It's an interesting news day in Gotham City this morning, as the major New York dailies are shelling all the camps of the remaining viable presidential candidates.

The New York Times goes into detail as to why the Lincoln Savings debacle makes viable the current scandal over John McCain's relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman even if there was no sexual aspect to it.

Considering how a story about Cindy McCain's drug use coverup was breaking just before this latest tale of misbehavior came out, one has to wonder if this alleged affair isn't just a salacious smoke screen intended to bury a real scandal - the use of political connections to not only squelch a felony drug investigation of Mrs. McCain, but to assassinate the character of the DEA informant who forced her to go public with her abuse problems. Wikipedia has a concise summary with links of the situation here.

Meanwhile Maureen Dowd excoriates Hillary not only for using Obama's speeches as an uncited source for her latest campaign slogans, but also for digging up ammunition for the Republican campaign to use against Obama should she falter in her effort to bend the DNC delegate rules in her favor. As MoDo puts it, "we’re only moments away from Hillary asking Obama: 'Can’t you control your spouse?' " referring to Michelle Obama's recent ill-considered commentary about national pride. This appears certainly to play into the jingoist entrenchment of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Speaking of the VRWC, it appears to have switched sides regarding Hillary. Instead of following MoDo's lead and going after Hillary, both NYT columnist and VRWC card-carrying member David Brooks and The New York Observer ride hard to Hillary's defense. Brooks seems not to have noticed that Obama has won the last eleven Democratic primary events against Hillary, presenting instead the tired broadside that Obama is too young and inexperienced to handle a "seventy-something" Congressional Chair delegation which he implies that la Clinton would have wrapped around her little finger. But, hey, David! Whatever works to keep the weaker of the Democratic candidates - the only one McCain can beat - in the race, right? Who cares if your facts aren't necessarily correct (which they rarely are)?

With that in mind, the low-brow The New York Observer is attempting to aid and abet the attempted theft of the Democratic nomination by spreading the meme that Obama's successes are due to the Cult-of-Obama. At least The Observer is willing to present a counter-view from Joe Trippi, Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign manager and former senior adviser to John Edwards’ presidential campaign, who noted that the cult slander is a last ditch attempt to rescue a "last of its kind" campaign, and would result in the loss of millions of Obama votes in the general election, promoting a McCain electoral victory.

That is the point of the exercise to rescue Hillary. McCain - despite all of the rancor he engenders in the so-called conservatives - is seen by the corporatists to be the only one they can trust with power. After Lincoln Savings, he isn't about to rattle his cage lest sensitive information about his real involvement were to emerge. Therefore, Hillary has to be Lame John's opponent.

All of this electoral hoopla is well and fine, but the real devil that requires his due is escaping notice.

Bernard Weiner, Co-Editor, The Crisis Papers, asserts that it would be "Better to go into 2009 without wearing our usual rose-colored glasses" because "Obama and Clinton are centrist Democrats who are beholden to many of the same corporatist forces that pull the strings in Washington and have done so for decades." This can be seen in the desperate attempt by the White House to rescue the Protect America Act. Blogger Mike Kuykendall opines that this effort wasn't intended to protect the nation as Bush bloviated, but was instead intended to protect big American corporations from being found liable for damages in lawsuits. Bush's Supreme's are performing judicial activism in defense of manufacturers of lethal products against those they have harmed, so the strategy isn't limited to the false national defense sector.

Kuykendall continues, pleading: "Can we all get past the fear-driven politics and try to use a little reason in our national discourse?"

Abandon fear-driven power mongering??? You ask much, Mike!

I used to work with former Nazi German citizens. It wasn't hard to bring out the fascist programming in them, especially when they were caught up in an action before they could think. It's amazing how quickly they can still snap out that stiff right arm when they think others are doing so!

It's no different with Bush supporters today. There is NO thought going on between their ears, and they are proud of it. Attempting to reach such people using logic is a waste of effort. After decades of striving gain total control of the American people, do you really think that the corporofascists who back Bush would surrender those hard-won advantages just because they make sense for the survival of the nation? You have a higher opinion of our fellow citizens than I do!

The effort you propose, however, does have value if it is directed at those who are allegedly on our side. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are two specific examples of whom I write. While they aren't lily pure of corporofascist taint, they are at least closer to the ideal than the Republicans are - yet they vote as if they are still in the majority. Despite this obvious bias, there is no good reason why the electorate cannot reclaim them for the benefit of the nation.

Paul Craig Roberts, who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan's first term and later Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, is willing to cut Reid, Pelosi & Associates more slack than I am. "For one reason or another, they have let the Orwellian-named Protect America Act expire. Perhaps the Democrats have finally caught on that they cannot function as a political party as long as they continue to permit Bush to spy on them."

Male Bovine Excrement, says I. I see this move by Reid, Pelosi & Associates as merely another limp campaign strategy to gain a tenuous political advantage rather than a reasoned defense of the Constitution against the corporofascist excesses of CheneyBush. Without a serious turnover in the makeup of the Congress, the Republicans will continue to run things from the minority side of the aisle. Going along to get along doesn't qualify as change, nor as qualification for higher office.

But what of our current national situation? Is there hope? I don't know. I don't see anyone out there that I would trust with the kind of power Bush has assumed without opposition or consequence. He's established a precedent which is going to require someone of much higher integrity than anyone public today has to reverse it.

It is my firm opinion that we have reached the end of the line for the two-party duopoly if the health of the nation is to be restored. We have reached the condition against which George Washington attempted to warn against. Americans need to abandon party politics and return to an active role in the governance of this nation, but with a new season of Dancing With The Stars about to begin, there is little hope of that.

Far too easy to let the corporate news decide.

Check out my other web pages at American Realistan and Blogcritics.