The late great Richard Jeni explains it perfectly

The late great Richard Jeni explains it perfectly - I am in 100% agreement with him on this subject.

Richard, you are missed.  Rest in peace.

VP DEBATE - Biden yells, " Hey Kid, Get off my lawn ! "

I watched the VP Debate last night and it was exactly what was expected.  Biden was unable to defend his points so he resorted to acting like  " Rude Joe "

The Wall Street Journal writes it up well this morning:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443749204578051073494711456.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

If the DEMS strategy is to act rude and try to shout over your opponent, they will lose as people are sick of that version of politics.  I have already voted by absentee ballot....make sure you vote as this election matters.

2012 Elections....How all politics is really local

The Obama Adminstration announced their re-election effort was officially underway yesterday...on the anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King....nice idea.....I feel that political empty suits use MLK as a political prop for their own self serving interests....POTUS has done so by yesterday's actions......sad.

2012 Election will be a defining moment as the past two years of POTUS' administration have been a serious example of why we should never elect a untested and under qualified community organizer. Obama has be inept, clueless and has made us look foolish on the world stage. He doesn't deserve reelection and we need to find a President that will stand up for the people and make sure that good decisions are made on what is best, not politically expedient.

Now, the other side has issues that will require a candidate that will not be so dogmatic and lock-stepped to the GOP's hard right, they will drive people away.....A candidate that will unseat the President will need to show that he/she can support "the middle" - those of us who are not in either camp but independent.

The challenges are tall - Iraq, Afghanistan, Japan's Tsunami & Radiation, the economy, deficiet, terrorism, entitlements, defense & security, etc. etc. Many have lost hope, something the knucklehead in charge ran on....Issues have gotten worse BUT unless the opposition comes up with a viable candidate who doesn't drive people away, the President will gain a 2nd term by default, not because he has earned it.

We need to do better as the future for our children and our children will be tougher....this is not what we were to leave them.....The choice is ours....Our choice will make that future better or worse........

Getting to the local side of this, my hometown had local elections this weekend and they threw the two incumbents out because they were ineffective....I see that presently in the President but who will be the choice we are offered in his stead???

Choices - Choices are ours and let's hope we get a choice we can follow to a better place than we are now....

It comes back to a famous quote, " Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago??" - If the answer is NO, than the guy in the Oval Office needs to go.....Right now, that seems the way it will be BUT again, what will be the alternative???

" DOPRAH "doesn't get it.....She tries to scold Americans for not showing enough respect to President Obama - She's the one who is clueless....

"DOPRAH" just doesn't get it......she has reached a point where she feels " entitled " to whatever she wants, no matter how ridiculous. What else would you expect from a selfish narcissist????

She feels that POTUS " deserves respect " - what a stupid statement

Let me spell it out for you, you fat, feckless cow.... RESPECT must be EARNED. Period.

It is not "deserved" by anyone. To say so shows a glaring lack of understanding what " RESPECT " means....

Let's examine the definition: Respect denotes both a positive feeling of esteem for a person or other entity (such as a nation ), and also specific actions and conduct representative of that esteem.

While all should respect the office of the Presidency, the man in the position has to earn the respect of the people by his actions and how he handles the job. With negative ratings holding steady in the low 50s, a "I know what's better for you than you do" attitude, acting clueless on the economy, jobs and foreign policy, it is difficult to imagine how he or DOPRAH could feel they " deserve respect.....no one "deserves it....it must be earned.

Why would self-centered DOPRAH think that way ??? Because she, along with POTUS & FLOTUS are clueless and out of snyc with the American people.....POTUS came in promising Hope & Change but only change we have seen is him blaming everyone and everything for his inability to handle the job....he has not earned anything but our continuing dissatisfaction with his poor performance.....

And as for you thinking you can lecture me or any other free-thinking American about how we can disagree with you and the Idjit-in-Charge, I have two words for you, and they ain't " Happy Birthday "

Do us all a favor, shove some more Mac N'Cheese in that big fat pie-hole of yours so we don't have to listen to any more of your stupidity.....


