When he was offered the job, Choe had a choice: be paid a few thousand dollars in cash or take the equivalent amount in stock in the one year old company. Choe made the smart move.

Last Wednesday Facebook declared its intent to trade as a public company. Business analysts have estimated the company's value at $100 billion which makes Choe's stake worth some $200 million.

In an interview with The New York Times Choe said that he found the idea of Facebook "ridiculous and pointless" but still took the stock. He has refused to discuss whether he has sold his holding, saying that he wants to maintain his privacy.

Mr Choe, 36, was born in Los Angeles to Korean parents. He began spray-painting in his teens and went on to provide the cover art for pop music acts including Jay-Z. In 2008, he painted a portrait of Barack Obama, a picture that now hangs in the White House.

The decision will make Mr Choe one of at least 1,000 of Facebook's early employees and advisers who were rewarded in shares and are now set to cash in. Other beneficiaries from the IPO will include Peter Thiel, Facebook's first outside investor whose 44.7m shares are thought to be worth $2bn, and U2 singer Bono, who will collect about $120m.

Artist for $200m Facebook windfall

What skills will the Bachelor of Laws (LLB) give you?
Over 70% of graduate level employment is open to students of any degree discipline and law graduates are always well sought after given the skills and discipline required to complete a law programme. A law graduate, in addition to having obtained knowledge of substantive law, will have the ability to analyse, critically evaluate and present material in a structured and coherent manner. Such wide range of skills equip graduates for a range of carrier opportunities other than legal practice including national and local government, business, academia, politics, international relations and the media.

Many successful and famous international figures including Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama, Tony Blair, Hillary Clinton and Andrea Bocelli are law graduates.

What is the competition for places like?
For those of you wanting to study law as part of your pathway towards one day qualifying as a lawyer or a barrister, it is important for you to understand just how competitive this process has become, especially in times of economic recession. Finding a training contract and an employer is becoming ever more difficult, especially for students with little experience outside of academic life.

The key is to start researching early, and to gather as much experience and as many contacts as you can to help you along the way. This is where law students have to set themselves apart from those studying other disciplines at university. As a law student you have to be more organised and more proactive far earlier in your academic life. It's no use waiting until your final year to start looking into LPC, BPTC or paralegal opportunities. You need to have been doing this almost from the day your course begins. Every law institution in the UK will hold law fairs and specific talks to help you on your way, but don't make the mistake of assuming these are just for third years. Take the time to go to them from the very start and it could just make the difference you need.

What will your Bachelor of Laws (LLB) degree cover?
Make sure you also use your studies to help you understand more about what fields you are interested in, and what path you want to take. Law degrees are very similar all over the UK in order to be Qualifying Law Degrees. As such you will cover law of tort, family law, commercial, company and land law amongst others. When it comes to the next stage of your career you need to be thinking about areas in which you want to work. Do you want to look for a training contract with a big corporate where you'll specialise in one particular area, or would you prefer a high street setup where you'll cover a whole host of diverse smaller scale cases?

Get a head start
There's plenty of online resources available that can help you plan from choosing the right place to study your LLB, all the way up to finding employment as a barrister or solicitor.

Estimates run around 40 percent for independent voters in this election cycle. Many answers are offered for why this phenomenon is so prevalent right now in the nation, but few are viewing it as a possibility of a growing sense of confusion and uncertainty.

Barack Obama has been castigated in the media for proclaiming that Americans may have gotten lazy in the last few years, so, where would someone come in who calls us wishy washy and confused? Unlike Barack Obama, I am sure that I love America, I will salute the flag and I don't think we were ever a Muslim nation, nor do we want to be. I'll take my chances with the people of this nation.

The Iowa caucuses may be the quintessential example of what happens when voters are uncertain. That may be completely understandable, unless for some reason, there is cause to believe, that it is more than uncertainty, but confusion itself, which may have caused the voters to flip from one front runner to the next in a matter of days in some cases.

The most common offering used to explain the rise in independent voters is that the republicans have moved too far to the right. Upon examining the newly invigorated platform of the right toward dealing with both abortion and the nearly half billion dollars of tax payers money used to pay for abortions in 2011 and paid to Planned Parenthood and others – perhaps it is the right time to move more to the right.

Defense of DOMA shouldn't be considered a move to the right because it is already the law of the land. Enforcing the law is, what is right, not merely a move to the right. If standing against the proliferation of the gay agenda in our system of education is a move to the right we may want to consider how many times California has had to challenge the states new laws that mandate requiring that gay history be taught in the public schools and gay marriage laws.

If people in the Golden State won't let it stand without a fight, it being the most liberal state in the nation, where does that put the rest of us? This is hardly a move to the right, but once again, it is more of a movement for what is right.

Most analysts are saying that it's coming down to a choice between electability and morality. In the language of the analysts and pundits that translates as, economy and jobs – vs. – doing what is moral and right.

The days when that would not even be a question, may have long passed, but that speaks more to the people than the candidates. It is what gives rise to the idea that independent voters will not, rather than, cannot, be nailed down on a moral issue.

American Thinker recently published an article by prolific writer, Bruce Walker entitled, The Left's Heart of Darkness, in which he said, Conservatives sometimes get too distracted by dollars and deficits and debt. These matter, of course — they matter a great deal in political life. But the deconstruction of the American economy is a consequence, not a cause, of our fundamental problem, which is moral.

If I could bellow out Walker's conclusion to every voter who was about to enter the voting booths around this nation without being charged with electioneering I would most certainly do it.

But proclaiming the cure, has of late, been futile. The generational long drive to eradicate God from our consciousness is bearing its deadly fruit. Academia leads, and only yesterday one educator reinstated her case against her own alma mater that refused to hire her because she was a conservative activist. The school made no effort to hide the fact that their decision was based on her politics, and her stand against abortion, which seems to indicate that the leftist are already seeing the right, and the moralists as loaded into boxcars and headed off to the camps.

In Hollywood, work is scarce for anyone not belching out the liberal rant of the day and the morality of the media and TV networks can be determined by just a quick perusal of the fall season lineup of new shows. The titles tell it all, how about these – Don't Trust the B—- in Apartment 23 – House of Lies – The Playboy Club – Shameless – Pretty Little Liars – and Californication. These are the new and returning shows for a nation waiting with bated breath.

Even God can respect an atheist if they are sure where they stand, but those who straddle the fence seem to be no good for just about anyone. Christ addressed a wishy washy first century church with this scathing rebuke, I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Rev 3: 15-16)

I submit that it is our refusal to deal with our immorality and Godlessness that is leaving us in a state of confusion. We are as the ancient prophet Elijah declared; halting between two opinions.

And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, how long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. (1Kings 18: 21)

They were left with not a word to say, but that is only the first stage of refusing to take a stand. The last and far more debilitating effect of capitulating to the paralysis of indecision is that if it is left unresolved it always turns into a state of confusion. In a strange, but poignant use of the language, the Bible describes such a condition only a few times in the entirety of writ. Here is one of them that aptly describes the result of provoking God with endless immoralities and expecting him to turn the other way. Do they provoke me to anger saith the Lord: do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces? (Jer 7: 19)

Not only is the confusion about who to vote for, prevailing, but it is also apparent that many voters don't know what they are voting for. News people have been calling Rick Santorum an evangelical, not so, he is a Catholic, and a good one at that. They have been critical of those who say Mormonism is seen as a cult or a heresy by most of mainstream Christianity, wake up, it is and always was, a fact that will not be altered because a few news people and journalists missed a good church history course or two. Yes, Rick Perry may be the only true evangelical in the bunch, but he has little to be ashamed of for that. He is also the only candidate that fully understands that there is a full scale war against the Bible and religious principles in this nation. It is a war of futility that will not end well according to prophecy.

The Ron Paul notion of bringing home the boys and putting up a fence around America and living happily ever after is not really constitutionalism, it is isolationism by any other name, and it flies in the face of our tradition and our history. That he is not Barack Obama may be little consolation for a vision of America that makes, all drugs legal, marriage a mockery, and allows the lines between, a life and a lifestyle, to be obscured. These views only help to promote a maze of social upheaval that strikes at the heart of a nation once defined by – once again – doing what is right.

Gingrich, a repentant man, should for a nation that practically worships intelligence, stay on the top of the heap in every primary, but the indie vote hasn't made that choice either, as yet. It is surprising that more Americans haven't seen that for a failing and deeply unappreciated congress Gingrich may be the best one dose cure they have had since he was Speaker. Replacing Obama and repairing the congress could be the two birds with one stone the nation needs, go figure.

