It's Curtains for Mittens.

I had nothing to do with the clandestine video that captured Mitt Romney in all his obnoxious glory that has made headlines this week. I had absolutely no advance knowledge about said video when I declared that President Obama would win a cakewalk against li'l Mittens. And until this video surfaced, I didn't realize the full scope of Mitt Romney vast, laughable ignorance.

These aren't one percenter's they are working stiffs! Well, certainly stiff.

Back in 2008, Mitt Romney came across as mildly intelligent. Perhaps this illusion was made possible by the utter incompetence of George W. Bush. At least this Romney character had the ability to construct sentences without coming across as someone who struggled as if English was his second language. As George Bush would say, I "misunderestimated" this guy. I completely "misunderestimiated" how dumb he is.

Sure, there's the obvious math problem in saying that those who don't pay taxes are lock for Obama. Former Slate man Tim Noah has very clearly deconstructed that argument. Yes, there is the disturbing realization that a the candidate of the party of Lincoln is openly indifferent to nearly half the country--a disturbing contrast when one considers that our nation's first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, found it in his heart to visit wounded Confederate soldiers in Virginia a week before his assassination. Now Mittens criticizes wounded veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as freeloading, irresponsible moochers who are "dependent on government." What a creep. In case you didn't notice, the party of Lincoln is now the party of Lincoln, Rolls Royce and Bentley.

The video itself makes for incredible juxtaposition with the Mittsters words. While butlers are serving $2000 bottles of champagne and clearing the table, Mittens and company are talking about how they are the "middle class," who are getting screwed by high taxes. I just seems unbelievable that someone who makes more money in an hour than most people do in a decade could claim to be a person of modest means. And in their infinite wisdom, they have concocted what they deem a fair solution.

Raise taxes on the poor and middle class. Raise taxes on the rich. Cut government programs that serve the general public and keep millions out of poverty. Use that money to make the rich even richer. That's his tax plan. Good luck trying to win over voters with that policy.

Maybe Mitt Romney can get a laundry ship named after him, too.

It would seem nothing short of madness for someone born into more wealth than most could ever attain sulk and complain that he needs more money--and he needs you to give it to him.

I was hoping I could use what little time I have to updating this blog into building the future that I believe in, that I have always believed in ever since I was in third grade, when I found a book in the school library about John F. Kennedy. This is the country that put a man on the more for no other reason than to prove we could do it. Now, we have an entire political party who claims that we can't afford Social Security, because if Alex Rodriguez were to pay the same percentage of his income in payroll taxes as a Yankee Stadium parking garage attendant, than Flake-Rod would lose his motivation to be employed, and there will be no joy in Mudville.

Folks, better times are coming. I am sure of it. Sure because as putrid as it was to watch the Catcher's Mitt sulk about how the Kenyan Socialist has destroyed America, I can sleep soundly at night knowing that the Mittster will soon fade from public memory faster than the New Kids on The Block.

Hasta La Vista, Romney. Na na na, hey hey, goodbye and goodnight. Sleep tight, and don't let the Vulture Capitalists bite.

This just in: President Obama . . .

Will the White Sox win the pennant?

Breaking news: a new poll has confirmed that that 2012 is shaping up to be a close race. President Barack Obama only leads challenger Mitt Romney among registered voters, likely voters, swing state voters . . .

Okay, I get it. Then I again, one of the principle reasons for starting this blog was to point out that virtually any Democratic candidate, even the 90 year-old George McGovern, would win this election.

The traditional news media outlets don't want to frame the story in that fashion. Why? Because they want to keep you glued to the TV, or your smartphone, or keep your news "paper" subscription. This just in: Barack Obama holds a slim lead over Mitt Romney . . . again!

Reading these polls under the pretense of drama is almost hysterical. Dead heat! Say the headlines and the pundits. Dead heat? If one takes all the polls conducted recently, then averages them together, President Barack Obama has a lead somewhere three and six percentage points. Granted, the margin of error in these polls is generally 3.1 percentage points, but what is the likelihood that every single one of these polls conducted by Rasmussen, Gallup, Quinnipiac, etc. is at the extreme end of the spectrum in Romney's favor? It's a virtual impossibility.

This map bears a striking resemblance to one I saw four years ago . . .

So let's commit to doing ourselves a favor. If someone badgers you to donate to President Obama's re-election campaign, politely decline.

In 2008, not only did I donate what meager funds I had to offer to then-Senator Obama, but I purchased several of his books and gave them out as gifts to friends who considered him an unknown quantity. I wanted people to see what this young, Barack Obama was as person and what he was capable of.

I didn't stop there. I donated my time as well. After the indecisive "Super Tuesday" during the Democratic primaries, I knocked on doors and made phone calls in the time leading up to the "Texas two-step." That's right: Texas. The one state that has both a primary and a caucus. I was a delegate for Barack Obama at the Democratic Travis County Convention. Wouldn't ya know it? BO won the Texas Caucus. The rest is history.