Obama 'deserves respect' says Oprah Winfrey as she blasts critics of the President in a television interview
By Daily Mail 11th February 2011

The first lady of television has called on critics of President Obama to show 'some level of respect' - even if they weren't in support of his policies.

Speaking on a special edition of Morning Joe today, Oprah Winfrey said the presidency is a position that 'holds a sense of authority and governance over us all'.

'I feel that everybody has a learning curve, and I feel that the reason why I was willing to step out for him is because I believed in his integrity and I believed in his heart.

'I believe that what he really wants is for this country to be greater, stronger more innovative. Those principles are what really enforces his beliefs.'

Speaking about the current negative mood of the country Oprah quipped: 'Everybody complaining ought to try it (the presidency) for a week.

Middleboro Jones would gladly relieve him of his job.....even I could do a better job than this feckless idiot.

Meanwhile back at the World Series...

The National Pastime mirrors the other "contest" of note in our country....interesting. Both seem to share a good hearty sense of competition and willingness to call out your opponent along with his character and lineage...funny stuff....PLAY BALL !

" What is both surprising and delightful is that spectators are allowed, and even expected, to join in the vocal part of the game.... There is no reason why the field should not try to put the batsman off his stroke at the critical moment by neatly timed disparagements of his wife's fidelity and his mother's respectability."

George Bernard Shaw

A Devotion to the limited Government embodied in the US Constitution...

A wise man on TV once said that he wasn't there to tell you what you WANT to hear, he was paid to tell you what you NEEDED to hear.....The enclosed post falls into that category.

I am NOT a party guy and find some of what the Tea Party people put out as "edgy" BUT also state that the SHITE the Liberals are whining for and desire makes my skin crawl.....so I have to "observe & report" and hope that collectively, we are all smarter than the media.

So I'm just the messenger.....read the enclosed post and develop your own opinion....I say that I feel I would rather be with the Federalists myself.....Here's what one of them said,

" Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."

US President James Madison

OPINION- WSJ

OCTOBER 16, 2010

Why Liberals Don't Get the Tea Party Movement

Our universities haven't taught much political history for decades. No wonder so many progressives have disdain for the principles that animated the Federalist debates.

By PETER BERKOWITZ

Highly educated people say the darndest things, these days particularly about the tea party movement. Vast numbers of other highly educated people read and hear these dubious pronouncements, smile knowingly, and nod their heads in agreement. University educations and advanced degrees notwithstanding, they lack a basic understanding of the contours of American constitutional government.New York Times columnist Paul Krugman got the ball rolling in April 2009, just ahead of the first major tea party rallies on April 15, by falsely asserting that "the tea parties don't represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They're AstroTurf (fake grass-roots) events."

Having learned next to nothing in the intervening 16 months about one of the most spectacular grass-roots political movements in American history, fellow Times columnist Frank Rich denied in August of this year that the tea party movement is "spontaneous and leaderless," insisting instead that it is the instrument of billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch.Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne criticized the tea party as unrepresentative in two ways. It "constitutes a sliver of opinion on the extreme end of politics receiving attention out of all proportion with its numbers," he asserted last month. This was a step back from his rash prediction five months before that since it "represents a relatively small minority of Americans on the right end of politics," the tea party movement "will not determine the outcome of the 2010 elections."

In February, Mr. Dionne argued that the tea party was also unrepresentative because it reflected a political principle that lost out at America's founding and deserves to be permanently retired: "Anti-statism, a profound mistrust of power in Washington goes all the way back to the Anti-Federalists who opposed the Constitution itself because they saw it concentrating too much authority in the central government."Mr. Dionne follows in the footsteps of progressive historian Richard Hofstadter, whose influential 1964 book "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" argued that Barry Goldwater and his supporters displayed a "style of mind" characterized by "heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy."

Similarly, the "suspicion of government" that the tea party movement shares with the Anti-Federalists, Mr. Dionne maintained, "is not amenable to 'facts'" because "opposing government is a matter of principle."To be sure, the tea party sports its share of clowns, kooks and creeps. And some of its favored candidates and loudest voices have made embarrassing statements and embraced reckless policies. This, however, does not distinguish the tea party movement from the competition.Born in response to President Obama's self-declared desire to fundamentally change America, the tea party movement has made its central goals abundantly clear.