Mitt Romney may be the best man to put his thumb on the economic pulse of the nation, but it may be we still need a man to discern the heart of the nation without which there will be no pulse. If Rush Limbaugh is correct and Washington will only engage candidates who preach the gospel of wealth along with the common wisdom that says Americans will only vote their wallets then there is no hope. Rush and common wisdom may have failed to see that capitalism is a tool but it is not the definition of community in these United States.

This is where we may discover that just making Barack Obama a one term president is not the best motive – anymore than waiting for the candidates to positively persuade us, as long as they are only punctuating our own view of America's future. If the economy and jobs are all there is to our nation we may not see the error in consciously voting for that single purpose until it is far too late to save the nation, which has always been more than just the sum of its good times, or, it's bad times.

Should we be ashamed because some of us still want freedom for all not to be confused with a free for all? We don't want candidates who think America may need a czar or an appointee who will become the ring master of the new sexual circus that is our moral decay. We don't want to make our cities and towns to look like theme parks for drug world USA just because it's hard to keep up with the cartels and the abusers. We also know that tax funded abortion mills make a lousy substitute for a conscience among the promiscuous in our society. Americans are not lazy and neither is lady justice, she can still do the job.

The bottom line is that whether we are driven by the need to make Obama a one term president, the GOP platform, the indie view, constitutionalism, moderate views or just jobs and economic recovery, there is one idea, one purpose that is more than all of these. Rather than, what we are driven by, it is what we are guided by. The subtle difference between these two is what's known as 'voting for what is right.' Such motives are not luxuries, but are the very fiber and grain of our heritage; they are what have always made the nation great. God forbid we lose that now.

The course of history is controlled by the hand of the Almighty and will be until the last minute of time. Even the evil days that are approaching the entire world now at breakneck speed have a purpose in the plan of God. The idea that American morality, politics and daily life is all just something of our own making is nave and dangerous. If it was ever guided by God it must always be guided by him and no amount of tinkering with the economy or buying a mountain of gold will save a single shred of the nation.

God will not forever wink at our indiscretions and blatant perversities. There is an end to all things, let's not rush it by standing in the middle of the road with a bewildered and confused look on our faces.

After the service, Aguilera told CNN that James was her idol.

"It was so emotional," Aguilera said. "I went through the lyrics last night, and I did rehearsal … and it took on a whole new meaning having been invited by her close friends and family to sing that classic song at her service. And I started crying every time I started to sing it, and I thought, 'My gosh, what if that happens tomorrow? I just want to do justice to Etta James. She meant the whole world to me, and it was a huge honor to be here today."

The Rev. Al Sharpton presided over the funeral in southern California where James was raised, and he began the service by reading aloud a note from President Barack Obama, who said that James' talents transcended genres.

Obama wrote that James will be remembered for her voice, Sharpton told family and friends at Greater Bethany Community Church City of Refuge in Gardena.

"I know she will be sorely missed by all those who knew and loved her," the president's note said, according to Sharpton.

James died January 20 at the age of 73 of complications due to leukemia at a hospital in Riverside, California. She would have turned 74 last Wednesday.

Her assertive, earthy voice lit up such hits as "The Wallflower," "Something's Got a Hold on Me" and the wedding favorite "At Last."

Sharpton said that James first developed her voice in a local Baptist church as a little girl singing gospel — which "was just race music when she started." When she died this month, he said, her photograph appeared on the front page of the New York Times, a mark of a triumphant life.

"Etta James has given us too much to work with," Sharpton said. "Etta James was for real. She was authentic.

"I think it was her authenticity that was part of the charisma that drew people to her," Sharpton said. "She really became a bridge of American culture that changed the culture of the world. It was Etta James that bridged rhythm and blues with rock and roll.

"Etta James helped break down the culture curtain of America before the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Sharpton eulogized. "She was able to get us to sing the same rhythms and melodies."

Evoking the title of a signature song of James, Sharpton raised his voice: "At last, you can find peace now!

"At last, you can get the gratitude of the savior now," Sharpton continued. "Etta, you made it, you're going home. At last! At last! At last!"

Donto James, the older of James' sons, recalled how his mother had a soft spot for anyone who lost their mother. Donto James played drums in his mother's band.

"She'd give them a job like that," he told the mourners.

"She loved her band. She would pick up anybody to work for," he added.

In a lighter moment, the son recalled how high-spirited his mother was.

"She was feisty, very feisty," he said. "I found myself as a son trying to clean up some things. I should have tried to stay out of it. I don't know what I was doing."

Fans got the opportunity Friday to bid farewell to James during a public viewing at the Inglewood Cemetery Mortuary. Hundreds of people waited for hours to sign registers and attend the viewing for James.

The family has requested donations be sent to The Rhythm & Blues Foundation.

The powerhouse singer, known as "Miss Peaches," first hit the charts as a teenager, taking "The Wallflower (Roll With Me, Henry)" — an "answer record" to Hank Ballard's "Work With Me, Annie" — to No. 1 on the R&B charts in 1955.

She joined Chess Records in 1960 and had a string of R&B and pop hits, many with lush string arrangements.

Today's Clickers

MESA, Ariz. — Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer says she meant no disrespect when she pointed a finger at President Barack Obama during an intense discussion on an airport tarmac. But the Republican governor says the Democratic president showed disrespect for her by abruptly ending their conversation.

The brief encounter – out of earshot of observers but captured on camera – was a highly visible demonstration of the verbal and legal skirmishing that has regularly occurred between Brewer and Obama's administration over illegal immigration and other issues.

Airport arrivals for presidents normally involve mere pleasantries between those involved, but Brewer and Obama have a history. And part of that history is what apparently got things going, according to accounts provided by Brewer and the White House.

Brewer said that during their talk, she invited Obama to visit Arizona to hear about her administration's achievements and to visit the U.S.-Mexico border, which has been a point of friction between the two because of illegal immigration issue.

Obama then said Brewer's recently published book mischaracterized a 2011 White House meeting between them.

Brewer said in an interview Thursday, at another Phoenix-area airport, that she talks a lot with her hands and that her pointing a finger at Obama during their conversation wasn't disrespectful.

"I respect the office of the president," she said. "I was there to welcome him."

She said she was grateful for the visit and intended to talk to him about the state's accomplishments. But she said she was "taken aback by his comments" when he said he wasn't happy with how her book described their White House meeting.

Immediately after the meeting Brewer had said it was cordial, but her book said Obama lectured Brewer in the Oval Office and that she felt he was condescending toward her.

"It is what it is. I proceeded to say that to him, and he chose to walk away from me," she said Thursday.

Asked whether she regarded that as disrespectful, she replied: "Well, I would never have walked away from anybody having a conversation. And, of course, that is what it is. It is disrespectful for me."

Their relationship covers disagreements on "most of his policies," she said. "That doesn't mean we can't be cordial to one another."

Brewer is among the Republican governors who oppose the federal health care overhaul, but the illegal immigration issue has been a particular sore point between Obama and Brewer.

The U.S. Justice Department has challenged Arizona's controversial 2010 immigration enforcement law in court, while the administration and Brewer are at odds over whether the federal government has done enough to secure the U.S.-Mexico border.

On Thursday, Brewer drew support from callers to conservative-oriented talk shows, but the incident left others in the state shaking their heads.

The Arizona Republic, the state's largest newspaper, editorialized that the image of Brewer wagging a scolding finger at the visiting president "now pretty much defines this state's relationship with Washington, D.C., to the world."

Bruce Merrill, a longtime Arizona pollster and a professor emeritus at Arizona State University, said there are two sides to the encounter so it's hard to fully analyze what happened and why.

But the incident follows past incidents in which Arizona for a time balked at declaring a state holiday to honor Martin Luther King Jr., and Arizona State University's refusal to award Obama an honorary degree, Merrill noted.

"It reinforces the image of Arizona being kind of a cowboy state that doesn't show a lot of respect," he said of the airport encounter.

Meanwhile, the two mayors who stood next to Brewer during the airport encounter were not available for interviews Thursday, their offices said.

"He doesn't want to get involved," said Melissa Randazzo, spokeswoman for Mesa Mayor Scott Smith, a Republican.

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton's office said his schedule had no time for an interview. Stanton is a Democrat.

