About Me

Name: Ron Maestri
Email: contact@ronmaestri.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Where Was Michelle?

Posted by Ron Maestri on Thursday, September 18, 2008 2:26:52 PM
I intentionally waited a week after 9/11 to post this blog because I wanted to see if anyone else would have the same reaction as I did. I think now is as good a time as any to ask a very simple question: Where was Michelle Obama during the 9/11 ceremonies at Ground Zero one week ago today? Since I have neither heard nor read anything about this except for a one-line disclaimer in the the New York Daily News on 9/12 which read, "Michelle Obama stayed home in Chicago with their 2 children", I found this to be glaringly odd since she was the one to make the brazen comment "For the first time I'm proud to be an American" in response to her own husband's run for president, and who would later defend it by poo-pooing the notion of being un-American on "The View", chalking the whole thing up as just being absurd, misunderstood and completely taken out of context by the press and the republicans. O-k, then why wasn't Michelle there?
 
Cindi McCain was certainly by her husband's side, yet Barack Obama stood alone. What possible reason could the Obamas have had for Michelle to stay at home in Chicago with their two children rather than pay respect to the families of the 2,751 people who lost their lives to terrorists, and the site of the worst tragedy on American soil on its' 7th anniversary?
 
Let's explore a few of them, shall we?
 
1. The kids had school.
I can think of no greater teacher than by learning about history standing on the same hollowed ground where it began.
 
2. The kids are much too young to understand.
Unless they're still in the womb, they aren't too young. In fact, it would be a mandatory field trip for my class if I were a teacher of any aged student. It is a perfect opportunity to teach about love of country and fellow man, resilience and the devastation of hate.
 
3. Michelle was tired and needed a rest.
Force yourself, babe.
 
4. Nothing to gain politically since both candidates agreed not to campaign on that day.
BINGO.
 
Obviously, no scenerio except for the last one can reasonably explain her absence. To say it was the least she could have done is a gross understatement.
 
Actions speak louder than words, and no matter what Michelle has said in response to anyone challenging her as being un-American, this demonstrated it exactly. I wasn't surprised she wasn't there. I'm just surprised no one else noticed or wrote about it.
 
This past Saturday, I attended a Bat Mitzvah for one of my cousin's beautiful daughters at F.A.O. Schwartz on 5th Avenue (yes, F.A.O. Schwartz), and the issue of presidential politics came up when several of the men gathered together while the kids were off being kids. Someone made a very astute comment which I have stood by since the very beginning of the presidential campaign, and which certainly proves my point here. "I don't like Obama because I think he's un-American". I'm happy to see I'm not the only one who notices this.
 
I'm sorry, but it wouldn't have killed her to be there and whether she brought the kids along or not makes no difference. There are things you do and there are things you don't. Michelle Obama should've been at Ground Zero on Thursday, 9/11/08. No ifs, ands or buts.
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Leading the Horse.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Tuesday, September 09, 2008 8:11:46 AM
Recent polls now show John McCain and Sarah Palin at 50% with Barack Obama and Joe Biden at 46%. It seems the tide has turned as I have predicted. As much as I hate to say it, “I told you so.”

It's easy to see when you pay attention. Even with the sound off, watching the rivals on TV seems backward. One would've guessed a Joe Biden type would have been on the McCain ticket and the Sarah Palin type would've been on the Obama side. If you were casting a feature film, that's certainly the direction you'd take it. So now, instead of youth, excitement, and change on the side that declared it as its' own, we have anything but. And on the side that seemed as though it represented the same old “George Bush 3rd term” politics, we have youthful thinking, excitement and change ahead of us.

The plot certainly has thickened.

I invite anyone to go back and read any of my previous blog postings on townhall.com and compare what I've said with the dates/times they were posted. You will find in every instance I have predicted what ultimately had become fact. Again, it's easy to see when you pay attention and I do.

Here's more. We all know what happens when we lead a horse to water. He doesn't drink. The same is true again (and again, written previously in my blogs of the past) with the liberal media's attempts to lead us to that water. We won't drink. Keith Olbermann's big exclusive with Barack Obama was ho-hum because Keith Olbermann isn't a journalist we can trust, despite his daily references to himself as “your humble journalist.” He's a democratic cheerleader. You'll never see any exclusives with anyone representing the right, because Keith wants you to drink his water, so take a big gulp and be sure to write “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” in your Nielson diary. The same is true of Chris Matthews who can't possibly say anything negative about the democratic ticket, except for once in a while pretending to play hard ball in hopes he'll appear un-biased. You better drink his water right now, if you know what's good for you or he'll never let you complete a sentence.

I'd be amazed if I'm the only one who sees any of this. Clearly MSNBC doesn't, if two far left leaning programs on their schedule weren't enough, soon they'll have three, because they're giving Rachel Maddow her own show. You know Rachel don't you? She's the star/choreographer/director/producer/executive producer/casting director and key grip of “The Rachel Maddow Show” which airs on AirAmerica radio, TV and podcasts. Oh yeah, AirAmerica is liberal. She's described as a political analyst every time she appears on one of MSNBC's other shows. But you see, she isn't. She has never provided a fair assessment of any republican candidate or strategy ever and in fact, trips over herself to come to the defense of anything Obama. At one point it was so bad, Joe Scarborough, filling in for David Gregory on "Race For The White House" on MSNBC, had to playback specific comments from Barack Obama for Rachel's behalf several times because she refused to acknowledge them on their face and instead chose to decipher their meaning for us. If you were dyslexic and retarded, you might have seen things her way and dammit, she sure as hell tried. She's no political analyst. She's a democratic strategist. So there's MSNBC and lovely Rachel baiting and switching us so we'll drink their water. No thanks. It's polluted.

The well just got much deeper by the supreme being herself, Oprah Winfrey, who has pronounced that she will not have any political candidates on her show before the election. You mean, except for Barack Obama, Oprah? Forgive me for questioning one of your commandments, but don't you mean you won't have any republican candidates on your show before the election, Ms. Winfrey? Shall I peel you a grape?

