KRLA’s Kevin James : The Anatomy of Idiocy – UPDATED

-San Jose California, The Almost Daily Binx; by Binx101,

Overview

This story is brief, because the subject of this story,  Kevin James the quintessential idiot, reveals his essence immediately – out of the gate.  A neocon’s nightmare come true, this ranting imbecile becomes almost uncommunicative and backs himself into a corner by having a conversation with two relatively smart guys, while quoting the Nation’s leading idiot – George Bush.  Additionally, he is deranged.

There is a video below.

Secondly, let’s eliminate any confusion about Kevin James.

It’s not this one:  He’s a successful and funny comedian with a syndicated TV Show under his belt.

Here’s the second rate neocon from LA with less brains than a mailbox and more hate than a junkyard dog

Anatomy 1-2-3

Step One: Accept a Booking to Provide Commentary to Boost Your Ratings

What a mistake if you don’t know what you’re talking about.  Apparently, Mr. James only talks … and has no ability to listen or reason.  He is the absolute epitome of a neocon information puppet.  He opens with a repetitious and unkind tirade about Barack Obama – surprise !!

Step Two:  Lose Your Mind and Keep Talking

It’s incredible, as though he didn’t even understand English.  If this were not live television it would have seemed as though it were a spoof.  He was without self-control and apparently not in possession of a GED from a correspondence school.

Step Three:  Continue to talk over the host

And, continue to prove that you  and the person that hired you should be fired together.  Make sure by the time you’re finished … everyone knows that you are a paid propagandist so that they can begin boycotting KRLA and it’s sponsors.  We are.

Enjoy video by clicking  HERE. Video will open in new window.

Click Here for a different video of Chris Matthews Interview on Countdown Guest Hosted by Rachel Maddow – Fri Night – discussing his views on the greater cause of what occurred on his show with James.

UPDATE:

If you would like to offer your civic minded disdain to KRLA, the highlighted link (in the above article) to KRLA will open to the station’s homepage.

The horizontal bar, about a third of the way across the page has a link to a list of the station’s advertizers.

Clicking on it reveals email links directly to those advertizers.

We encourage you to be heard by sending email to these advertisers and experience the benefit of helping stamp out the terrorism movement of this extreme Right Wing misinformation machine.

It is our opinion that Kevin James is an anti-American terrorist. We strongly believe in the First Amendment and see no better way to fight terrorism than starting at home with these sabbateurs of reason, by letting our collective voices ring louder than their despicable propaganda, and by giving those that pay them a reminder that they have a choice.

Advertisements

Democrats Unite : Rachel Maddow’s Points to Ponder

Talking Heads Disagree with Rachel Maddow at MSNBC – We Don’t

“… at the very least, those stones may be very useful in a battle with the ideologues.”

Everyone saw the stats last night … everyone sees the talking heads drawing up battle plans for next barrage of info-tainment.  While the math is omnipresent, Maddow persisted that Clinton’s game is not over yet.  We think it’s wise to consider her position. There are 3 major points to consider:

  1. Clinton Campaign, significant personal debt to Clinton  – While 5 Million sounds like a drop in the bucket for Hillary – it truly isn’t.  Just start moving the decimal points to place that you feel comfortble with and tell us if you still don’t consider the amount worthy of protecting.  Any thoughts of this being inconsequential are simply ludicrous.  It is noteworthy that most Americans can’t conceive themselves earning that amount of money no less making decisions about that sum.  Nonetheless, its a real issue for Clinton for a number of reasons – not the least of which, is Hillary’s ability to raise money in NY for re-election to the Senate, should that door remain open.
  2. Dropping out to appease party powers is nice talk, but is it politically sound. There are still areas of the Country that haven’t voted yet – does the process now impose Super-delegates before the fact?? What would happen if Barack Obama lost to Hillary Clinton in remaining states – wouldn’t that be a tool for Republicans to further capitalize on divisions in the Democratic Party ??
  3. Should Clinton by forced to drop out further disenfranchising her supporters? We think deals have to be struck and politics at the precinct level needs to be considered. Hillary deciding and being forced by political rainmakers are to entirely different political constellations.  Campaign tactics aside, Hillary Clinton commands a significant political machine and while she has never been our preference, her significant position was crafted with many different stones, and at the very least, those stones may be very useful in a battle with the ideologues.