— GET MORE POLITICAL NEWS FROM ABCNEWS.COM

— Get Eyewitness News Delivered

Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters | Text Alerts

(Copyright ©2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Get more Politics & Elections »

barack obama, politics & elections

Obama critiques Arizona Gov. Brewer's book

"Saturday Night Live" and "Bridesmaids" star Kristen Wiig is in negotiations to star opposite Ben Stiller in a remake of "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty," according to the Hollywood Reporter.

Danny Kaye starred in the 1947 movie, based on a short story by James Thurber, about a timid writer who imagines himself a hero in exciting adventures, only to get caught up in real intrigue.

In this remake, Stiller will play the daydreaming title character, now a timid magazine photo manager who goes in search of a missing negative.

Wiig would play his co-worker and the woman of his fantasies, THR said.

THR notes that Wiig "has been very careful about selecting her next role" since "Bridesmaids," which she also wrote and co-produced.

She continues as a regular on "SNL" this season and shot two independent films — "Imogene" and "Revenge of the Jolly!" — over the summer. She'll also reprise her role as the voice of the girl Viking Ruffnut in the 2014 sequel to the animated hit "How to Train Your Dragon."

"Walter Mitty," which Stiller is also co-producing, is tentatively set to start shooting in April in New York and Iceland.

More around the Web

APZoe Saldana

• "Avatar" star Zoe Saldana played good Samaritan this week, coming to the aid of an elderly woman involved in a car crash Wednesday. People has photos from the scene.

• A man who prosecutors say stalked Oscar winner Halle Berry has been sentenced to 386 days in jail, TMZ reports. He's already served 193 days. The judge also extended a restraining order against the man, Richard Franco, to 10 years.

• New York magazine examines Channing Tatum, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and other movie stars we'll be seeing a lot this year.

• Also from nymag: See the [form] letter President Barack Obama sent to Zooey Deschanel.

Kristen Wiig in talks for Ben Stiller's 'Walter Mitty' remake; Halle Berry stalker sentenced; and more

AUSTIN — Gov. Rick Perry dropped out of the presidential race on Thursday, endorsed his old friend Newt Gingrich and returned home to Texas, where the failed White House candidate has three years left to serve as the chief executive. "I have come to the conclusion that there is no viable path to victory for my candidacy in 2012," Perry said in North Charleston, S.C., just two days before the primary there. "I believe Newt is a conservative visionary who can transform our country." Money also was a factor, with spokesman Ray Sullivan saying: "We have spent the bulk of our funds." He added that Perry hasn't ruled out running again for governor or the White House in 2016 if President Barack Obama is re-elected. Perry ended his campaign where he launched it last August, when tea party and evangelical Christian leaders hailed him as a charismatic conservative and some early polls showed him as a front-runner for the Republican nomination. But soon after, Perry's verbal gaffes and poor debate performances sent his campaign into a tailspin from which it never recovered. It was too soon to tell whether Perry's rocky turn on the national stage had damaged him politically at home. But already there were signs of his diminished clout. Several Texas donors who fueled his bid indicated they were likely to back Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who is considered the more moderate candidate in the race. And South Carolina House speaker David Wilkins, who had supported Perry, ignored the governor's recommendation and shifted his support to Romney, too. Short of a Gingrich victory leading to a job for Perry in Washington, Perry will most likely stay in Austin where — despite his dismal presidential campaign — he's still considered the most powerful politician in the state. He has appointed more than 1,000 people to key government positions since becoming governor in 2000. State lawmakers also depend on his support. But that doesn't mean he won't face serious headwinds. Democrats insist the failed presidential run has diminished his power and embarrassed Texans. Conservatives also have complained about the $2.6 million the state has spent on his security detail while he campaigned outside the state. Top Republicans, meanwhile, have been positioning themselves to replace him whether he won the presidency or retired in 2014. Roy Blount, a Perry supporter and deep-pocketed Republican donor in Texas, said he expected Perry to remain popular and powerful. "Everything he stood for resonates with Texans," Blount said. "He's got this state as a leading state, and he wants to continue that and expand it." The Texas Democratic Party was ready Thursday to begin exploiting any perceived weakness created by Perry's decision and called on him to focus on problems at home, including legal questions about the constitutionality of the school finance system as well as water shortages and greenhouse gas emissions. Perry's biggest supporters, in turn, welcomed him home. Bill Hammond, president of the Texas Association of Business, said "Gov. Perry has always been good for Texas business." Mark Jones, chairman of political science department at Rice University, said Perry risks becoming a lame-duck governor and must not rule out seeking a fourth term if he hopes to continue being effective. "As long as he can maintain the illusion that he could be governor through 2019, that allows him to maintain authority not only among the legislators, but also among donors, lobbyists and his appointees," Jones said. Perry's early missteps called into question whether the Texas politician who had never lost a race in nearly 30 years was ready for the national stage. His biggest flub came in a nationally televised debate in early November, when he could not remember the name of the third Cabinet department he pledged to eliminate. Perry could only manage to say, "Oops." Making fun of himself afterward, he told reporters: "I stepped in it." It was a cringe-inducing moment replayed more than a million times on YouTube. The memory lapse not only solidified Perry's reputation for weak debate performances, it gave the impression that he couldn't articulate his own policies. Perry, 61, was relatively unknown outside of Texas until he succeeded George W. Bush as governor after Bush was elected president in 2000. A former Democrat, Perry had already spent about 15 years in state government when he became governor. He went on to win election to the office three times, the most recent was in 2010. Part of Perry's appeal came from his humble beginnings as a native of tiny Paint Creek, Texas. He graduated from Texas A&M University and was a pilot in the Air Force before winning election in 1984 to the Texas House of Representatives. He switched to the GOP in 1989, and served as the state's agriculture commissioner before his election as lieutenant governor in 1998. Perry picked Aug. 13 for his official announcement speech, the same day as the Iowa Straw Poll. While rival Michele Bachmann won that poll, the Texas governor cast a shadow over her victory by challenging her as conservatives' best hope for winning the nomination. But his support of a Texas policy to allow children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates soon proved to be problematic with conservatives nationwide. So, too, did his 2007 order that would have required schoolgirls in Texas to be vaccinated against human papillomavirus. Although state lawmakers overturned the order, Perry defended the vaccination as necessary to combatting the sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer. Perry also risked backlash from elderly voters after calling Social Security a fraud and a "Ponzi scheme." He said the popular federal retirement program for seniors was financially unsustainable and pledged to retool it if elected. His performance on the campaign trail also led to concerns about how his rhetoric would sound to a national audience. During a campaign stop in Iowa in August, he suggested that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke would be practically committing treason if he were to print more money and said, "I don't know what y'all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas." ————— Associated Press writers Beth Fouhy, David Espo and Jim Davenport in South Carolina and Will Weissert in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report. ————— Want to "Soundoff" on this story? Email: soundoff@corsicanadailysun.com

Perry ends White House bid »
Latest News »
Corsicana Daily Sun, Corsicana, Texas

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Thursday that Newt Gingrich was acting like leftist community organizer Saul Alinsky for his criticisms of Mitt Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital.

“What the hell are you doing, Newt? I expect this from Saul Alinsky. This is what Saul Alinsky taught Barack Obama, and what you’re saying is part of the reason we’re in so much trouble right now,” said Giuliani on Fox News.

Continue Reading Text Size

• -
• +
• reset

Alinsky was a writer best known for his book, “Rules for Radicals,” which is said to have influenced Barack Obama’s thinking as a young community organizer.

The New York Republican and 2008 presidential candidate said that he was “shocked” by the line of attack, calling it “ignorant” and “dumb.”

“I’m outraged about what [Newt] and Rick [Perry], who is a very close friend of mine, I’m shocked what they’re doing. It’s ignorant, dumb. It’s building something we should be fighting in America, ignorance of the economic system, playing on the dumbest, most ridiculous ideas about how you grow jobs,” Giuliani said.

“What they’re doing to Mitt right now is totally unfair, and bad for the Republican Party,” he said.

The former mayor said that he had visited China with Bill Clinton recently, and quipped that the Chinese “are the real capitalists; they should be teaching capitalism 101 to the American Congress.”

Rudy Giuliani : Newt Gingrich acting like Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky's book Rules For Radicals was published in 1971. Its methods have become synonymous with leftist political strategy. Even people who never read the book have been so ingrained by the techniques outlined within its pages that they use its methods without realizing it. Both President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are admirers of Saul Alinsky.

A 21 year old Hillary Rodham was offered a job with the Alinsky Community Organizing group and later wrote her thesis on Alinsky. Obama's early community organizing started when he was 24 years old in the Alinsky groups Developing Communities Project (DCP) and the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC).

