A "SUPER TUESDAY" STORY, NOT A PROGNOSTICATION, OR ANALYSIS

Like the wave to the beach, the highly touted and mainly biased, "SUPER TUESDAY" week and primaries have now come and gone. Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama are both claiming victory, for the delegates and states won. McCain won nine states, Mitt Romney six states, and Mike Huckabee won five states. Yet, their analysis of "Super Tuesday" was vastly different. Rather than going thru tortured details of "Super Tuesday" (like every media outlet in the world), the Oprah and California voting scandal(s), or anything that may be construed negative, ambiguous rhetoric, a witnessed story begs to be told, instead.

It is six o'clock in the morning, at a primary spot in a small elementary school (in a smaller suburb of Kansas City, Missouri), there are just four people working the site. After explaining that they were expecting a massive rush, people trying to vote before work, they were pleasantly surprised. There were only four people waiting to vote. The first three voters made it thru the process, without a hitch. The fourth person made it to get his ballot, when a silver haired woman spoke, "Republican, Democrat, or Libertarian?" There is a tone of sarcasm and disdain, in the woman's voice (who was obviously there for her $100, not to "volunteer"). The man asked to see the Libertarian ticket, rather than just picking one of the three, making her job just thirty seconds faster. After a brief exchange of words, the lady refused once again to let him check the ballot (to see who was on the Libertarian side). However, she did not bank on the man knowing his voting rights and things were resolvedthe was resolved, but only after he demanded to see the "Missouri Voting Process Book", the elderly woman thrusting a ballot into his hands, and sending him to the booth to vote.

During the uncomfortable and unnecessary display, several more people had filed into the education building. Waiting in line, a Caucasian, elderly lady was next to an Asian man. He volunteered his place in line, to her. [The gesture was in stark contrast, to the vulgar display of power, the elderly volunteer had shown to the man a minute before. Yet, that choice enabled the two strangers to start an unbelievable and telling exchange.] She declined, stating that she was not in any hurry, "at her age." Her name was Ruth. She was seventy-eight years old. His name was Carlos, and was fifty-seven years younger (thirty-one years old). Carlos asked her if she had always lived around the area and made small talk. Ruth's response was remarkable:

"It is very nice to meet you and be cordial, to one another. [she smiled, because of the semi-fight in front of them] I have lived in this area my whole life, for seventy-eight years. [Carlos said, "I bet things have really changed."] I remember everyone I voted for in the last fifty years, some winners and losers. However, times were different and people were different, back then. I was a registered republican, until 2000, but in my sixties it seemed to me like world and people changed, so much. I have been more concerned with how the city and people have become hardened, or like the world revolves around individuals. I registered as an Independent, for the elections between 2000 and 2006. I voted for George W. Bush both times. After over fifty years of being a voting republican, an independent voting for republicans, I am now a registered democrat and I will be voting for Barack Obama."

The man (Carlos), commented about being a registered democrat, himself. He also stated that he was going to vote for Barack Obama. Carlos and Ruth were then pushed thru to the registry process, while more people began to file in. However, they parted company with kind words and moved into the booths, to place their respective votes.

Every choice in life counts. In just a brief ten minutes, it looked like the people of the United States was in, a sixteen by sixteen, foot petry dish. Three people cast a vote for president, a man and an elderly woman had a heated discussion over looking at a piece of paper (because the lady was either lazy, or did not care enough to do her job), and two strangers (who were nearly three generations apart, from different ethnic backgrounds, and were also from very different economic backgrounds) having a conversation. Some people are fighting, others of all persuasions and backgrounds in positive dialogue (sharing their past, the present, future, and dreams), and still some just stand on life's sidelines doing nothing. Life in a nutshell.

This election season, when votes have been cast and the new President of the United States decided, the free world hangs in the balance. The world's biggest "Super Power" will have a new leader, brought on by individual's gathering together, believing in one human being. After the visit to the primary destination this morning and the end of "Super Tuesday," only one statement by any pundit, media outlet, or nominee had sustenance for the country.

From Obama's celebration speech, in Illinois:

"What started out as a whisper [on the steps of the courthouse, in Illinois], has now become a chorus of millions of people. However, this (election) is not about me, but it is about you (the individual voter)!"

Barack is a spectacular orator. However, speaking may not mean that he should be the "leader of the free world," has the vision and policies to lead, and this is not in any way an endorsement. However, one thing rings true, in his quote and thru the story above. Every single person in America and the world, must start thinking of the collective (rather than "individuality"), which breeds the right choice. When a person eliminates themselves out of the equation, it forces outward thinking, to the choices that effect the people around them. America will only become the great nation it was, when people start participating and demanding truth, thru individual choice for the betterment of society.