Activists and the sizeable swath of voters who sympathize with them want to reduce the massively ballooning national debt, cut runaway federal spending, keep taxes in check, reinvigorate the economy, and block the expansion of the state into citizens' lives. In other words, the tea party movement is inspired above all by a commitment to limited government. And that does distinguish it from the competition.But far from reflecting a recurring pathology in our politics or the losing side in the debate over the Constitution, the devotion to limited government lies at the heart of the American experiment in liberal democracy.

The Federalists who won ratification of the Constitution—most notably Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay—shared with their Anti-Federalist opponents the view that centralized power presented a formidable and abiding threat to the individual liberty that it was government's primary task to secure. They differed over how to deal with the threat.The Anti-Federalists—including Patrick Henry, Samuel Bryan and Robert Yates—adopted the traditional view that liberty depended on state power exercised in close proximity to the people.

The Federalists replied in Federalist 9 that the "science of politics," which had "received great improvement," showed that in an extended and properly structured republic liberty could be achieved and with greater security and stability.This improved science of politics was based not on abstract theory or complex calculations but on what is referred to in Federalist 51 as "inventions of prudence" grounded in the reading of classic and modern authors, broad experience of self-government in the colonies, and acute observations about the imperfections and finer points of human nature. It taught that constitutionally enumerated powers; a separation, balance, and blending of these powers among branches of the federal government; and a distribution of powers between the federal and state governments would operate to leave substantial authority to the states while both preventing abuses by the federal government and providing it with the energy needed to defend liberty.

Whether members have read much or little of The Federalist, the tea party movement's focus on keeping government within bounds and answerable to the people reflects the devotion to limited government embodied in the Constitution. One reason this is poorly understood among our best educated citizens is that American politics is poorly taught at the universities that credentialed them. Indeed, even as the tea party calls for the return to constitutional basics, our universities neglect The Federalist and its classic exposition of constitutional principles.For the better part of two generations, the best political science departments have concentrated on equipping students with skills for performing empirical research and teaching mathematical models that purport to describe political affairs. Meanwhile, leading history departments have emphasized social history and issues of race, class and gender at the expense of constitutional history, diplomatic history and military history.

Neither professors of political science nor of history have made a priority of instructing students in the founding principles of American constitutional government. Nor have they taught about the contest between the progressive vision and the conservative vision that has characterized American politics since Woodrow Wilson (then a political scientist at Princeton) helped launch the progressive movement in the late 19th century by arguing that the Constitution had become obsolete and hindered democratic reform.Then there are the proliferating classes in practical ethics and moral reasoning.

These expose students to hypothetical conundrums involving individuals in surreal circumstances suddenly facing life and death decisions, or present contentious public policy questions and explore the range of respectable progressive opinions for resolving them. Such exercises may sharpen students' ability to argue. They do little to teach about self-government.They certainly do not teach about the virtues, or qualities of mind and character, that enable citizens to shoulder their political responsibilities and prosper amidst the opportunities and uncertainties that freedom brings. Nor do they teach the beliefs, practices and associations that foster such virtues and those that endanger them.

Those who doubt that the failings of higher education in America have political consequences need only reflect on the quality of progressive commentary on the tea party movement. Our universities have produced two generations of highly educated people who seem unable to recognize the spirited defense of fundamental American principles, even when it takes place for more than a year and a half right in front of their noses.

Mr. Berkowitz is a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution

The Politics of Race....Our Country needs to move on to solving the larger issues

I find the politicizing of race very disturbing....I have found that you have to take people one at a time. The people I met from all around the world while working overseas demonstrated to me that it doesn't matter where you are from, what gender you are or what nationality you proclaim, there are good people all over our small & beautiful planet......