In the first chapter of Rules For Radicals called The Purpose, Alinsky writes: What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. 'The Prince' was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. 'Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

Who is supposed to have power in the United States? According to the Constitution, the people hold power and are governed by their consent. The government must answer to the people, not the people to the government. So who, exactly, does Alinsky want to take power from and who is supposed to get this power? This idea of holding power is always couched in terms such as the Have-Nots or the Poor but in reality it seeks to fundamentally change the government of the United States.

In speaking about the Constitution, Barack Obama said It says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf. It would be easy to say that Obama lacks an understanding of the constitution but he probably understands it all too well. Trained in Alinsky tactics, Obama wants to change the power structure and will use the structure (the constitution and free markets) only insofar as it can be used to achieve his ends.

Alinsky said All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new. So it is not just about creating new ideas, it is about discrediting the ones already in place, as Obama does when he criticizes the constitution. When people refer to the constitution as a Living Document they make the constitution pliable. A pliable constitution is easier to bend to the desires of those who wish to remodel it in such a way that the original intent is unrecognizable.

Ironically, according to Alinsky, it is the very idea of being a radical or a dangerous enemy to the status quo that gives the community organizer his credibility. Alinsky said that the establishment must fear the organizer and label him as DANGEROUS: for in that one word the establishment reveals its fear of the organizer, its fear that he represents a threat to its omnipotence. Now the organizer has his 'birth certificate' and can begin. And you silly people thought Obama didn't have a birth certificate

Alinsky understood that in order to gather a following, the organizer needed to inspire confidence to a core group. While Obama fights charges that he is not a radical and tries to minimize his associations with people such as Bernardine Dohrn, Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, he revels in it at the same time, giving a nod and a wink to those who openly or secretly adhere to the same agenda. He also has the added benefit of ridiculing those who point out these things as being out of touch or conspiracy mongers.

In the chapter Of Means and Ends, Alinsky utters his Rules of Ethics. In the eleventh rule of ethics he states goals must be phrased in general terms like Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, Of the Common Welfare. It's easy to see his influence in current mindless clichs such as 'the rich get richer while the poor get poorer'. Mostly in this chapter, Alinsky justifies any means if it leads to the desired end. He points out that morality is flexible, depending upon the time of occurrence, who commits a particular act, and how the act is sold or marketed. It is a war mentality, as he states in his third rule of ethics, in war the end justifies any means. If you listen carefully, you can almost hear Rahm Emanuel's voice saying Never let a serious crisis go to waste.

Alinsky's power tactics can be seen in almost everything the left does. For example, the fourth tactic is Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. Conservatives always moan about double standards. The reason that there are double standards is because conservatives have standards. It is impossible to always live up to high standards but the admirable part about having high standards is to try. Failing is not a crime but in the view of the left and of Alinsky, it is an opportunity. Therefore, if Bill Clinton has affairs or is accused of sexual harassment, it is a personal matter since he never had any standards to begin with, but a conservative such as Clarence Thomas is expected to walk on water or be viewed as a hypocrite.

The fifth rule states Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. Alinsky goes on to say It is almost impossible to counter attack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition who then react to your advantage. When the Tea Party rose to prominence in response to Obama's radical agenda, the left came up with terms such as tea bagger. They thought themselves very clever in their use of that vulgar term. They have also shown fondness for the term Neo-con, giggling like 10 year old children when using that witty phrase. They use terms such as Chicken Hawks if a person who never served in the military should dare say that maybe military use is needed in a certain situation.

The thirteenth rule is Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. The left constantly looks for the latest boogeyman/boogeywoman. The viciousness of the attacks on Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and many others all fall into this category. In this tactic, the left doesn't seek to find truth — They seek to create a living caricature of evil, incompetence and cruelty and they don't care how cruel they are in slandering people who have families and loved ones as long as it serves the purpose of mitigating an effective voice of the right.

The dirty little secret about Alinsky and his approach to change is that he has contempt for the average person. In the thirteenth rule above, for example, Alinsky explains that a person or target is needed because it is difficult to get people organized and excited about a concept or policy. It's almost as if he views people as children, who need a cartoon character to understand his point.

In fact, Alinsky says about average people: Their lives have been 90 per cent unfulfilled dreams. To escape their frustration they grasp at a last hope that their children will get that college education and realize those unfulfilled dreams. They are a fearful people who feel threatened from all sides. Alinsky shows his contempt for his own followers. When reading his book, you get a sense that he is out to manipulate people, not to inspire them.

Yet Alinsky does understand the need to inspire. His form of inspiration, however, does not appeal to the best in people, it appeals to their worst – their fears, their envy and their jealousies. It is inspiration by trickery. In order to inspire by trickery, a good salesperson is needed. Along comes Barack Obama and he is perfect for the job. In the chapter titled Communication, Alinsky states: the organizer will have a pretty good idea about what the community should be doing, and he will want to suggest, maneuver, and persuade the community toward that action. He will never seem to tell the community what to do. Instead he will use loaded questions. If possible, he will get someone in the audience to faint in order to accentuate his point. OK, I made the last one up but certainly Obama is Alinsky's ideal communicator.

The founders of the United States didn't base the constitution on trickery or manipulation. They created an idea that has survived and prospered based on the concept that people do not owe their existence to others and that they are responsible for their own happiness and well being. Rules For Radicals by Saul Alinsky is a recipe for agitation, not for prosperity and certainly not for morality. Anyone in a position of power who follows the teaching of Alinsky is someone who should not be in a position of power.

I was surprised and shocked today when the President announced today, Don't bet against us. We are going to make this thing happen, meaning the Nationalized Healthcare Plan. Since when does a president tell us what we want? These are the tactics of a community organizer, not the president of the United States.

Saul Alinsky, a Marxist, wrote Rules for Radicals the bible for radicals who wanted to change their neighborhood or their organization. The community organizer tends to bypass the regular democratic rules of representing a constituency through the process of elections. Instead, he creates influential friends in the neighborhood that are ministers, social leaders or civic leaders and together, this influential 'group' of friends manipulates, cajoles and forces the changes that are presented. The strategies and tactics used are those in the book, Rules for Radicals.

One of the main directives for change is that the ends always justifies the means. Given that the enemy [establishment] was to be portrayed as the very personification of evil, against whom any and all methods were fair game, Alinsky taught that an effective organizer should never give the appearance of being fully satisfied as a result of having resolved any particular conflict via compromise. Any compromise with the devil [enemy] is, after all, by definition, immoral. The ultimate goal, believed Alinsky, is not to arrive at compromise or peaceful coexistence, but rather to crush the opposition, bit by bit.

Barack Obama was a Community Organizer in Chicago for 3 years working in the ghetto areas. Obama's main accomplishment was removing asbestos from the Altgeld Gardens Projects buildings. After law school, he taught Rules for Radicals to the far left organization, ACORN. Are we still seeing the tactics of an organizer, not that of a President?

It's probably a good time for the administration to be reminded that he's an elected president, not a community organizer using manipulative tactics to force his ideas on the constituency.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

COLUMBIA, S.C. – As the time for attacks and stump speeches and bus fumes nears an end in South Carolina, the two leading contenders for Saturday's Republican presidential primary here sought a final surge of Palmetto State magic.

Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, one of whom will almost certainly emerge Saturday night with a crucial victory, dealt with a variety of crises while also trying to make closing arguments to voters in a conservative state. While Romney seemed to have the state locked up just a week ago, Gingrich has made a furious push to take a slim lead according to a pair of South Carolina polls released Friday. Both surveys showed at least 20 percent of Republican voters remain undecided, making Friday one of the most pivotal days yet in the Republican race for president.

Gingrich, the former Georgia congressman and speaker of the U.S. House, was still glowing from a pair of fiery debate performances this week. He kept up the heat on Romney.

“Tell your friends and neighbors that if we get every conservative to decide Newt Gingrich is the right person to stop a Massachusetts moderate, we will win by a surprising margin," Gingrich told nearly 500 supporters in Orangeburg, about 45 minutes southeast of the state capital.

Romney kept his public focus on President Barack Obama while speaking in the rain to nearly 300 people in Gilbert, a 30-minute drive west of Columbia.

"Three years ago [Obama] was on the 'Today' show and said if I can't get this economy turned around in three years I'm looking at a one-term proposition," Romney said to huge cheers at Harmon's Tree Farm. "He is. We're taking it back. This is a president that failed."

After retreating from the elements, Romney acknowledged the tightening race.