The lesson to be learned from all this is soon to come, I'm afraid. Try as hard as they will force feeding their points of view will soon backfire, which is the real tragedy in all this. Real Americans like myself are interested in the facts, not the slanted rhetoric from self-described “journalists” who aren't. What would their Columbia professors think of them now, I wonder. The writing is on the wall and it will only get worse unless the liberal press (radio, TV and newspaper) backs off, goes back to the basic premise of what real journalism is supposed to be (and not to be) and let us decide the facts on their merits. The RNC should send thank-you cards for all their help, because the harder they try, the harder they will be fall.

Thank heavens for fair and balanced press like The New York Post, who yesterday endorsed McCain/Palin, writing an incredibly poignant editorial as to the reasons why. Anyone still fooled by who Obama/Biden really are should read this. Kudos to that paper and its' parent, News Corporation, for telling it like it really is without bias. If anyone reading this still questions whether or not a democrat in the white house would be better for our economy than a republican, I invite them to compare New York with Las Vegas. New Yorkers, in a blue state controlled by democrats long before FDR was governor, pay a whopping $9 for a pack of cigarettes, while Nevadans pay a mere $3.50 per pack. So what's the difference between the cigarettes out there vs. those out here? TAX. Now unless cigarettes in New York are wrapped in gold, New Yorkers pay almost $6 more than Nevadans just for tax. Nevada a red state. New York a blue state. Connect the dots, and I don't even smoke but for God sakes, ENOUGH already! Democrats=big government, big tax. Republicans= don't.

Need more? Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) rents not 1, not 2, not 3 but 4 rent controlled apartments in Harlem under the guise of office space. Never mind that the units must be for living and not for business purposes. Mr. Rangel doesn't care because he's a democrat who lives for big government and big pet projects and big perks like 4 rent controlled units that cost him less than one studio apartment in Manhattan. Democrats in congress are just as bad. Even our own Governor Paterson calls these types of legistlators Draculas. They'll be real nice to you by day, and then suck your blood for everything it's worth until they get what they want, like Dracula. Barack Obama was weened from the same bottle. His refusal to admit the troop surge is working was because he was afraid to alienate his own party, not us. He failed miserably.

I'm happy to watch them all scramble and try so very hard to convince me otherwise, all so they can keep their cushy government jobs and live like kings while the rest of us struggle. Then, like a horse, I'll do the opposite. I for one would be very happy to drink from that trough.

Ron Maestri
www.ronmaestri.com



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Yesterday.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Friday, September 05, 2008 10:36:22 AM
Yesterday certainly was a big day in presidential politics. In one fell swoop, John McCain swooped in with an out-of-the-ballpark nominee for vice-president, a great speech, proving his credentials with facts, not lingo. If I were advising him, I'd tell him to remind America that the gridlock came from a democratically controlled congress, whose own job approval ratings are in the high single digits.
 
It's obvious Americans have seen the same old movie before when politicians deliver the world to get themselves elected, and then do nothing until about the final year of their terms when they're up for re-election, and then off they go again having parties and cutting secret deals for bridges to nowhere. Richard Nixon mastered the art when he promised to end the Vietnam War to get himself elected the first time, never did, and then promised it again to get himself re-elected. Thank God Americans are much smarter than that. It's not just change we're after, it's accountability. How much can we trust they'll deliver on their words?
 
It's obvious what I'm saying (and have been saying) is the case. Last night on "The CBS Evening News with Katie Couric", she showed two polls. The first, taken immediately after the Obama rock concert: Obama 48% and McCain 40%. The second, taken a few weeks later, one day BEFORE Sarah palin's speech, showed both candidates dead even at 42%. What's wrong with that picture?
 
But wait, there's more. WCBS-TV, the local New York CBS affiliate asked respondants online "How likely would you be to vote for McCain/Palin after hearing her speech?" A whopping 73% responded most likely with less than 10% still unsure. NEW YORK IS A BLUE STATE! These are not words of hope for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Clearly this election is theirs to lose unless something is radically changed, and I know what it is. Now mind you, I'm the type of person who typically roots for the underdog. I guess all my years in direct marketing taught me how to spin gold from sheet metal, so trust me on this. I'm actually beginning to feel sorry for Obama and would like to offer my friendly advice, because honestly, I love a good horse race.
 
Joe Biden needs to resign from the democratic ticket. He needs to come up with some credible reason why, and just do it. You know, for the good of the party? Barack Obama should accept the resignation and then in the same breath name Hillary Rodham Clinton as his new VP running mate. I'm dead serious. We all know Hillary's strengths and we can all now begin to see the void she left will only get deeper and stronger for McCain/Palin unless Obama punts fast.
 
Mark my words. Barack Obama will lose this election unless he makes this "change".
 
Yesterday.
 
Ron Maestri
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

...and The Plot Thickens.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:22:08 AM
I have to admit I was a bit miffed by John McCain's choice of running mate in Sarah Palin. Who? What? Where? and even more importantly, Why? So, I decided to wait it out and see. Now, almost a week after his announcement, I'm convinced. His choice shows us exactly the type of president John McCain would be if elected. He thinks outside the box. Of course it was risky, but never afraid to stare fear straight in the face, Mr. McCain proved himself to be a very smart leader. We weren't hearing Obama chants after the DNC. We were booking flights to Alaska and spending all of our media time (liberal and conservative) talking about this person with 5 kids still breast feeding. She's everything Hillary could have been to Barack Obama, had he been willing to stare fear straight in the face. That's a big negatory. He was afraid of Hillary and especially Bill, so rather than fight, he switched to one of the biggest Washington insiders around, completely contrary to his message and his brand. Joe Biden is no friend to Israel, either. He made some ridiculous comment to their leadership in 2005 that "Israel needs to accept a nuclear Iran."
 
During the DNC very intuitive directors were cutting back and forth between Hillary's speech and Michelle Obama's expressions, which were fear and an "I knew she'd tout herself instead of Barack" facial expressions (I could almost see the thought bubbles overhead) to one of relief after an incredible show of strength and support by Mrs. Clinton for her husband. The next night when the former president spoke, once again those fears were laid to rest because say what you want, the Clintons know how to make things right, and they most certainly did. I always thought he was a good president and both their speeches were stellar.
 