The other side of that coin is that being a knucklehead is NOT exclusively assigned to any one race, gender or nationality either.....plenty of meat-heads out there of all shapes & sizes in many nations.... Read a sample of what is being passed off as "fact" by those who profit off the continuing discourse between ethnic groups:

The Village Voice is running a piece titled, "White America Has Lost Its Mind
- The white brain, beset with worries, finally goes haywire in spectacular fashion"

This has got to be some of the most racist crap ever allowed to be printed by a large news organization.....If you had written something similar about any other group than white America (pick a color), you would be hung out to dry in a NY heartbeat. But because we are taking a potshot at the majority of Americans, it's OK to print this tripe.

From the AFL-CIO NOW Blog:

"AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka points out that the America the Republicans envision doesn’t look like the real America, with barely 2 percent of the images in the “Pledge to America” document depicting people of color. In the real America, the Census Bureau reported people of color made up 34 percent of the population last year."

http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/10/08/republican-pledge-would-make-life-worse-for-people-of-color/

Turns out the "facts" that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka cites is false - The US Cencus Bureau states are that 74.3% of Americans are "white", with the remainder (25.7%) of other ethnic groups. His Union profits from stirring up racial politics to keep his members in lock-step and under his control.

The point I am making is that the use of RACE by anyone in politics is deplorable. Those who continue to use their status as minority can be and are also as guilty of racism as much as though who hold views that minorities should not be allowed to participate.

Gov. George Wallace of Alabama was a racist - Rev. Al Sharpton is also a racist. Both have committed deplorable acts that have no part in American Politics. Until we can make sure that racists on both side of the equation, along with anyone (regardless of race or gender) who uses race as a means of profit are discredited and universally condemned, we will be dragged down by these cretins.

I have spent years defending our country in uniform and we are a argumentative bunch....No one group holds the title of "virtuous" and no one group can be blamed for all the ills of society.

Last week there was another large gathering on the mall at Washington, mainly run by the Liberal Groups, those who support illegal immigration and featured a speech by Al Sharpton. The people who organized this gathering have a large investment in keeping race issues stirred up, as it provides them with a very lucrative living by making sure Sharpton, et al are always there to speak against the "alleged" racial bias that occurred (Any one remember Tiwanna Brawley and how Al Sharpton was up to his armpits in perpetuating the lies that were told??)

I feel that anyone who sets his mind to make something of himself will do well - blaming race & gender for your shortcomings is pointless. The number of successful minorities in all areas of our country & world shows that it is not about race or gender but the individual who is willing to make the extra effort.

If you look at the number of successful people of all races who made something of themselves by focusing on doing the best at what they liked to do, then the crap the Al Sharptons of the world put out becomes laughable....he is a shyster, a charlatan....his words are meaningless.

My views on the way things should be fall back on the great words of JFK & Martin Luther King, as they set the standard with their insightful ability to move past the issues of race & gender:

President Kennedy - " We are confronted primarily with a moral issue,' he said. 'It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution. The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities … One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free … Now the time has come for this Nation to fulfill its promise … The fires of frustration and discord are burning in every city, North and South, where legal remedies are not at hand … A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all … Next week I shall ask the Congress of the United States to act, to make a commitment it has not fully made in this century to the proposition that race has no place in American life or law." - June 11th 1963

Martin Luther King - " I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character... "

While I do not agree with all the views of MLK, this is one he got right. I agree wholly with President Kennedy as his words speak truth.

Criticism of our present President is NOT RACISM....He is the President, and his political views are his....I criticize his view of how things should be, as he doesn't represent the majority of American's points of view on where our country should be heading. Solely based on his merits as a Leader, I rate him as a failure. His race has nothing to do with it and I would criticize anyone else who shares his views, like Pelosi, Reed and Napolitano....they are all equally wrong regardless of their race or gender.

Suffice to say as long as the press props up the politics of race baiting, we will have issues. It needs to stop as we are a better people and a better country. There are bigger issues that need out attention and to allow the leaders of either party to focus on Race when we have much larger problems to solve is regrettable. We are all Americans and we can be better.

All Politics is local.....That Goes Double for Middleboro, MA - TIME FOR MARSHA TO GO.....