HUCKABEE SHOWS UP BIG, EARLY ON "SUPER TUESDAY"

HUCKABEE SHOWS UP BIG, IN THE EARLY PRIMARIES

At six o'clock AM, at small schools, VFW's, and small convention halls around the 24 states, on "Super Tuesday," were filled with potential voters. However, there was one thing that was certain at the beginning of the voting day, Mitt Romney was not happy. Mitt Romney had his machine using phone calls, the media and cable outlets, and was even screaming from the hills of Utah, "A VOTE FOR MIKE HUCKABEE IS A VOTE FOR JOHN McCAIN! MIKE HUCKABEE SHOULD JUST DROP OUT OF THE RACE, FOR A TWO PERSON RUN DOWN!"

Mike Huckabee had other ideas, and so did the people voting for him. Early on "Super Tuesday's" polls closing, Mike Huckabee has not only won delegates, but he has won four full states (and not just Arkansas). Obviously, a vote for Governor Huckabee was not a vote for McCain, but it was a vote for Huckabee. There was no media people, papers, or really anyone that I personally read/watched, that wanted anything to do with Mike Huckabee over the weekend (except my humble self). However, Mike Huckabee now will have more power than anyone ever thought with his newly won delegates. Mitt Romney should have used his vast political knowledge, that he boasted so early and often about, to not make an enemy of other candidates. The liberal, flip flopping, Governor of Massachusetts must have never heard the quote, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." It is really to bad for Mitt, because he will not be getting a whiff of any of those delegates Huckabee worked hard to get.

COVERAGE OF "SUPER TUESDAY," ON SUNDAY, A DISGRACE

One might say, being just one day out from "Super Tuesday," that the pundits, media (both print and television), and all of the people in the "Blogosphere" would want to have as many candidates still alive. By having all four of the republican candidates and both democrats (Hillary and Obama), the whole coverage system wins. Due to ratings, actual advertising dollars, and the sense that some media outlets are "in the bag, biased, or just don't care," they should not be negating Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, or where John Edwards' delegates are going to go.

After the Patriots got the shock of their lives, with their first loss of the season to the Giants, Fox News and CNN both had major time slots just for the "Super Tuesday" clash. However, both of the major cable news outlets took major looks at the "McCain vs. Romney" and "Hillary and Obama" showdowns, but they left out Mike Huckabee (who has almost as many delegates as McCain and Romney), Ron Paul (who has virtually no shot, but is still in the race), and did not even mention the "delegate factor" (for Huckabee, or Edwards). Both coasts and the majority of the elites in America, think that Fox News is a shill for the republican party. In the coverage on Sunday, Fox News has eliminated all of the "extras," (Huckabee, Paul, and Edwards, not to mention Alan Keyes and the possibility of Mike Bloomberg coming into the race), tossing all ideas and possibilities as yesterdays garbage.

What the country does, in voting, is the essence of our democratic process. By discounting any candidate prematurely, the outlet covering the elections (at whatever level) is doing the country and the candidates a complete disservice. On "Meet the Press," "Chris Wallace's Fox News Show," ABC's "News with George Stephonopolus," and the two CNN and Fox News shows (focused only on the election), had Obama, Clinton, Romney and McCain on them, with "FULL INTERVIEWS." However, there was little coverage, no interviews, or actual time on the networks with Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, or John Edwards (where he could discuss his electoral votes). When the media bets on the middle and lower class of people in America to not follow the politics of the media, the candidates, and the actual third parties who are making call after call to their homes, because they have to raise a family and work (not actually having time to research two to four hours a week, to get the truth), it is a sad day. Although, that is exactly what is happening, as of now. Not only are the candidates not getting the same coverage, but the "third parties shill" are blanketing America with inflammatory emails, lies, and calls smearing the majority of the candidates running.

After the "Super Bowl," both CNN and Fox News were brutal in their coverage on the upcoming "Super Tuesday," where twenty-two states will cast their votes. Watching Fox (especially), one would have to assume that there is only two candidates in each party, John McCain and Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama. Nothing could be further from the truth, when a person sits down and looks at the electoral map, which actually decides who will be the candidates for their respective parties. Only 12% of the electoral map is decided, and even after "Super Tuesday" there is not actually a certainty that there will be one candidate, for either party. When Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, and John Edwards' (who is out of the campaign, but has gathered delegates, before his departure from campaigning) drop out of the campaign and are no longer a factor, then coverage should stop on the perspective candidates. Until then, the fact that ALL candidates are not getting the same amount of time in debates, in overall coverage in the print and Net media, and most of all in the cable and other news media outlets is a complete disgrace to our media and all that are behind the coverage.