I'd bet my parents (win or lose, take them, please) that Barack and Michelle secretly regretted passing over Hillary as his VP. I still firmly believe it would have been game, set and match for him, and I would have cheered him for taking such a bold risk for choosing her...and vote for both. Nope, Mr. Obama's fear of failure and Mt. Sinai ego got the best of him, and he went with a loud mouth who on "60 Minutes" this past Sunday, spent the entire interview backpeddling his gaffs, like plagiarizing a speech that took him out of a presidential election. Mr. Biden needs to check his own ego at the door when he debates Ms. Palin, or she'll probably kick the crap out of him and send him back to scrotum...I mean, Scranton, PA., which he has suddenly embraced as his home. Sorry Delaware, you're just not big enough. Biden is now longer from you.
 
John McCain showed us strength and courage. Barack Obama showed us weakness and fear. In a conversation with my sister who is 5 years younger and a staunch democrat living in Colorado, she referred to Sarah Palin as too inexperienced. I replied, "You mean, like Barack Obama?" It was the first time I ever heard my sister speechless. I actually thought the phone cut off and the signal had faded.
 
I wonder what Rachel Maddow must be thinking right about now. I'm sure she's ferklempt because all the kings horses and all the kings men may not be able to put Barack Obama back together again. She should be spending her off time from all the Obama focus (no-one sweems to care as much about him these days as they do this governor from Alaska) and learn proper attire and make-up tricks, like forgoing low cut or insisting the make-up artist continue past her neck. The CU poses don't work well, either. I hear through the grape vine she's considering whether or not to wear glasses on her new MSNBC show. I'd go with a bag.
 
The saddest part to this whole thing is that Hillary's views are more in line with how I think. She's pro-choice, pro-universal healthcare, pro-gay marriage. Ms. Palin's creationism argument is laughable and pictures of her seated on a dead bear in her governor's office are repulsive. Her stance on abortion is equally absurd, but hey, that Barack certainly can be a leader, can't he?
 
So now let's look at the campaign today and see how things have radically changed on both sides with the choice of Sarah Palin. Those 18,000,000 cracks in the ceiling might just band together because she's a woman (don't laugh, what percentage of blacks are supporting Barack?) and the greatest blunder of the 21st century, his failure to go with the obvious, may be scrutinized for years to come during the McCain/Palin Administration.
 
...And the plot thickens.
 
Ron Maestri
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Coke Blinked".

Posted by Ron Maestri on Tuesday, August 26, 2008 11:26:01 AM
Remember the cola wars, when Coke was clearly the favorite, best selling cola over Pepsi? But then something very strange happened. Coca-Cola got too big for their britches, or, put another way, their egos got the best of them, and they decided to change their formula. A huge disaster, it became Pepsi's best case scenerio. This, along with their brilliant ad campaign "The Pepsi Challenge", became the catalyst for Pepsi to take over as the favorite, best selling soft drink in the world, surpassing Coke. They described it later as the day "Coke Blinked."
 
I feel the exact same way about Barack Obama. All criticism aside, this guy is to be commended for being such a renegade. With all odds against him, he rose to the top becoming Coca-Cola to John McCain's Pepsi. Martin Luther King would be proud. But then Obama let his ego get the best of him, which he proved with his choice of VP in Senator Joe Biden. Don't get me wrong. An attack dog and a leader with strong foreign policy credentials is mandatory. I DON'T TRUST IRAN. However, to presume his own strengths could warrant bipassing the most obvious choice for VP, Hillary Clinton, speaks a lot more to Mr. Obama's character than his choice instead of Joe Biden.
 
It has been reported that his wife Michelle played a huge role in the selection of Mr. Biden with her husband while on vacation in Hawaii recently. BINGO. This tells me who wears the pants in that family. Women always seem to have more problems with other women and there was never a doubt in my mind Michelle did not like Hillary Clinton. Period. Is this who we want for president, someone who let's his wife get the best of him on such an important issue as Vice-President of the United States? Of course not. Certainly I'm not suggesting she should be seen and not heard, but this one came from her, not him, and therein lies the problem.
 
There is absolutely no argument that Hillary Clinton would not have been better. She would've assured 18,000,000 voters (including her own home states of New York and Arkansas) with no need for placating angry voters who still feel slighted by the whole primary process, and the ticket would've sailed through this election far surpassing any Republican candidacy, a fact which I'm convinced would have been clearly demonstrated in the polls with a much greater margin over what we're seeing right now. The writing is on the walls and in the polls. Results from Mrs. Obama's speech last bnight are mixed. People can see right through her, no matter what color dress she's wearing or how big her pearls are.
 
Why didn't Barack just bite the bullet and go with Hillary? He obviously doesn't like her, because even though he told us she was on his short list, she clearly wasn't. JFK didn't like Lyndon Johnson either, but we all know how that turned out. I'd be very surprised if his own daughter Caroline wasn't also pushing for Hillary for the exact same reason.
 
I was a registered Republican, recently switching to Independent. So my leanings were always more toward John McCain than Barack Obama. But when Hillary Clinton showed her strength by going for the gold and fighting 'til the very end, I loved her for it. I was sold. Had Barack Obama chosen Hillary Clinton as VP, I'd have voted for them, no questions asked. I like John McCain, but this ticket would have been the deal closer for me. Now, not so.
 
Without question, I'm for John McCain. I need a leader, not Michelle Obama's husband. Iran and North Korea won't be pretty in the coming years and I don't want a whimp or bad decision maker who takes his own ego into consideration first, over what is best for the American people.
 
I guess history just repeated itself, and "Coke Blinked".
 
Ron Maestri
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Obama-Biden Double Flusher.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Saturday, August 23, 2008 10:48:14 AM
Well, alright let's just stop the presses for today's big ho-hum announcement by Barack Obama...he's chosen Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) as his running mate.

Yawn. This choice is what I and so many of us refer to as the official double flusher. You know, the one that's such a full load it takes two attempts to take it all down. To be more specific, that dog has fleas.

Doesn't anyone get it, or am I the only one? If you were casting an exciting event, who would you have chosen as the picture-perfect candidate alongside Barack Obama? All together now, HILLARY.

Choosing Biden without ever considering Mrs. Clinton (which of course Obama claimed he would...wink, wink) is like ordering a side of mayonnaise to go with your homemade gnocci. It doesn't work, and on so many levels I've already lost count.