The Great Tip O'Neill, who was a legend in local politics in Massachusetts was famous for saying, " All politics is local." - no truer statement could ever be made about this issue or how Politics is viewed by those who live in Massachusetts.

My hometown of Middleboro, MA is no exception. We have had our share of donnybrooks and struggles over how the town is run, who runs the town and what the Town should/should not allow. Google " Casino" and Middleboro will pop right up. Not the first time it has happened in town, nor will it be the last time.

There is not only a local, but also a national dissatisfaction with the incumbents in office due to the way things have been done and the less than stellar results of Government on Local, State & Federal level. The Taxpayers are fed up and have had enough. Those who are in the position of being " Public Servants" have instead placed themselves as the "Lords of the Manor" and are using their positions of being politically connected to alter how things should be.

Example number one this week is Marsha Brunelle, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen. She has instituted a new set of rules for weekly Selectmen Meetings that effectively stifles all public dissent from occurring. The new rules are so restrictive that it would be near impossible for a town citizen to appear to speak unless they have full approval from the Board.

This is not only counter to what the purpose of the Selectmen's Weekly Meeting is for, it is against the long standing tradition of being able to show up, listen to the deliberations of the board and contribute in a respectful manner to the discussion.

Marsha Brunelle has had a series of ethics issues, mainly due to her inability to proper handle the responsiblity of her position, and being married to the Director of IT for the town, Roger Brunelle, another person who has had a long standing history of ethical issues. The two of them act like they can do whatever they please and there is no one who can hold them accountable.

Marsha wants to cut off all dissenting opinions which is further evidence that she should not be in the position of deciding town matters as her use of the "rules" to limit challenge to her position is a sign of her lack of ethical behavior. No person should see themselves as above reproach. All of those who work in public service should be willing to have all their actions subject to review and comment from the public. If you are unwilling to do so, then STEP DOWN.

There is no gray area in this issue - it is purely black & white. You should allow the public to contribute in an open and traditional manner as you were elected to manage the town's affair as a representative of the people's will. If you put in place restrictive rules stifling dissent, you have become a dictictorial Hypocrite who is unworthy of the position.

Enclosed is a copy of the editorial from this week's Middleboro Gazette.....Time to go MARSHA....take your less than ethical bag of troubles with you, and retire with your HACK husband to somewhere you won't deprive others of their right to challenge town leadership. You'll be living off the taxpayers for the rest of your life, not caring who has to pay the bill.

The disgusting abuses of the municipal pay & retirement system is rife in our town and others across the country. The self-serving people who were trusted with the public well-being have instead turned the rules around to satisfy their own needs. It is a total betrayal of the public's trust and a perversion of what was established as a way of providing a retirement.

Alllowing Muncipal Governments to get out of control and become unresponsive to the avergae citizen is something we and our children will regret for the rest of our lives.




A spirited discussion may be shaping up here
August 12, 2010 11:07 AM
Jane Lopes - Middleboro Gazette

I had a dream last night that was more like a premonition. I dreamed that I saw Vic Sylvia, Paul Stiga and Larry Carver marching on Town Hall.

Well, it might have been a dream but there's no doubt in my mind that if it's possible for people who have passed on to make a return appearance, this trio will be at the next selectmen's meeting.

Vic, Paul and Larry no doubt have better things to do now, but surely they glanced down Monday night as they heard the selectmen talking about a proposal drafted by Chairman Marsha Brunelle that would, as one onlooker put it, severely restrict if not stifle the public's ability to participate in meetings of the Board of Selectmen.

After a majority of the selectmen twice rejected a proposal that they adopt Robert's Rules of Order as their guidelines for conducting meetings, the board received a letter from former selectman Adam Bond suggesting that they need some sort of rules to run meetings by, and offering guidelines adopted by other communities as examples. Ms. Brunelle instead came up with a six-page document that goes well beyond providing a structure for the board's weekly meetings. In terms of the meetings themselves, the document — which was not voted upon Monday night — Ms. Brunelle is calling for "all matters to be placed on the agenda" to be submitted by noon on Wednesday prior to a Monday night meeting. And that goes for anything that a resident might want to bring up during the "public comment period" that Ms. Brunelle reluctantly retained when she took over again as chairman from former selectman Pat Rogers earlier this year.

