“I take back nothing I have written about Barack and Michelle Obama. That said, I don’t want to see them destroyed or to fail. For the sake of our country I hope that Barack has a successful Presidency. While I am not happy he is in the big chair, it is what it is. I do not require anyone to bow down at the altar of Obama. But I also do not prohibit or ban folks who do. For me the beauty of America is our diversity. We have got to learn how to disagree without going into pure visceral hatred.”

and, “I simply point out the reality that he will be sworn in as President. And at that point we judge him by what he does and not what he was. Is that fair?”

Reading all the comments by all of you, and emails from my family and friends, I am still as perplexed as ever. How do we move forward? How do we hold the DNC accountable for all the crap they pulled this election cycle? How do we still hold Obama’s feet to the fire on his promises, and his policies, but hope for a positive outcome for our country?

How do we *move on* after suffering personal attacks, witnessed character assassinations on some of our favorite people, and witnessed the most vile sexist attacks on women across the country, (Hillary supporters were victims to many sexist attacks on blogs and in the media.) as well as on two leading women in our government. It was impossible for many to not take those attacks personally.

As angry as many of us are, or were, or will always be, I don’t think that anyone truly wants America to *fail*. Perhaps there still are those who want Obama’s presidency to fail, but a country as a whole? I don’t think anyone really wants that. They want justice. People, in my opinion, are feeling victimized, and want justice. Some are demanding justice.

But there are also people in this country who are truly worried, even scared. Their businesses are failing, their nest eggs are drying up, we are watching our banks and car companies fail. Healthcare is…well, you know. People are scared. And some people, whether they voted for Obama or not, are at a point where they are hoping for a successful four years - because they NEED it. It is serious. And people are scared and worried.

I read some comments in response to UBM, that it is easy for those who *won* to come and kiss and make up, or gloat. And that is true. They *won*. They are happy. They are moving on. But, many of us, are not there yet.

It is very similar to the 7 stages of grief. (and I don’t mean this in a joking way…I see very similar patterns. And I am sure I will get mocked for this, but I think it is important.) And I am not trying to reduce people’s feelings to a flow chart. I am trying to understand and deal.

People process differently. Some people deal, and move on. Some people grieve for long periods of time. Some people take things so personally, like they have been punched in the gut, others laugh things off.

But, I think it is a disservice to tell those who are feeling as if they are grieving from the past two years, to *get over it*. Larry or Susan are NOT doing that - but I do think it is happening, whether Obama supporters here, or on many of the sites I read. And I do think that some people are moving forward faster than others. People will *get over* it - if and when they are ready - and that may be never, for some.

Like I said in my first post after the 4th, I want to *feel good* about what had happened but I remember too much, and am still too angry. I still get pissed about things that happened. But, I want to try and get to a point where I am hopeful, and think that we can fix all that *ails us*. I do, I know that people are really truly worried, and truly are praying/hoping/wishing for change/help/relief - putting the *Obamamania* aside. (I would love to be excited about the prospect of Hillary as SoS, but after all the VP rigamoroll, I am hesitant to even ponder the possibilty. And I wasn’t sure if I could stomach the new round of attacks that were sure to come - talking to you Tweety and Hitchens!)

Just as important as Obama’s victory was to his 65M supporters, the damage and ridicule and attacks and stolen delegates and voter fraud and sexism was just as real to those who supported Hillary or McCain and Palin. Having spent two years, glued to my computer, writing and reading and absorbing all I could, it was very personal and very real.

I have said before, that from the moment I typed *I support Hillary* on the keyboard, I was attacked and called racist, stupid, voting for a vagina, an idiot, and worse. Perhaps I am a sensitive idiot, but I lost sleep and even was brought to tears a few times by the attacks (from people at HuffPo). But I never gave up. I left those types of sites, but I never gave up. It was my right to fight for Hillary, and I tried. So, for people to tell me it isn’t real, or that I should get over it, just don’t understand, or know me at all.

I think one of the worst things about this whole process is the shear lack of respect for *the other side* and for our choices, and now for our *feelings*. (I know, I know… mock away). Personally, from the moment I began this quest, Obama supporters destroyed any chance of civil exchange, where I was concerned. It was so bad, I found myself huddled with fellow Clinton supporters in a handful of sites, where trolls were somewhat limited. I read NQ daily, but didn’t comment much, just because I couldn’t take the personal attacks/trolls.

And I don’t understand why someone like Undercover Black Man (sorry, UBM but you are topical at the moment) intentionally sought out to mock PUMAs and ridicule those not supporting Obama. Isn’t backing your candidate of choice your right? Aren’t our opinions and thoughts just as valid as anyone’s? Why does the failure to conform and join the Hope Express result in charges of racism? I think civil debates on qualifications, experience, judgment and policies would have been so much more productive. I honestly feel that my attitudes towards Obama and the things I chose to write about and discuss suffered because of the attacks I had suffered from the get go, and then the actions of the DNC, and the atrocious media. I became a bitter, angry Obama hater. And that is not an easy thing to get over.

All I wanted to do was debate, and exchange ideas and information and learn some things, and be involved. I was so excited about the prospect of Hillary becoming President, something I had been waiting 12 years for. And then, having an African American, and a Hispanic in the mix was just *too cool*! But, instead of a *dream team* year, it became a nightmare.

But, I don’t want to live in this nightmare, and I don’t want to remain bitter and angry. I like being happy, and positive and I want our country to do well! (I would be MUCH happier if Hillary were Commander in Chief…) but it is not to be. No matter how pissed I am about it, how it became so, and the things that were done, it is what it is. Now, I just need to figure out how to take that anger and make positive changes. Whether that means campaigning against him in 4 years, or fighting alongside HLF and others to change the system, or voting out all those who supported Obama, and boycotting all those stations that we now hate, or sucking it up, and trying to do what I can to be positive, or whatever! I still haven’t figured it out.

We, as a country went through an enormous shock on 9/11, and since that time, we have gone to war, lost more than 4000 soldiers, suffered massive drops on the stock market, seen videos of terrorist threats, had the anthrax scares, seen rising costs in housing, gas, food and healthcare, our image has suffered around the world. And this election was very, very important to all of us here. Whether you voted Obama or Hillary, or McCain, it was very important for all of the reasons I listed, and more (Many AA Obama supporters had their own real reasons). We supported our candidate because of all that we have been through, and seen, and we felt that person to be the best to lead us through. It was personal, and it was real. (who knows, maybe the guys on the park benches DID vote for a reason…)

So, after reading all the hundreds of comments, my whole point was to demonstrate how, I believe, people are in a a sense going through the seven stages of grief. And it is a process that everyone needs to go through, at their own pace. (and I do not think the seventh stage - HOPE - means that you have to swallow the kool-aid, and worship at the feet of Obama, I just think it is a stage where we discover our own way to move forward, however that may be. I think I am feeling a little bit of stage four…)

So, I am not trying to preach, or tell people to get over it, or to act like I am some psychotherapist. My intent is to just let those *doubters* out there know, that for many of us, the feelings are deep and they are real.

