For the past two weeks there has been a word that keeps cropping up in the talks of the Republican attack dogs and in the right leaning media types discussions of Senator Obama. I find it striking that so many of them have coincidently begun using the same word in the criticisms of the Senator. The reason that I think it is important to point out this coincidence is because they are actually code-speak for white males. The word that keeps cropping up is Machiavellian. I first heard it on CNN Newsroom last week when the anchor person was discussing Senator Obama's speech at a church on Father's Day and his call for black fathers to step up and become more involved in raising their children.

On Tuesday, John McCain announced that a pillar of his energy plan is to lift the ban on offshore drilling.

Sen. John McCain on Tuesday proposed lifting the ban on offshore drilling as part of his plan to reduce dependence on foreign oil and help combat rising gas prices. Sen. John McCain says it's time for the federal government "to put our own reserves to use."

"The stakes are high for our citizens and for our economy," McCain, the presumed Republican nominee for president, said at a press conference Tuesday in Houston, Texas.

This announcement represents a shift in policy of just about 180 degrees from his prior position, a flip flop that did not go unnoticed by Barack Obama.

"John McCain's support of the moratorium on offshore drilling during his first presidential campaign was certainly laudable, but his decision to completely change his position and tell a group of Houston oil executives exactly what they wanted to hear today was the same Washington politics that has prevented us from achieving energy independence for decades," he said. "It's another example of short-term political posturing from Washington, not the long-term leadership we need to solve our dependence on oil," he said.

Hell, even CNN called McCain out. Check out this piece from The Situation Room that frames McCain's entire energy policy as one big flip flop after another.

As Dana Bash says:

"What really came across in John McCain's speech [on energy] is how challenging it is for him to find his way...what you get are some contradictions."

Seriously, it makes you wonder if McCain is losing his base. Watch it:

Of course, one key point CNN misses is just how tied to big oil John McCain actually is. Brave New Films has a great new video in their Real McCain series that reveals exactly what big oil's $1 million+ worth of donations they've made to McCain has gotten them in return: his refusal to require oil companies to use their profits to invest in alternative energy.

But I think my favorite part about McCain's blatant pandering yesterday was that despite his ongoing efforts to distance himself from Bush, McCain just can't seem to catch a break. Guess what Mr. 28% is going to be doing today:

Hours [after McCain's speech], White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said President Bush on Wednesday will ask Congress to lift the ban on offshore drilling.

Hilarious.

On CNN, Lou Dobbs website:

Do you believe Senator Hillary Clinton should run as an Independent candidate for President?

Yes 61%  
No 39%  

link here:

http://loudobbs.tv.cnn.com/

CNN PROJECTS

CNN News is reporting this morning that the Clinton and Obama campaigns are in formal talks to have Hillary become his VP running  mate.

The two Democratic campaigns are talking about ways for Clinton, to drop her bid for president that may include joining the Illinois senator's ticket, CNN reported. Talks are in a ``very preliminary'' stage and are described as ``difficult,'' the network said.

Further Updates Forthcoming

CNN: Clinton May Join Ticket

UPDATE: Citing anonymous sources, the network reports that the Clinton campaign is pushing for a compromise with Obama and outlining three possible scenarios, including her as his VP pick. Formal Talks

After the West Virginia primary last night, CNN paid pundit and covert Obama supporter Donna Brazile got into a heated discussion with Hillary campaign media honcho Howard Wolfson about the DNC "rules" with regard to the Florida and Michigan delegates. Wolfson made the case that perhaps the DNC might not want to disenfranchise the 2.3 million folks who voted in those states, but Donna is a stickler for the rules and wouldn't hear of changing them, even for 2.3 million Democratic voters. Two things strike me about this conversation, which is one that has been repeated ad nauseum since Hillary fell behind in pledged delegates.

First of all, the "rules" that Brazile and the other Obama Democrats keep touting are not the rules at all. The actual Delegate Selection Rules provide a clear remedy for states that hold their primaries or caucuses in violation of the timing rules: the loss of 50% of their pledged delegates and alternates, and all of their "at-large" or add-on delegates. That is the actual rule. It is also almost never mentioned that Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina also held primaries or caucuses on dates that violated the timing rules.