"Frankly, to be in a neck-and-neck race at this last moment is kind of exciting," Romney told reporters.

Meanwhile, South Carolina's reputation as a haven for political dirty tricks reared its ugly head. An email, purported to be an official CNN breaking news alert, surfaced that claimed Marianne Gingrich, the candidate's second ex-wife, alleged he "forced her to abort a pregnancy conceived during the affair that preceded her marriage to Gingrich," according to a copy of the message obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

CNN said on air Friday the email was a fake.. The AJC also obtained a copy of a second fake e-mail sent to Gingrich supporters that appears to be a message from Gingrich confessing to the charge.

“It is an unfortunate fact that there are elements in American politics who are negative, dishonest and, I will use the word, despicable… If we could find out who they are, I would urge the government to prosecute," Gingrich said.

Marianne Gingrich's Thursday ABC News interview, in which she claimed Gingrich wanted an "open marriage," remained a topic of conversation.

Gingrich angrily denounced the allegations in Thursday's debate and said the couple's friends at the time said it was not true.

In Orangeburg, several voters said they still support Gingrich despite the allegations from his ex-wife.

“He has asked for forgiveness and I am a Christian and I believe in giving him forgiveness,” said Karen Roquemore, of Orangeburg. “Let’s cut that issue and go on to something else.”

But voters who braved the rain to see Romney had differing views.

"It affected me," Robert Parrott, 55, of Columbia, said. "He said there are friends of his that can vouch for it. I kind of don't believe it. Were they there when it took place? I doubt it."

Parrott is supporting Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and financier.

But as the most recent polls showed many South Carolina voters still undecided, Romney was unable to close the deal with at least one on Friday.

Glenda Dieterly, 42, of nearby Lexington, said she braved the weather to hear Romney. She said before Romney spoke that she was undecided.

After listening to Romney, Dieterly said she was … still undecided.

"I thought he was very personable. I liked the way he presented himself," she said. "I’m still undecided though."

Dieterly said Gingrich's background of three marriages and allegations of affairs gives her pause.

"A pattern of behavior in their life and their marriage is something that concerns me as well about Newt Gingrich," she said.

Bob Horton, of North Charleston, was at a Gingrich event and said he almost wished the two candidates could be merged.

“Romney is my business man,” he said. “Newt is my foreign policy man.”

Gingrich made his first campaign stop at the Children’s Hospital in Charleston. He spoke with the medical staff there and watched his wife, Callista Gingrich, read her children’s book, “Sweet Land of Liberty,” to some of the young patients in a bright and airy atrium. More than 50 journalists crammed into the atrium to report on the event.

At one point, Gingrich looked up and smiled brightly at some of the doctors and nurses gazing at him through a window. They had posted a handwritten sign on the window that said: “Newt we love you.”

Among the people Gingrich spoke with was Dr. Scott Russell, the medical director of the pediatric emergency department. Russell, who grew up in Norcross, said he likes Gingrich because he supports funding medical research. He also praised the former congressman’s performance in Thursday’s debate.

“His debate skills are pretty legendary,” Russell said. “I thought he did a good job. That is his forum that he succeeds in.”

Gingrich and Romney kept up a serve-and-volley of attacks and responses throughout the day. Romney told reporters that Gingrich should ask that documents from the congressional ethics investigation into his actions in the 1990s should be released.

“He was pushed out of the House by his fellow members,” Romney said. “I think over 80 percent of Republican congressmen voted to reprimand the speaker of the House for the first time in history.”

Gingrich scoffed at Romney's charge.

Romney, Gingrich said,  “could have today released his tax records so the voters of South Carolina could discover something. I refuse to take seriously any request by the Romney campaign to disclose anything.”

Gingrich, Romney battle to the end in Palmetto State

After the Democratic Convention in August, 2008, the Boston Globe received a letter from David Alinsky, praising the Democratic nominee for President, Barack Obama. David's father was Saul Alinsky, Marxist and author of Rules for Radicals. Barack taught 'Rules for Radicals' in Chicago, based on Alinsky's book. David's letter indicated that his father would be proud of this protg, Barack.

So what is Rules for Radicals? It is a book written by Saul Alinsky, a self-proclaimed rebel who didn't believe in organized sit-ins or protests through violence when promoting a cause, such as higher pay, unsafe working conditions or discrimination. Alinsky, who grew up during the 1920's and 1930's, saw discrimination and poor living conditions among minorities in the ghetto's of Chicago during the depression. He initially attended college to be a social worker and criminologist, but that turned to a more active part in helping others less fortunate.. Although his rules are part of a methodology, his political beliefs drove the agenda behind these rules and eventually the role of the Community Organizer, better know and referred to as the 'radical'. Hence the name, Rules for Radicals.

Alinsky thought that today's radical should wear a tie, not a bandanna and carry a suitcase, not a bomb. He felt that the old days of sit ins, violence and blowing up buildings didn't work because the other side has the guns. Besides, it's not a good way to influence the general public. So, therefore, change, Alinsky's favorite word, has to come from within an organization.

The Rules for Radicals was a book written by Alinsky, in the 1980's to teach Community Organizers how to organize people within a group, pick out leaders, manipulate, lie, cheat and do whatever means is needed to obtain a goal. The goals could be higher wages, better living conditions or the organization of a union. He founded an organization called the Industrial Areas Foundation or the IAF, which taught his rules.

Today, his IAF rules have progressed to more sophisticated ways of governing groups to move forward to a goal, and can be referred to as Leadership classes rather than radical rules.

House Speaker, John Boehner said: "Republicans in congress will continue to push this because it is good for our country"

The US state department has formally recommended the rejection of a controversial crude oil pipeline.

The state department denied a permit for the 1,600-mile (2,700km) Keystone XL pipeline, saying it had insufficient time to review the plans.

The Canada-Texas project has been delayed amid objections by the state of Nebraska and environmental groups.

At the end of 2011, Republicans forced a final decision on the plan within 60 days during a legislative standoff.

US President Barack Obama said he was disappointed that the deadline set by Republicans in Congress had caused the state department to reject the project before a full study could be undertaken.

"This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the state department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people."

But Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke to Mr Obama and expressed his "profound disappointment" with the decision, a spokesman said.

The crude oil pipeline would run from western Canada to oil refineries on the Texas coast.

Jobs at stake

The state department added that Wednesday's recommendation not to proceed with the current proposal would not preclude TransCanada, the developer, from submitting a new route for the pipeline.

Officials said that any new plan that was broadly similar to the rejected proposal could be processed more quickly, but it would take between 12 to 18 months to complete a full review.

Keystone XL has been approved by Canada and is supported by US Republicans who say it would create much-needed jobs and improve prospects for US energy independence.

The Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, criticised the Obama administration for failing to give the green light to a project that would have created "hundreds of thousands of jobs".

"The president's policies are making the economy worse, not better," he said, adding that the pipeline would be good for the country. Mr Boehner pledged that the fight was not over.

Republican Congressman Fred Upton said he has requested that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testify before a House committee.

The oil industry has estimated the project would create 20,000 jobs, although the state department and some independent studies suggest a lower figure of 6,000 jobs.

Carbon emissions

Environmental groups and the US state of Nebraska expressed concerns that the pipeline could contaminate a major aquifer on its route.

There are also concerns about carbon emissions from oil sands production in Alberta, a western Canadian province.

The project has divided two key Democratic voting blocs: environmental groups and labour organisations

Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, a group that has protested the Keystone XL project, praised President Obama for taking a stand against the "fossil fuel lobby".

"This isn't just the right call, it's the brave call," Mr McKibben said in a statement.

The legislature of Nebraska passed a measure requiring state approval of any route before TransCanada could start construction.

The pipeline would also pass through the US states of Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

The White House had tried to postpone a final decision on the project until after the 2012 presidential election.

But during a congressional impasse on a payroll tax holiday in December, Republicans forced the Obama administration to agree to make a decision on the pipeline within two months.

The US state department, however, said this would not be enough time to carry out the legally required environmental studies needed to approve the project.

US rejects Keystone XL Canada oil sands pipeline

Last updated at 11:07 PM on 10th January 2012

There's been a meme around recently that Mitt Romney's campaign looks a lot like Hillary Clinton's in 2008.

But in terms of organisation and approach, it looks a lot like Barack Obama's.

The painstaking accumulation of delegates in all 50 states (though Obama, even more ambitiously, went for 57) and the preparation for a war of attrition were – though hope and inspiration obviously played a big part – keys to victory in 2008 and have been features of the Romney approach.

