to work in his new administration is expected to complete all 63 questions and provide all requested information. It is totally outrageous especially for the party that supposedly is against the more intrusive Patriot Act laws.

When this questionnaire first surfaced, everyone zeroed in on question 61 - “Have you had any association with any person, group or business venture that could be used - even unfairly - to impugn or attack your character and qualification for government service? ” Gee, can you say Bill Ayers or Reverend White? Just a bit hypocritical, don’t you think? And what about Whitewater? But somehow I doubt if Hillary will have to fill this out if she wants to be Secretary of State.

Actually I can picture these young lawyers and politicians sitting around and coming up with these questions. They are thinking that they want to avoid any of the pitfalls of past administrations by doing a comprehensive vetting on their own. Think about it. Does Obama strike you as the sort of man who would tolerate it if somebody embarrassed him, especially in the first few months of his presidency? I don’t think so, either.

Some of the questions are legitimate and should be asked. The typical ones about where you worked, what you did, who you worked with are all normal for any job. I remember the “Nanny Gate” so questions about Domestic Help is now de rigueur as are most of the financial questions but they take it too far. The four questions in the Domestic Help section is fine but the Financial Information section contains Questions 21 - 32 and then this is followed by an entire Tax Information section with Questions 33 - 41. A little overkill, yes? Imagine trying to complete Question 32 - “Other than from relatives, or close and longstanding personal friends on occasions such as birthdays or seasonal holidays, have you or your spouse ever received a gift exceeding $50.00 in value? Please identify the donor, the value of the gift, the date received and the circumstances in which the gift was made.”

Many of the questions make me think that the authors of this questionnaire were young. Not because of the inexperience shown in coming up with the questions but because they didn’t take into consideration people who have been working for 25 or 30 years. There are too many questions where they ask questions about “have you ever” as in the above Question 32. Another example is Question 12 - Speeches: Please identify all speeches you have given. If available please provide the text or recordings of each speech or identify any recordings of speeches of which you are aware of. Forgetting for a moment the obvious first thought of Obama’s San Francisco “bitter people” speech, my second thought is who can remember all of the speeches? Even in my own career, I couldn’t begin to remember all of the speeches I have given. Perhaps it is easy to answer if you are 32 but when you are 52 or even 62? “Ever” is a long time for some of us to remember this stuff…

Then there are the truly outrageous questions. Here are just a few of them:

#8 - Briefly describe the most controversial matters you have been involved with during the course of your career.

#13 Electronic communications - If you have even sent an electronic communication, including but not limited to an email, text message or instant message, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect, please describe.

14 Diaries - If you keep or have ever kept a diary that contains anything that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect, please describe.

Gee, see a trend? As I said in the beginning, I don’t think that Obama would be happy if anybody ever embarrassed him in any way. So let’s just ignore all those pesky laws about privacy and freedoms and really interrogate anyone who wants to be a part of his team. As for being hypocritical? It doesn’t matter, because as they see it, they are the winners and now they are the ones making the rules, except there are two potentially fatal flaws….

As everyone ridicules these questions they seem to be missing the obvious. Who is going to take the time to read all the completed questionnaires and attachments? Just filling out all the financial information with accompanying tax returns and multiple statements will take pages and pages and require a tax expert to review. Then in addition to asking for copies of Diaries, Electronic statements and speeches, there is my favorite question, Question 10 - Writings: Please list, and if readily available, provide a copy of each book, article, column or publication (including but not limited to any posts or comments on blogs or other websites) you have authored, individually or with others. Please list all aliases or “handles” you have used to communicate on the Internet.”

Putting aside the issue that this question just seems so wrong, who is going to read all the stuff that would be applicants send them?  Many of the men and women wanting to be a part of this new administration are prolific writers with regular columns or blogs and even numerous lengthy books, all of which will start to pile up as they are sent in with the questionnaires.

This brings me to the final problem. I can envision a few years down the road when a scandal breaks out about someone in the Obama administration. (And let’s face it, there always are scandals.) Except in this case, when Obama tries to disown the person, the accused will point to Question XX and say they had told then about this problem. But in all the paperwork that inundated the team Obama’s people somehow missed this. Instead of pleading ignorance, as all previous administrations could do, the Obama team will have no excuse. So the lesson is, if you are going to ask everyone to fill out this questionnaire and send in all this material, Obama’s team better have somebody read it all or it might come back and bite them someday.