Battles Ahead with Sinister Forces – Complacency is Deadly

//www.light-to-dark.com

“… into the darkness that the Bush Administration has tricked our Nation into believing is the “good life.”

Remember those ideologues that the Democratic Party is fighting are the ones that hijacked and transformed the Republican Party into a shameful ‘corporatism’ machine that would have impassioned Benito Mussolini to lie prostrate in majesty.  These are truly sinister forces that have gutted our Justice Department; infiltrated administrative departments that have been generally apolitical, into campaign adjuncts.  The State Department has been headed by a political appointee with no diplomatic experience, that further alienated the bulk of the professional diplomatic corps and forced them to chose sides or chose career change.

So while we’re tuning in our TV sets or talking up politics, keep in mind that this battle has just begun.  Let’s treat our embattled with respect and as quickly as we can – prove – that we have learned from history and put the party differences as secondary to our goal.  Secondary to our collective passion for “feel good.”  Secondary to any personal umbrage we may feel for any of the candidates.  We need to move forward with enough momentum to prevent any further backslide into the darkness that the Bush Administration has tricked our Nation into believing is the “good life.”

Maddow was Making a Plea for Propriety

Oringal Political Artwork Courtesy of Stephen Pitt.“… happy-meal of par-boiled platitudes …”

As we could see last night, Maddow was trying to explain the potential mindsets and considerations ahead for the Democratic contenders.  While no one on the set shared her perspective, we feel it was an important one.  We feel it was that of a critical thinker considering the options, alternatives and cause and effect of decisions from this point forward – without the benefit of a large screen display – but by using considerable vision and perception in understanding the sensitivities that motivate the political paradigm.

While she’s relative newcomer to the scene we think she offers a valuable distraction from the happy-meal of par-boiled platitudes and re-statement  that is delivered by the millionaire club of info-tainers (some former journalists.)  We’re very impressed.

(Original Political Artwork in this article are courtesy of Stephen Pitt – Light to Dark – Link Here)

Tim Russert : ‘Misspeaks’ Galore

The following story was written, with the intention of follow-up stories regarding Tim Russert. In all fairness to the very sad and very tragic passing of Mr. Russert on 13 June 2008, we ask readers to keep in mind that this article was critical of what we consider factual misspeaks that were repeated throughout the nomination process and not a critical review of his career or contributions, thereof.   We are deeply saddened by his passing. – 14 June 2008

– 4 May 2008, The Almost Daily Binx, San Jose, CA; by Binx101

As Though it Were

“… only asking the tough questions of the Bush administration when it wasn’t actually news worthy any more.”

Sunday mornings always used to include Meet the Press in our home, long before Russert came to town.  As a kid I started watching it when Lawrence Spivak* hosted it.  About a year ago, long into Russert’s tenure, we have opted to watch it occasionally but mostly not at all.  Today’s lure was Barack Obama.  We’ve watched sporadically in the recent past, but we’re likely to tune in when the show includes those that have distinguished themselves with public service.

MTP lost any value to my family when they lost their spine, their will to exist, their purpose.  We found that most indelibly represented when they began waving the flag and only asking the tough questions of the Bush administration when it wasn’t actually news worthy any more.  In fact, when everyone had caught their breath and worked out their story.

We believed that they were performing – theater, if you will, and we didn’t have the stomach to watch any longer.  We also sold some stocks that were advertising on the show after writing letters to the corporate giants that buoy the show with their institutional ads and not receiving a single reply.  It was the same experience we had with NBC News, so … we took our business elsewhere.  We actually go out of our way to not buy products that are featured on the show – sure – its absurd, but it makes us feel better.

* After publishing this story we learned that Lawrence Spivak passed away on 3 May 2008 – RIP

Russert and Many NBCers Makes Material Misstatements – Routinely

“… the continuous hum of inaccuracy and misleading statements …”

We will presumptively exonerate Rachel Maddow and David Shuster as a matter of principle. Today’s was the one though that gets us crazy.   He’s done it a number of times and some, not all, of his colleagues in the MSNBC cadre do the same thing.  He referred to Barack Obama as a candidate for President.

This is patently untrue.  It may be the wish of these alleged luminaries, but if any political science student made that statement in a paper – they would be looking at a failing grade.  Failing because it decries a greater misunderstanding of our system and its detail.  Something that Russert is allegedly an expert – or why else would he be Washington DC bureau chief.