The Obama of 2012? Mitt Romney's chief strategist said that he viewed 2012 as similar to four years ago, and Romney will be the anti-status quo candidate as Obama was in 2008

Stuart Stevens, Romney's chief strategist, has described 'the best campaign organisation ever put together'. He is fond of quoting from Obama 2008 campaign manager David Plouffe's book The Audacity To Win.

Looking ahead to the general election – 'if we are lucky enough to be the nominee (no one in Romneyworld wants to be quoted as counting chickens) – Stevens said that he viewed 2012 as similar to four years ago.

'It's in many ways like the '08 campaign when Barack Obama ran as a candidate to be an alternative to George W. Bush. That was true in his announcement speech in Springfield [in February 2007].

'This was true when Ronald Reagan ran [against Jimmy Carter in 1980]. We went back and looked back at his [Obama's] speech. He closed it out offering an alternative to George W. Bush, much to John McCain's frustration.

In 2012, President Obama is now the unpopular incumbent

In 2012, the economy would be the 'one big, dominant issue' as in 2008. 'This race is about the economy and a referendum on Barack Obama.'

In terms of New Hampshire this week, however, the Romney campaign looked long and hard at what Obama did here in 2008 when he arrived in the state from Iowa with momentum from his win there and a poll lead in the Granite State. It all evaporated on voting day when Hillary Clinton won.

'We studied what Obama did wrong,' said Stevens. 'A lot of people thought that Obama was going to win big. I would have bet you anything Obama was going to win big. So we went and said, 'OK, what did Obama do wrong?'

'The best thing we could figure out was that he didn't take questions, that he isolated himself in the bubble. I can remember being in Manchester on a Sunday. He had an event in mid-afternoon and there were people lined up. It was very moving actually. It must have been what it was like with Bobby Kennedy or something. And then he [Obama] lost.

'So we said, 'OK we're not going to do that. We're going to do the exact opposite. We're going to keep taking questions from voters'. If they sense that you're on a glide path, that you're not taking questions I think that's really bad.'

I remember Obama's events in New Hampshire in 2008 and that was the impression he gave. Everyone thought he was an inevitable winner here and that certainty seeped into the campaign and the candidate.

Eight years earlier, Bush had lost by 19 points to McCain after voters detected what they thought was a sense of arrogance and entitlement in New Hampshire.

Romney advisor Stuart Stevens, picture far left, is a fan of Obama 2008 campaign manager David Plouffe's book The Audacity To Win

Stevens said that learning from the lessons of 2008 was the reason why some of Romney's events in New Hampshire over the past week have not been as slick as previous ones.

The stagecraft at Romney events has been superb but in the last week the staging has been designed to make the events appear unstaged. Small venues have been chosen, Romney has been surrounded by people and taken questions from all comers.

At times, it has looked a little chaotic. He got some tough questions from people who were not Republicans. Whether this will pay off today, election day, remains to be seen.

I met some Democratic operatives who are currently in New Hampshire helping organise a Get Out The Vote effort for their man, who is the only person on the ballot. Naturally, they've been attending Republican events too.

Overall, they were fairly unimpressed with Romney's events, believing that his being surrounded by his family looked forced and that the candidate himself was ill at ease.

They noted that at rallies Romney had 'greeters' who weeded out young people with Ron Paul stickers but failed to detect youth with earrings and goatee beards who – surprise, surprise – turned out to be Occupy New Hampshire activists planning to disrupt the proceedings.

Democratic activists in New Hampshire believe Republicans are far behind Obama in terms of technology and the gathering of voters' names and emails at events – one of the hallmarks of the 2008 Obama campaign.

TOBY HARNDEN: Mitt Romney is planning to turn Barack Obama's 2008 strategy against him

The candidacy of Barack Obama, the first man of color to be the presumptive nominee for President of a major U.S political party, has been a dream come true for some Americans and a waking nightmare for others. Indeed, by the time the electorate and his democratic competition realized the skinny guy, with the funny name, was a serious candidate he had virtually sewn up the primaries.

During the long and hotly contested primary campaign, followed closely by the American and foreign press, our country had its racial divide exposed to the world. Many Americans revealed during primary exit polling they could not vote for Obama, a man of color, regardless of his apparent intellect, moral integrity and ability to lead. About one in seven Pennsylvania voters said race was an issue and that group voted overwhelmingly against Obama. (David Wiessler, reuters.com)

American cable television political pundits (among them MSNBC commentator Joe Scarborough host of Morning Joe) were quick in their attempt to reduce the anti-black tone of these statements by implying that what the voters were really saying is that they don't feel Barack Obama is one of them. I personally believe the voters meant exactly what they said.

Obama himself has said, Race is not an issue in the U.S election but statements from the American press, political commentators, leaders and the public indicate otherwise. The interesting thing about the resistance of some voters to Obama, because of his race, is that the resistance is not exclusive to whites. A point in fact is the following written statement by Glen Ford executive editor of the Black Agenda report, an Internet journal of African American political thought and action,

Barack Obama's candidacy for president reveals critical fissures in the historical African American world view, forcing Black citizens and activists to make a choice: will we support a cosmetic change in regime that is no more than skin deep – endorsing the ruling structure because it has a Black face – or continue on the long journey to self-determination, true social democracy and peace. Obama, the political twin of Hillary Clinton and the corporate Democratic Leadership Council her husband helped found, is determined to liquidate Black politics as an independent force in the United States, having already proclaimed, There is no Black America. (Glen Ford, blackagendareport.com)

In his commentary, A Brief for Whitey well known, white, political pundit and author Patrick Buchanan wrote, all black Americans should be grateful for slavery. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. It is evident from his statement that Buchanan, like most Americans, knows nothing of the ancestral history of African Americans. The ancient Nubians, more than 5,000 years ago, were a rich and powerful nation called the Kingdom of Kush. Nubians are the people of northern Sudan and southern Egypt. With a history and traditions which can be traced to the dawn of civilization. The Nubians first settled along the banks of the Nile and are believed to be the first human race on earth. Most of their customs and traditions were adopted by the ancient Egyptians. To the Greeks, they were known as Ethiopians and Nubia as the land of the Gods. (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History, Books II.35 – IV.58 wysinger.homestead.com)

In the same commentary Buchanan summarizes his remarks by saying that, Even though Obama has stitched together the McGovern wing of the party — the anti-war crowd, the cause people, and professional educators — with the Jesse Jackson wing and 90 percent of the African American vote — he is being systematically pushed out of the heartland of the party, the white working and middle class. The Republican spin machine is reinforcing the impression in Middle America that Barack Obama is not one of us. Buchanan further stated in his commentary that this idea is the core of the Republican strategy and it is working.

I believe John McCain is an able politician. I also believe if he was the McCain of 2000 and the economy was not in a nose dive he could win the presidential election in a walk. However, with the exception of the first statement, none of the aforementioned statements is true. American confidence in our leadership and our economic future is at an all time low. While most voters agree that Obama lacks experience and there is a lot we still don't know about him, they are anxious for change in our foreign, domestic and economic policies. Replacing the party in the White House is widely seen as an important step in that direction.

The elephant in the room is the question of whether the Bradley Effect will sink the Obama candidacy. This theory suggests that a statistically significant number of white voters will tell pollsters that they are either undecided, or likely to vote for the non-white candidate, but that those voters will exhibit a different behavior when actually casting their ballots. If the Bradley Effect materializes on Election Day our current foreign , economic, and domestic policy nightmare would continue. America would undoubtedly have four more years of policies and political behavior which mirrors our current administration.

Actors and other individuals who find themselves with a handy, built-in audience and soap boxes practically custom-built and handed out to them often run into something of a catch-22: Here you have a large group of people who, whether they like it or not, are granted access to your thoughts and opinions via the media. You have the opportunity — and, perhaps, as one might see it — the responsibility to convey a certain message to a sizable group. But then you run into the possibility, the very distinct likelihood, or turning people off, of having people react to your message with a very good question: "Why in the world would I care what you have to say?" while at the same time taking issue with your comments and, as such, making them a part of our national conversation.

Actor Don Cheadle, who has managed to help bring us both the heartbreaking Hotel Rwanda and the perplexing Hotel for Dogs, is currently in such a situation. In an interview with Jet magazine, Cheadle, who has a new TV show coming out soon, shared that he believes President Barack Obama "inherited an impossible situation. I wish he had not been so much of a consensus-seeker. I just wanted to see a more ‘gangsta’ president."

