Can Hillary Get Dem Nomination?

Short answer: "NO!"

Some of the people I work with in the NoBama Movement assure me that "Super Delegates are moving toward Hillary" and "she still has a chance, blah, blah, blah." I ask them if any of the (imaginary) SDs have a name or are located in specific states. So far, I have not received one name. That's because there are no such SDs.

In fact, the opposite is happening, and I give names of former Hillary Supporters (like Evan Bayh and Ed Rendell) who are now "strongly" supporting Obama. The most-disliked people in the world are those, perhaps including yours truly, who tell the truth and in so doing, puncture people's illusions. As one poet put it, "Humankind can not bear very much reality."

I have many friends who are Hillary Supporters, and I always ask them to do what their hearts and heads tell them. At the same time, I believe valuable time is being lost with the misguided focus on "Denver." In fact, Denver is going to be a disaster for Hillary Supporters -- and, more to the point, for America.

As I put it recently, there are "911 people in America who believe Hillary can get the nomination, and I am on a first-name basis with all of them. Unfortunately, one of those 911 people is NOT named Hillary Clinton."

My Comments on the Much-Maligned George W. Bush

On Russia's obscene, thuggish invasion of Georgia: To this point, George W. Bush has done and said everything right -- along with the remarkable Condi Rice. The Democrats, including Barack Obama, have offered no insights or suggestions.

Instead, as usual, they sit and wait for something to go wrong so they can blame the ever-useful scapegoat GWB. At his best, GWB is leading a country called the United States of America. At their worst (their "default position"), his political opponents are preserving their "options," the better to protect their "careers" in government. To them, the concept of "country" is no more than a bloodless abstraction.

For all his deficiencies, GWB loves his country. I have seen no evidence that Obama loves his, whichever it might be. Historians, rather than pollsters, judge presidencies.

The first President I really remember was Harry S. Truman. He was in an endless war (Korea) where some 55,000 Americans died. His approval rating was much lower than GWB's.

Now, many students of government see HST as one of our best Presidents -- I certainly do.

In 1952, however, he was an object of widespread scorn.

There's an important new book by Prof. Lawrence Freedman, a British subject, on what we've come to know as "The War on Terrorism." He points out that Presidents like FDR and HST faced a dangerous world, but one in which the issues (and the enemy) were much clearer. In our world, it's not that way.

How will history judge GWB? Relatedly, how will it judge Bill Clinton and his own efforts against terrorism? After Nov. 5, I'll give my own unvarnished views on the two men and their respective efforts to protect the people of America. We haven't had a terrorist attack since 9/11, and somehow I don't believe any credit should go to Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid, and their merry bands of political opportunists.

Obama? Under his presidency I expect many gloom-laden speeches from the Oval Office, but the overall rhetoric will be high-minded. The body count, unfortunately, will be very high, since the folks at al Qaeda, Inc. see him correctly as a lightweight.

Someone once said, "Life is a terrible teacher. First, it gives you the test -- and only then does it teach you the lesson." That has never been more true than during recent times.