 
But first, a little something about Senator Joe Biden. When I guest hosted a week for hometown radio station WGMD-FM in Rehoboth, DE., a very powerful news/talk radio station serving all of Delmarva, I tried getting Senator Biden as a guest while he was running for president. The only thing I received was a polite brush off from one of his underlings stating, “The Senator is much too busy criss-crossing the country for appearances in very important big states. Thanks anyway.”
 
Oh, forgive me for assuming the same people who elected Mr. Biden to the senate for over 35 years have any less than a big voice. Even though his 'appearance' on my show would have entailed nothing more than a phone-in (which would've been faster than a trip to the urinal), I still think it would have been a courtesy and frankly, an obligation to the people he's supposed to really serve.

Obama's “change” scenario was a good idea, for about a minute. By choosing Joe Biden as his running mate, the only thing he's changed is his own brand. Starbucks is now selling Folgers. He's selected a Washington insider who also happened to vote for the war in Iraq and who's own knee-jerk reactions offered some damaging (and very true) quips about Senator Obama's ability to be Commander-in-Chief. If Barack was worried about Hillary (and Bill) upstaging him, wait 'til he gets a load of Joe. It was funny to see the scared look on Obama's face as they strolled for pictures practically hand-in-hand. The only thing missing was a forced singing of “Feelings” to complete the ensemble. If Obama were to become our next President, each day in the Oval Office would probably start with, "What else did he say today?", and "How are my numbers compared to his?"

I can read between the lines. Obama is worried. He knows what the Republicans is saying is true and that's why he went the way he did. Calls to Oprah will probably go unanswered after this snafu. I'd give anything to be a fly on the wall today watching Bill and Hillary at home naked enjoying chocolate dipped strawberries and mimosas, setting things up for that 2012 presidential run. Every day forward is two steps back for Mr. Obama. I'm actually beginning to feel sorry for him now, and more inspired than ever for Mrs. Clinton (whose Botox injections have really been working.)

 
One more thing about Barack Obama. If you were an Iranian, North Korean or leader from any other country that hates us, what would be the first thing you'd do to placate this new president whose was willing to sit down with you and chat? You'd overwhelm him with praise and adulation like Hollywood does to actors to get them off their back, which of course would work just as well because he'd eat it right up. Then you'd stab him in the back. That's because the star of the show in Barack Obama's eyes is and always will be Barack Obama. Conversely, the star of the show in John McCain's eyes, is and always will be America. His own maverick track record has proven that. I still maintain Hillary should be his VP choice. They'd sweep the country, not to mention New York in an election that would probably result in a more embarrassing outcome than Nixon-McGovern in 1972. Oh, that's right, wasn't it George McGovern who was quick to offer advice to Hillary about getting out for the good of the party?
 
Flush twice, then get the spray.
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Picks Hillary as VP!

Posted by Ron Maestri on Thursday, August 21, 2008 8:54:30 AM
Now wouldn't that be a dream ticket?
 
Think about it. No only would it be THE perfect way to completely usurp and upstage rock star Obama's "Change" campaign promise (I can think of nothing better to describve change than that) but it would also practically guarantee McCain the 18,000,000+ voters for Mrs. Clinton who felt betrayed. You don't think they're just dying for "change"? I'd be leery of those boring conservatives, if I were you John.
I'm betting that if they have a choice of going to polls or staying home to watch re-runs of "The Beverly Hillbillies", they'll choose the latter. You need the dems. This idea isn't so far fetched.
 
I was first to say I disliked Hillary Clinton as president until she grew some hustpa and showed what an incredible fighter she really was. That's who I want in the White House. A fighter, not anyone willing to have tea and krumpets with Iran who can't make up his mind about whether or not the troop surge is working.
 
The advantage for her of course is that it's a perfect "I told you so" to the Democratic National leaders. My eyes still hurt from rolling so much after the "It's all for the good of the party" concession speech and follow-up campaigning next to Obama. The guy clearly hates her as he proved by his Freudian slip, "Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Help Hillary pay off her debt. Basketball, anyone?" Why should she care anything about a party that clearly didn't invite her. Let's also not forget that should Mr. McCain nab the presidency, he still has to endure a Democratic controlled Congress. In between nail salon appointments by Nancy Pelosi and IQ tests for Harry Reid, they just might get something done if Hillary were the one casting all tie breaker votes, and she speaks their language.
 
I think it also goes without saying that Bill Clinton, you know, Mr. Hillary, would jump at the chance to say love you-mean it to B. O. Then if elected under the McCain-Clinton ticket, he could still run around with his fly open and should it come back to haunt him, McCain could simply say, "Oh those Democrats. You know I love them" and call it day.
 
I'd give anything to see Michelle's appearance on "The View" after the big announcement. Stop the presses, let's get a follow-up to that New Yorker Magazine cover. I'll buy 10 issues. Let's watch those fist bumps.
 
John McCain could convince Hillary to jump ship and it would in no way interfere with her message of America first. What better way to guarantee he'll be seeing things her way than to be 2nd in command. And here's the kicker: Mr. McCain should announce he's only running for one term. Who do you think would be the next obvious choice for president? Get the pen. Where does she sign?
 
The best part of all this, and my favorite part (it gives me goose pimples thinking about it), would be how it would be handled by the liberal press:
 
1. Bill O'Reilly would have to sit in for Keith Olberman, because he'd be stuck negotiating for cab fare back to Bristol, Ct.
"I'm sorry, Mr. Obama. Keith's unavailable right now, he's flailing around on the floor speechless. We're trying to get him to bite the stick. Can he get back to you? Oh, o-k, we'll tell him that you're Barack Obama, and that you DID NOT approve this message. Good luck, sir. Good-bye."
 
2. Rachel Maddow, host/star/choregrapher/director/producer and executive producer of "The Rachel Maddow Show" on AirAmerica would be speechless. She just might need some mandatory time off from her pretense as a political analyst on MSNBC to actually learn to either have the tan#2 make-up extend past her neck or not to wear the low cut blouses that reveal it. (I hate political analysts who refuse to be impartial. Why can't we just call her what she is? A democratic strategist and pro-Obama supporter).
 