The second thing that strikes me is the absolute failure of the media with regard to calling out Donna and the rest of the Obama supporters on this point. It seems a highly relevant point of interest in such a hotly contested primary, but no mention of it has been made anywhere except for a few Hillary forums. The rules are easily accessible from the DNC website. Here they are. If you don't believe me, read them for yourself.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/ de68e7b6dfa0743217_hwm6bhyc4.pdf

2000
All Al Gore wanted to do was count the FL votes.  
To find out who won the presidential election.

On cable news, the mantra was "STOP, GORE!  
You are HURTING THE COUNTRY." and "Americans just want
to move on."

"People on the street" were interviewed, all saying the same
thing:  "Americans just want to move on."

The election was OVER.  
Why did Gore want to keep dragging this on.  It was really
hurting the country.

We were all lulled into resignation.  
The democratic party took the easy route, sighed, and gave up.  

As a result, thousands and thousands of people were murdered.  
Thousands of Americans have lost their homes.
 The middle class is a peasant class, while CEOs get billion
dollar salaries.  Our economy is far out of wack.

2008
Cable news chanting in unison again.
"Get out, Clinton!  You are hurting the democratic party by finishing
the primary process!  You are hurting the country!  You are a divider,
Clinton."

Same mantra.

Are we going to sigh and cave?

If so, our options are between a candidate who should be in
assisted living enjoying shuffleboard, and a mediocre neophyte
with little record, soft ethics, poor health and economic proposals
and very bad judgement in the company he keeps.

We will be tossing a star - a brilliantly informed, relentlessly hard
working candidate with amazing accomplishments, including the
recent child car safety bill that went through the senate - but you
never heard about because things like this are not important to the
media.

A weak president is important to the corporations that puppeteer
 news hacks like Tim Russert, Chris Matthews and Campbell Brown.
A weak president means a weak America, which means more control
and money for corporations.  More lucrative wars, richer CEOs, and
desperate employees - who will work for less and less.

Are we going to sigh and shrug and let cable news stop the democratic
process in its tracks once again?

CNN regularly includes Donna Brazile, a superdelegate, on its "Election Center" panel.  They officially refer to Brazile as a "CNN Contributor."  Paul Begala, James Carville and others, in contrast, are referred to by CNN as "CNN Contributor, Clinton Supporter."

Why does CNN continue to pay Donna Brazile to sit on that panel, day after day, and pretend to be neutral when it's apparent to a 10-year old that Brazile supports Barack Obama?

It's unethical, unprofessional, and infuriating.

I stopped watching CNN's election coverage due to its anti-Hillary bias months ago but when I read about this segment, I had to take a look.  Pay attention to the titles CNN puts up for Begala and for Brazile.  And listen to Brazile explain, in response to Cambell Brown's suggestion that Brazile is in-the-tank for Obama, how she is "not undecided" but "undeclared."  Does that mean, Donna, that you have decided who you prefer for President but you have not yet "declared" as a Superdelegate because you don't want to lose your CNN paycheck?

Donna sounds angry at anyone's suggestion that Barack Obama may have flaws.

Take a look at Brazile's website.  Sure sounds like she should declare, doesn't it?

To Obama's opponents and those carrying the dirty water, it's all about winning, not governing or leading a diverse, multiethnic and multicultural society. Our strength has always come from our ability to unite as one people, one indivisible nation...

With a wink and a nod, Obama's detractors and political opponents use code words such as electability to drive home the most divisive of messages: Obama's 20-year association with what some in the media world label as a radical pastor is now new fodder to make him a drag on the Democratic ticket or an easy target for the Republicans. Pick your weapons carefully

And here's an email reply from Brazile to a Hillary supporter who wrote her suggesting that she might vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee. I saw this posted on another website and I've edited it for privacy.  

From: Donna Brazile
Subject: RE: Switching to Republican Party - I'm a Hillary supporter
Date: May 7, 2008 7:48 PM

Yes, please join Rush and McCain asap. The train has left. Catch it.

Please don't send these emails to working people like myself. Notice you sent it to my campus address. I am a working class person. Can you find someone who drinks latte?

Message to the base: stay home.

Message to the base:  stay home?  Way to unify, Donna.

CNN: Your credibility and integrity is going down the sewer.  You should immediately fire Donna, or re-classify her "Obama Supporter."  You should have done it months ago. She's no more "neutral" than I am.