1. SHOCK & DENIAL-
You will probably react to learning of the loss with numbed disbelief. You may deny the reality of the loss at some level, in order to avoid the pain. Shock provides emotional protection from being overwhelmed all at once. This may last for weeks.

2. PAIN & GUILT-
As the shock wears off, it is replaced with the suffering of unbelievable pain. Although excruciating and almost unbearable, it is important that you experience the pain fully, and not hide it, avoid it or escape from it with alcohol or drugs. You may have guilty feelings or remorse over things you did or didn’t do with your loved one. Life feels chaotic and scary during this phase.

3. ANGER & BARGAINING-
Frustration gives way to anger, and you may lash out and lay unwarranted blame for the death on someone else. Please try to control this, as permanent damage to your relationships may result. This is a time for the release of bottled up emotion. You may rail against fate, questioning “Why me?” You may also try to bargain in vain with the powers that be for a way out of your despair (”I will never drink again if you just bring him back”)

4. “DEPRESSION”, REFLECTION, LONELINESS-
Just when your friends may think you should be getting on with your life, a long period of sad reflection will likely overtake you. This is a normal stage of grief, so do not be “talked out of it” by well-meaning outsiders. Encouragement from others is not helpful to you during this stage of grieving. During this time, you finally realize the true magnitude of your loss, and it depresses you. You may isolate yourself on purpose, reflect on things you did with your lost one, and focus on memories of the past. You may sense feelings of emptiness or despair.

5. THE UPWARD TURN-
As you start to adjust to life without your dear one, your life becomes a little calmer and more organized. Your physical symptoms lessen, and your “depression” begins to lift slightly.

6. RECONSTRUCTION & WORKING THROUGH-
As you become more functional, your mind starts working again, and you will find yourself seeking realistic solutions to problems posed by life without your loved one. You will start to work on practical and financial problems and reconstructing yourself and your life without him or her.

7. ACCEPTANCE & HOPE-
During this, the last of the seven stages in this grief model, you learn to accept and deal with the reality of your situation. Acceptance does not necessarily mean instant happiness. Given the pain and turmoil you have experienced, you can never return to the carefree, untroubled YOU that existed before this tragedy. But you will find a way forward.

I also think this site has some similarities into how some people are feeling. I know I do. From Victim to Survivor, The Emotions of the Abuse Survivor.

I love debate. I love alternate thought. That is how I learn. As someone said, without alternative thought, we are an echo chamber. All I, *personally* wish, is that we are civil. I am not saying we can’t swear, I love swearing, dammit. But, rabid attacks are just crazy. I am even one who loves good conspiracy theories. I think they are sometimes fun….but that is just me. Heck, there is even room to learn while searching out theories…. I just wish the internet wasn’t so anonymous, and people discussed and debated as if they were in the same room together. (so, don’t get mad at NQ, this is just my own opinion.)

And, one other note… man, get me started and I never shut up… I want to thank NQ and the writers and Hill supporters here who were a gift this past year. I love ya, man! Thank goodness I found ya’ll!

Ok, let the mocking and/or debate begin. :O)
(I say mock, because I know how other sites like to point back at us, and mock…)

Rupert Murdoch says big media has only itself to blame for the situation it is in.

With newspapers cutting back and predictions of even worse times ahead, Rupert Murdoch said the profession may still have a bright future if it can shake free of reporters and editors who he said have forfeited the trust and loyalty of their readers.

“My summary of the way some of the established media has responded to the internet is this: it’s not newspapers that might become obsolete. It’s some of the editors, reporters, and proprietors who are forgetting a newspaper’s most precious asset: the bond with its readers,” said Murdoch. . .

Read the rest ->
——————-

Murdoch, whose company’s holdings also include MySpace and the Wall Street Journal, criticized what he described as a culture of “complacency and condescension” in some newsrooms.

“The complacency stems from having enjoyed a monopoly–and now finding they have to compete for an audience they once took for granted. The condescension that many show their readers is an even bigger problem. It takes no special genius to point out that if you are contemptuous of your customers, you are going to have a hard time getting them to buy your product. Newspapers are no exception.”
——————–

“A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let’s be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves.”

Of course we’re too stupid. Think not? Well, watch any media person defend “journalism” and you’ll see some version of “we’re really good, but the people, they just don’t understand: our job, how we do our job, what’s really going on, how smart we have to be”, etc. etc. etc. Whenever you have to defend your intelligence because it’s not readily apparent, you’re in trouble.

Then, WaPo notes that many news outlets are offering BO commemorative news products. Is this a problem or just a way to make money?

Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled “Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story.” Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama’s campaign.

Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue — “Obama’s American Dream” — filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.
Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit?

Yes, they are.

Seems to me WaPo doesn’t like this too much but just sees it as a tacky way to make a buck. I think it’s a bigger sell-out than that. After all, how do you offer a commemorative package if it has lots of real criticism and real vetting? Commemorative products don’t do that.

Kurtz goes on to list some of the more nauseating media Obama-worship, but unfortunately doesn’t offer much criticism.

Jennifer Rubin, though, has a comment.

The MSM championed Barack Obama throughout the primaries, clubbed his opponent, lauded him during the general election, and is now marveling at his transition. There’s no reason to stop now. If the mainstream media cared about unbiased reporting and exacting investigation, they would have made some effort earlier to balance the coverage. And now that the election of Obama has fulfilled their dreams and aspirations, why should they return to the humdrum tasks of quibbling with the press secretary, investing inter-agency squabbles, and questioning the lack of progress or the outright repudiation of campaign pledges? That might scuff up the President’s image. And it might put them on the outs with their hero.

Really, I think it’s too much to expect that the lapdog media will turn into attack-dogs or watchdogs anytime soon. After all, they have a President to help succeed.

Of course, Rubin is referring to Tweety’s assertion that it is his JOB to help out the Obama administration. Either Tweety is completely revising the definition of journalist or trying to get a running start on a potential Senate/lapdog seat, as has been rumored. If you haven’t already seen this example of high objective journalism in action, I suggest you watch.

Mediamatters has a piece on how the media is covering the rumors of HRC as SOS. Apparently, MSNBC is still bashing HRC whenever it can.

Discussing the possibility of Sen. Hillary Clinton becoming the secretary of state in President-elect Barack Obama’s administration on the November 14 edition of MSNBC’s Hardball, MSNBC political analyst Michelle Bernard asserted: “If she’s secretary of state, she will run a parallel government. It will be a huge problem.” Additionally, Jennifer Donahue, political director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, asked: “Will she [Clinton] be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama?”

