Elitist? Hillary Clinton Can't Use A Coffee Maker Or Pump Gas

Elitist? Obama's elitist? Here, we have Senator Hillary Clinton struggling to figure out an every day coffee maker. She just can't do it! How's she supposed to connect with the common person if she can't pour her own coffee -- from a machine?!

I guess it takes "testicular fortitude" to work the coffee machine, but if she can't then maybe these endorsements were a big mistake? Of course they were!

Check this disasterous Indiana episode!

Dr. Barbara A. Reynolds Set Up Rev. Wright To Hit Barack Obama

Many are upset that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright would come to the National Press Club and essentially throw one of his parishioners, Senator Barack Obama under the bus, saying that he would "come after" Barack Obama should be become president and essentially showing the worst behavior one could imagine, stooping to the level of the stupid questions tossed by the media in attendance and insulting even the National Press Club moderator.

But now it seems we have a person -- a Clinton supporter -- who has it in for Barack Obama. A Dr. Barbara Reynolds, who when this is over may just become the poster child for African American fear of success. On her own blog, Reynolds writes:

And it is a sad testimony that to protect his credentials as a unifier above the fray the Senator is fueling the media characterization that Rev. Dr. Wright is some retiring old uncle in the church basement instead of respecting Wright for the towering astute father of progressive social and global causes that he is.

What?! Where she got that from, I don't know. But what I do know is this person who undoubtedly can't stand the idea of Black male success voted for Hillary Clinton in the Maryland Primary, and not Barack Obama. Think about that. She didn't vote for Obama, voted for Clinton, trashes Obama in her blog, then brings Obama's pastor to the National Press Club to make Obama look terrible and less than authentic.

And with all this, the Left Coaster goes out of his or her way -- whatever -- to make it seem that Reynolds was really innocent in all of this. Give me a break. She brought Pastor Wright back to the National Press Club because she knew they would take him this time versus 2006, when she first tried. She also knew it would have an impact damaging to Obama's campaign.

She -- like some other Blacks -- can't stand to see another Black man make it.

Obama / Wright NY Times Editorial Is a Home Run

Today's NY Times Editorial on Senator Barack Obama's angry response to Rev. Jeremiah Wright's appearance at the National Press Club was a home run. I too was not happy with Rev. Wright's presentation, complete with the "dog" pose after he answered one question. While the media questions were also stupid and race-batting, Rev. Wright lowered himself to their level.

But what hurt most was seeing Wright throw Senator Obama under the bus, when Obama took great pains to protect Pastor Wright even in Obama's landmark speech on race, a response to initial criticism about the former leader of Trinity United Methodist Church.

The LA Times is wrong.

This isn't about fitness, it's about character.

The article has the facts about McCain's time as a P.O.W. and his subsequent recovery, and the author suggests that if McCain is "fully disabled" as his pension indicates that he might somehow be unfit to serve as President. That's provocative, and it may help ratings for Vartabedian as he struggles to earn notoriety as a staff writer, but it's a red herring.

Nobody will deny that a retired military person is entitled to a pension. Nobody will argue that physical disabilities would disqualify a person from seeking this high office. Everybody can agree that years as a P.O.W. will require rehabilitative care and support.

So where's the beef?

The issue is character. In describing McCain's career after being released, Vartabedian offers these two facts:

After he was released in 1973, he returned home on crutches and began a painful physical rehabilitation. He later regained flight status and commanded a Navy squadron before retiring from the service in 1981.

Fair enough. The issue isn't about the tax-free status of that $58,000 pension, either. It's the implication about the character of a guy who claims a disability-status pension after he "...regained flight status and commanded a Navy squadron..." What kind of double standard is that?

He's a patriot, he earned a military pension...

...but either he's disabled, or he's not; I'm having trouble reconciling a naval flight surgeon finding an officer who needed rehabilitation fit to lead a squadron yet that same officer retiring with a disability pension based on events before he was re-certified to fly. Robert Schriebman, a senior Pentagon tax advisor and tax attorney who recently retired as a judge advocate for a unit of the California National Guard asks, If McCain can hike across the Grand Canyon, then why should he be getting disability payments from the government...?

Seriously, I don't care if they're tax exempt pension payments, I trust his rehabilitation left him physically fit enough for the rigors of elected office, but can anybody explain that to me how this double-standard fits with the moral character we want in office in Washington?