He later took to Twitter to explain his comments. Here's an excerpt from what Cheadle shared:

I realize that when speaking to reporters who are looking for the juiciest comments to print, a word like gangster in connection with a black president uttered by a black celebrity can almost be too much to resist. I also realize that when you do an interview you are likely to at least have your comments reduced and constructed to fit into a required space and never do you have say over the final edit. I say this not in defense but to offer some perspective. I believe I used the word gangster and I meant it. But I wasn’t talking about pants sagging and forties and “hoes” or any of that other nonsense and I find it hard to believe that that is what some people thought I was saying. I was talking about wish fulfillment; my own and my desire to witness something more than I had.

RELATED: Matt Damon Would Have Preferred ‘A One-Term President With Balls’

But the actor's attempt to offer some context and perspective to a provocative word choice brought with it another problematic phrase:

I am a father, a “husband”, an actor and a citizen of this country and planet who flippantly expressed on a press tour, a desire to see our president riding roughshod over his adversaries to get the job done for the least represented amongst us. I still want that. I still want that with full knowledge that it might be an uphill fight that ultimately proves impossible given the hostile impasse our president faces. I still have a fevered dream of the POTUS smacking up John Boehner in a public forum in middle America and making him defend support of tax cuts for the super rich.

"I kinda want a gangster president," he continued. "I was about to write that in the future I would chose my words more carefully but I’m sure I won’t. Besides," he added. "I think the debate is more enriching."

NewsBusters weighed in to note that, in his Twitter missive (Twissive?), Cheadle "concluded with violent thoughts, and then peace" upon writing that "I’m glad he’s at the wheel and not me – I woulda swung at somebody by now. I wish you all peace in the New Year and let’s keep on keeping on."

RELATED: Elizabeth Hasselbeck Calls Sarah Palin’s Crosshairs Ad ‘Despicable’

Given the impassioned debate surrounding the sometimes violence-tinged rhetoric or outright bloodthirsty and disturbing diatribes expressed by some in the public sphere in the wake of last year's shooting in Arizona, Cheadle's come at an interesting, if not volatile, time in our national discussion.

But, much more importantly: Who will be the next Ocean's Eleven through 117 castmember to let us know all about his political beliefs? (My money is on Casey Affleck.)

h/t NewsBusters and Twitter

Follow us on Twitter.

Sign up for Mediaite's daily newsletter.

Don Cheadle Explains Obama 'Gangsta' Comment, Hopes The President Will 'Smack Up' Speaker Boehner

As we get ready to start 2012, the presidential campaign is beginning to heat up. The election, to be held on November 17, 2012, will be a crucial one for a Democratic Party trying to maintain power and a Republican Party attempting to wrestle back political dominance. As the candidate front-runners begin to emerge, the politics surrounding the election naturally comes to involve more direct attacks on candidates' opponents.

Barack Obama, the current President of the United States, has come out to assert that he will seek re-election. There are several other Democratic candidates who have not yet withdrawn their names from consideration, such as Darcy Richardson and Randall Terry. By the time of the first Democratic Primary, however, it is believed that there will be little competition for Obama. Thus, barring any unusual circumstances, Obama will be the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party.

The Republican candidate for the 2012 election is still anyone's guess, however. A number of political players have declared their candidacy. Michele Bachmann, a congresswoman from Minnesota, has some early backing but seems to have lost favor with most Republicans due to several verbal missteps. Newt Gingrich, an old-hand at politics, still is experiencing some significant support. Gingrich is the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, and due to his history with the Republican Party, many Republicans feel Gingrich has a strong chance to upend the President. Rick Perry, the current governor of Texas, also has a strong backing due to his political influence. So far, however, Perry's performance in the debates has set him back just a bit.

The current Republican front-runner for the 2012 election is Mitt Romney. Romney is a former governor of Massachusetts. He ran for the Republican nomination in the 2008 campaign, but eventually lost the nomination to John McCain. McCain went on to lose the election to Obama. Romney is an articulate politician and has the charisma to carry the Republican nomination. Some Republicans are unsure of Romney, however, because his politics have not always been consistent with the party line. For example, his wide-spread health care reforms enacted while he was governor of Massachusetts have been likened to some of the changes Obama made after his election.

The campaign this year will likely focus on several political and social issues. Republicans will force Obama to defend the lack of positive gains in the economy over the past four years, and Obama will likely counter by describing the framework he has put in place, and the potential it has in the future to improve the economic landscape. The war in Afghanistan and other pressing foreign policy issues will also be center stage for portions of the campaign. And social issues, like gay rights and abortion rights, will certainly be the cause of some heated political debates.

The task facing the Republicans in the upcoming election is finding a candidate who is strong enough to challenge the incumbent Obama. While it doesn't seem the country is strongly in favor of Obama, many are also not overly excited about the Republican field of candidates. As the campaign progresses, it will be interesting to see which Republican candidate can pull ahead of the pack, and push Obama come election time.

GRAND JUNCTION, Iowa — Grabbing garland, Shirley Herrick wasunknowingly helping prepare for the caucus for Republicans livingin Grand Junction, population 842.

"I'm taking down the Christmas decorations and starting to putup hearts (for Valentine's Day). I love this little town, I'mtrying to improve it," Herrick said.

Working in the community center at 4 p.m. Tuesday whilelistening to conservative talk radio from WHO-AM, Herrick wasunaware the caucus would occur there at 7 p.m. But she planned totake part, and caucus for former Massachusetts Gov. MittRomney.

"It is gonna take someone stronger than Romney to beat(President Barack) Obama. Obama has done a lot of right things, hebrought our troops home from Iraq," Herrick said.

"I don't think anyone can beat Obama."

She said Newt Gingrich is another top Republican option. Herrickmisnamed another candidate she likes a bit, former U.S. Sen. RickSantorum.

"Who's that young man coming up, Sombrero?" she said.

Herrick wants federal program entitlements to be cut to savemoney, and said the earned income credit also should be paredback.

Grand Junction, which is part of the East Greene SchoolDistrict, has a three-block-long downtown, although many propertiesare vacant or weathered. At the public library, Carrie Fox, 29, ofGrand Junction watched her son, Connor, play games on a Wiimachine.

An independent, Fox has never caucused. She said she has barelypaid attention to the final push of campaigning by the sixRepublicans competing in Iowa.

"I've been watching bowl games," Fox said.

She has some regard for Santorum, but does not like Gingrich.Fox voted for Obama in 2008, but is not sure she will again in2012.

"It seems like (Obama) is still trying to clean up (PresidentGeorge W.) Bush's mess. But he's not really doing anything tohelp," Fox said.

Assistant library director Joyce Nelsen has lived in Iowa since1995, but has never caucused and the process holds no intrigue forher.

"I was always told, don't get in politics too much," shesaid.

A Democrat, Nelsen said Obama has been opposed by anintransigent Congress.

"He's doing a good job. He is more or less trying to clean up,and things are being put back on him. He's really trying for thecountry," Nelsen said.

Back at the community center, Herrick, 65, heard IowaCongressman Tom Latham joining the radio show. Latham was asked whyIowa should maintain the status of the first contest in thepresidential nominee selection system.

"Iowans take it seriously," the congressman stated.

Said Herrick, "Yes, we do."

Greene County residents assess presidential race

Des Moines, Iowa — Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney waged a seesaw battle for supremacy in Iowa's Republican presidential caucuses late Tuesday night, a dramatic opening round for the campaign to pick a challenger to President Barack Obama.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul ran third.

Returns from 99 percent of the state's precincts showed Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, and Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, in a near dead heat, a fitting conclusion to a race as jumbled as any since Iowa gained the lead-off position in presidential campaigns four decades ago.

As of 1:30 a.m. this morning not all precincts had reported in and election officials did not know when all the votes will be tabulated. With the vote so close, the AP wasn't going to call a winner until the vote total will no longer be subject to adjustment or correction.

Regardless of the outcome, there was room for both to claim victory — Romney as the man to beat for the party's nomination and Santorum as the leader among those struggling to emerge as the former governor's unvarnished conservative rival in the primaries yet to come.

"Game on," Santorum said, jaw clenched, in a late-night appearance before supporters in the Iowa capital city.

Romney congratulated Santorum and Paul on their performances and says he's looking forward to a long GOP nomination race. Romney ignored barbs from other contenders for the GOP nomination. He focused his remarks on Obama, saying Obama has mismanaged foreign policy, the economy and the federal deficit.

New Hampshire votes next, and Romney is heavily favored in the first-in-the-nation primary on Jan. 10. South Carolina on Jan. 21 figures to be a tougher test, the first contest in the South and a state that is part of the Republican political base.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich finished in fourth place and vowed to fight on.

He was followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who somberly told supporters he was headed back home to Texas to reassess a candidacy that bloomed early, then faded.

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann was far behind. Her campaign manager, Keith Nahigian, suggested she might drop out, but she seemed to signal otherwise a short while later. "I believe that I am the true conservative who can and who will defeat Barack Obama in 2012," she declared.

Returns from 1,749 of 1,774 precincts showed both Romney and Santorum with 24.6 percent and Paul with 21.5. Romney had 29,683 votes, Santorum had 29,673 and Paul 25,976.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had 13 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry, 10 percent, and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann with 5 percent.

No matter how close the final results in Iowa, there were no plans for a recount.

Doug Heye, a spokesman for the state party, said the ballots were counted under the supervision of campaign representatives who certified the totals. He said the numbers were double-checked when they were reported to state officials and there was no reason to check them again.

"On to New Hampshire," Gingrich said to the cheers of his supporters, vowing to carry on his campaign no matter the Iowa outcome.

The former speaker led in the pre-caucus polls as recently as a few weeks ago, only to fall under the weight of attack ads run by a super PAC run by allies of Romney.

Paul, too, said he was looking forward to the nation's first primary in a week's time, telling supporters his was one of two campaigns with the resources to do the distance. "There's going to be an election up in New Hampshire, and believe me this momentum is going to continue and this movement is going to continue and we are going to keep scoring," he told supporters.

The Texas lawmaker didn't say so, but the other campaign built for a long campaign was Romney's.

Earlier, the former Massachusetts governor was closeted with aides and his family as he sweated out the caucus count in a state that humbled him four years ago.

This time, win or lose, he appeared destined to draw a smaller share of the vote than the 25.2 percent he did then.

Each of the three in the top tier strove to create a distinct identity and brought a different style to the race.

Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, ran the old-fashioned way, spending parts or all of 250 days campaigning in the state in hopes of emerging as the preferred conservative alternative to Romney.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, brought organization and money to the table, and was aided by deep-pocketed allies who ran television commercials attacking former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and others. That allowed Romney to take the high road in person, running as a former businessman who knew how to create jobs and defeat Obama.

Paul, the Texas congressman, was something of a blend of the two approaches, with money and organization. He drew on the support of younger caucus-goers with a libertarian-leaning approach that included a call to legalize marijuana and bring home U.S. troops from overseas.

Whichever among the three eventually finished ahead, it appeared likely the winner's share of the vote would be a record low for GOP caucuses in the state. Former Sen. Bob Dole had 26.3 percent support in 1996, when he won.

This time, the economy and the federal budget deficit were top issues, judged more important than abortion or health care, according to a survey of early caucusgoers.

Nearly a third of those surveyed said they most wanted a candidate who could defeat Obama, and those favored Romney as a group. Paul and Santorum split the votes of the one in four who called the selection of a true conservative their top priority, and the former Pennsylvania senator also made a strong showing among those who said their top priority was a candidate with a strong moral character as well as among late deciders.

Paul had an edge among younger and first-time caucus goers.

The survey by Edison Media Research for The Associated Press and television networks was based on interviews with 1,737 people arriving at 40 precinct caucuses across the state.

Obama was unopposed for the Democratic nomination. Even so, his re-election campaign set up eight offices across Iowa, made hundreds of thousands of calls to voters and arranged a video conference with caucus night supporters.

"This time out is going to be in some ways more important than the first time," the president told Democrats across the state. "Change is never easy."

The Iowa caucuses' outsized importance was underscored by the estimated $13 million in television advertising by the candidates and so-called super PACs as well as thousands of campaign stops designed to sway 100,000 or so voters.

Ironically, the weak economy that has made Obama appear vulnerable nationally was muted as an issue here. Despite areas of economic distress, the farm economy is strong. Iowa's unemployment in November was 5.7 percent, sixth lowest in the country and well below the national reading of 8.6 percent.

Despite its importance as the lead-off state, Iowa has a decidedly uneven record when it comes to predicting national winners. It sent Obama on his way in 2008, but eventual Republican nominee John McCain finished a distant fourth here to former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Even before Tuesday night's results were known, this year's Republican hopefuls were turning their attention to the next contests. Romney's campaign purchased time to run television ads in Florida, where balloting is three weeks distant, while Perry put down money in South Carolina.

Aides said the Gingrich campaign had purchased a full-page newspaper ad in New Hampshire for Wednesday morning calling Romney a "Timid Massachusetts Moderate."

Romney, who finished second in Iowa in 2008 despite a costly effort, initially campaigned cautiously this time around.

But he barnstormed extensively across the state in the race's final days in pursuit of a first-place finish, running as a conservative businessman with the skills to fix the economy and as the challenger with the best chance to defeat Obama.

Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann argued that Romney wasn't nearly conservative enough on the economy and social issues such as abortion. They vied for months to emerge as the alternative to the former Massachusetts governor.

Paul's libertarian-leaning views set him apart, and he hoped that might be enough to claim victory in a six-way race where no one broke away from the pack.

Unlike in a primary, in which voting occurs over hours, the 809 Iowa caucuses were meetings in which Republicans gathered for an evening of politics. Each presidential candidate was entitled to have a supporter deliver a speech on his or her behalf before straw ballots were taken.

Under party rules, caucus results have no control over the allocation of Iowa's 25 delegates to the Republican National Convention. The Associated Press uses the caucus outcome to calculate the number each candidate would win if his support remained unchanged in the pre-convention months.

The race in Iowa came to be defined by its unpredictability as the months rolled by and nationally televised candidate debates piled up.

Bachmann gained early momentum on the strength of a victory in a summertime straw poll and a feisty debate performance.

But she quickly faltered when Perry joined the race and overshadowed her as the 10-year governor of Texas with deep-pocketed supporters and an unbroken record of electoral success at home.

Perry's rise lasted only as long as a couple of debates including one where he memorably was unable to recall the third of three federal agencies he wanted to abolish.

Next up was Herman Cain, a black former businessman who improbably shot to the top of the polls in a party that draws its support chiefly from white voters. He suspended his candidacy a few weeks later, after a woman said she and he had carried on a long-term extra-marital affair.

Gingrich rode the next surge in the polls, a remarkable comeback for a man whose campaign had imploded earlier in 2011 when most of his aides quit in frustration. But his rise lasted only until a super PAC that supports Romney began attacking him on television.

Democrats watched carefully in a state that has swung between the two parties in recent presidential elections.

It was Iowa that launched Obama on the way to the White House four years ago when he won a convincing victory in the caucuses.

Romney, Santorum seesaw in narrow Iowa vote

In reporting the Barack Obama victory in the Democratic caucuses in Iowa political pundits, including those for the candidates themselves, have missed what is possibly one of the most significant events of the day.

It is not necessarily their fault for missing an unprecedented event as they are focused strictly on the candidates and voter demographics. On the surface this seems sufficient as demographics represent people. But that is similar to saying a fever represents illness. Although it is true that demographics represent people, they miss the reality that people represent cultures. If they were looking at cultures also demographics they would have seen an absolutely amazing story.

They did pick up on the fact that Iowa has a heavily white population. According to the United States Census Bureau, only Vermont and West Virginia are whiter than Iowa. This is important in analyzing the results, but fall short of diagnosing a fever.

Historical perspective

African-Americans historically have been rated higher in polls than on the actual ballot casting. The difference between the two, polling and balloting, is that the pollster knows the identity of the respondent. Balloting is anonymous.

The simple fact shows people want others to think they are inclusive. By publicly stating they are for a minority candidate they feel good about themselves. Once in the voting booth, the anonymity allows for personal prejudices to take over. The stunning aspect of the Iowa results is the caucus process causes someone to publicly declare their vote. It removes the curtain of the voting booth that cloaked the personal bias of the voter.

White Iowans publicly declared their desire for an African-American in the White House. They stood before their friends and neighbors, people they work with, and white folk they had never met to say the African-American Obama was their candidate for the presidency. Never before has this happened. Iowa was a reversal of the norm. Obama actually received a larger percentage than pre-caucus polling had indicated — and he did it with white voters.

The future

It will be interesting to see how Obama does in the states where secret ballots are used. Regardless of whether or not he ultimately gets the Democratic combination, or the privilege of moving into the White House next January, he will always be the one who broke a very significant cultural barrier — whites publicly saying the time has arrived for an African-American President.