During the program, Bernard also said Clinton “could give him [Obama] some cover, and she could also walk — go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States — the president of the United States. That’s a huge danger for him. It’s a very, very high-level job.” Host Chris Matthews then asked Donahue, “[W]ould you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague?”

Here’s some wisdom from Tweety and guest “journalists.”

Matthews sounds as if he is defending HRC, but that’s a deliberate ploy to keep the conversation going in the direction he wants. He later accuses HRC of looking at Biden as a roadblock as she tries to accumulate power. The theme of this “story?” How HRC is a power hungry steamroller trying to flatten everyone as she grasps for whatever she can find. Ugh. Journalism? No. Speculation and bad thinking. Standard fare with Tweety.

Mediamatters also has a VERY interesting page noting all the negative HRC statements and media stories saying that she is “out to get” or somehow destroy the Obama wagon. This is worth looking at. MM groups media “stories” into 3 categories, below which are specific examples from tv and print “journalists.”

Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama’s

Examples of media figures referring to Clinton as Obama’s “enem[y]

Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton might cause trouble for Obama if he does not include her in the administration

Here’s a video compilation of some “news” professionals.

The media obsession with the Clintons continues unabated and they make HRC or BC the story whenever possible.

What’s the takeaway here? Well, Murdoch, I feel, accurately diagnosed the major problem with the MSM. It’s lost the trust of viewers/readers. While journalists try to figure out why this has happened and continue to claim THEY are doing THEIR jobs well, others continue to point, fruitlessly, to video and print where journalists spout “received wisdom” rather than challenge assumptions.

For example, it’s long been the narrative that HRC is a grasping, power-mad, mutant woman who is intrinsically unfit for any trust. “Journalists” start out by faintly praising her experience and quickly move to their BUTS. But she’s a harpy, BUT she’s trying to take over, BUT she’s not a real woman, BUT, BUT, BUT. Then after playing the BUT card in some way, they move on to BC as a reason to distrust Hillary.

WTH? The very fact that the same narrative with respect to HRC plays again and again and again and again makes it sound very much like the “research” for the “story” consists of reading MooDoo or reviewing Chris Matthews’ video. Do ANY of these people challenge their own assumptions? Apparently not.

Given that, am I really surprised that NBC will be peddling a “Yes We Can” DVD? No. The “fourth estate” died from dehydration a while ago. If all they offer is slobbering praise on the one hand, out of control vitriol on the other and still manifest arrogance and condescension, I’m surprised they’ve lasted this long. Because of all their assertions that America will somehow be lessened if big media isn’t accorded respect by those they cover and those who “consume” their “product,” I hope they die out sooner rather than later. It certainly won’t be the end of news or of investigative research and reporting.

Despite being in the business of exposing other people, the media is myopic about itself. The continuing pushback by media personnel to those criticizing their performance certainly suggests they don’t get it at all. Somewhere during the “professionalizing” of journalism, journalists came to believe that they were not only specialists in news gathering but in news understanding. That part was always supposed to be left to the reader/viewer. Not anymore.

Any chance this economic downturn will result in fewer “professional news” outlets?

The image above was posted on Post Secret on November 8, 2008. I have no doubt that the dominate narrative of this campaign — the forceful suppression of women — is responsible for the author’s “secret.” In the Obama-realm, feminism isn’t just bad, it’ll ruin your life. One only need to look to Hillary and Sarah Palin as examples.

Dr. Violet Socks writes:

A few days ago I was asking you all to think about why there is still so much deeply-felt resistance to women’s equality. This is the lesson of radical feminism: that the gender revolution requires just that — a revolution.

Why does there need to be a revolution for equality? Because this year misogyny was used a political tool. As many of us witnessed, this election was so poisoned with hate speech against women that it’s not an exaggeration to say that the FBI would have been investigating the perpetrators if it had been against any other oppressed group.

Let’s be clear: Hillary Clinton was the choice of most Democrats this year. The Democratic establishment, consisting of Donna Brazile, Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and many others, worked furiously to keep Hillary Clinton from receiving the Democratic nomination. Their left-wing allies and the media worked to sabotage her campaign at every turn.

It’s not entirely clear why there was such intense animous towards Hillary by such a large and diverse group. We do know, however, that the most vile tactics were used to suppress Hillary’s campaign; caucus fraud, race-baiting, and outright misogyny comes to mind. As examples, the Obama campaign initiated a not-so-secret whisper campaign that President Clinton was a racist when Clinton called Obama’s Iraq War position a “fairy tale,” Hillary was accused of waiting for the unthinkable to happen to Obama when she mentioned the length of the 1968 campaign and Bobby Kennedy and, from January on, there was a constant drumbeat that she must leave the race.

Running below the murky currents of this campaign, however, was a sexism so deep and so pervasive that it can be said that sexism defined this campaign. Indeed, I believe the subtext and central narrative of Obama’s campaign was sexism. Because two women were the biggest political threat to his campaign, Obama needed to unleash sexism.

Dr. Socks continues:

Narratives: think about narratives. Anthropologists of gender, like Peggy Reeves Sandy, talk about “scripts”: the stories that a society tells itself to explain the world. How men are. How women are. How they should be.

The Obama campaign, with the help of the media and “progressives” blogs, pushed a narrative against Hillary and later Sarah Palin, that invalidated them as public servants because on their gender. Misogyny, wrapped in the protective shell of race-baiting, was the central narrative of the Obama campaign.

I subscribe to the bumper sticker view that “feminism is the radical notion that women are people.” My wife and I are expecting a girl in January. I want this girl to live the full and free life our son enjoys, without gender being an obstacle in her path. I don’t want my daughter to be called a “bitch,” or for someone to wear a t-shirt calling her a “cunt.” Put in those terms, the Obama movement unleashed something very ugly into the culture. The Obama campaign, in its subterranean narrative, encouraged the hatred of women. It is little wonder then that the author of the Post Secret card blames feminism for her unhappiness; she’s witnessed that women who expect equal treatment will be beat down.

A lot has been written about this, I know, but after getting TWO crappy articles from my sister with blatantly FALSE attacks on Governor Palin, I feel compelled to say more about this. And no, I’m not referencing the assholic articles she sent, but at least one came from a source I turned her on to a while ago: Alternet.

When their articles started attacking Senator Clinton non-stop, I quit my subscription to them. Judging from the articles my sister insists upon sending me, they have gone WAY over to the Rabid Voldemort side, with lots and lots of women-bashing to make their point. I am sure you can find it easily enough, if you really want your blood pressure to rise that much.

