Because it is a political trump card which Democrats have but don't want to think about conveniently, but prefer to be blindfolded and led by Republicans.

But for me I am unaffected whether Republicans or Democrats are in power, having arranged my life that way. So I can completely relax and sit in the gallery watching whatever be the drama that is unfolding, writing what I feel about it.

Ever Heard of a Hillary-Obama Combination?

No need to shout expletives at me. I know truth is unpalatable. I know nobody wants to think about it. Moreover, some detractors may even bring before you the picture of nude interns floating around in the corridors of the executive mansion. Republican Party knows very well that it is a very lethal combination: woman power + minority power.

That is why they want the media to project the cart before the horse, the other way around: minority power before woman power. And they very well know that by getting the media to continuously press the public to forget about that powerful cocktail, they can make the opponents weaker. That is what is exactly happening here.

In fact I was laughing when the reporter of a TV channel accidentally blurted out "Hillary-Obama" and then fearfully corrected with apology "Obama-Hillary." Why?

Because that is what his Republican-controlled, media-baron-boss has ordered and he stands to lose his job if he ever utter Hillary-Obama.

Why Republicans want Obama to be nominated? Because if Hillary is nominated and Obama becomes her deputy, white votes will get split but African American votes won't be split.

But if Obama is nominated, white votes will be consolidated to Republican advantage. They any way don't have an African American base.

Unfortunately, African American pride and prestige will come in the way for Democrats.

What they have to realize is that what we see now and read in the media represent only the "registered" voters of this country. The unregistered, independent voters of the country who form the majority are still not visible.

That is going to be so until the day of the election. Even if party members solicit votes, the independents will share pleasantries and small talk, without ever revealing their mind. They may even say "yes" just to get you out of the way.

What is being conveniently forgotten is that at this time African Americans form only 13% of the US population. But why we hear about them more often is that their leadership had enough time to evolve and be prominent.

Non-Hispanic whites still form the majority at 69% with Hispanics at 16%.

But the Republican-controlled media wants to project the opposite so that people, not much aware of the statistics, can be brainwashed. They are not sure if bringing up the Condoleezza Rice trump card at the last moment may work or not.

So the easiest way to subdue the Democrats is to make them forget their possession of the most lethal Hillary-Obama weapon, by projecting Obama as a winner, with unlimited funding for the asking through the facade of the internet.

It remains to be seen whether Democratic leadership and the African American leadership will have the unconventional wisdom to realize that they are being led astray.

If they don't, the independent voters will definitely sway to the Republican side.

That is why the Republican media henchmen have no shame in calling American women b****** and w***** conveniently forgetting they too have women in their homes.

Whoever be the next President, unless that person is a miracle performer, it is bad popularity that is awaiting, due to the messed up economy.

What are they implying?

Is it that, if she is made President, she will go on changing her Cabinet Staff every other day?

Changing staff is a Presidential prerogative as given by the constitution. If a President finds that a staff member has outgrown his or her usefulness, he or she is definitely going to be asked to step down. Rarely congressional committees try to interfere with that Presidential authority.

Moreover, changing staff members is not something Hillary Clinton invented.

In their endeavor to become super-constitution makers, our media people are showing their utter ignorance about such matters. Not only that, they are exposing their unworthiness for their jobs.

It is high time for American media barons to change some, if not most, of their comely but ignorant staff, who think that sensationalism is the only thing the art of journalism is made of.

They showed their immaturity by thinking that Hillary Clinton can be driven away using dirty tricks, which even a kid will be ashamed to use even though they were all in adult suits.

In fact she proved her mettle by surviving and persisting this far against every obstacle the media put in her path.

When their efforts to insult her with a hired scarecrow who called her a b****, the media recruited one from their own fold to insult Chelsea Clinton with p****** and another to call Hillary a w****.

If these people -men or hermaphrodites- do not know how to treat women properly, they are not fit for their jobs. Otherwise, their moneyed employers also may be displaying their pedigree.

Probably, those are the very names they use to call their own women-folk.

If this is the type of vocabulary our media people picked up in their journalism classes, then it is high time our universities revamped their journalism curricula.

Otherwise, they may better rename their journalism courses as “Courses in Street Rowdyism”.

