For quite a while now, John McCain has gotten a free pass from the media. The reason could be that they are still buying into the whole “maverick” myth, even though McCain is not the same John McCain of 2000. Hell, he isn’t even the same John McCain of 2006. This is the guy who used to call evangelical nuts like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson “agents of intolerance” but, couldn’t kiss up to them fast enough when he decided to run for president again. This is the same guy who introduced an immigration reform bill and, when it proved unpopular with the far-right of the Republican base, said he would oppose his own bill. This is a guy who, as a victim of torture in Vietnam, used to be against our use of torture but, in a flip-flop, voted against banning torture by the CIA.

But, probably worst of all, McCain has talked for years about his opposition to lobbyists and special interests but,the past two weeks saw no less than 5 high-profile resignations from his campaign. All 5 were lobbyists.

However, one high-profile member of his campaign, in particular, may prove to be a real problem for McCain. His name is Charlie Black and his is finance co-chair for the McCain campaign. Often, when we think of lobbyists, we might think about lobbyists for energy companies, cigarette makers or the pharmaceutical industry. However, Charlie Black’s claim to fame is none of this. Instead, Charlie Black has represented some of the most murderous dictators the world has known.

Some of these names you might know. Black has represented the now-deceased dictator of the Phillipines, Ferdinand Marcos, who may have been responsible for as many as 10,000 deaths and Jonas Savimbi, a rebel leader whose decades-long civil war in Angola may have cost as many as one million lives.

Of course, to ask Black, he either represented these people before they turned bad or was trying to get them to change their ways.

The problem is that, if you have a record of representing people with unsavory records, it’s kind of hard to believe that you are getting duped that often.

For now, McCain is sticking by his man. This doesn’t surprise me. John McCain now wants to be President more than he wants to serve America and will say/do anything to achieve that end.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Surprise — more race-baiting from the Clinton campaign!

This time, it’s from the candidate herself.

In attempts to make her case for the nomination (though her chances are currently slim), she wants to remind us that she is the candidate of white voters.

“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.

Now, how is it that you have a much broader coalition when Obama has some of those same working-class white voters, some of those white women voters you tout, a solid majority of the black vote, a solid majority of the youth vote and more independent voters.

That, to me, is quite a broad base.

However, what Clinton is really doing is trying to remind white voters that Obama is the “black candidate” and insinuate that white America may not vote for a black guy.

Obviously, desperation is kicking in because, the kitchen sink strategy just went into overdrive.

Popularity: 17% [?]

Well, Democrats, you just might have done it.

You find yourself on the precipice of losing your black supporters during this year’s election cycle. If you do, you will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

McClatchy News Service has run a story about black voters and their possibility of staying home if they feel Obama is cheated out of the nomination. I can’t lie — I know I can’t stand McCain but, with Hillary Clinton trying to be Republican-light, I ain’t feelin’ her too tough, either.

Though they get the views of,primarily, voters in Indiana, I hear people from all over the country expressing similar disdain for the way things are going down in this election. Some might call it bitter or sour grapes but, when black people have so greatly supported a party for so long, to get slighted will turn a lot of folks off.

We also see how the so-called big tent of the Democrats really doesn’t have room for opinionated black people so, this is also leaving many to wonder where we really stand with them.

Democrats, the race is your to lose. If Clinton gets the nod, it better be because she flat-out won and not because of political gaming on the part of the party. Otherwise, you might have to kiss the black vote goodbye.

Popularity: 15% [?]

Honestly, I wish big money weren’t such a requirement to be President. I think a lot of good people with good ideas get left out because they can’t raise the big bucks. But, at least for now, we are stuck with this system so, how much money one raises is a big deal.

In January, the news was that Barack Obama outraised Hillary Clinton by more than 2-to-1. Her campaign brought in about $14 million while his brought in $36 million, which was record for a primary candidate.

The February numbers are rolling in and Hillary Clinton’s camp released their total — $35 million for the month, which is nothing to sneeze at. However, it appears that Obama’s campaign may be releasing a number that will shatter this amount. Insiders are hinting that they may be talking about a number in the range of $50 million for the month.

This means that the Obama campaign could set yet another new bar for fundraising. Even more interesting is who’s donating to his campaign. A huge number of his donors are donating $100 or less. This means that he can consistently come back to these donors for donations for the remaining primary races as well as the general election, should he be the nominee.

So, if money is an indicator, Obama seems to be the people’s choice.

Popularity: 17% [?]