OBAMA, CLINTON DEBATE; MAKES HISTORY AND LEAVES TEASER

In the Thursday night CNN debate, between democratic candidates Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton, there was little new information to be had. However, CNN's moderator Wolfe Blitzer, at the Kodak Center in Los Angeles, was light years ahead of Anderson Cooper's lackluster performance (the previous evening, for the republican debate). Where "Mr. AC 360" failed to bring out the discrepancies between the republican candidates and almost begged them to duke it out on the stage (at the Reagan Library), Blitzer tactfully poked and prodded with a bevy of questions. Actually separating the two remaining candidates, on at least four issues. Where there have been 17 other democratic debates, the debate before "Super Tuesday" between the first real Afro-American and woman candidate (which one will be the democratic choice to become the President of the United States), was a treat to watch and analyze. From the first words out of the candidates mouths, a middle of the debate that did show a handful of discrepancies and policy differences, to the very last question (a teaser virtually every talk news show host took to endless task and no doubt every media outlet over the weekend will drive into the ground until Tuesday's end) the night was filled quality and possibly history, just as it was billed.

Remarkably, the first words out of Obama's mouth was, "John Edwards." Who he thanked for bringing up, along his trek to gain delegates, his main issues of America's war with poverty, the poor, and the overall war on the middle class. Then, he used the democratic catch phrases, stating, "there is not a choice between black and white, a man or a woman here for president, but the planet is in peril...." Hillary's two minute opening, was a little bit more subtle, "January 20, 2009, I hope that it is one of us, who is taking the oath for the Presidancy of the United States!" However, she also included the newly ousted candidate, Edwards. They both made a huge points, to strategically pander for Edwards electoral votes and a possible endorsement. Although, after the rhetorical openings were over, both were forced to dive straight into actual differences.

First in health care, Obama wanted to give 95% of the people health care, but the other people a choice (15 million people, an estimate by the Clinton campaign). He said would have a choice to pay for a program. Within this choice, "He would repeal the Bush tax cuts to pay for the people not covered, and it would provide an avenue to keep costs down." Where as Hillary's plan would demand a "mandate" on the people, not giving them any choice. However, Clinton quickly came back, stating that she had the experience on this topic and the scars to prove it. Having been a purveyor of health care options for better than a quarter of a century, also that she was "ready to lead on day one, giving the people what they wanted, and that was every single person covered with health insurance."

When prodded about the housing plunge, Mrs. Clinton stated that she would, "set a moratorium on housing rates for at least ninety days, and a five year freeze on interest rates." However, Obama did not really delve into a huge plan on the housing market, rather going into the economy in general. He did say that there would be no interest rate freeze, because it may cause interest rates to spike and crush the economy, making things worse than it is now.

Iraq and foreign policy was the biggest stickler of the night, for the two candidates. Obama pointed out, that he wanted to pull out a portion of the troops immediately and he would also make sure that Iran would be spoken to directly, to bring them into the fold. "Speaking to Iran directly would open up avenues, the Bush Administration has never opened," he said. Although Hillary has completely different views on both Iraq and Iran, she did say that she would try to move as many troops out of Iraq, "as soon as possible." She continued, "the main thing is protecting our troops and those who have helped in the fight, but the Malicki Government has to start making the tough choices, because time is up."

The main difference and biggest jab of the evening was Obama making the point, "he has always been against the war from the start." Which prompted Wolf Blitzer to say to senator Clinton, "Since you have stated that you are the best choice for president, to lead the country on day one if elected president, and because of your experience, isn't a little bit naive that you voted for the Iraq war?" The question alone garnered some boos and hisses from the crowd. However, Hillary handled the question in stride, going back to the talking points, "I voted to give President Bush the option to keep the inspectors in, not George Bush take us to war."

Aside from a few other jabs, or swipes that were far from overt, the night was an overall success and fairly cordial. Although, the last question Blitzer proposed to the candidates will be the most spoken about, thru "Super Tuesday." "Would either of you consider, becoming the other's running mate, for vice president?" The auditorium boomed with both buzz and laughter, as did the candidates. Obama spoke on it first stating, "Obviously there's a big difference between those two," Obama said. "I respect Senator Clinton, I think her service to this country is extraordinary." But he said, "We've got a lot more road to travel" before such a decision. Pressed for an answer, he ended with, "I'm sure Hillary would be on anybody's short list." Then Hillary replied, "Well, I have to agree with everything Barack just said." It was too early to discuss running mates. However, I do not think that the media, pundits, and everyone else who follows politics (for that matter) will have any trouble discussing it at all.