3. Hillary's a New Yorker now. I'll bet there will be some real Bronx cheers after this one.
 
4. Fox News Channel's ratings would soar as would "Morning Joe" on MSNBC. I'd pop some popcorn to watch Joe Scarborough have a field day with this one.
 
All's fair in love and war. We're at war and John McCain would love to be in the White House. So would Mr. and Mrs. Hillary.
If you can't join 'em, BEAT 'EM, I always say.
 
There's your winning ticket Mr. McCain. Now put on your Nike's and sprint into the White House.
 
JUST DO IT!
 
Ron Maestri
Future McCain Communications Director.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Hits The Motherload!

Posted by Ron Maestri on Thursday, July 31, 2008 7:49:04 AM
  You can always tell when the McCain Campaign hits pay dirt: when the liberal media talk pundits openly despise their tactics. PAY DIRT!
 
David Schuster today on "Morning Joe" all but imploded about McCain's "ridiculous assertion" that Barack Obama should be held responsible for high gas prices. Oh, David. He opposes offshore oil drilling never "changing" his position and his party has consistently opposed "change" in their position directly conflicting with his "change" mantra. Here's an idea: CHANGE!
 
The new McCain ad comparing John McCain to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears is RIGHT ON. One of the biggest mistakes I ever made when I was thrust into working with Joan Collins was to tell her I was a huge fan of "Dynasty". Even though I never watched the show because I thought it was absurd, I thought I would win her over by playing into her ego. Absolutely, positively, without a doubt, WRONG! I could see her head inflate as I gushed about her later paying the price by a monster who tried walking over all of us. When she chewed up and spit out the Director on the first day and I inherited the task for the remainder of the shoot, my only success working with her was when I took control and treated her like a child.
 
This is precisely what Barack Obama has become, all the accolades and the press and all the attention overseas have turned him into a monster who all but said, "I am the Messiah" during his ridiculous prediction with the democrats. He has become a monster who believes his own dialogue, and that's dangerous. Joan Collins was clawing her way to the bottom, and if we elect Barack Obama to the highest job in the world, he will too, and even worse, I predict he'll bring us down with him because he thinks he can do no wrong...like Paris Hilton, Britney Spears and all the other self-important celebrities I know VERY VERY WELL. They all self-destructed sooner or later.
 
When John McCain says, "Barack Obama is willing to lose the war to win this election", he's right. Obama prays for defeat so he'll get elected. Why would he visit sick troops without photos, press or hype? No photos. No press. No hype. Why won't he agree to any town hall debates as proposed by John McCain? Because he's as thin as the photographs he loves posing for.
 
Watching the liberal press seethe about where the McCain camp is heading inspires me. It plays right into the theory that you should keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Those who hate you purposely give bad advice. So listen, and do exactly the opposite. Their reactions to McCain's newest ads should paint the whole picture. While Obama is busy casting his audience, McCain should stay busy pointing it all out, as the spoiler who reveals all the magician's tricks. The real change candidate is and always has been John McCain. During a time of war, the last thing we need in the White House is another Joan Collins.
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Keith Olbermann Must GO!

Posted by Ron Maestri on Monday, July 28, 2008 10:29:18 PM
I forced myself to watch "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" Monday night because I thought I might have been a bit unfair to him in some of my previous postings. I'm a firm believer in evaluating fairly both points of view before making choices as do I'd guess most Americans, so I gave him another look.
 
I don't know any other way to say it except to just come right out and say, this man is embarrassing! Plain and simple. The entire show, not part, not most, THE ENTIRE SHOW WAS PRO-OBAMA, PRO-DEMOCRAT. Not once did he have ANY guest or point of view supporting the Republican perspective. For this show to air on a respected news network like MSNBC is appalling, and frankly, embarassing.
 
What do we think about the new John McCain ad chastising Barack Obama for his failure to visit ailing troops in Germany, choosing instead to play basketball? Let's talk to our first guest, the Obama Campaign Communications Director.
 
How bad is the McCain Campaign running these days with no clear strategy? Let's talk to our next guest, Rachel Maddow from Air America who wears "Democrat" on her sleeve and probably has a matching tattoo somewhere on her body.
 
How stupid is George W. Bush? Let's poke fun with quotes from his former Treasury Secretary, giving the audience the illusion of being fair to both sides. Forget the bad elevator audio, this stuff is good.
 
And what is it about Rupert Murdoch that Keith Olbermann has it out for? I watched with my mouth open a few weeks ago when Keith declared like a child "Ha ha Mr. Murdoch, see, I am successful and very, very rich. Nah." (I swear I saw him stick out his tongue afterwards.) Then, last night, it happened again when he roasted the Fox Business Network for its low audience levels as being less than 8000 people in daytime and "at this rate, it would catch up to CNBC in 2077." Of course Mr. Olbermann left out the part that CNBC's contract for DOW Jones probably wouldn't get renewed because News Corp. now owns them which would have a predictable impact on their numbers going forward, and that CNBC is carried throughout the world with greater penetration than Fox Business, on-air less than a year. If there ever was an apple to orange comparison, this was it. I too can read the ratings, Keith. I can make any show #1. I'm guessing Mr. Murdoch probably fired him from one of his sports networks or refused to hire him because of his reputation as being as completely unstable, which is why he left KCBS in L.A. (or was most likely asked to leave) and ESPN in Bristol, Connecticut. I know why Keith Olbermann isn't allowed to drive. He shouldn't be able to drive this train, either. make
 
Speaking of numbers and an audience, the point is to attract NEW VIEWERS and build an audience. There are already die hard Olbermann liberals watching the show (although I'd guess not for very long), but you can't grow unless you grow. That means broadening your horizons. Look left AND right. Let me be the judge, not you. Push me and I do the opposite. We all touched the fire when our parents told us we shouldn't, remember?  Like guests on CNBC, Keith Olbermann should be required to provide full disclosure because he's obviously a Democratic supporter of zealots like Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), (whom Mr. Olbermann referred to on Monday's show) and whose own bill of impeachment was struck down by members of his own party as being too radically liberal.
 
