by Barack Obama is probably the story of the year. He started running for President back in October 2004 before he was even a U.S. Senator. It's been all about him - not the party - since then.

Obama diluted and overwhelmed the core, frequently voting Democratic party base. Smart? Okay. But try telling the regular Party base that their nominee has been decided by a bunch of newly registered 20-year olds, and I'm sure "smart" is the last word they would choose to describe it.

The Obama strategy was what I call The Field of Dreams strategy, "If we win it, they will come." Barack Obama was never about appealing to middle-class, working-class Democrats. It was about cobbling together a support base of newly registered people, the African-American vote, and the left-wing financiers. It was smoke and mirrors to suggest he had the backing of the majority of Democratic voters.

Plain and simple, get the PR bounce coming out of Iowa, another Caucus state, cobble together other caucus states and the southern states, stay close in the larger states, produce a math model that implies you are the inevitable winner, and get the media to help you push Clinton out of the race. And just in case those pesky Clintons think they are more entitled than Obama is entitled, the Clintons of all people would be accused early on of being racists allowing Obama to put on his Martry Coat of many colors, complete with Chip-on-The-Shoulder inserts.

But Iowa was white, middle-class folks voting for him. No, middle-class, middle-aged Democrats wer not voting for him in large numbers. It was newly registered and activists who swelled the ranks of turnout in that Caucus state. It wasn't until New Hampshire where the contrast was shown - and the media missed it. However, Wisconsin, a state next door to Illinois where Obama probably made sure he had exposure in the preceeding years, made it look like he was a mainstream contender. But, hell, we all know that Wisconsin's capital city, Madison, has twice elected two Socialist mayors.

If Barack Obama wasn't so arrogant he would have known that the two issues that have "outted" him, Wright and bitterness, could not have stayed in the closet for too long. Then, again, Obama's campaign wasn't set-up to have to go the distance either. It was designed to hi-jack the Party before it realized what had happened, and who they had ended up with.

Then came the Jeremiah Wright problem. This was not a shock to Obama. He aleady knew Wright would be a problem a long time ago. He did vet his Pastor. He lied about that. He did break off with him. He lied about that too in the Philadelphia speech. We've been hearing that atleast as far back as the night before Obama publically announced he was running for President, Obama called Wright to tell him he was not to be at his announcement. He may have also told him that he would not be playing any other role in his campaign. The media never did look into why Wright suddenly retired from his church and conveniently took a cruise while Obama was telling us in Philadelphia how he was "standing by his man" and white grandmother.

We all thought those were kind words - or were they? To someone who had already been thrown under the bus last year, they were probably adding insult to injury - and lies. Wright surfacing was not the rantings of some elderly man with delusional ideas about our government or whose past experiences might make him say hateful things. No, Wright surfacing now was to shine a light on Obama's dishonest campaign - and throw him under the bus.

And did you listen carefully to Micelle Obama on CNN? She was right on message while not answering any questions about "why" Wright would be looking to hurt her husband's chances to be the nominee. She knows why. Obama knows why too. Maybe if they had chosen a church for a spiritual purpose instead of looking at it like another resume' bullet point, they could've avoided all this. Wrights' church was packed with people like the Obamas -professionals who were there to network, not get religion. The Obamas already had been baptised at Harvard. He needed a church home to be credible in politics.

The second issue that shows Obama for the fraud that he is was the San Francisco comment about small town Americans being so bitter they have to cling to guns, religion, and hatred for people not like them. A guy who has his own spiritual/religious connection doesn't usually describe religious others in this way! Did anyone else see the contradiction here?

The San Francisco fundraiser comment was probably the first honest thing the guy said since his campaign kicked off. Having no resume', no experience, and no record to run on, Obama had to fill out the gaps with platitudes, flowery speeches, and a pop-culture-driven media show. Armed with high-priced consultants, Obama stayed on message and played his scripted part - until San Francisco, that is.

When taken separately, these items in and of themselves probably don't add up to anything other than "gaffes" or "unfortunate associations." However, when you throw in Obama's left-wing associates who financed him up the political ladder in Illinois, Resko real estate deals, and everything else, you begin to see a picture of a guy who has been less than honest about alot of things - especially his ambition.

The story this fall will not be about race if Obama ends up being the nominee. It will be about the conning of the Democratic Party and superdelegates that colluded in it.

"We are who we've been waiting for..." said Barack Obama. Oh really? Then I guess the majority of us had better start looking for another Party. And we might as well start this November with our "bitterness" votes - or no votes at all.

Obama has tried to have it all ways, and that includes his relationship with Wright. He threw Wright over the night before he announced he was running for President. So clearly, he knew the guy was going to be problematic.

Obama didn't choose that church for spiritual reasons. He chose it like most of us would regard adding something we thought we needed for our resumes'. Obama got his religion at Harvard in case anyone is confused here.

Obama was being asked about Wright as far back as atleast December that we know of. He ignored it. And until the tapes surfaced a few weeks back, the Obama campaign strategy was not to discuss race on any level - except to accuse people in the Party of being racists when it served him.

Obama and his platitudes coach put that Philly speech together because THEY HAD TO - NOT BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO. At first blush, it appeared that Obama was displaying character and intellectual prowess by separating out Wright's words from the man himself. Remember Obama said he could not disavow his relationship with Wright. Those were kind words - or WERE THEY?

Wright's surfacing at this time is not an accident. Obama lied in that Philly speech and Wright knew it. It has been reported that Obama called Wright the night before he announced he was running for President and told him that he could not be involved in the announcement or the campaign. Obama already disavowed and distanced himself. The rest of us just didn't know it.

Now, don't go getting all excited and start handing out Obama Martyr Coats, complete with Chips-On-The-Shoulder inserts! Obama is not a victim here by any means.

CAN YOU SAY PAYBACK IS A BITCH?