“Clinton has been under pressure to release her tax returns, especially from rival Sen. Barack Obama, who posted his 2000 to 2006 returns on his campaign Web site last week. Neither Obama nor Republican Sen. John McCain has made their 2007 tax returns public, though both say they will this month.”

When Barack Obama raised such a hue and cry about Hillary Clinton not making her tax return public, I thought he had done that before her.

American people thought she had committed some sin or that she had broken some rules.

But Barck Obama didn't tell us the whole truth.

Because on the date he or his campaign machinery made that accusation against Hillary Clinton, he hadn't published his 2007 tax return. And not until today.

What he did was publishing his past records, which have nothing to do with 2007. That even a small fry like I can do because it is all done for.

Media tried to underplay it by saying that Mr. McCain also did not publish his 2007 tax return.

Let us leave McCain alone. He assiduously kept away from the immature pranks of Barack Obama by not blaming both Democrats on this count.

Hope Barack Obama will treat his fellow Americans with the respect they deserve and not treat the Americans as imbeciles. We may be ignorant but not imbeciles.

We may have been when we elected Bush, but we have learned our lessons.

Now as for American media games.

American media highlighted the amount “$109M since 2000”.

I was laughing when foreign media highlighted “$20.4 million in income for 2007”.

Clintons paid 31% to American people as taxes and 9% to charities.

That put me in the right perspective.

After 9/11, I have started reading the foreign media too to arrive at the truth.

Now, does Barack Obama practice what he preaches?

No American President in history have so far recorded “rabble-rousing “ as his hobby.

If that is the case for a small envelop, what is the punishment if you use government machinery:

1. To usurp the constitution to become Head of State.
2. To use armed forces of a country for making money.
3. To kill people of the country using foreign mercenaries.

Naturally, you will take every precaution so that the law will not catch up with you.

• You will frame laws to protect you from future punishment.
• You will make sure that your own men succeed you to seats of power.
• You will make sure that your potential opponents are undermined.
• You will infiltrate your opposite party with impostors to weaken it.
• You will painstakingly nurture a dynamic young guy to lead those spies to foil the established leaders of the opposition.
• You will make sure that guy has inexhaustible amount of money to do internecine warfare destroying his own party.
• You will make sure that that guy has the support of the media to spread your word.
• You will make sure your ill-gotten money is transferred to foreign safe havens, in case none of this works.
• You will try to buy whoever is willing to change sides.

Sounds familiar, eh?

However, the only problem for such traitors is that small people like you or me can decide their future, provided we use our own brains to make our own judgment free of all biases, prejudices and influences.

No money can stop our brains to make our own decisions, if we chose to.

Thank God for not forgetting to put that faculty in before he closed the human skull.

As for political registration and affiliations, a lot of changes are desired.

How about this?

I was sitting at the DMV to renew my driver's license. I was waiting my turn either staring at the numbers on the digital counters or watching people around.

Then a family of four came and sat nearby. From their talk it was obvious that they recently moved to this state from another and needed to change their licenses as well as the vehicle registrations including number plates.

Then at some point I heard the son asking his parents," Which party I should sign for?" Then his sister also asked the same question.

Obviously they needed help with that inescapable section on voter's registration.

Dad's decision was pretty quick. He looked at his watch and impatiently shouted,"I don't have time. I have to go to work. You David sign for Republicans. Mary you are a Democrat."

Yeah, what I saw that day was the birth of a Republican and Democrat as decided by their father.

Yes, we are asked to determine the fate of our nation at odd hours when we are anxiously waiting for our turn before a desk or impatiently waiting in the line of the toilet in a government office.

And we sign up as Republican or Democrat with our mind set on something more important at that time.

In some countries either each political party invite us to their conventions and offices to familiarize us with their policies and manifestos. Or their cadres visit us to explain things. All decisions left to us with more time to think and learn.

Agreed the government doesn't force us to make decisions. Still a sizeable numbers of party affiliations are done while filling unrelated official forms.

That is also the reason why many people refuse to side with either and leave those entries blank, preferring to be independents.

But there is another side to the story too. Both Republicans and Democrats have dealt the nation badly starting with Kennedy. The only time we had a respite was the early Clinton years of positive economic growth only to be messed up by the Republican intern.

So most probably Americans may ignore the political system, if party registration and membership is left our own devices. So government has no choice but to prompt us at odd moments to do so.