Barack Obama is competing for the privilege of being the Democratic candidate.  He is not the candidate yet. Plain and simple.  Poly Sci 101. We feel very strongly that the continuous hum of inaccuracy and misleading statements, that sometimes are later edited or amplified, are an enormous disservice to the public good and if not for organizations such as Media Matters, we may never understand the rot in our electorate that these misstatements contribute.

We respectfully submit that as Americans we must demand something different of News Agencies as we do commentators.  This column is commentary.  Tim Russert is the Washington DC Bureau Chief for NBC News.  He should not be permitted ‘misspeaks’ without officially losing his authority to continue to make them.  While we aren’t suggesting a public whipping, we do highly recommend something that would protect the public, no less than a department of health warning on a eatery with one too many cockroaches.

Obama – Close the Deal? Journo-tainers Stir the Pot

– 25 April 2008, The Almost Daily Binx, San Jose, CA; by Binx101

“… played into the GOP’s hands by dividing and self-conquering. “

Popular television and cable news Journo-tainer Chris Matthews offered what he considered, solid sage advice for Barack Obama  at the close of Thursday’s edition of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews.  We respectfully submit that Matthews needs to bone up a little on his political science and his reading comprehension.  He proposed that Obama would be taken more seriously if he shifted his conversation to taking on McCain and showing what a fighter he can be, just like Hillary.

We demur, despite Matthews’ popularity as a TV Journo-tainer, we respectfully submit that he’s once again fallen off-the-wagon and is making news instead of commenting on it, by manufacturing facts that aren’t facts.  The Democratic nomination process is still underway and as far as we can see – the divisions in the Democratic Party are causing the actual nomination process to be prolonged while they disenfranchise party supporters and have played into the GOP’s hands by dividing and self-conquering.  Barack Obama needs to take on Hillary in exactly the way he is – and the national figures will still favor him – despite the Clinton propaganda machine and “new math.”

“… drive-by paint-ball currently passing for journalism”

Obama isn’t Hillary, and apparently he does not find her style appealing or helpful.  However, we are certain, that if Hillary had determined that Obama’s style, as it were, could be helpful, she’d drop the screeching and nervous laugh and be enrolled in “cool” lessons faster than she was just heard invoking “Noth Caylina,” with her newly re-polished Pennsylvanian, New Yorkish, Ohioan, Arkansan drawl.

Matthews further conflated the facts when suggested that there were three(3) people running for President.  While we acknowledge the corporate Media elite (pardon the expression) would be gleeful for such an opportunity, the simple fact remains that the only person currently running for president – is John McCain.  The Democratic opponent has yet to be determined.  While a three (3) person race might be the corporate journo-tainers’ equivalent of a big-game safari, fully stocked with drugged animals for them to shoot it remains impossible.  For the time being  we’ll continue to suffer the drive-by paint-ball currently passing for journalism. (We do concede that Matthews certainly does understand but struggles to present the facts cogently in fulfillment of his corporate obligation to provide a boat load of fans and carloads of manure in which to hit them.)

“Obama, has not wavered very far from his message of hope.”

Barack Obama is not running for President.  He’s running to be the Democratic nominee.  There is a considerable difference in the latitude provided under the pretense of each.  There is limited opportunity to challenge John McCain while he’s seeking the nomination.  His opponent is Hillary Clinton.  She’s chosen to go for the nomination in what we consider,  the politics of the darkest Democratic past.  Obama, has not wavered very far from his message of hope.

Hillary Clinton has mocked hope as a dementia of the masses, mere wishful thinking and promised hard fisted fighting.  Barack Obama has repeated that citizens will make the difference and their involvement, while Hillary has either mocked his words or opted to incorporate them as needed.  Hillary has a huge corporate machine and Obama has a political machine that ostensibly has risen from grass roots humble beginnings

“Hillary never fails to deliver a completely balanced assortment of demographically nutritious emotions …”

One Clinton characteristic that is amplified by the lengthened primary is that she is by far a reliable and predictable pit-bull of political ambition.  Her focus is unwavering, her ability to attack and fight is admirable.  Admirable in the sense of a guard-dog, but not particularly admirable in the sense of one who is required to pilot a ship of State. One that is admirable in the sense of performing the same trick in a reliable fashion, but not particularly admirable in the ability to represent sensibilities of the shamefully abused middle-class that has been all but stomped out of existence. Stomped that is by the destructive and distracting politics that the Clinton once shunned, but now embraces.