"If a resident desires to make an inquiry or comment during the public comment portion of the meeting, notice to do so must be given to the Board's secretary by the deadline stated above (Wednesday noon). This allows time for appropriate research if required," the proposed rule reads.

Resident Allin Frawley, who regularly takes advantage of the "public comment period" opportunity, read this paragraph and rightly envisioned, well, a muzzle. After the meeting, Ms. Brunelle allowed that she is aiming to limit what she views as obstructive chatter from the audience. And the alleged obstructionists are not limited to the audience, since the proposal to require board members to get on the agenda in order to speak is also designed to limit discussion — say, like the proposals to adopt Robert's Rules, which came up under "Other." "Other," an agenda item designed for board members to raise issues, is to be as circumscribed as the "public comment period."

Mr. Frawley's consternation would surely be echoed by the aforementioned Vic, Paul and Larry were they available for comment Monday night. Because Allin Frawley and the others who regulary participate in selectmen's meetings come from a long and honorable tradition in Middleboro, one that has been fiercely defended by Vic, Paul, Larry and others like them over the years. Two of the three men, Vic and Larry, served as selectmen at different times, but for most of their public lives they, like Paul Stiga, made their contributions from the audience in the selectmen's room at Town Hall on Monday nights.

The chairman of the board suggests that other government bodies do not provide for the public input that Middleboro residents enjoy. Well, Ms. Brunelle, we live in Middleboro, and in Middleboro we speak our piece. As chairman you have the right to cut off someone who is disrespectful, who has long since made his or her point, who is holding forth on the subject of apples while the board's discussion involved oranges. It's up to the chairman to ensure that meetings run effectively and adjourn in a timely manner unless there's pressing business that dictates otherwise. But the tradition in Middleboro is that the selectmen's meetings on Monday night are the place where people can get their questions answered and make their opinions known, albeit certainly within reason.

There was little comment Monday night about the proposed guidelines, and it was indicated that there will be discussion at the next meeting. Since Ms. Brunelle seems to have already adopted her own recommendations, given the lack of input allowed from the floor Monday night, the discussion may be limited to the board members themselves. The proposed guidelines are available on the town web site with the Aug. 9 selectmen's agenda items for those who want to read for themselves.

So far the Town Hall has been investigated for paranormal activity and spirit beings with limited results — mostly a ghostly voice or mysterious light source here or there. The investigators might want to stop by for the next selectmen's meeting. I'd be surprised if some folks weren't there in spirit. Certainly someone needs to be present to object to the those physically present in the audience being seen, but not heard.

ENTITLEMENT MENTALITY...

It's hard to top this write-up - The sense of "entitlement" is ripe in all forms of State and Local Government (especially in small towns) - The " Don't-you-know-who-I'm-am ???" mentality is a BLIGHT on our landscape.....Ms. Coakley is about to find that out.....ouch - how the mighty have fallen....

If we could make the "cancer" of entitlement in our state go away, we could save so much money it would bring tears to your eyes.......

From the BEANTOWN GLOB

In public battles, entitlement buys nothing
By Joanna Weiss

Globe Columnist / January 16, 2010

YOU CAN’T turn on the TV right now without finding yourself in the crossfire of two epic battles: for Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat, and for Johnny Carson’s old desk on “The Tonight Show.’’ The stakes are different, obviously, but the same cautionary tale holds for both: Whether in politics or Hollywood contract negotiations, a sense of entitlement gets you nowhere.

Entitlement is a good chunk of the reason why Martha Coakley has watched her once-comfortable lead in the Senate race vanish. Her shock at her predicament is palpable. I can’t keep myself from giggling at one of her attack ads, so sinister in tone that it feels like self-parody. “Who is Scott Brown, really? A Republican,’’ it asks. Wait - he didn’t tell us that already?

But that’s the underlying message, apparently heartfelt: Can’t you people understand that Brown isn’t supposed to win this race? This is Massachusetts, after all, where congressional seats are supposed to be reserved for Democrats. And the primary, which Coakley won without exerting herself, did nothing to dissuade her that a candidate with Kennedyesque views and statewide name recognition owned the future.Assumptions can be hard to shake, in politics and in the equally political business of TV. And just as conventional wisdom holds that Massachusetts is ruled by the left, it says that TV is ruled by the young, the hip, the edgy. That’s why we keep getting shows like “Jersey Shore,’’ and why NBC promised “The Tonight Show’’ to Conan five years ago.

Now, Conan and his hipster fans seem shocked that the network would renege on its promise and cling to someone as square as Leno. So they’re reacting with their own, tech-savvy sense of entitlement. They’ve set up Facebook fan pages and drafted Shepard Faireyesque posters declaring, “I’m With Coco.’’ They’ve graft subtitled rants about Leno onto old German films about Hitler. It’s great stuff, but what is Leno supposed to do - disappear just because he isn’t hip? Give up the right, in a vicious and ego-driven business, to get the best time slot he can?

Or should he get credit for understanding his audience, and sensing that NBC would come around? After some boneheaded scheduling moves and clumsy negotiations, NBC realized its late-night future doesn’t rest with the young hipsters who don’t bother to watch TV at a scheduled time, or are already lost to the cult of Stewart and Colbert. Jay Leno speaks to the un-hip viewers who love “NCIS’’ and “CSI,’’ and who - for now, at least - are the power source for network TV.

You can’t win an election, either, without understanding where the power lies. That’s why, in Massachusetts, Scott Brown now has a chance. He knows that the swing voters here are the Interstate 495 independents. He knows they like candidates who reflect their frustration at the state of the world, and that they like to be asked for their support.

Now, they know who Brown is, too; ever since this race turned into a race, he’s been on the air so much that I can trace the outlines of his kitchen cabinets in my sleep. Brown’s ads are clever: They reflect a general sense of disgruntlement without bothering to get too specific. They sell the political equivalent of Leno, an everyman in a comfortable sweater who doesn’t like mean people.

It’s still amazing that Coakley hasn’t been able to tap into similar populist fervor, to connect her past work fighting Wall Street excesses to the news of record Wall Street salaries, to make a case that obstruction on health care is bad for the little guy, too. She needs her own “I’m With Coco’’ movement more than ever now. And while a rally with President Obama is one approach, she could also take a page from the O’Brien fans’ playbook, and try to turn her now-precarious situation into a source of strength.

Just as O’Brien is getting a ratings boost from gabbing about his misfortune, Coakley could get some sympathetic attention by offering an honest assessment of the race. She could apologize for thinking this was her seat to lose and admit she has to work for every vote. And then she could start working. Fast

PRESIDENT JAFO

I have tried to stay away from Politics in this Blog because it is one issue where things get ugly and there is enough of that elsewhere. I would rather talk about cars, old Jeeps, Warbirds, etc.

The continuing whine about RACE & Racism in politics is really, really, really getting tired. The RACE Card is as dumb as calling your opponent a "NAZI"....Both tactics are beneath contempt and show true lack of intellect. Take a point & defend it. Leave the mud slinging out of it.

That said, Obama was elected but he is NOT the right person for this job or times. He has surrounded himself with others who are not competent enough to do their jobs either ( Biden, Politano, Gietner, etc.) and they think because we don't follow their lead, we are/must be racists.

They are false leaders. Like others of their ilk - Oprah, Dr. Phil, Romney, Rush, etc. They are not the right people to be in Leadership roles. They don't have the skills necessary or the intestinal fortitude to make the key decisions.

NONE of them could hold a match to people like FDR, Churchill, Truman, IKE, or JFK.

The movie Blue Thunder featured Roy Schieder & his young side kick who he tagged with the name "JAFO". The kid couldn't figure it out until he was let in on the joke.

JAFO - Just Another F*&kin' Observer -

President JAFO ain't getting it done.