MSNBC is a great network. "Morning Joe" is my favorite morning program, besting "Fox & Friends" for news value hands down. "Fox & Friends" has 3 commercial breaks to every one on "Morning Joe" and F&F can't even have a meaningful conversation with any guest without rushing them through it and either ending it abruptly or splitting the interview in 2 so they can tease, tease, tease and go to more commercials. They tease more than they report. But say what you want, Fox News Channel is fair and balanced and, for the most part, so is "Morning Joe" on MSNBC. Joe Scarborough, a Republican is very fair to both sides, sometimes even being a little more critical of the Republicans than most, but I respect him because he's honest and that's all I ever expect. Pat Buchanan, a Republican is fair. Andrea Mitchell, a great reporter, is fair. They step out of their skins to provide accurate analysis pro/con for/against both sides so independent thinkers like myself can make intelligent choices without being pushed. All in all, MSNBC is a great network and certainly deserves the moniker as "America's Fastest Growing News Network". Their anchors and hosts throughout the rest of the day seem to be fair, and I trust them to deliver the facts letting me decide, with opinion they don't hide under the guise of news.
 
I don't trust Keith Olbermann.
 
He's selling, pushing and force feeding one point-of-view down my throat for an entire hour.  I kept asking myself, "What's in it for him?" My guess is that his cume rating is very low and his demo and household ratings are falling, as well. He's supposed to be counter-programming "The O'Reilly Factor" in primetime and not doing a good job of it. The only thing missing from his show was a lower 1/3 disclaimer throughout stating, "The following program is a paid advertisement for the Democratic Party." and V/O from Barack Obama saying, "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message."
 
I'm predicting that the reason Barack Obama isn't as far ahead in the polls as he should be is because of "newscasters" like Keith Olbermann, who has the gall to 'humbly' refer to himself as such, keep pushing him on us. The writing is on the wall with the Desi Arnaz/CBS factor as my best example. "The more CBS told me not to hire William Frawley as Fred Mertz, the more I liked him", said Mr. Arnaz to Johnny Carson in one of his final interviews. I'm no newscaster, but I sure as hell know what one looks like. Keith Olbermann is no newscaster and Dan Quayle was no Jack Kennedy.
 
What was #1 on the Keith Olbermann Countdown Monday night? His foolish appearance on "The Soup" airing on E! It wasn't funny the first time and it sure wasn't funny played back over and over again by Mr. Olbermann, who was ogling himself. Here's another news flash: Keith Olbermann is not funny. I'd walk out of that comedy club faster than a speeding bullet if he were on the roster. My head hurts from rolling my eyes so much. Go back to Bristol, Keith. You're bad.
 
This show must go. I'd replace it with re-runs of "Captain Kangaroo" to save whatever is left of an audience, who I'll bet are beginning to lose interest in him too. There's only so much sell and hype one can stand on a day by day basis. Hell, I'll do it. I can beat Bill O'Reilly with my eyes closed and I could sure do a helluva lot better than Keith Olbermann, whose countdown to departure is the only thing NBC execs should be contemplating right this very moment.
 
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"I Believe It Was Peace For Our Time."

Posted by Ron Maestri on Monday, July 28, 2008 3:59:04 PM
Kudos to Brian Williams and his "Nightly News" staff for snaring an exclusive interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran while overseas with his friend and mine, Barack Obama. NBC should be proud of Mr. Williams, who wasted no time gushing about his prize throughout the day on MSNBC. Asked to set up the story and draw a conclusion, Mr. Williams let the cat out of the bag and proclaimed what he single-handedly achieved by getting the Iranian President to agree to freezing his countries' nuclear enrichment, "I believe it was peace for our time", said Mr. Williams.
 
Clearly there was absolutely no political influence intended by the Iranians, who invented the game of chess, to influence the presidential election against John McCain (a strong national defense Republican) by granting the exclusive with a member of the liberal media. Oh, did I mention Barack Obama is also a liberal? They'd rather switch than fight.
 
Just a coincidence, I'm sure. We can certainly trust those Iranians. It's not in their nature to say one thing and do another.
 
Alright, alright. Enough praise. Let's get right to the interview, a first of its' kind moment as history repeats itself, thanks to Brian Williams.
 
(Applause sign)
 
Brian Williams: "Mr. President, will you agree to suspend your countries' nuclear enrichment?"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: (Farsi)
Translator: "We want peace. We're a wonderful country. Walk around. See the sights. Feed the animals. Ride our women."
Brian Williams: "You've said you think Israel should be wiped off the map"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: (Farsi)
Translator: "L'chaim".
Brian Williams: "Can we really trust you?"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: (Farts)
Translator: "The President invites you to sign the agreement he has prepared during his recent visit to Munich, as proof he won't invade Poland, Mr. Chamberlain.""
Brian Williams: "But I'm Brian Williams."
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Translator in unison: "Heil!"
 
Good job, Brian. Keep it up. Better get ready for that audience with The Queen.
 
Ron Maestri
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Can Run, But He Can't Hide.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:51:09 AM
Behind the mask, I can see the who the real Barack Obama really is. My only hope is that the majority of Americans can too before it's too late or frankly, we're in a heap of trouble.
 
His "World Concert Tour" showed us he knew how to pose for the camera in all the right settings: aboard military choppers seated next to General Patraeus, playing hoops with the troops, eating with the troops, pretending to be being humbled by all the press, etc., etc., etc. "Please, no pictures....is this my good side?"
 
But for those of us far more astute and less one dimensional, we saw without ever seeing his failure to spend even one minute with our wounded soldiers, declaring the Pentagon as his scapegoat because 'they wouldn't allow all the press.' (cue playback of baby sucking thumb). Here's an idea: how about doing it alone? Not a chance, don't be ridiculous. You know the rules of the Obama Campaign. Like Britney Spears, Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan, they refuse to go anywhere unless there's lots of publicity, or why bother? It's a must to call ahead insuring lots of fans and plenty of press. "I'm so surprised you're all here. Are you sure this is my good side?"
 
He says this, then says that, then says this again trying to confuse us into thinking that's what he's been saying all along. "Now how many fingers am I holding up?"
 