Now the question is how can Barak Obama ask Hillary Clinton to withdraw when most of his supporters are from traditionally Republican stronghold?

I don't see a chance for both of them against McCain, though.

And I don't see many white guys in his meetings now-a-days after the unfortunate Rev. Wright outbursts against whites - possibly fearing reprisals from white extremists.

So there is every possibility that a sizeable number of white supporters we saw at Obama meetings were actually Republican imposters.

And I won't be surprised by Republican electoral tricks after the dirty tricks they played in Florida. Nor am I surprised by the naiveté of the Democrats who don't know that their party is infiltrated by Republican Special Forces.

Congrats to Al Gore for disappearing from the scene. Now he is enjoying the adulations and respects of a greater world. Had he been president we would have dumped him into history's garbage heap, considering the fact that our political affiliations are decided at odd moments in the most unlikely places.

But we have no way but to start thinking of it.

Unless we get away from both Republicans and Democrats, who know nothing but third-rate street games and tricks, we have no future, we are doomed.

Enough is enough.

In the aftermath of 9/11, having witnessed the towering inferno myself and the drama that unfolded after that, I knew both political parties were useless for us.

I prepared and collected signatures for an appeal to President Gerald Ford and President Jimmy Carter to come out of their respective parties and together take the lead to give us a third party. But that plan fizzled out when President Ford was incapacitated.

I know you guys and gals may have some difference of opinion on either or both of my selections. But those days I couldn't think of any other names.

Now at least I can bank on an independent like Mike Bloomberg.

The politics in our country has been in a downward spiral since Kennedy and both political parties have done grave injustice to us.

Democrats killed us morally. Republicans killed us physically.

If you search on the internet you will hear about how both parties indulged in immoral activities - only that Republicans were more adept at cover-up. For me both parties are same irrespective of how the media handled both parties regarding those scandals.

We neither want the Republican hole-diggers nor do we need their naïvely willing Democratic fallers into the hole.

Americans deserve better than be treated like gossip mongers and voyeurs. We need not be at the mercy of Republican political pimps and their prostitutes or even their Democratic customers.

We Americans need to be treated with dignity by our politicians!

Both the Republicans and Democrats failed us miserably!

We need a third political party!

(Sorry folks, if I have used inappropriate language. But then the human bodies I saw falling through the blinding dust from the towers on that fateful day prompt to me to write!)

No, it is not due to racism. In fact a whole generation of young whites who have gone to integrated multi-racial schools are now part of the electorate. They are not as much concerned about the color of skin as my generation were or as my forefathers were.

Yes, history is partly to blame.

But then, African American community forgot to nurture worthy successors to Martin Luther King's legacy, who can fire up the imagination of people of other colors too like he did.

What has recently undermined their chances is the emergence of Hispanics as the most prominent minority.Total numbers matter, even though the TV newscaster wants us to believe that the sampling of their pollster on the street is what the nation thinks.

So any statistics dished out by the condescending American media should be read against this population percentage. (Condescending? Yes. In fact I was amused when ABC interviewer tried to coerce Al Sharpton to support Obama including once where he was cut short as he started to talk about Civil Rights, something not likely to help their favorite. They immediately followed it with a feature on a woman behind Mike Bloomberg to confuse voters in case of any possible election threat from Bloomberg. Americans should be vigilant against manipulative acts of media under the guise of information provider, however popular and comely their paid interviewer is.)

Now what is Barak Obama's real record:

Only that he voted against Bush's Iraq adventure. He has no other legislative initiative of his own to show off.

But Democrats had the nerve to present such a guy as their potential nominee. And they have dug their own political grave by doing that. Why?

If Clinton is the Democratic nominee - Obama's votes will go to Republicans.

If Obama is the Democratic nominee - Clinton's votes will go to Republicans.

And Republican vote-bank is a solid block not available to trading like the Democratic one.

Whoever is the Democratic nominee, the Republican nominee wins hands down.

Congratulations Republicans! Even though your tricks and tactics are not something I would like to emulate!

What is striking is the fact that those women were elected by their societies to lead them more than once. They even led their people through threats of separatism, extremism and wars.

I don't care whether you are man enough to elect a woman president or not. But I am concerned when my own sex takes this woman-hating thing to the extremes.

What made me write this traitorous article?