Ok this is weird. After finishing my two-part blog I turned on the TV while I read other articles on the net. I wasn’t paying much attention until I heard the following statement “Some firms need to be allowed to fail so that other firms can be allowed to succeed.” What did this guy just say? Wow. This is exactly the same thing I had just concluded. I had to hear more and thanks to Tee Vo I could back up the program and listen to the entire interview.

I have never heard of the man who was interviewed, Jeb Hensarling, a Congressman from Texas, but I certainly like what he said. To paraphrase him, he said that a lot of industries are struggling today so why should we bail out some and not others. Plus the federal government is becoming the lender of last resort and that the plan could fundamentally change the role of government in America.

As for Detroit, Congressman Hensarling continued, “they are producing high cost products that consumers don’t want to buy and so now we have Washington on the verge of giving them a bailout simply because we’ve all heard of them and they have high priced lobbyists in Washington.” He went on to add that “it is the small business people, they’re the ones that create the jobs around America and that with the $50 billion that’s aimed at Detroit, the average small business is capitalized with $25,000, you could create two million new small businesses in America. If you’re going to dole out money to somebody dole it out to small businesses. Don’t dole it out to a failing Detroit”. Towards the end of the interview he reiterated his belief that you need to allow people and companies to fail so that they can learn how to succeed and that government is hurting not helping with the bail outs.

I like this guy! He talks like a true Republican, someone who believes in small government and laissez faire policies. The Republican Party is looking for new, fresh faces and I think this is a man to watch. And I learned that I am not the only one who thinks this. To find out more about him I went to his website, www.JebHensarling.com which states that he has won a number of awards and recognitions for his conservative stands including being recognized as the “Best and Brightest” in 2007 by the American Conservative Union. I agree. So remember that name, Jeb Hensarling, a man who I truly hope does have a bright future in Washington.

America’s car industry is dying… again. Congress wants to bail them out (again) but I am not sure if that is the right thing to do. I can’t help but wonder if the car industry is like a dying person who would be artificially kept alive if given an injection of money. I don’t know if GM and Ford can continue on their own any more and if they can’t then why should we keep them going? Maybe these companies have run their course and it’s time for them to close their doors.

I think what we may be seeing is the final death throes of manufacturing in this country. For the past fifty years we have slowly been evolving from a manufacturing society to a service society. I don’t know if this is even something bad but merely a result of becoming a more advanced nation. This is not an original idea yet I don’t hear people talking about it very much and I think we need to have this national discussion. For my own edification I want to think through how we got where we are and then try to figure out if this is good or bad and what we should do next.

As this country advanced we have continuously evolved and yet each time it took violence to help us move up the chain of evolution. Like most new nations, America first started out as an agricultural nation. Once this country’s metals were discovered then ambitious and sometimes ruthless men began to find ways to manufacture these metals into needed products. Steel, ore, iron, coal and the like were the building blocks on which this nation stepped up a level on the evolutionary chain.

Yet moving from an agricultural society to a manufacturing society was a brutal and bloody transition. It started with the Civil War which was primarily a fight between the manufacturing North against the agricultural South. The final blow to our agricultural dominance was the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression which destroyed millions of acres of farmland.

War World II ushered in the peak manufacturing years. After years of disuse during the depression, our factories were producing at maximum levels to provide the materials and products needed to fight a war. After the war, these same factories continued on peak levels but now to produce all the new products that the young and growing middle class were clamoring for after years of deprivation. Not only was there a demand for goods but there was also a new demand for housing. This country lost for good untold millions of acres of what could have been productive farm land. Now this land was irrevocable gone as the suburbs were being born.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s this country couldn’t manufacture items fast enough to satisfy this country. The birth of the suburbs issued in a whole new array of needs from all the things housewives were now demanding to have in their house to the products required to maintain the new lawns. Midwife to the birth of the suburban appetite for products was television which now told everybody what they needed to have.

As the need for big ticket items diminished, the 1970s started a whole new world of consumer goods - electronics and computers. Not only were these products in high demand but due to continuing technological advances products quickly became obsolete thus requiring new purchases.

Although our demand for products still remains high, at some point we stopped producing these goods. America is moving up one more step on the evolutionary chain from being a manufacturing country to being a service country. When and how did this happen? Was it inevitable and simply the result of being an advanced nation? If that is true, then government’s plans to “rescue” these factories with obscene amounts of money may be pointless and a complete waste of our money.