Her demeanor is reflective of the task.  In small community settings she is soft and even lachrymal, yet when counted on to deliver a forceful message she can be Stalinesque, particularly in her gesticulation  and hand gesturing to the Heavens with authority.  Sometimes, listening to her range of emotions, we are carried off in thought to fond memories of the High School Drama Club’s endless hours in preparation of Thurber Carnival.  If nothing else, a mixed bag of emotion as  Hillary never fails to deliver a completely balanced assortment of demographically nutritious emotions selected by the Madame and her Maitres De campaign.

“While their … political affiliation is the same, their leadership style  … from this point is likely to be incredibly divergent. “

Conversely, Obama is generally consistent, but unless he’s delivering a speech that will carry 27 news cycles, the Journo-tainers are crushed.  Take the recent PA Primary concession speech.  In what period of time, in what election has any candidate been criticized for a concession speech being lack-luster?  That’s precisely the consensus the corporate media agreed to this past week.  Hillary, was covered in laissez-faire splendor even though her speech contained at least a dozen factual misrepresentations.  Hey, we’re just paraphrasing Pat Buchanan or Howard Fineman, and it isn’t limited to them.  These are no longer solely Journo-tainers, they have become political theatre critics commenting on what we can only imagine they perceive as fiction.

Chris Matthews’ and his colleagues (with the exceptions of Eugene Robinson and Rachel Maddow)  seem unclear that most of America sees Barack Obama as running against Hillary Clinton for the nomination.  While their general political affiliation is the same, their leadership style and ultimate direction from this point is likely to be incredibly divergent.  The differences in health care is minimal, but these are health care programs that were meant to familiarize the public with theory.  There is no health plan yet. Certainly not one that’s ready to be published, yet they talk about the differences in Health plans that are nothing more than smoke right now and simply meant to pass election muster.  While we have great affection for the Edwardses, they aren’t helping right now.   There is a Democratic primary going on, and while time may be of the essence, they were instructed to sit this round out by the electorate.

Obama Speech: Poised, Precise, Powerful

-18 Mar 08, The Almost Daily Binx, San Jose, CA; by Binx101

Poised

 “… the very first word that passed his lips was ‘We.’ “

“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.” This was the first line spoken during the recent speech of Presidential hopeful, Barack Obama – the first sentence of the preamble of the U.S. Constitution.  One would be hard-pressed to find a self-sustaining piointing-obama.jpgmoderately competent individual that wouldn’t be listening keenly to the words to follow with a degree of patience.

In our opinion, this is what sets this leader apart from the field, by a wide margin.  In the heat of controversy, all of which is about other people’s words or other people’s deeds, Obama managed to capture attention by leading not only with an historical American epistle, but the very first word that passed his lips was ‘We.’   The Preamble to the Constitution is recognizable to Amreicans devoid of politics or heritage and the mere simplicity set the tone for a speech that was not about outrage – but about understanding.

Precise

“The new visibility, may just impact the reality of the heavily Clinton favored Pennsylvania primary, in a way her camp had not considered.”

He then, didn’t move the discussion away from Rev. Wright’s highly provocative words from the pulpit, but rather steered directly into it.  The Pastor’s words have been largely the focus of the media and the Clinton political operatives Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson have been considering the controversy to be just the party Pinata they needed to sweeten up thier odds.

wolfson.jpgmarkpenn.jpghillarylooking.jpg

Unfortunately, it may turn out that instead of a Pinata, they’ve handed Barack Obama the opportunity to be visible in yet another way that is likely to widen his lead.  The new visibility, may just impact the reality of the heavily Clinton favored Pennsylvania primary, in a way her camp had not considered.

Powerful

“… a lesson in respect of which a battle fatigued electorate desperately needs.”

Obama’s speech never deviated from the posed arguments from political operatives. He even cogently and skillfully disarmed (mentally competent) detractors by equating Wright’s comments with those of Geraldine Ferraro, making it difficult to create a different argument for each of their words, and in fact, dismissing both of them as relics of their own relevance in the current conversation.

revwright1.jpgbaracksmile1.jpggerryferraro.jpg

As usual, his words were hopeful and some of the most powerful and healthy rhetoric our Nation has heard in decades.  Newscasters were visibly moved as the powerful delivery left them searching for description.  MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough was hit his professional high with concise and sober summary.  We hope the rest of the MSNBC team reacts ‘in kind’ instead of cheer-leading or storming the gates of reason.