I’m sick of it. And sick of the blind acceptance of all attacks on Palin (or Clinton, for that matter), especially of the misogynistic variety. Heck, that seems to be most of them.

The kicker on all of this is my sister attacking ME for not supporting Obama when I was a founding member of my city’s first NOW chapter. I am not kidding. Not that SHE ever marched for Equal Rights, like I did, or helped women through Operation Rescue lines, but since I would not give my allegiance to Voldemort, all of a sudden, I am no longer a feminist. Because feminists can only support LIBERAL women, which I did not know until just a few months ago. Gee, was I ever living in a fantasy world before!!

Anywho, I am sick of all of the blatant lies smearing Gov.Palin after the election. So is one of her oldest friends:

Governor Palin has been slimed by the Obamabots up one side and down the other, with tremendous assistance from the MSM and those “anonymous source” (read: COWARDS) who are are full of more manure than my horse. A good-hearted No Quarter reader, Geo, provided this LINK to send the governor a letter of support after the election. So, here’s mine:

Dear Governor Palin:

As a former “yellow dog” Democrat (5/31 when the DNC took lawfully cast votes from Clinton and gave them to Obama was the last straw), I want to thank you for your participation in this process. Your presence on the trail with John McCain was invigorating. Even though I disagree with some of your policies, I respect your right to have them, and your willingness to engage in discussion on them. As someone who fought for the ERA, who engaged in (lawful) protests for women’s rights, I was marching for ALL women, not just liberal women who think exactly like I do. I am proud of what you have accomplished in your life. You are a role model to our young women.

I have to say, though, to see the continuation of the misogynistic treatment Senator Clinton received turned on you was horrifying. It made it quite clear that it was not your POLICIES to which people objected, but your GENDER. This year was a real eye-opener to me, and what I saw was shocking. To have your MANY accomplishments demeaned and belittled, even though YOU are more qualified than the president-elect, says a lot about where this country is in terms of women. Even more shocking was the way women were all too happy to jump on that bandwagon, mocking what you have done with your life, or not, focusing on rumors the MSM was awfully quick to get out there without any investigation, and mighty slow to correct, if they ever did, rather than what you have done for your state. A sad state of affairs, I have to say…

And to now try and blame YOU for John McCain’s loss rather than the registered Republicans who did not turn out, or look more closely at the RAMPANT voter fraud in states across this land, is outrageous. You were a breath of fresh air after Senator Clinton was drummed out by the DNC elite, who cared not for the will of the people. You brought some hope to those of us who lost our party this year when they ceased to be democratic. You inspired us, and for that, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

All the best to you, Governor Palin, as you continue serving your state, and wherever else your life takes you. Hopefully, we will see more of you on the National Stage! All the best to your lovely family as well.

Sincerely,
The Rev. Amy

If you are so inclined, and sick of the way Voldemort and crew treated this woman, as well as the MSM, send her a shout out. Like me, you don’t have to agree with her policies to respect the person and her accomplishments. Sadly, that kind of respect has been sorely lacking in this campaign of sexism and race-baiting, but it isn’t to late to let her know that you are better than that.

Can I just say how sad I am at the state of women in this country in the 21st century? When I was younger, and apparently, more naive, I thought we would be so much farther along at this point. I never dreamed we would have it worse than we did back then. Un-freakin-believable.

Thanks, Voldemort, for exposing the reality of sexism, misogyny, and internalized misogyny. We couldn’t have done it without you, or is it BECAUSE of you? Yeah, I think it’s the latter, too.

And how about those race relations? Bang up job on those, too. What a healer. What a Uniter. What a flim-flam artist. What gullible people we have in this country. What a long, long way we have to go…

Throughout this campaign season, any attempts to discern the “content of (Obama’s) character” have been thwarted by the Propaganda Machine, formerly known as the Fourth Estate, his handlers, the DNC, and his followers who claim, irrationally, I might add, the “Obama will heal us!” as Cher did on The Ellen Degeneres Show Nov. 3rd, as if he truly IS the Obamessiah, ignoring the tremendous splitting of the country, of the Democratic Party itself.

For the first time in memory, a candidate was NOT “known by the company he keeps,” “the birds of a feather which flocked together.” Rather, any mention of Bill Ayers was met, even by university professors with the illogical justification that Obama was only 8 when Bill Ayers and his compatriot, Bernadine Dorhn, were bombing the US Capitol, Pentagon, and other US buildings.

That may be so, but the ideology which drove Ayers and Dorhn is the ideology to which they still adhere. Obama has chosen to have them in his life, to live near them, work with them, and seek them out, as we recently learned for sure (as many of us suspected, and confirmed in this article by Steve Diamond at No Quarter, “Ayers and Obama In Regular Contact Says Source Close to Obama Candidacy“).

The list of his close associates in addition to Ayers and Dorhn are troubling: Rezko, Wright, Khalidi, Kilpatrick, Farakkhan, Blogajevich, et al, a list that contains convicted felons and one under investigation. I have said before, and will say again, any ONE of these people would have sunk any other candidacy, yet in the case of Obama, they were brushed aside as irrelevant. As was the glaring reality that Obama took the majority of his policy positions, often lock, stock, and barrel, from Hillary Clinton. But the Propaganda arm flipped it around, and his minions, again, many university professors, brushed aside his plagiarism as inconsequential. What a great lesson they are teaching their students, and their children.

Along those lines, I am in disbelief that adults, people who would not hire Obama at their own universities or businesses with his refusal to provide ANY documentation of his academic life, or allow friends, families, or fellow students to discuss him to ANYONE trying to get information on this first term senator running for the highest office in the land, would gladly give this man their votes.

I despair that adults, and their children, believe that the means justify the ends, that hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registrations, over 200,000 in Ohio, and 212,000 discovered in Georgia, in which voters were registered in GA, as well as OH or FL, are dismissed because as one neighbor, a retired university professor said, “ACORN does great work.” The level of voter registration fraud was through the ceiling, as the 16 investigations into ACORN indicate, yet the Propagandists say NOTHING about this as Obama “wins” contests in states where voter registration fraud was rampant. Even duplicate voting is brushed aside, as this video demonstrates (and h/t to a listener of Truthteller’s Election Night Radio Show mentioned):

Um, no - it is NOT okay for anyone to vote more than once in an election. It is FRAUD, and it is ILLEGAL!! But we already know there were instances of this in OH and FL. Heck, in VA, felons were allowed, no, RECRUITED, to vote for Obama, but absentee ballots to our military serving abroad went out late, sparking a lawsuit to make sure THEIR votes were counted. And on and on it goes.

