Clinton wants to hijack America

Bring out the duck tapes and stock up. A Clinton wants to hijack America, again. This one, open minded men say is a squealer goes by the name Hillary. She wants to kidnap America. If she succeeded, she would hold America hostage for 8 years, paving the way for another Clinton called Chelsea who would have been 35 years old in 2016 and ready to continue the nefarious Clinton agenda. At least the media portrays it, even the progressive media.

That would leave two Clintons in the White House with nothing to do in 2016. Republican candidate Romney who could not imagine one Clinton unemployed living on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue if Hillary became president could be forgiven for his thoughts. The conservative media led by the Fox Network could easily be forgiven for analysis or reports skewed against Clinton. They hate her or they are afraid of her? Yet, what is the deduction when analysts, pundits who claim neutrality or liberalism, slyly push conclusions skewed against Hillary? That while she was being touted as the obvious choice for the Democrats.

Meantime, a half white, half black man who said he had a funny name called Barack was packaging himself, enlisting an institution called Oprah in the venture. Then, he slipstreamed Hillary Clinton and won a caucus and a primary election; and now, winning over, three Kennedys. Slipstreaming is a tactic used in auto racing in which the slipstreamer drives behind the leading car, taking advantage of the leading car’s pull force while easing a bit on the accelerator and conserving fuel. If done right, the driver in the following car would power up fully at the right moment and win the race or at least, over take the lead car. Political slipstreaming may not be new but Obama appeared to have pulled of the mother of all political slipstreaming against Hillary Clinton.

The spotlight was on Hillary as she was being bisected and dissected left, center, right, Obama lurked in the background. Mr. Clean with little or no known weakness. Then, whoosh, there he was, " the new face of politics, a unifying force, charismatic, a phenomenal approach never before seen." A charmed media; journalists, pundits, analysts repeated the afore mentioned labels. Exactly how Obama portrayed himself and wanted to be seen, fresh, new ideas a different kind of politics. The media bought it and essentially became all but Obama’s official mouth. Clinton, oh mama, the white sister was virtually ghetto stumped.

The violent act of participating in a ghetto stump is to identify with the in crowd. It is a hip thing to do, embolden oneself, feel powerful while a helpless ghetto stumped individual lay on the floor bleeding. That individual dared not fight back less he got more. Anyone who dared come to the aid of the individual got it too, sometimes more. Ghetto stumping Clinton became a fashion, the in thing to do. "She is divisive, polarizing, people are tired of her, she will energize the conservative base. Americans do not want to go through all that Clinton drama again". Those labels, analysts virtually lined up to attach to Hillary. It was something they had to say to feel good. Gloria Bogger, Jack Cafferty and the worse, Roland Martin all used most or all these words about Hillary Clinton.

Now, picture yourself in the Clinton camp, running a campaign based on issues and you had a track record to back it but the media focused on your candidate’s perceived weaknesses while trumpeting the strengths of your opponent. And you watch in horror as your candidate’s ratings parachuted down while your opponent’s rocketed up?

Ask Bill Clinton what happened to him when he came to the aid of the ghetto stumped victim, his wife. His messages came out wrong at the critical moment but the continued stance of the media led by CNN analysts, defending Obama and not calling him out on any issue was not really baffling. It showcased what really happened when America invaded Iraq in 2003 with an overwhelming support of the population and the media which essentially repeated what the White House told them.

That America was misled into supporting the war is now an understatement consideration all we know now. The rhetoric, the rallying cries, the united sense of purpose, the repetition by the media of what the White House was putting out about Iraq. And some analysts now say "I have never seen this kind of thing before," about the Obama campaign. Really?