The CNN team was a bit overwhelmed and in need of hand fans, but while they may have taken a brief respite from broadcast demeanor – it was indicative of the powerful speech in which many “Newsies” thought that the U.S. Senator from Illinois was going to distance himself from Rev. Wright.  Howeer, he very eloquently and directly responded by delivering a lesson in respect of which a battle fatigued electorate desperately needs. Perhaps we will not have to suffer the continous loop of Rev. Wright and Geraldine Ferraro’s comments in the coming weeks.

The entire speech can be read at this Raw Story Link.

Barack, Hillary and the Ugly America the Press Loves

-13 Mar 08, The Almost Daily Binx, San Jose, CA, by Binx101

Ferraro, Wright and Wrong (And Crazy Uncle Nunzio)

Ferraro

 “… she’s handling her embarrassment in a profoundly unflattering way…”

Geraldine Ferraro shot off her mouth, whether contextually correct or incorrect, she has to account for her words.  Whether that means she gets more speaking engagments or less club dates at the AEI Speakers Bureau, we can’t say.  But we can say that any press is gferraro.jpggood press if you talk for a buck, and among other things – she does.  All of her comments were said in broad daylight – not on a dark muddy country road.

We don’t agree with her sentiment or her insistence that she’s being unduly targeted.  that she’s handling her embarrassment in a profoundly unflattering way is her own doing and product of her personality.  She’s decided to defend her awkward and very obscure metaphor instead of simply saying – I meant no offense and didn’t really express myself the way one would expect a ‘Paid Professional Speaker.  Anyone that thinks Geraldine Ferraro deserves to called a racist is way off.  That here words could be considered racist and offensive is another matter.  Politics, her dangerous profession of choice, provided the venue for misunderstanding.  We think she should have known better and simply sit down and take a brief time out.  She’s now a liability to all Americans because her words are being broadcast all over the world as Ugly America.

Wright

“… the headline is actually uglier than the story…”

Reverend Wright also talks for a buck – so to speak.  You can call it a lot of things, and one can give all the money away – but talking for a buck is still talking for a buck.  Brian Ross’s ABC Investigative Team “uncovered” this story from broad daylight.   Rev. Wright echoed partly the sentiments of over 60% of Americans.  CNN is covering , FOX will do their thing, as will the NYT, Wall Street Journal and anything else that will turn a buck. Bloomberg will be in there and then Time and Newsweek will bat clean-up. Sure, the headline that ABC used were infact his words, but so were Marc Antony’s when he said “Brutus is an honorable man.wright”  We think it was already controversial and risky that he opted to preach with a profound negative.  Nonetheless, it was his decision.

What is more disturbing is that the headline is actually uglier than the story – and that’s what puts the pizzazz, the smack, the sizzle in the story.  Our guess is that Brian Ross had nothing to do with the title.  The story itself is very fair – but the editor or editors that selected the title -that’s how you get news profits.  Nonetheless, the Reverend needs to take a lesson from the ‘Ferraro v. Ego’ bout and just take a time out.  Is it possible?  We don’t know. What we do know is that Democrats – single handedly, have just handed the Bloated Right Wing Hate machine enough material for the next month of broadcasts.  C’est la D!

Wrong

“… Olbermann did one of those overreactions last night … “

We think that the continous overreaction is fruitless.  Sure, someone says something olbermann.jpgagainst our ‘choice’ and we’re all noise and shaking fists. MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann did one of those overreactions last night on his broadcast at ‘Countdown.’   At the risk of annoying the Olbermann fans – his commentary was pure nonsense and further support of the corporate media’s love affair with the Bloodsport of Politics.   It just jumps into the game as defined by the opposition.  This hyper-emotional display in place of intellectual analysis and reasoned discourse is submission to the business of hate – not enlightenment.

This is not a discussion about the shredding of the American Constitution, this is one of the Freedoms of the American Constitution – a free election with all it’s strengths and weaknesses.  This is not about the coup of our White House and the leaders selling the furniture to foreign governments – this is about Americans trying to get to the White House to take back our government.  Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are going to be the Democratic nominee for President.  We think you should keep that in mind and not drag either of them down the rabbit hole.  The fight is ugly enough.

Crazy Uncle Nunzio on Keith Olbermann

“… you lose your perspective and become a meaninglsess brawler !”