Recently I was researching for a piece on the recent spate of piracy in the shores of Africa. Since my first search was not a targeted one, I got too many unrelated links back.

One such link was to an American feminist website. That particular item was a news story on the inclusion of an all-female Indian para-military contingent in the UN peace-keeping forces in Sierra Leone. They had to be brought in as rapes by militias and rioters increased.

What surprised me was a comment by a “brave” male below that. He decried recruitment of women for such jobs. Most ridiculous was his “kiddish” argument against it.

When lightning and thunder occur his little kids run to him for cover and not to his wife.

This type of talk is utterly shameful to his own sex which includes me too.

Okay buddy, I can visualize it. You are slouching on the sofa in your pajamas, with one sleepy eye on the idiot box and the other on a half-open gossip mag, with your restless feet jerking on the ottoman.

Then this bolt comes out of the blues to terrorize your kids. Their mom is toiling in the kitchen. So naturally the kids come to the only guy in the house who have nothing much to do in the house other than bothering their mom behind closed doors.

At any rate their mom is working, they are playing, and you are the only one with neither work or play.

Why should this guy feel threatened if females from a far away country are willing to fight in yet another distant land? Why should he care if their husbands have no problem with that?

Last but not the least, what was the need for insulting his own wife on the cyberspace in front of the whole world on hearing about women in a far away land?

If we don't want a woman president ok let it be, as long as the reasons are purely political.

But carrying this hate-woman-campaign to the extremes and beyond our shores is nothing but cowardice. And when you carry it to your own home, it is time to call a shrink.

If am really a man I should behave like one! Not piss in my pants when I hear anything feminine.

Don't start on that freedom of speech thing. That is entirely a different topic.

This guy, not that young, sees two burglars trying to break into a neighbor's house and shoots them dead. They turned out to be illegal immigrants later.

Great civic sense! No, problem. I would like to have such caring neighbors too as long as their gunshots don't pierce through my window and through my heart. In fact the law in that state allows preventive shooting in self-defense.

Then, you may ask, what is my problem, if it is within the law?

Only this one:

This guy of a patriot called 911 and let the police dispatcher know in advance about his intended good neighborly, mercy killing.

The police guy told him not to do it as the cops would be soon on the way. For his own safety he was asked to remain inside especially since the burglers were not on his property.

But this good Samaritan of a neighbor told the cop that law allows him to commit that murder, that he should mind his own business (which anyway is called law-enforcement whatever that means), and went out and killed those guys in cold blood.

What did he think was the job of the cops in this?

Just to record his brave, good neighborly deed? A clerk is enough for that. That saves money too on law-enforcement training too.

Are cops just ornamental scarecrows or just silent witnesses in a gory bullfighting arena?

Or, did he think that any illegality in commiting murder he doesn't know can be wiped away by ensnaring the cops into this?

If the guy was cocksure it is within the law, there was absolutely no need to intimate the cops.

The now fawning neighbors of this gunslinger should realize that a gun-totting neighbor can finally end up murdering them too, as in present day America not everybody can be expected to know everybody else in the neighborhood.

Now, a bulb lights up in my head:

How about moving to the Lonestar State?

Where else I will get such too helpful neighbors willing to commit murder on my behalf? Where else you can find such legal luminaries who can teach a law or two to the cops before committing murder?

May be, once there, I can steal my neighbor's wife, dispatch her husband heavenward, and then tell the court I was trying to protect her from her abusive husband - all according to the constitution.

This service you get only from New York Times.

See what they have achieved:

1. First publish an endorsement for Hillary Clinton
2. Then accuse John McCain of improper liaisons

Whatever ambiguous words they may have used, that is essentially the final impression that is being registered in the readers' mind.

Now let us see how this irresponsible or cunning behavior by the fourth estate affects both candidates.

As Hillary is the only candidate prominently endorsed by NYT, the public will consider them as pro-Clinton.

So the public can be thus manipulated to think that Hillary was behind the accusations against McCain, undermining her chances further.

Also, confirmed Republican antagonists of McCain are also provided a stick to beat him.

How long will American media carry on this romance with yellow journalism and manipulative behavior?

Since NYT has NOW proved that they are neither pro-Hillary nor pro-McCain, will they have the guts - that is, if they really have the guts- to tell their readers which third candidate they are actually working for?