He speaks with our commanders on the ground, but doesn't listen because it's the democrats that are his real constituents, not us. He isn't a leader, he's a follower. "Stop everything. I need to take this conference call from Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and MoveOn.org." Even though he probably should, he probably won't pick Hillary as his VP. Why? Because she upstages him, and Barack won't have any of that. I've worked with Joan Collins, too. I can smell a diva a mile away. It's not pretty.
 
It's high time John McCain take a few lessons from the Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush campaign playbooks. "Hit them where it hurts". Stop being so lack thereof, and start kicking and scratching at this bratty kid you're running against whose only claim to fame is 3 minutes in the Senate, cleaning up a neighborhood and kissy face with Oprah.
 
To win this election and save us from ourselves, John McCain needs to re-run the Ronald Reagan/Jimmy Carter debate (if you could call it that) when Mr. Reagan asked point blank, "Ask yourselves if you're much better off today than you were 4 years ago", and ask Americans today a similar type question, "If Iran becomes a nuclear power, who would you rather have as your Commander-in-Chief?" Say what you will about George W. Bush, but when the Twin Towers were destroyed, I thanked God he was in the Oval Office and not Al Gore, or we'd still be begging the UN for permission to use the restroom and the Taliban would still be in Afghanistan using us.
 
The world stage doesn't need a rock star. I'll see your Elton and Bono for a real leader. That trumps both of them hands down. We should be thinking about Iran and Israel, not how far a presidential candidate can make hoop shots.
 
If that's the case, I'd rather have Kobe Bryant. Maybe that's who John McCain should name as his VP to wean us from all this foolishness.
 
Ron Maestri
www.ronmaestri.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How Either Candidate Can Win.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:08:44 PM
It's interesting for me to see that everything I've been suggesting early on in my blogs, is now coming to fruition. A quick read of all my previous blog postings will prove that.
 
Almost from the beginning, I've said John McCain should pick/announce his VP right away to counter the Obama-mamas. Now it seems I'm hearing these same suggestions by the media, including the liberals.
 
Now, here are more predictions:
For McCain to win;
1. Apologize to America for not being a rock star, just a real person who really cares (sarcastic).
2. Pick your VP yesterday.
3. Clarify that you suggested Barack Obama go to Iraq and Afghanistan to speak with the troops and the commanders on the ground, not going to Paris, self-serving presumptive speeches in front of the Germany Gates or visiting the middle east was ever suggested. OBAMA IS REPHRASING WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY SUGGESTED TO JUSTIFY HIS WORLD TOUR. By the way, Obama looked absurd in a yamaka and from what I hear, he spent less than 45 minutes with our troops and more time working out in his Four Season's gym. I'd mention that 62 times a day.
4. Stop being so soft. You want to win? Be a bulldog.
5. Repeat after me: "Which would you rather have? George Bush's 3rd term or Jimmy Carter's 2nd..you know, the one who caused the energy crisis 30 years ago by gas rationing and a national 55mph speed limit?"  Let's not forget our current US President has been trying to get us more energy independent from the very beginning, it was the democrats who kept stopping him (and still do.) Obama is a democrat. Guilt by association.
6. Do an infomercial. Show charts. Show graphs.
7. Even though the liberal media is clearly spending much more time with Obama, it's beginning to show signs of backfire. I've been saying that since the beginning.
8. Tell America you're only interested in serving 1 term to prove it's America first.
9. Obama is part Muslim, yet he denies it. Offer the proof not to hold the Muslim roots against him, but asking "why" he denies them and what he's trying to hide. I'd certainly think twice about his motives, wouldn't you? He keeps talking about his grandmother, uncle, etc. What about his half brother? What's he ashamed of? Why did he remove 2 Muslim women from behind him at one of his rock concerts?
10. Repeat after me: "Obama is a coward afraid of one-on-one debating."
11. Stop micro-managing your own campaign. It's blatantly obvious you're doing this and it's not helping you at all.
12. Wear make-up. Hire a producer. I'd never have allowed a cheese aisle backdrop. Neither would any competant producer.
13. Tell us why when you go to Iraq and Afghanistan, you downplay it because you're not into grand standing to win an election. This might explain why no press joined you while there...the 9 times you've been.
14. Choose Mike Bloomberg or HILLARY CLINTON as your VP. Ouch!
 
 
For Obama to win:
1. Choose Hillary as your running mate or you just might lose. She's less full of crap than you are and perhaps Bill Clinton can keep you all under control.
2. We can all see through the big speeches in front of big crowds as having little to no substance. How about agreeing to those debates you kept saying you'd be happy to engage in?
3. Lower yourself and go into the heartland. We all know this is beneath you, but try.
4. Hope more Americans are stupid to vote for you than John McCain.
5. Wear flip-flops to complete the look.
 
That's all for now.
 
I'll be back again soon saying "I told you so" once again.
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Political Warshack Test.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:38:07 AM
First reactions to what's happening right now in politics.
 
1. On Dr. Zbigniew Brzenzski's interview on "Morning Joe" when asked about his advice to the next president-elect about Iran, "Negotiate by threatening stiffer sanctions"
---Just to be clear, you were Jimmy Carter's former national security advisor, the weak, pacifest US President who completely failed winning the freedom over 400 hostages abducted in Iran  (and who single-handedly caused the Arab World to consider all Americans "weak" as a result)?
 
2. On Barack Obama's trip to Iraq-Afghanistan "bonding" with the troops to prove he's ready to be commander-in-chief?
---I could wear a lab coat and pretend to be doctor, too.
 
3. On Barack Obama's flip-flopping from one minute to the next?
---My neck hurts.
 
4. On John McCain's ability to convey his points clearly and effective public speaking?
---A crash course with Toastmasters should happen yesterday.
 
5. On the right answer of both presidential candidates when asked "In 2 words or less, what would be your response to Iran's threats against Israel?"
---Nuke 'em.
 
6. On San Francisco's ballot measure to change the name of the Oceanside Sewage Plant to the George W. Bush Sewage Facility.
---Hilarious.
 
7. On the liberal media's obvious, blatant love affair with Barack Obama?
---I'm now wearing a condom full-time.
 
8. On the title change I'm proposing for "Countdown with Keith Olberman" on MSNBC?
---Democrats "R" Us.
 
9. On the New York Time's refusal to print John McCain's oped, responding to Barack Obama's?
---Be afraid. Be very afraid.
 