“Hey Olbermann, you’re a smart kid – Bring back the intellectual commentary please? Rise above the smoke an tell us what’s happening … don’t roll up your sleeves and start swinging with the rest of them – you lose your perspective and become a meaninglsess brawler !  There’s plenty of volunteers for that game.”

Uncle Nunzio knows.  He’s a big fan.  He catches all your grammatical errors, malapropisms and loves the way you want to be an intellectual newsman.

He says, “Being a newsman means more than just using a line from Edward R. Morrow!  You’ve got to lose that expression on your face like your mother made you eat the brussells sprouts.  Then get that feeling out of your gut.”  He continued, ” You can give your opinion without a tantrum.  You’re playing their game – not yours.   Play your game.  Keep at it kid !”

MSNBC: Dumming Down Dem Debates

by Binx101 – San Jose, CA-27 Feb 08 – http://www.binx101.wordpress.com

MSNBC - Debate - Clinton_Obama

Brian Williams and Tim Russert presided over, what is hopefully, the last debate for a while. Far be it from us to discount the value of watching potential Presidents debating in action; however, the questions developed by the moderators were derived entirely from the campaign rhetoric without any probative value.Obama_Clinton If one follows the campaigns, one already knew the nominees responses. So? what was the point? Was it to see how well they would do their lines? With all due respect – crazy Uncle Nunzio could have come up with the same questions. Here’s some we heard last night:

“Eh, how about the picture in his pajamas !!!”

“Oh, now tell him shame on you to his face !!”

“Kid, you really think you got as much experience as the nice lady?”

“When we went on strike, my wife Rosa, rest her soul, taught the other wives in the local how to prepare for the strike and then how to get through it. Everyone recognized her as amazing. Do you think she could drive a locomotive?”

“Fahgettabowdit, what’s with the insurance talk What happened to health-care? All you they talk about is coverage. Didn’t you guys go to school? In the insurance racket – someone has got to lose, but its never the company. Aren’t enough of us losing now ?? How in God’s name did you convert this issue to insurance? We need a health-care for people who work hard. Charge them for the health-care they use – forget about insurance!!!”

About this time, we encourage Uncle Nunzio to go back to his room and listen to a little Julius La Rosa. Plus the fact that striped sweater that the kids bought him for Christmas makes him look like he’s on a chain gang – but don’t confuse crazy with stupid.


So Tim Russert, using Al Jolson hands sans white gloves, repeats himself, russert_debate1.jpgurging the candidate to commit to something, even if its irrelevant.

Wouldn’t you have been blown away if he asked the Uncle Nunzio insurance / health-care question? Maybe asked Barack to elaborate on the Rezko matter?

 

Brian Williams, certainly he’s a nice guy too, but he causes spontaneous narcolepsy when he takes 50 seconds to ask a 3 second question. Another fan of Jolson hands,williams_debate he has to tell us that he’s going to read something and then read it. Didn’t anyone tell these guys that they are on television? We can see them reading. This isn’t a 1927 radio broadcast.

Then there is the debate coverage analysis which should more appropriately be aimed towards analyzing the moderators and how they squandered a perfect opportunity to ask two very bright and capable candidates questions that weren’t memorized – the way kids know the remaining candy in the big bowl a week after Halloween.

Frankly, form our perspective, we’ve learned a lot more from listening to the Senators Clinton and Obama speak to crowds or one-on-one interviews than any of the debates have provided. The silly semantics involving Louis Farrakhan’s endorsement of Obama were a waste of time and revealing about some of Clinton’s experiences. It reminded us of the airplay that “the definition of is” got for Bill Clinton just over a decade ago. Obviously, Hillary beginning to see a waning of the Black support she had previously commanded would pipe up in some manner – it just didn’t seem relevant to incredible opportunity to ask these two candidates revealing questions of principle, rule-of-law, immunity, our military preparedness, States rights, the Supreme Court etc… How about what they would be looking for in Cabinet choices? Attorney General? Joint Chiefs?

Perhaps it’s just us – we wanted to hear something new. We don’t need to hear from the NBC News-talkers – we wanted to hear responses to well thought out intellectually stimulating questions. What we got was debate for dummies, largely because of the moderators. The Candidates are clearly intellectually capable – the moderators seem to be either terribly scripted, constrained by management or simply less than imaginative. As far as we’re concerned – leave the millionaire talking heads to sell soap powder and provide some depth next time. Please?