As I said, I despair that adults are teaching our young people that you cheat, lie, and steal to get what you want. While you are at it, make sure you are a sore loser, hammering away at the vanquished in a juvenile, mean-spirited manner, never having learned the concept of gracious winning (especially when the “winning” is suspect). These are the same people who said NOTHING, or were SUPPORTIVE, of the Democratic Party forever smearing its very name by stealing votes from one candidate to give to another. The ends justify the means, and if that means we tarnish, tear down, belittle, smear, and steal from a candidate to win, so be it. Oh - and blame them for it, too, while we are at it as the NY Times did in an incredibly offensive editorial it had up last night celebrating Obama’s defeat of Clinton (I won’t link to it - go find it yourself if you want to read that dribble). We have now taught our young people that you can register as many times as you want, and vote as often as you want - just like on “American Idol”! - to make sure YOUR candidate wins. Fair and square is old school. Now it is win at all and any costs, and belittle your opponent while you are at it.

Then there are the issues of misogyny and race-baiting that sustained this campaign, with the willing participation of the Propaganda Arm, Obama, and the DNC. The treatment of women during this campaign was a low I have not seen in DECADES, yet many women were willing participants to this abuse, claiming even as Obama contradicted them, that he was going to be great for women. Ask Hillary. Ask Sarah. Ask those folks wearing, “Sarah Palin Is a C–t” t-shirts, or the organization that used the “C-word” as its acronym regarding Hillary. Women were treated as not just objects, but as sexual anatomy period, in a most vulgar and derogatory way. Still, since it was the DNC, too many women accepted this treatment from the very party of which they are the majority. How they can celebrate the future presidency of a man who treats women in such a hostile manner is beyond me. That goes for the GLBT community, too. But hey - they got their “Bro Before Ho,” so I know they are happy.

The race baiting that was used to tear down our only two term Democratic president in decades was horrendous to watch, especially as members serving in Congress, people whom President Clinton had helped personally, went out of their way to paint him with the stigma of being racist. Hillary, too. Two people who have worked TIRELESSLY to end discrimination in this people were called racists, and it stuck. Then anyone who would not, could not, imagine voting for the most inexperienced, unqualified candidate who was taking Chicago-style politics national, with his thugs attacking people around the country, were labeled, no, BRANDED racists if they did not support Obama. As women’s rights have been set back decades after this election season, so have been race relations. All in the service of getting this man elected because of the color of his skin, not the content of his character, which is still largely ignored or unexplored by the electorate and the Propagandists.

I do not think this is what Dr. King had in mind. I do not think this is what our founders had in mind, either. This election, with its win at all costs, even if it means cheating, lying, and stealing, is not democracy. It surely isn’t decent. And it is not the American Way. At the moment, I can’t see how this will change - how we will regain any semblance of justice, of knowing right from wrong, of being ethical, moral, good. Yes, we made history last night, but I ask you, at what cost to us, to our country? I weep for us today, at what we have become. I have to hope, and pray, that we will regain what we have lost, but for today, grief overwhelms me.

1)The computer systems of both the Obama and McCain campaigns were victims of a sophisticated cyberattack by an unknown “foreign entity,” prompting a federal investigation, NEWSWEEK reports today.

At the Obama headquarters in midsummer, technology experts detected what they initially thought was a computer virus—a case of “phishing,” a form of hacking often employed to steal passwords or credit-card numbers. But by the next day, both the FBI and the Secret Service came to the campaign with an ominous warning: “You have a problem way bigger than what you understand,” an agent told Obama’s team. “You have been compromised, and a serious amount of files have been loaded off your system.” The following day, Obama campaign chief David Plouffe heard from White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, to the same effect: “You have a real problem … and you have to deal with it.”
—————
Officials at the FBI and the White House told the Obama campaign that they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps’ policy positions—information that might be useful in negotiations with a future administration. The Feds assured the Obama team that it had not been hacked by its political opponents. (Obama technical experts later speculated that the hackers were Russian or Chinese.) A security firm retained by the Obama campaign took steps to secure its computer system and end the intrusion. White House and FBI officials had no comment earlier this week.

Read the rest ->

Nothing like being a victim to alert a person to the danger. I wonder if any technology-related policies will benefit from Obama’s victimization.

2)Meanwhile, in Russia, things are heating up. Foxnews has a piece about Russian President Medvedev “sending a signal” to the US.

Russia will deploy missiles near NATO member Poland in response to U.S. missile defense plans, President Dmitry Medvedev said Wednesday in his first state of the nation speech.

Medvedev also singled out the United States for criticism, casting Russia’s war with Georgia in August and the global financial turmoil as consequences of aggressive, selfish U.S. policies.

————————-

Speaking just hours after Obama was declared the victor in the U.S. presidential election, Medvedev said he hoped the incoming administration will take steps to improve badly damaged U.S. ties with Russia. He suggested it is up to the U.S. — not the Kremlin — to seek to improve relations.

“I stress that we have no problem with the American people, no inborn anti-Americanism. And we hope that our partners, the U.S. administration, will make a choice in favor of full-fledged relations with Russia,” Medvedev said.

Well, here we go. A Russian demand for a new American President to kiss some butt. Hmmmmm.

3)In the most thoughtful piece I’ve seen on the racial aspect of a President Obama, Shelby Steele talks a bit about what Obama implicitly promised and what he may not be able to deliver. From LAT.

[Obama's] talent was to project an idealized vision of a post-racial America — and then to have that vision define political decency. Thus, a failure to support Obama politically implied a failure of decency.

Obama’s special charisma — since his famous 2004 convention speech — always came much more from the racial idealism he embodied than from his political ideas. In fact, this was his only true political originality. On the level of public policy, he was quite unremarkable. His economics were the redistributive axioms of old-fashioned Keynesianism; his social thought was recycled Great Society. But all this policy boilerplate was freshened up — given an air of “change” — by the dreamy post-racial and post-ideological kitsch he dressed it in.

This worked politically for Obama because it tapped into a deep longing in American life — the longing on the part of whites to escape the stigma of racism. In running for the presidency — and presenting himself to a majority white nation — Obama knew intuitively that he was dealing with a stigmatized people. He knew whites were stigmatized as being prejudiced, and that they hated this situation and literally longed for ways to disprove the stigma.
——————–

Of course, it is true that white America has made great progress in curbing racism over the last 40 years.
——————–
It is exactly because America has made such dramatic racial progress that whites today chafe so under the racist stigma. So I don’t think whites really want change from Obama as much as they want documentation of change that has already occurred. They want him in the White House first of all as evidence, certification and recognition.

But there is an inherent contradiction in all this. When whites — especially today’s younger generation — proudly support Obama for his post-racialism, they unwittingly embrace race as their primary motivation. They think and act racially, not post-racially. The point is that a post-racial society is a bargainer’s ploy: It seduces whites with a vision of their racial innocence precisely to coerce them into acting out of a racial motivation. A real post-racialist could not be bargained with and would not care about displaying or documenting his racial innocence. Such a person would evaluate Obama politically rather than culturally.