I want to explore this some more but right now my brain is tired from thinking about all of this. So I will stop for now and will finish this up in a day or two. Meanwhile, here is something to think about. If Congress is this upset over the possibility of losing our car industry would they be willing for their children or grandchildren to forego a higher education in order to work in a car factory? Would you?

My last post discussed the younger Baby Boomers. It turns out I am not the only one who wants to distinguish between the older and younger baby boomers. Unfortunately since my retirement I no longer get to see one of my favorite magazines, American Demographics, or else I might have been aware that a sociologist has created a new group: Generation Jones.

This new demographic group consists of those born between 1954 and 1965, bridging the Baby Boomers and GenX groups. Jonathon Pontell, who defined this new group in a book a few years ago, called them Generation Jones because of their desire to keep up with the Jones’s.

Basically Jonathon Pontell and I arrived at similar conclusions - there are a lot of younger Baby Boomers and they have had very different life experiences than the older boomers. But we differ on how to treat this difference. He wants to rewrite the long-time definition of Baby Boomers by carving out this new group - Generation Jones, whereas I feel that although they need greater recognition, this group is still a part of the Baby Boomers. (Of course I could also question why the group with the most people doesn’t retain the name of Baby Boomers and the smaller group given a different name!)

I look at the difference between the first and last Baby Boomers as being similar to Seniors and Freshmen in high school. Seniors in high school have a very different outlook, temperament, goals and maturity level than Freshmen yet both are in the same high school and call themselves high schoolers. Therefore, I don’t see a problem of having subsets within the Baby Boomer category. As I mentioned in the last post, this topic has greatly interested me and in fact I have been fiddling around with the idea of identifying three Baby Boomer subsets: True Boomers, Wanna Be’s and Tag Alongs.

My three subsets of Boomers were based on their age during a few key dates in our country’s history. I defined True Boomers as those born between 1951 and 1946.  This group was the most impacted by all the events in the 1960s. They were 12 to 17 years old when Kennedy was assassinated and five years later during the assassinations in 1968 they were 17 to 22 years old. Wanna Be’s were born between 1952 and 1957. As the name implies they want to be like the older group but they were too young to be in the forefront of the 60’s revolution. They may say they remember where they were when Kennedy was assassinated but they were only 6 to 11 years old, and while some might have been impacted by the events that happened in 1968 when they were 11 to 16 years old, this group was definitely affected by Watergate and Nixon’s resignation in 1974, as they were 17 to 22 at the time.  The last group, Tag Alongs, were the youngest boomers born between 1958 and 1964. This group was not impacted by any of the events in the 1960’s and instead came of age during the 1970’s.

I feel that using these subsets within the Baby Boomers group is a better solution than completely changing the definition of Baby Boomers and adding a new group. This new group, Generation Jones, includes people born between 1954 and 1964 and I am sure that those born in the mid 1950’s would strongly balk if told they were no longer considered as Baby Boomers. Perhaps those born in the early 1960’s wouldn’t mind being classified as Gen Jones instead of Baby Boomers but I still think this is the wrong approach. But no matter what you call them, this large group has become an important and finally recognized part of our society.

I am so very proud of my country. I may not agree with the country’s decision but that doesn’t take away my love and pride of my fellow citizens. The election of Barack Obama is not something I wanted yet it is something I can understand. Listening to his victory speech I was once again struck by his blend of preaching and orating that lifted his speeches into inspiring sermons of hope and change. You had to have a heart of stone to not be affected by these speeches. I was also moved by the look on the faces of those listening to him. From long-term politicians to Hollywood to average people, all had a look of pure adoration while tears of joy creased their cheeks. I truly am happy for them, especially the new voters; the young college kids who got involved for the first time and the African Americans who will now understand that their vote matters, that they matter.

This country made history last night in electing its first African American president. We also did something that continues to awe the rest of the world; a peaceful transition of power between two opposing groups. I think many people were worried about the election process itself. On top of the concerns that ACORN generated, it seemed as if every news channel was requesting that you call them if you see voter fraud.  But there were no major or even minor problems which is pretty incredible. We had more people voting and though the polling places were definitely overtaxed it still worked. And again, kudos to the people themselves who stood in lines for 3 or 4 or even 5 hours so that they could vote.

Today is not the time to discuss why I disagree with Obama on almost all of his political ideas or even to analyze what his presidency might bring. There will be four long years for that. No, today is for the victors. To celebrate this great victory, not only over John McCain, who did a valiant job, but a victory over one of the last vestiges of our national nightmare, slavery and the continued ill treatment of a large segment of our society. America will never be perfect, no one or country is, yet we have showed the world, and more importantly ourselves, that after last night we are one step closer to completely fulfilling our country’s promise as set forth in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

God Bless America

A teacher wrote to tell me that she had asked her high school students to evaluate the convention speeches by the two candidates.  She looked up the speeches shown on CNN and wrote “Obama’s has a grand introduction with inspiring music, 5 minutes of thundering applause, and panning the cheering stadium.  McCain’s begins with his speech and a shot of a guy in the back holding a sign that says McCain does NOT support vets.”  The sad state of the media is that stories like this are no longer unusual and you almost begin to expect this kind of biased coverage of the two candidates.

The writer then concluded “I try very hard to give a favorable introduction to both candidates, without bias, and also include the ideas that we benefit greatly from a 2 party system rather than a totalitarian 1 party system.” Wow. How disturbing is that? You would think that by high school the students would know about our history, our heritage as a democratic country and why this is better than a one party government. It is scary to think that the idea of America is something that now needs to be taught.

As for this election, I have no doubt that the majority of teenagers are supporting the young black man versus the old white guy. There is more than some truth in the old joke about being idealistic when young but becoming conservative the moment you get your first paycheck. When you don’t have any money it is easy to agree with Obama’s “spreading the wealth”. Anyway, I am sure the teens are very enthusiastic supporters of Obama and probably wouldn’t listen if someone tried to tell them otherwise.

Maybe this teacher has the right idea; to try to be unbiased and yet to expose the students to the blatant misuse of power by the media in favor of Obama. On one hand, you hate to disillusion the teens by showing them the seamier side of politics or even by helping them see for themselves that this is yet one more instance where life is not fair.  So finding the bias on their own might make them more cynical and distrustful of not just the politicians but also of the supposedly unbiased media. Yet lessons like this will better equip them to make judgments about what they are seeing, and to learn to question even what “trusted” authoritative figures are telling them. And that might be a good idea after all.

It is one week before the election and I want to scream in frustration because a Democrat friend, after discussing the latest about Obama, then asked me “Why didn’t we learn about this earlier?”

What provoked The Question was a conversation about the latest news. My friend was unaware that in addition to Obama’s “spread the wealth” response to Joe the Plumber, there is now a newly discovered tape on this subject from 2001. In this interview, Obama not only talks about redistributing the wealth, he says it was a “tragedy” that the civil unrest of the 60’s didn’t address this issue. Based on this it is hard not to wonder if Obama is a socialist.

We weren’t the only ones with questions and I filled my friend in on the latest news about this.  He knew about Barbara West, a local anchorwoman, who in an interview with Biden dared to ask if Obama was a Marxist. But my friend hadn’t heard that Biden also didn’t answer a local station in Philly where he was later interviewed and asked a similar question.

Based on this information, we discussed how Obama’s actions are becoming more and more disconcerting. First Obama supporters tried to thoroughly discredit and trash Joe the Plumber. It was bad enough when they went after Palin, but at least she is a public figure. But Joe was a citizen who simply asked a question. Yet his life may never be the same after the horrible treatment by the press and Obama supporters. As for the two TV stations which dared to openly question if Obama is a socialist? Both stations have been banned from further contact with Obama until at least the election.

The fact that Obama has expressed his true socialistic ideology in the past combined with the silencing the journalists who dared to question Obama or Biden about this caused my Democrat friend to ask The Question. “Why didn’t we know about this earlier?”

Of course it was hard not to be angry and frustrated by The Question. I couldn’t help but get a little heated when I answered him by saying “We didn’t know this earlier because no one was looking! The media has been so enamored of Obama that they never investigated him. Why did the NY Times dig through Facebook to locate friends of the McCain’s daughter in order to find dirt on Cindy McCain when she was addicted to prescription drugs years ago? And yet no one has dared to interview any of Obama’s high school or college friends to ask about Obama doing coke as a teenager.” My friend simply replied “Valid point,” For what else is there to say?

History has shown that almost every government take over begins with silencing the media. Up until recently, this wasn’t a problem because the media never asked any tough questions. In fact it was the mainstream media who attacked anyone who didn’t like Obama. But now the true side of Obama is showing. And it is very scary. And yet how many TV stations, radio channels or newspapers will Obama ban before journalists finally wake up? And when they do, will it be too late?

I had a flashback this morning as I listened to more news regarding ACORN and their potentially illegal practices in voter registration. There are now reports of counties with more registered voters than population, plus tapes of this non profit organization’s obvious, yet illegal, support of a political candidate (Obama). Out of nowhere CREEP popped into my mind. Now that is a blast from the past.

For anyone under 50, CREEP was the Committee to ReElect the President and in this case the President was Nixon. Everyone is familiar with Watergate, the hotel where the burglaries took place, but few remember that it was at the direction of CREEP. So why does ACORN remind me of CREEP, other than the fact they both have memorable acronyms?

Richard Nixon would have clearly won his second term without the machinations of McCord, Dean, Mitchell etc. breaking into and wiretapping the offices of the Democrat Party. Assuming Obama wins in two weeks, I would think he still would have won even without ACORN’s help. Yes, it might be a lot closer race without the millions of voters registered legally and illegally by ACORN but he probably might still be the next president.

Yet thanks to the illegalities of ACORN all the votes cast for Obama in areas in which ACORN was active will be questionable. Additionally, the millions raised by ACORN will now be thoroughly investigated to see if any money was diverted to Obama’s campaign. Even the NY Times, which had previously refused to write about ACORN, is now investigating this organization because of the growing accusations.

Just as in the case with CREEP, I think the overriding problem is hubris combined with stupidity. For how arrogant and dumb can you be for an ACORN executive to give a speech at an ACORN event in which they openly and forcefully support Obama while they were being taped? Did they not know it was illegal for a non profit organization to support a candidate? Or did they think that no one would dare to take them to task because Obama is the chosen one who must be elected? Additionally can’t anyone count in this organization? It is one thing to knowingly register false names but to end up with more supposedly registered voters than there is a voting population is absurd. (Yes a few areas might be attributable to college campuses but this doesn’t explain all of them.)

Whatever the reasons, ACORN is now beginning to tarnish Obama’s campaign.  Unfortunately, by now ACORN and Obama are clearly tied together in the public’s mind such that any illegalities by ACORN will reflect on to Obama. Even if Obama wins, I believe that the investigations into ACORN will continue. Unlike CREEP which eventually brought down Nixon’s presidency I sincerely doubt if ACORN’s activities could do the same to Obama. An obvious difference is that Obama will have a sympathetic Congress and media who will do all that they can to shield Obama from any criminal activities by ACORN.

I have no idea how all of this will play out. It is also important to remember that it wasn’t CREEP’s activities as much as it was the cover up afterwards that caused Nixon’s downfall. It will be interesting to watch how both ACORN and Obama react to these newest charges.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PS - I wanted to add a short follow up to my blog about the first day of early voting in Florida. I had said that two of my friends had given up due to the long lines but that I expected they would try again. They did. Yesterday, on the second day of early voting, my friend returned to the downtown Orlando polling place where once again the parking lot was full and there was a long line. This time she was prepared for this and thinking that it might never get much better she spent the 90 minutes needed to park, stand in line and then vote. My second friend, who lived in an upper income suburb, also returned to his polling spot. This time there were plenty of parking spaces and no lines, and he was in and out in about 5 minutes. Considering the demographic trend of downtown urban voters vs. suburban upper income voters, this does not bode well for McCain….

On September 27^th the home of Martin Rynja, which is also the headquarters for Gibson Square’s publishing house, was firebombed.

It didn’t make the major headlines and yet it should have for this was a terrorist attack against a company who stood up to Islamic threats. This weekend I received an email berating me for an article I had written about a radical Islamic group. Although a bit creepy, the email was not threatening and yet I mention it because the two incidents are somewhat related.

In August I wrote an article denouncing Random House for submitting to Islamic blackmail.  If you recall, this blog was about a new book by Sherry Jones on a wife of Mohammad called “The Jewel of Medina”. Random House was to publish it until they were told that it might be offensive to Muslims and could cause violence. I thought Random House was wrong to then back down and give in to this blackmail. I feel that we always need to stand up for our freedoms no matter the threats.

However, I was wrong when I wrote that Random House would not let any other company publish this book. They did sell the publishing rights to Gibson Square Publishers who was willing to publish “The Jewel of Medina” even knowing about the threats.  But these threats were not idle for, as previously mentioned, their headquarters were bombed the end of September. Luckily it was only a small bomb which was inserted in the mail slot and no one was injured. In fact, according to the NY Times “The police were already on the scene as the result of what they described as “a preplanned intelligence-led operation,”.  The London police have already arrested three men so that’s one for the good guys!

Did this terrorist attack stop the publisher, Mr. Rynja, from publishing this book? No. Although he is taking precautions and is currently in hiding he actually sped up the printing process. Instead of the October 30^th date they sent the books to the US for an October 15^th publishing date. I am so pleased that the book is actually published as I had been very upset with Random House when they backed down to the threat of possible violence. It just felt so wrong to me. I believed that the radical Islam’s had won and it only takes a few decisions like this for us to slowly begin to lose our freedoms. We need to stand up against bullies of all shapes and sizes and preserve our freedoms no matter the costs. Gibson Square Publishing needs to be applauded for their actions.

In the beginning of this blog I also mentioned an email I received on Saturday. After I wrote my blog about Random House I followed it with an article on a radical Islamic group called Messenger of Allah Unites who wanted to “criminalize any act deemed to be insulting to Islam” In addition to the passing of their UN resolution denouncing defamation of religions, the scariest part is that they want to subpoena and try anyone accused of blasphemy or inciting hatred against their religion.

I was appalled to think that this Jordan based group could reach out to anyone anywhere that they thought were anti Muslims or whom they simply disliked. Ironically it turns out I am one of those people. The email I received on Saturday was to tell me that someone had left a comment on this old article. The comment was:

“The most intelligent thing to do is to recognize that Prophet Mohammad is too important for Muslims and should not be degraded in the guise of ‘freedom of speech‘. You do this for anti-semetic propaganda. So, why not anti-Mohammad. “.

Remember, Muslims usually don’t have an issue with a scholarly criticism of Mohammad or even a non-scholarly criticism of Islam and Muslims. But, Prophet Mohammad is dear to every Muslim no matter how religious or non-religious he/she might be. And, the day people like you recognize it, you’ll actually start promoting harmony instead of hatred in this world.”

In a way I sympathize with him. It isn’t easy to see a beloved and revered religious figure degraded. For decades, Christians have had to deal with blasphemous books or pictures of Jesus, Mary and other Christian symbols. It is disturbing and yet that is the price you have to pay to ensure our freedoms. And yes, it is hypocritical to be told that flying the Confederate flag or using the N word or speaking against gays is considered “hate speech” but attacks on any religion is allowed. This isn’t right but in today’s world of political correctness where some are more equal than others I doubt if it can be changed.

As for my article, I never denigrated the Muslim religion at all, I was only criticizing those who wanted to prosecute and censure anyone they deemed was anti Muslim. The commenter mentioned promoting harmony and yet the only way to obtain perfect harmony is to silence anyone who disagrees with you. This means threatening book publishers and even commenting on an obscure article written months ago by an amateur blogger. But we can’t let them silence us. For we believe in a free world with freedom of religion as well as freedom of speech. And with these freedoms come discord and the right to disagree as we all will have our own opinions. It may not be perfect but I’ll take our messy freedoms over perfect harmony any day.

I was surprised by what I saw on Friday night as I surfed the major network’s evening news and then glanced at CNN. Here are some highlights of what I heard:

• NBC - Brian Williams actually had a piece that was positive towards big business. He and a couple of MSNBC hosts discussed the economy saying “if there is no government figure with towering amounts of credibility on this…” then added that big business CEOs should step forward to help out. Imagine that. First, did they just imply that Obama doesn’t have a lot of credibility? Secondly instead of saying the economy is the fault of big businesses (i.e. Republicans) they are actually looking for a corporate CEO to save the day!
• CBS - I was very surprised to see a segment on ACORN. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/10/cbsnews_investigates/main4514429.shtml?source=search_story) They first interviewed a voter registration official who showed the top of his desk overflowing with false forms. He blamed ACORN employees for massive cheating which was encouraged by ACORN management. They followed this with a woman who is the chief organizer for ACORN. She said of the recent raid in Las Vegas “It was purely politically motivated.” She also denied that they had quotas which would force employees to sign up so many people every day. However, CBS said they interviewed dozens of employees who disagreed with her and CBS went back to the registrar who again said falsifying forms is a major problem. No surprise that the ACORN employee was an African American but to my amazement the voter registration Registrar was also black! And they ended this piece by saying this could cause questions and problems in key states in this election.
• ABC - I didn’t see much change in this network’s tone or point of view. But when interviewing supporters of the two presidential candidates, McCain’s supporters discussed his policies and plans to help the economy while Obamas’ supporters admitted they were voting for Obama but didn’t know anything about his policies. I am not use to that kind of editing which made the supporters for Obama look bad.
• Larry King - I didn’t watch him but I did see that King also did a segment Friday night on ACORN. The right wing fear that this story would be buried turns out to be misguided as the main stream media (MSM) is finally investigating ACORN.

The polls show Obama with a 7-11 point lead so it will be difficult for McCain to catch up. Yet I believe there is a slight shift in the support for Obama. I doubt if anyone from the media would actually turn against him but I think the magnitude of the economic quake that rattled the world this past week is having an unintended reaction. I could be completely wrong but here is my take on what might be happening.

I think many Liberals truly believe that they want to help the poor and disadvantaged, and protect them from big business. Not only does Obama support these causes near and dear to liberals but simply voting for a black man is a symbol of their progressive ideals. So when the Stock Market first started its downward trend, liberals were quick to blame Bush, Republicans and big business and Obama skyrocketed in the polls. Then to fix the economy they did what they always do - have government throw a lot of money at the problem. But the Stock Market continued to fall and fall and fall into unimaginable levels.

Major corporations found their stocks cut drastically, some to levels not seen since in over 50 years.  Democrats always viewed the corporate world as the home of Republicans and the stereotypical white, wealthy businessman. They demonized companies to the point where it was an “us vs. them” mentality. The left saw themselves as the benefactor helping the poor and less fortunate “us” against the mean Republicans and big businesses.

This week we watched corporations crumble and names you thought would always be there are now disappearing. It was one thing to mock corporations or even make sarcastic docudramas about them but to have these companies disappear completely? Sure the liberals have continuously hampered corporations with taxes and minimum wages, OSHA laws and Sarbane-Oxley legislature, yet they still expected the corporations to continue functioning. As in the past, big business was supposed to take whatever the liberals did to them and somehow keep producing their goods. They are not supposed to stop no matter what was done to them.  Besides, how can you champion the downtrodden “us” if there is no longer a “them” out there anymore?

Plus, liberals are now being personally affected by what is happening with businesses on Wall Street. They, too, are watching their portfolios and 401k’s take a nose dove and are also trying to reassure elderly parents who are no longer as comfortably fixed as they were just a week ago. Suddenly these wealthy liberals are becoming fearful about their future as it is their wealth which is affected when these major corporations finally buckle under the weight placed on them by the liberal laws.

On top of all this is the specter of socialism. Since the Great Depression this country has slipped more and more into socialism. Yet this movement to the left has always been cloaked as policies to help the poor and disenfranchised or even simply buried under other laws. Now, though, we are blatantly discussing government taking over businesses and even talk openly of redistribution of wealth. A line has been reached and I think people are having second thoughts. Some liberals are realizing that it is our democracy that is at stake and are beginning to move back slightly from crossing that line.

In this new economically challenged world many liberals are now taking another look at the two candidates. I think that they are beginning to question the wisdom of electing a first term 47 year old Senator with little to no experience. These journalists and other liberals might be asking themselves if they can trust America to this young man and more importantly, wondering if they can also entrust their own personal future to an inexperienced politician surrounded by radical advisors. Speaking of radicals, in the past anyone who brought up Obama’s associations with various radical groups and people were either ignored or mocked. Today, though, the main stream media is beginning to take a closer look at these relationships, starting with ACORN.

It is all probably too little too late for McCain. And there are still the far left supporters such as Chris Matthews who will never change. Yet start to watch the news for not only what is being said, how it is presented and of course what isn’t being said. Maybe some in the networks are belatedly trying to be fairer but I wonder if perhaps some are beginning to fear turning our damaged country over to someone so young with such little experience and yet with such questionable taste in friends and pastors…