CNN BLOWS THE GOP DEBATE AT REAGAN LIBRARY

The remaining republican candidates gathered in Simi Valley, at the Ronald Reagan Library, for the last GOP debate, before "Super Tuesday." With so much at stake for the country, not to mention the four remaining candidates (McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and Ron Paul), the last debate should have been a full hour and a half of evenly distributed time between candidates, dominated with hard hitting questions, and an even flow of information for America. Anderson Cooper, CNN's moderator of the evening, ultimately should have been slipping in questions and weaving in candidates subtle differences, exacerbating where each candidate stood, on the heavy issues of the day (immigration, health care, education, and the Iraq War for starters). However, that was far from the case on Wednesday night.

Anderson Cooper and CNN blew an opportunity to show America and the world that they were there for the business at hand. Cooper came off a simp and a shill of the democratic party (during the debate). "Mr. AC 360" asked few questions regarding any policy, how they would actual institute the "change" (which has so freely been the "catch word" of both parties during the political campaigns), and most important he let Mitt Romney dominate the majority of time. During the debate, Romney was more of a moderator than Cooper, or any of the heralded "City of Angels Beat Writers" attending the debate. Romney, when not directly engaged with McCain (as per Cooper's questioning, "Do you actually support a time table to get out of Iraq?"), refused to divulge anything new, sticking to the main Romney talking points. Romney actually was given, or took, around 27% more speaking time than McCain (the presumed front runner), with Paul and Huckabee struggling to get any words in at all. When congressman Paul and Governor Huckabee did have the chance to opine, it was usually from a backhanded comment from Romney (to try and clear the record), a question about McCain and/or Romney, or else it was just Paul reciting more of his "Constitutional synopsis'", that never gets over the top (or else he never gets the chance to speak his whole point).

After the debate was over, CNN still found more ways to kill the debate, rather than try and achieve some success. Bringing on Bill Bennett, Amy Holmes, David Gergen, and Roland Martin (just to name four contributors) to speak on what was supposed to be a GOP evening and debate (after showing a brief McCain/Romney spat), the attention immediately switched to democratic politics, the debate tomorrow night, and then a switch in the contributors. Claire McCaskill and Stephanie Tubbs Jones began stumping for Clinton and Obama, respectively. CNN's team of broadcaster's roaming all over, like an old 90's cell phone, then went to an electoral map. As if the performance to this point was not bad enough, the "CNN TEAM" acted like a "live focus group" (what they called "dial testing") was the equivalent of the invention of the wheel. However, where the same thing is used on Fox and MSNBC after debates, CNN failed again, because there were no people to poll and ask live (why the "line was up, or down during a candidates answer"), just a feeble line moving across the screen and another pundit to explain "for the dial testers." After a brief discussion of the "dial testing," the majority of points, data, and commentary was minuscule and useless. CNN made Frank Luntz (Fox News) look like he has the charisma of J.F.K., himself, by comparison to the "dial testing results." The guests, aside from Bill Bennett, had little input into the Republican outcome, where things may go between candidates and even less of a prognosis of things to come. CNN, Cooper, and all of the pundits of the evening failed most, when they had to fill one hour and twenty minutes (before Larry King's "Tribute to Reagan").

In that eighty minutes, CNN spent a total of Eighteen minutes of actual talk, footage, and polling about the republican party, candidates, possible outcomes, and the debate, overall. After the lethargic and unenthusiastic reports on the hour and a half (joke) GOP debate, there was enough time left for CNN to shove their agenda, or just poor ethics, down the America's throat for forty-one minutes (after taking out the 19 minutes of commercials). Therefore, what kind of information did they decide to fill forty-one minutes of time with? They spent over three quarters of theair time, after the debate, on tomorrow night's democratic debate and who would obtain John Edward's delegates.

On a night at the Ronald Reagan Library, the last GOP debate before 23 states vote for perspective nominees, "The Best Political Team on Television," decided; they would have a more than sub-par debate (with "No Rules", as Cooper stated at the beginning of the night), analysis and recap of the debate for roughly nineteen minutes (out of a possible eighty full minutes, minus commercials), and then have the gumption to hammer out all possible prospects and prognosis' for the democratic debate, for a full forty-one minutes. With a captive audience, CNN was the only broadcasting station to have the GOP and democratic debates, they actually showed in just a three hour span why Fox News consistently hammers the competition and always leads in the ratings. Tonight was a brutal and completely biased affair, from one end to the next.