On the nose. Particularly that last part. Although many people would not feel the same, I can say that this election has pretty much cured me of any need to seek “racial innocence.” While many blacks have often said they felt constrained not to make whites feel “threatened” by their presence, I think whites could respond that they often felt constrained to project “I’m not racist” at every opportunity.

However, I’m not doing it anymore. I’ll be polite to people, not wishing to give offense and just hoping to get along - same as ever. But I’m not going to worry if someone perceives me as a racist because I looked at them too long or noticed what was in their grocery cart or any of a thousand things you do when you interact others. I’m done with that.

But what about how Obama will transform our culture? What does Steele say?

There is nothing to suggest that Obama will lead America into true post-racialism. His campaign style revealed a tweaker of the status quo, not a revolutionary. Culturally and racially, he is likely to leave America pretty much where he found her.
——————
Presidents follow the culture; they don’t lead it. I hope for a competent president.

Yeah. I completely agree. All I ever wanted was competence.

4)The Orlando-Sentinel had an interesting and yet ridiculous piece today. Obama won because of black athletes. Seriously.

If you’re searching for tangible reasons why it became possible for Barack Obama to make his historic run at the presidency of the United States, then look no further than the golf course, basketball court or football field.

Obama may have emerged from the partisan political arena, but it was the nonpartisan athletic arena that opened white America’s eyes and minds to the amazing potential and personalities of black America.

OK, you can make a case for any barrier-breaker, no doubt about that. But to suggest that black athletes who excel in the ruthless meritocracy that is sports today somehow are the forerunners of a man elected despite a lack of experience is not a very good argument, IMO. Seeing Michael Jordan play basketball or Lynn Swan play football is to see a truly expert individual. Simply put, you don’t play if you don’t have the chops.

But to suggest a presidential campaign reflects meritocracy is absurd. It reflects many things, but not necessarily merit. These athletes will be out on their butts as soon as they can’t perform. Anyone honestly think THAT will happen to BO? Has it yet?

5)Who should get Obama’s Senate seat? An AA of course. I’m seriously doubting any white people need apply, but let’s look at the contenders. From Newser is a Time piece on who could fill that seat.

As confidence grew in recent weeks that Barack Obama would be the next President of the United States, a battle intensified among various Illinois politicos to fill his Senate seat. Although a number of local leaders have publicly expressed interest in the position, the decision on who will complete the roughly two years remaining in Obama’s Senate term ultimately rests with Illinois’ governor, Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat and former congressman. . .
—————

Identity politics may play a major part in Blagojevich’s decision. Observers believe the governor may feel compelled to appease two of his core constituencies — women, and blacks, particularly from his native Chicago area — that could prove crucial to his prospects should he seek reelection in 2010. He may feel extra pressure to replace the Senate’s only black member with another African-American. One of the names most frequently mentioned here is Jesse Jackson Jr., a veteran Congressman who represents parts of Chicago’s South Side, and a national co-chair of Obama’s presidential campaign.

In an interview Monday, Jackson told TIME: “I’d be honored and humbled to succeed Sen. Obama in the U.S. Senate. I’m confident the governor will make a decision in the best interest of the state, and country.” But Blagojevich could also opt for a sort of placeholder figure to complete Obama’s term and allow Democrats to find a long-term candidate for 2010. Among the prominent black politicians the governor would turn to in that scenario, are Illinois’ secretary of state, Jesse White, or Emil Jones Jr., the recently retired president of Illinois’ senate, and one of Blagojevich’s few General Assembly allies.

The author mentions some other contenders, but I think Jackson is the most likely choice and he’s clearly indicated he wants it. And as national co-chair of Obama’s campaign, I’m betting it’s his. As for the idea that a woman might get the seat? Only if Obama tells Jesse Jr. to pipe down.

A better question is this: what might Blagojevich need more than the goodwill of the President?

6)Newser also has a story from the AP about Iraq.

Iraqi officials said Wednesday they don’t expect Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops hastily from Iraq because he told them last summer that he wouldn’t make a decision without consulting them and U.S. commanders on the ground.

With violence down and the economy No. 1 on American voters’ minds, the Iraqis said they believe the new president will take his time before fulfilling his promise to end the war in Iraq, which costs U.S. taxpayers $12 billion a month at a time of financial crisis back home.
——————

“Obama has to deal with Iraq’s issues in a positive way and have a sense of responsibility to correct the situation in Iraq, as well the situation inside America,” said Salim Abdullah, spokesman of the largest Sunni bloc in parliament.

“We are not concerned that he will take a unilateral decision to remove troops quickly from Iraq since he needs to discuss this issue with the Iraqi government first,” Abdullah said.
——————–

This year, U.S. and Iraqi negotiators hammered out an agreement that would remove U.S. soldiers from Iraq’s cities by June 30, with the last American troops leaving the country by 2012. The accord still must be approved by parliament by year’s end when the U.N. mandate expires.

The draft agreement has drawn strong opposition inside Iraq, but government officials are hopeful that parliament can approve the pact in time for the deadline.

That would largely satisfy both Obama’s pledge _ and the Iraqi goal _ of an orderly end to the U.S. mission.

Don’t forget that part. Despite an agreement in place, Obama will take credit for any forward movement in Iraq. Having said that, I don’t think Bush deserves any credit at all. But perhaps some of his people might. They won’t get any.

7) Lastly, I looked in vain for MSM or even sorta MSM discussions of this election in terms of misogyny or in terms of women’s issues. Crickets. Except for a wonderful post here on NQ by Bud White, there is very little out there. We should push BO on this issue at every opportunity and carefully monitor his administration. While everyone talked about race being the “unspoken issue” of the campaign, it got thoroughly aired. What was never spoken of was hate against women.

So far, only bloggers are addressing the issue, but here’s another one:

Grail Guardian is pointed:

There will never be a female President of the United States. There. I said it. Ladies, go home and grab your burkas and start cooking dinner for your man and popping out babies. You will never have equal pay for equal work, you will never be considered competent or capable at anything you ever do, and you stand no chance of ever getting anywhere unless it’s to a soccer or hockey game to cheer your (male) children on. Of course the laws will be wide open to allow you to abort female children so you don’t have to sully the landscape with them at all anymore.

How do I know? Because before even half the nation’s votes were tallied tonight, not only were all the major networks calling the race for Barack Obama, but the pundits are already discussing how Sarah Palin was John McCain’s downfall. Pundits attempting to defend her popularity with statistics were shot down on Fox News. That’s it – it’s over. You will not see another female Presidential candidate taken seriously in this country in our lifetimes. We’ll be lucky if we continue to see women continue to hold seats in the Senate and House after tonight. Female Governors? Forget about it. Palin won’t be re-elected there, because in spite of the fact that Alaska loved her (90% approval rating) just 4 months ago, she has been trashed and is now persona non grata in her own state courtesy of the Chosen One.