10. On General Wesley Clark's advice on anything?
---Weren't you fired?
 
11. On democrats' (and Obama included) refusal to allow oil drilling, shale refining, nuclear facility building to wean America's independence on foreign oil?
---(See answer #1)
 
Well, there it is.
 
Ron Maestri
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Post Office.

Posted by Ron Maestri on Monday, July 21, 2008 8:31:34 AM
I hate standing in line at the Post Office, but I still go because it's a necessary evil. Everyone thought it was a good idea, but now that I'm there, I realize I'm stuck standing in that line which is longer than I ever thought. It really makes no difference about whether or not I'm happy with my choice to go. I've started and now I need to finish or I've accomplished nothing.
 
I could leave early and go to another Post Office, but in the time it takes me to regroup and travel the distance to find another, I might just find the line to be even longer than the last and ultimately, what I thought could save me time ended up costing me so much more.
 
Ron Maestri
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

An Open Letter to the National Media

Posted by Ron Maestri on Friday, July 18, 2008 9:34:16 AM
When I first registered to vote over 20 years ago, I registered as a Democrat. I guess it was primarily because I thought since most people in my inner circle were of the same affiliation, that it was the right thing to do. I had no clue what the differences were between Republican and Democrat (as I suspect as is the case with most Americans today), except that Republicans gave me the impression they were a bunch of stodgy old guys representing the same party as Richard Nixon, who we all know was corrupt. Then Came Jimmy Carter, who single handedly botched the Iran Hostage Crisis and played into their impressions of us as being weak by neglecting to be more forceful than the pacifist in him ever would allow. This along with long lines at the pumps for gasoline rationing and a national 55 mph speed limit began the thoughts of party change in my mind. It was immediately after Ronald Reagan's inauguration and the subsequent release of our hostages from Iran that I immediately switched to Republican. Say what you want about those stodgy old guys, they are strong on defense and Reagan proved it. What Jimmy Carter couldn't do in all the months our hostages were held captive, Ronald Reagan achieved in 30 seconds after becoming our President. I'd have given anything to be a fly on the wall during that conversation with Ayatollah.
 
When George Bush ended the Gulf War (which I strongly supported) right before nabbing Saddam Insane, I switched again to Democrat. I don't get along with whimps and I believe Bush to be one after that mistake. Watching Saddam use this as a propaganda tool made me cringe and dislike George Bush and the Republican party.
 
Bill Clinton did well for me and I even voted for Al Gore in 2000. I was beyond pissed off when George W. stole the election, but God is my witness, I said to a close friend, "There's a bigger reason why this happened. I just know it."
 
On September 11, 2001, unfortuneately I was proved correct. It was a good thing a Republican was seated in the Oval Office because he took the right action which disproved any thoughts of weakness by terrorists and bin Laden himself. I'm sure it shocked them by our response. Say what you want about George W. Bush, but he was a helluva lot better than Al Gore ever would have been during all this(we'd still be begging for permission at the UN) or, dare I say it, Jimmy Carter. Did I think Bush could've handled Tora Bora better? Of course. Did I think The War in Iraq was necessary? Definitely. I still believe weapons of mass destruction were delivered to Syria under cover. This was reported by Israel, not by our own intelligence.
 
Now living in New York (again) and faced with the prospect of registering to vote here, I chose instead to become an Independent. I have found myself to be a social liberal and a fiscal conservative with strong national defense opinions. Since that represents a little of both, I went smack dab in the middle as an Independent. But something happened when I did. Suddenly I found myself stepping away from the tendency to defend positions on either the left or the right and to look at everything from an open minded frame of reference, you know, like the judges in our legal ought to do? Now, instead of defending Democrats when I was a registered Democrat or Republicans when I was a registered Republican, I have a free, unbiased perspective. Honestly, I still don't know who I will vote for in November.
 
Unfortunately, it's easier to see more clearly when news networks like MSNBC devote so much more time to Barack Obama's campaign clearly in an attempt to to assist the candidate in getting elected more so than John McCain's, who they obviously dislike. Every show's main topic is always Barack Obama with John McCain as a strained aside. But here's a news flash for those newsies everywhere (not just MSNBC but all of them), instead of gulping down what you're subliminally force feeding me, I want to go in the opposite direction. The best way I can describe this comes from an interview with Desi Arnaz on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson when both were alive. He was telling of how he came to choose William Frawley as Fred on "I Love Lucy". He said that the more that CBS executives resisted that possible choice, the more he liked him. Bingo. If MSNBC and all the major networks would just stay middle of the road presenting the facts (and scheduling their guest appearances) that way, I'd be less likely to dislike one candidate over another, not because of something the candidates themselves may have said, but because I don't appreciate being force fed. For proof of this, watch "Countdown with Keith Olberman" for a week on MSNBC. He's a classic example of what I'm saying here. Now, don't get me wrong. I would love to work for MSNBC. I even sent Steve Capus, NBC News President an e-mail about my own show "Ronn & Summer" (www.ronmaestri.com) as a possible late night show for the network and I think Chuck Todd, Andrea Mitchell, Pat Buchanan, David Gregory and Joe Scarborough are the exceptions. Some of the harshest criticism I've ever heard about John McCain's campaign has come from Joe Scarborough (Republican) on "Morning Joe", but I appreciate his candor and his honesty. He clearly has no hidden agenda, which is more than I can say for most other anchors on MSNBC.
 
What about Fox News Channel? Yes, they seem to be more fair and balanced as they claim, but with the Jesse Jackson recent snafu off air and on mike, Fox was quick to release this to anyone who wanted it. Even though they refused to release his "N-word" comment, they still were quick to release the details. I wonder if Fox would have been so quick to release a damaging snafu by John McCain if the tables were turned. Honestly, I seriously doubt they would have.
 
In closing, I offer some friendly advice to all news channels and national press. You're journalists. You're professionals with college degrees. What would your professors say about you right now based on your choices. Would they approve or disapprove?
 
Let people like me and millions of other Americans make their own informed choices, and keep things balanced and in perspective, please.
 
Respectfully,
 
Ron Maestri
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »