Donna Brazile, CNN Analyst and apart of the best political team on television (BPTT), was in a panel discussion on the Situation Room.  She said to Wolf 1 in 6 West Virginians are on Food Stamps.

Wolf started to respond, “that’s pretty pa…”  he was about to say pathetic, but wisely caught himself and used the ‘new appropriate term,’ “that’s pretty shocking.”

This all happened between 1:45 and 2:00pm.

That phrase was said by outgoing President George Washington to incoming President John Adams.  What tonight has shown, and what the following days will highlight, is that the divisive race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will bring about this same phrase albeit with a 21st Century kicker.  The headline going into the rest of the month of May and into the first week of June will be Clinton is fairly out, and Obama is fairly in, but don’t count out Clinton, unfairly coming back in.

Amazing, truly amazing.

Lake County makes up 8.0% of Indiana’s population.  It has two major cities, Hammond and Gerry (or Gary).  The County of Lake told the media that they would not release their election returns until all +11,000 absentee ballots were counted.  The Mayor of Hammond says that he turned in his ballots half an hour after the polls closed, but the County held those returns and is just beginning to report them, which all sounds a bit fishy.

The Mayor (of Hammond) stated that he had talked to surrounding council chairs and mayors throughout Lake County and stated, on CNN, that Clinton looked to be winning the majority of those precincts.  He, however, failed to mention that most of those precincts surrounding Hammond are smaller and rural, therein the vote and the differential is smaller.  The Mayor did concede that the other major city Gerry (or Gary) would fall to Obama with it’s larger African-American community, and larger populace.

This could all swing the state to Obama’s favor.  All-in-All he would probably only gain 1 or 2 delegates.

CNN just released new exit polls that show:

+50% of Clinton voters would notvote for Obama if he is the nominee, in both states.

+60% of Obama voters would vote for Clinton if he is the nominee, in both states.

What does this mean?  It could mean a number of things.

1) Clinton has greater support among Blue Collar, rural, voters who are not educative enough and would vote for anybody that they “like” never mind those candidates policies or actions. (Yes, I just called them non-educative)

-OR-

2) Republicans who are registering as Democrats or Independents, are voting, where allowed, for Hillary in order to cause chaos in the Democratic Party.

-OR-

3) The Democratic Party is officially divided.

…

What’s interesting is that a simple majority of Clinton voters aren’t voting based on policy, they are voting based on who they like MORE than Obama.  Going from voting for Clinton to, if having to, vote for McCain is a complete reversal in ideologies, and is far from reasonable thinking.

She says:

“If Iran attacks Israel, we will obliterate Iran.”

John Roberts says:

“Iran is already aiding and abetting terrorists who go on to kill our soldiers in Iraq, as President what would you do to stop this?”

She says:

‘Well umm… you know maybe I could juggle a couple of six-shooters and down a Crown Royale or something.’

I was of course being sarcastic in the last bit there, but what’s suprising about the esteemed Senator from New York is that, as President, she would obliterate Iran if they attacked Israel, however, as President, she doesn’t have an answer to what she would do to stop Iran from killing our soldiers (she didn’t provide a discernible one in her interview).  Nice how Clinton supports Israel more then our own troops.

I respect the Crown of England, though being Indian I’d kinda like you to return all the stuff you stole from India, or at least work with India to work out some payment or sharing options.

In any case, the Tories have won a majority of the local council seats in Wales and England, even winning London.  This sets the Conservative Tory Party up to win the most seats in Parliament next election cycle and appoint their own government and therein Prime Minister.  The Tories also don’t like the Crown much, more precisely they don’t want to remove the Royal Family, but ratherthey want to eliminate many of the current powers entrusted to the Crown and her Ministers.  The Tory leadership want to remove those powers inherent to the Ministers and render them to the entire Parliament while still in keeping those privileges strictly given to the Crown.

I admire their courage though, to go head to head with the Crown and her reign, as many hundreds have done before them for more then 600 years.

Very few shows are the best shows on television.  For all its failures Battlestar Galactica (2003) is still better then 80% of television, but Boston Legal is by farbetter then all the rest.  Tonight’s episode only hardened the shows standing at the top; for that matter every episode of Boston Legal is better then the last, and that’s say something since the first one was pretty damn good.

Nothing can sum up the outstanding quality and depth of show then “…this is WolfgangBlitzkrieg with the Best Political News Team on Television…”  Actually, tonight’s balcony scene is something worth remembering and knowing, like you know the back of your hand.

The President becomes Presidential when a reporter doesn’t stop asking questions.