Time to saddle up. We need to demand BO own this issue since he’s knowingly benefitted from misogyny. At the very least, he should be required to choose some women for his administration. But we already know what his people said to just that request before: “you can’t have that.”

Lynette Long talked with a BO staffer and heard just that.

Think the Congressional Black Caucus might be willing to push for women? BO MIGHT listen to them.

It’s clear to many Democrats that a radical clique has taken control of the Party. Democratic ideals once held to be sacrosanct, including freedom of speech, one person one vote, and an intolerance of sexism have been violently pushed aside for the benefit of Obama. The media drumbeat for Obama is incessant; the media has even stopped pretending to be neutral. We’re seeing the country through Alice’s Looking Glass now and everything is upside-down and backwards. In an effort to save our Party and country, many Democrats are actively working to defeat Obama.

In 1980, the last Japanese soldier of World War Two, Captain Fumio Nakahira, was discovered on Mt. Halcon, Mindoro Island, Philippines. During the previous 35 years, Captain Nakahira had survived alone, serving his Emperor and believing that the War had not yet ended. (This was 15 years after the Gilligan’s Island episode).

Captain Nakahira comes to mind when I think about the thousands of disaffected and disillusioned Democrats across the country who will not be voting for Obama. If Obama is elected despite our efforts to defeat him, it will codify for a generation the Chicago corruption, race-baiting, and misogyny practiced by Obama and his minions; tactics which caused many of to leave the Party. And Obama’s race-baiting, misogynistic thugs will say: Good riddance!

Camping out on our own private Mt. Halcons, many thousands of men and women will remain committed to the causes which brought us to the Democratic Party in the first place. We won’t stop being concerned about sexism, race relations, economic opportunity, and national security.

It’s now dawning on Republicans and independents that a creeping totalitarianism is sweeping the country. Obama’s Truth Squads use the power of the state to stifle free expression, McCain supporters are jeered in public, and Obama’s shock troops — in a form of hate speech so ugly that it can only be described as a pogrom against women — wear clothing which declares that the Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, is a “cunt.” Sexual terrorism is the new form of Left-wing Kristallnacht.

Where did this come from?

The ecstatic mania of Obama’s supporters comes from many places, and I don’t pretend to understand all of the sources. Many who support Obama are low-information liberals, do-good progressives, proud African Americans, and fed-up independents. I can’t blame these groups; the Bush Administration has been a disaster. There is, however, a core group of Obama supporters who believe that the Senator from Illinois will bring revolutionary change. And their desire for the revolution is all-consuming and any tactic is considered fair game: caucus fraud, sexism, race-baiting, voter intimidation, online smear campaigns, sexual terrorism, and voter fraud. Anything to win.

I hold Obama accountable for the tone of this campaign and the actions of his supporters. From “hoodwink and bamboozled” to his “lipstick on a pig,” Obama’s sexist double-speak and race-baiting innuendos have unleashed something very ugly into the ether. Obama has given his supporters the tacit encouragement to cross lines of acceptable discourse in order to destroy his political opponents. In the Obama world, Bill Clinton is a racist, Hillary is a bitch, Sarah Palin is a cunt, and John McCain is erratic and senile. I fully expect that an Obama Administration, like all recent Administrations, will continue in campaign mode and I expect these tactics to continue. This was the reason, to borrow a phrase, that we sought to fumigate our Party.

Like many of you, I won’t have anything to do with Obama or his party. Obama’s tactics go against the reason I was a Democrat and no pleas and no threats will force me to give up my principles. Above my computer I have postcards with the images of Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy; my Hillary poster is in the corner and remains unframed.

Hell, Obama ran a very negative campaign against HILLARY (remember those “Harry and Louise” ads? NAFTA ads?). The issue seems to be “robo-calls” connecting Obama to - wait for it - AYERS!!! How DARE the McCain campaign say something that is TRUE about Obama’s history??

Yet, both Biden and Degeneres act as if JOHN MCCAIN, and McCain alone, has changed his entire character. Mr. Hope-y Change-y Unicorn is spreading sweetness and light wherever he goes, apparently, and John McCain has completely morphed into Darth Vader or something. Take a look:

Yeah, okay. I guess he didn’t hear Obama claim that supporters at a Palin rally yelled, “Kill him!”, a claim debunked by none other than the Secret Service. I don’t know about you, but with Obama’s problems with “truthiness,” I’ll take the Secret Service’s word over Obama. I guess Biden hasn’t watched any of Obama’s ads. Or seen the tee shirts worn by the Obama supporters, beginning with the “Bros Before Hos” and escalating to the vulgar Sarah Palin tee shirts. Or his supporters who call a 12 year old girl a racist for wearing a Palin tee shirt. Or the man who had his 2006 Lexus LS 430 scratched with “KKK” on it, and American flag burned on it, and some other damage done to it (just so you know, this model, new, cost close to $70,000. That’s a mighty expensive piece of property to “vandalize.”). Oh, what prompted this attack? The man had the audacity to have a McCain/Palin sticker on it. How DARE he?!? Apparently, that is what the thugs who trashed his car seemed to think, anyway.

Oh wait - here is one that is McCain specific! Yes - one of McCain’s offices, right here in South Cackalacki, was defaced in York County with the claim that “Republican means Slavery.” Well, hell, Biden himself has engaged in race baiting as a manipulative ploy.

But McCain has changed? Are we to infer, then, that Obama has always been an arrogant misogynist and liar whose supporters can act anyway they see fit without fear of repercussion? So it would seem, anyway.

Oh, but it gets better. Here is the second part of the interview:

Did you notice the glaring omission here by Biden when Degeneres asked about Proposition 8? When he said he would vote against it and all of that? Well, here’s a little reminder:

Despite appearances to the contrary, OBAMA DOES NOT SUPPORT SAME SEX MARRIAGE! It was disingenuous at best to frame it the way BOTH of them did. Degeneres asked about an initiative on which Biden would NOT be voting, so he could say whatever he damn well PLEASED, but did NOT ask him where the Obama Camp stands on same sex marriage. I expected better from Degeneres, at least, because she certainly DID ask John McCain about it.

Anyway - this whole thing of painting McCain as being incredibly negative for looking into Obama’s history, and denying the 18 months worth of negative campaigning from the Obama camp, is absurd. I know some of it is just plain politics, but some - a LOT - is how it is reported (or not) in the MSM. Even when reports come out proving Obama is more negative in his campaigning, the MSM turn it around on McCain, and talk CONSTANTLY about his “anger” problem. Wow. So this is the new spin, just to keep you updated - McCain has totally changed his entire character, and Obama is merely trying to do what is best for the country. Got it? You must ignore all facts and evidence to the contrary, and simply accept that Obama will bring a kinder, gentler Administration to the White House. Yeah, right. A little “truthiness” wouldn’t hurt right about now from the Obama camp - oh, wait - that’s right. Joe Biden DID actually speak a little ‘truthiness,” much to The One’s dismay - claiming that Obama will be tested, and tested early by international factions. Oh, goody - that’s JUST what the country needs in the midst of economic hardship - “testing.” Well, thanks, Joe, for finally telling the truth about SOMETHING in this campaign. I reckon there’s a first time for everything! I take that back - you also acknowledged that Hillary Clinton would be a better VP than you, and was definitely qualified to be President, unlike your running mate, so there was that - have to give credit where credit is due! Ahem. Now, if you will only start telling the truth about your race-baiting, and character assassination of John McCain, we’ll be in business…

But first, I do want to point out that a lot is going on AGAIN with ACORN. Sen. Cornyn of TX (R) is pushing legislation to stop all taxpayer dollars to ACORN. Yes, it seems that since 1998, ACORN has received $31 MILLION of YOUR taxpaying dollars. You read that right - this very partisan organization (despite their claims) has received $31 million TAXPAYER dollars.

See, I don’t want ANY partisan organization to receive taxpayer money. Not ACORN, not Faith-based organizations, not any partisan organizations. Non-partisan only, I say.

Now, Senator Cornyn isn’t sure he can get our money BACK, but he does want to staunch the flow. Remember that Chris Dodd also tried to get 20% of the bailout repayment to go to ACORN, National La Raza, and the National Urban League. Do the math - 20% of $700 billion dollars = $140 BILLION dollars. OF YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

Thank heavens that got kicked out, but what does that say about what ACORN really does that Dodd and others wanted to funnel them that kind of money?? Mighty suspect, if you ask me.

Oh, and more misogyny with Sarah Palin as the target has been out this weekend, especially a YouTube video. I refuse to give it any more play, but it featured a former NFL football player knocking Gov. Palin to the ground and rendering her unconscious. Again - the attacks on her are attacks on women, pure and simple. There is no other way to paint it. They aren’t attacking her POLICIES, they are attacking her GENDER, same as they did to Senator Clinton. Why women would still support a party that treats them so shamefully is beyond me, but that’s just me. There us an excellent post at No Quarter entitled, “Dear Sarah, Dear Sister” on this topic that is WELL worth reading.

Okay - now for a light moment. My mother read this to me from the Charlotte Observer, her local paper. My mother had five children, a pertinent piece of information for this article, which is entitled, “Are We Really Sure Deep Throat Wasn’t A Woman With Kids?”

They say talk is cheap, but not when it comes to talking on the phone when kids are around. Its author is Tracy Curtis, who apparently knows whereof she speaks when she writes:

If they hadn’t revealed who Deep Throat was back in 2005, I would swear it was a woman. A woman with children.

That would have explained everything. Why she couldn’t talk on the phone with the Washington Post. And why she had to secretly meet the reporter in a parking garage.

And it wouldn’t have been because she was afraid her kids would hear her spilling secrets about the Nixon administration. It’d be that Bob Woodward couldn’t hear a word she was saying because of all the kids screaming in the background.

I think my mom could agree with that. In my family, there are three boys and two girls, all about two years apart. Oh, we could get into some trouble, I’ll tell ya.

Why is it that every time a mom gets on the telephone, the world around her crumbles? And I can speak for all moms, because when I talk to another mom and I’ve got my kids all around me, I can hear her kids all around her. In fact, every conversation I’ve had this week has ended with a blood-curdling scream in the background and then “I gotta call ya back.”

I know THIS is true. When Mom would get on the phone, we’d stand there going, “Momma, Momma, Momma, Momma…” What am I saying - we STILL do that!

Any normal person would call the police. But if you’re a mom, you just hang up and finish making dinner. No biggie.

My initial theory was that I call too much attention to myself when I get on the phone. I’m too obvious. I’m too happy and excited to just be having conversation beyond which Power Ranger is the strongest. And my kids can’t handle it. They have to be right under foot with my full attention.

I’m imagining that a lot of you moms out there are nodding your head up and down at this point. I reckon it must be true, because I know WE did that, too. I bet we could have been out in the yard, up in a tree or something, and as soon as Mom got on the phone, there we’d be! “Momma, Momma…”

So I started sneaking off to make calls. Bathrooms and broom closets became my regular haunts. Dial quickly and quietly and speak in low, robotic tones that won’t be picked up by ears conditioned to “Sesame Street.”

And it worked. For a while. Until somebody had to go really bad and I had no choice but to let him in. And turn on the lights.

Ms. Curtis is lucky. She has the benefit of CELL phones!!! Mothers of people my generation (and older) weren’t so lucky. About all our moms could do was say, “I gotta go kill one of my kids now,” and hang up the phone attached to the wall.

There are lessons to be learned from Watergate. Particularly if you’re like me and you desperately need to have a conversation. They knew it back then and I know it now. You gotta have a plan.

When Bob Woodward wanted to talk to Deep Throat, he’d move a flower pot with a red flag on the balcony of his apartment. And Deep Throat scheduled meetings by inking a clock face with the time on page 20 of Woodward’s copy of the New York Times.

So now, when I want a call from a girlfriend? I stick my husband’s Clemson (Clemson? Ugh. Not even UNC?? Sorry - longstanding NC v. SC university rivalry!) flag in our azaleas. Then my girlfriend confirms the meeting with a smiley face on page 20 of my Parent Magazine. And then we meet at the farmers market, in the shadows, by the cantaloupes.

We don’t share government secrets and we don’t rat anybody out. But for the lengths that we go to, to have a complete conversation, 10 minutes of uninterrupted gabbing is plenty exciting. tracyobserver@yahoo.com

No doubt - I think my mom’s best opportunity to get some peace and quiet was when we all went to school. That was about it, until we went to college. It didn’t stop us from being bratty whenever we came home, though. I guess some things never change…

Therein lies the comic relief from me for the time being. I hope it gave you a smile as you ponder why the Obama people are giddy that Gen. Colin Powell, he of the “white powder” before the UN to get us into the Iraq War in the FIRST damn place (and another excellent article which I recommend to you, “Powell Endorses Obama, and Supporters Pee Their Pants in Glee.”). Or how many of these multiple-times registered people will be voting in this election, and how often. Or has the NY Times officially become a paper on the lines of the National Enquirer after their smear piece on Cindy McCain? Inquiring minds want to know! Ahem. But for now, I hope you can have a smile for a moment, anyway…