I wasn't naïve enough to expect extreme act of magnanimity from the man. I just didn't think he would communicate to the American people that I was part of the "professional left" that was destroying the country. Ouch. And he still asks me for money? What does he need it for?

That's a good question. What a nice way to send a message to our representatives in Washington to learn how to actually commit to an annual budget rather than to use foreign creditors as constant cash cow to keep the gears moving.

Rosie, Rockwell and Roosevelt are right!!

But I mean to be optimistic. Better times are coming. The crazy cyborg-human named Romney will lose, Obama will win, and this country will have another chance to get back on the right track towards reducing unemployment and attacking the myriad of complex problems that plague not only the United States, but the world. Yeah, I still have hope for change, and I'm not giving up.

Let's commit to maintain our commitment. Global Warming, environmental degradation, crippling infrastructure and income inequality are just some of the most pressing problems that need fixing. Can we fix them? If we band together in our communities, if we sacrifice like our parents and grandparents did during times of stress years ago, and if we are more careful with our finances, we can make progress. So, in three words, Yes We Can!!

I may work 50 hours a week, but I will find time to share actual solutions towards some of our most pressing problems. Some policy proposals that state and local governments can adapt, others lifestyle choices that can enable us to be the change we wish to see in the world. If a white guy from Kansas can  become America's first black President, surely we, as Americans, can band together on a scale not seen in decades to meet the challenges of today to have a better tomorrow. Yes. We. Can.

Was Clinton Eastwood the Fifth Column last night? Or had he just been drinking?

Normally, I can't wait for the Republican convention to end. The four day pack of lies that generally goes unchallenged by the media was such a gross display of falsehoods that even the press winced. In the meantime, the base of the Republican Party went wild.

But I'm sure I wasn't the only one who got a kick out of Clint Eastwood's "speech" last night. Was it even a speech? What was the deal with that empty chair?

After I saw the speech, I was scratching my head, too!!

For the few who missed it, the star of Unforgiven and  Gran Torino decided that he would crash the GOP convention with a speech between him and President Obama, the latter being represented by a chair. Was the chair some sort of metaphor? Like when a faux rancher is said to be "all hat and no cattle?" Is guess Obama is just another long-legged beauty queen who is silent on the issues that matter?

That's would I would have presumed, but apparently, this chair was quite talkative. Eastwood had to constantly remind the chair to "shut up." What was he basing this on? Has Obama been trying to keep the star of In the Line of Fire out of the public eye?

What made the Oscar winner's bizarre speech so puzzling is that Eastwood is no stranger to politics. He once served as mayor of Carmel-by-the-sea during the 1980s, and has spent the last two decades serving of various state commissions in California. How could someone familiar with both entertainment and politics be so bad? Was he trying to make Fred Thompson look good by comparison?

What had me must confounded was Eastwood's rant against lawyers serving in the Oval Office. "Take that Adams! And Jefferson! And Lincoln! And 22 other Presidents!

Maybe the chair represents the wooden nature of  . . . Oh I give up!

"Lawyers can see both sides of the issue," said Eastwood. "Always playing Devil's Advocate!" The crowd cheered--sort of. Perhaps many of them were subdued because they were lawyers themselves. Eastwood's loudest cheer of the night came from trumpeting Romney's tenure as a businessman, but was back to nervous laughter and subdued applause when he called for Obama to expedite troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Weird.

Rachael Maddow, the most intelligent voice in broadcast journalism, was dumbfounded by Eastwood's conversation with said chair. "I guess he's 82," she said, trying desperately by figure out what we all had just seen.

I don't understand why someone in the crowd shouted out "make my day!" to Eastwood, either. Did that mean that said shouter wanted to shoot Clint Eastwood to shoot him in the face? Or was said person hoping that the Dirty Harry star would say the line, and then pop a few into the crowd? When everyone joined in, asking to "make each other's day," were they entering some sort of mass murderer/suicide pact? It wouldn't seem so far-fetched after watching someone have a conversation with a chair for ten minutes, speaking to a group of people who clamor for the right for schizophrenics to carry assault rifles into movie theaters.

I don't want to continue speculating, because it's just mean, and Clint Eastwood is a man I have respect for. Also, one of my reporters in the field enjoyed a soaking wet embrace with Newt Gingrich last night. I'll have more on that later. Until then, good day, and good luck!

Hopefully, these are Final Thoughts on Chris Christie

 Every so often in the political realm, we here lingual play on the term "political party." In the 1994 film Forest Gump, the autistic Forest apologizes for spoiling a "black panther party." As surely as the sun rises in the East, eccentric Pepperidge Farm delivery truck driver Ralph Ferrucci has run under the banner of the "Guilty Party." The obnoxious, egotistical Chris Christie can add himself to that list after tonight. I don't care what kind of party one is hosting, but if I see this guy, I'm heading for the door.

We should notify the world's top-notch anthropologists  that we have found the missing link!