If only that guy had been President for the last 8 years. In this clip you can see that somewhere under all that, is an actually intelligent guy. Too bad…

Every issue surrounding the Holy Land is pock-marked by great balls of stupidity.  Esteemed Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice says Hamas is not a recognized political group and the U.S. will not open negotiations with them.  Former honorable and venerable President Carter says that ‘of course Hamas is a recognized political group, theirown Palestinian people elected them.’  While Carter has a point, Rice doesn’t really back up her sentiment, IN THE POLITICAL SENSE.  Yes, Hamas has carried out terrorist attacks, but even the political wing of Hamas says that they can’t control the military commanders on the ground.

For an example of how Hamas’s elected leaders can’t control their military wing, we can look towards Hezbollah.  The Observer, a part of the Guardian, UK, looked into how Hezbollah is training possibly thousands of new fighters, after their recent defeat at the hands of the Israelites.  They cited the great military might of Hezbollah and how it’s command structure operates by giving it’s commanders on the ground freedom to deny orders given from senior officials.  When Israel invaded Lebanon a couple of summers ago, Hezbollah senior leaders ordered it’s group out of certain town in Lebanon.  The military commanders on the ground refused the orders and held their ground, eventually defeating the Israeli’s and sticking it too the man, for lack of a better phrase.  This same freedom to accept and deny orders among the command not uncommon to the larger Middle East.  Turkey and Pakistan for example are always under the thumb of it’s military oligarchy, which in the case of those two countries is good thing because the military leadership is secular in nature - but the point to be had is that the Military in Middle Eastern culture is distinct from the Political hierarchy.  Establishing that difference one finds it odd why Rice holds the views she does, even while the U.S. OK’s Egypt to hold talks with Hamas.  So, it’s OK for the U.S. to hold Egypt as its middle man but we can’t talk to Hamas directly, like Carter did.

To further the idiocy of the Holy Land, Israel said they would offer Syria back the Golan Heights if Syria opened up to negotiations with the Israelites.  Syria said it will consider taking back the Golan Heights region, after President Bush leaves office.  What’s great about this line of reasoning is that Israel took the Golan Heights from Syria when Syria, & Friends, went to War with Israel, so the latter offering up the Golan Heights to the former and the former turning it down, just goes to show how meaningless all their stick-over-head beatings are really worth.

All the while the West Bank sits, twiddling their thumbs, while palatial homes are being built up on the hills through out the West Bank, homes that are apart of Israelite settlements in Palestinian Lands.  On the other end of the spectrum Hamas is lobbing rockets over into Israel just about everyday, rockets whose only function seems to be to harden Israel’s threat responsiveness to oncoming attacks, and kill about one person a year.

Ridiculous does not even begin to define this region.

In America, everybody needs gas. Around the world humans pay a higher price for gas then Americans, so there’s no surprise that the Europeans, who pay the highest, aren’t very sympathetic to our plight here in the States. But the fact is, the geographical and societal dynamics are hugely different, there can be no comparison between the needs of the Europeans and us Americans.

Some would argue that it should be America’s goal to decrease it’s needs and therein the prices won’t hurt the pockets as much. This is a good long term goal, however it may be achieved, but solutions need to be found in the short term, because in the short term gas prices are rising quicker then the citizen’s finance’s will allow. They, rightly so, may not be able to afford a car that has above 50 mpg when ever such inventions come to fruition in the future, and by no means of sanity will a citizen move closer to their place of work, which, with the current market, may not be a choice for the majority. No, solutions need to be found to alleviate the problem in the short term.

Gas prices are set via the exchange markets in New York. Oil Traders, regular human beings, buy up or sell barrels of crude oil. Their basis for buying up oil, besides pure greed, is that certain negative societal or environmental effects on the flow of oil from the ground to the station could harm the supply of oil which could raise the price of oil, which would cut into their profits IF they didn’t raise the prices on a barrel of oil before the negative societal or environmental effects harmed the supply of oil and raised the prices. You see?

This arcane way of setting prices is hurting the 300 million citizens of the America, and helping the couple hundred or couple thousand oil traders and oil company CEO’s around the world, not to mention the dictatorships of Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. There is no justification for why oil prices are set by an exchange, the free market for oil is obviously not helping the people and it’s not creating competition that creates new technology that in theory would help the people - and here’s why that theory doesn’t work, because my car gets 32 mpg, and in 2015!!! ! !! ! the law requires cars to have around 30 mpg, well great, I’m sure that’ll help…

Arggg….