On Wednesday Dame Reginald Dwight (a.k.a. Elton John) sang to a crowd of Hillary Clinton supporters at Radio City Music Hall.  The benefit raised about $2.5 million in a state that Clinton already won, but it was necessary because she is nearly $20 million in the red and the polling data from the upcoming Pennsylvania primary does not look good as Clinton’s 20 point lead dwindled to almost nothing (some polls have her losing).

Clinton, her family, friends and supporters all leapt to their feet to applaud an idiotic rant from Dwight where he opined on why Clinton was floundering in the polls and fundraising. Before they began applauding they really should have thought about the comments that Elton made because the only people who already voted for or against Clinton are Democrats.

I'm pretty sure that even in Britain it is considered bad form to bite the hand that feeds you and Clinton needs fed!  She lags in both votes and money and is in desperate need of both if she wants to fend off her doom on April 22nd.

Sir Elton (oh, did I call him Dame – well a title is a title and he wanted Queen, but Elizabeth has that one) addressed the crowd and his remarks are being reported as if they mattered because he made them.  They mattered because what he said was endorsed (with a smile and a bad joke by Clinton herself) and because they had to do with Democrats - not Republicans.

Republicans have not had a crack at voting for or against Hillary yet and one would think that even in the heat of being serenaded by someone as talented as the 300 pound poof from Britain - the Clinton camp would have realized that playing the "they don't like me because I'm a woman" card - again - would not be very smart this late in the campaign.  They don't think well when things are scripted, as this clearly was since stand up is not exactly Hillary's greatest asset.

Dwight started out innocent enough, “I've always been a Hillary supporter,” said the 61-year-old drag queen.  “There is no one more qualified to lead America.”  I don’t know about that – surely there is someone better than a woman who has no experience in running anything except interference for “bimbo eruptions” when her husband was POTUS.  Then he said this:

“I'm amazed by the misogynistic attitudes of some of the people in this country. And I say to hell with them.... I love you Hillary, I'll be there for you.”

Instead of attempting to smile and crack a joke – Clinton should have done something to distance herself from the broad generalization that Democrats are not voting for her because they like an anti-Semitic black guy more than they like women in general.  What a stupid remark and silly argument, but Clinton stood by and laughed and giggled while it was made.

The idea that a Brit is worried that Americans hold contempt or an unfounded hatred of women is almost as silly as thinking that because Great Britain elected Margaret Thatcher to the Premiership in 1979 that there is an affinity toward powerful conservative women in that country.

Besides, tolerance is hardly a virtue of Britain and it has nothing to do with the fact that they lack freedoms that we have in America and have a system of governance that allowed a radical and racist group to not only go unchecked for a decade, but to be exported to the rest of the world is evidence that we should probably ignore anyone that wears more sequins than Gay Aiken.

Skinheads trace their roots to the 1950s in Britain.  The British government ignored their violence and hatred for Pakistanis and other Asian minorities as well as Jews and blacks until Margaret Thatcher became the Prime Minister in 1979.  Skinheads were unapologetic for their violent attacks and made no attempt to distinguish between men and women (I guess that is great for Sir Elton).  Skinheads found all people belonging to minority groups to be “dogs” and less than human and therefore ripe for the kicking (with heavy black boots).

They saluted like Nazis, styled their “uniforms” like the SS and modeled their organization like something from 1930s Germany and now we have a Brit coming to America to give speeches about how much Democrats hate women?  Far be it from me to stop Dwight from speaking, but British entertainers should come to America and embrace the nation and entertain us.  They should get their nose out of our politics.

What is really amazing is that no matter what happens Democrats are going to put forward either a woman or a black for the most powerful job in the world – hardly intolerant is it?

Elton John should hop on a plane and take himself back to his native Britain and worry about the problems of that country.  A place where Muslim youth feel persecuted, where unemployment is rampant and poverty immense and where the most powerful minority in the British government is the modern day equivalent of the Groom of the Stool.

Using Dwight's logic Democrats are the only people that have a problem with women.  We already know what happens when Clinton begins losing ground to Obama: undoubtedly she will cry at some point before the Pennsylvania primary and some people on cable will pretend it was genuine.  She will take to the stage and give a speech about how hard she works and then, and only then, will she remind people about the anti-Semitic preacher loving Obama.  Unfortunately for her - it is too late.  Obama is virtually unstoppable.

It is far more likely that Hillary Clinton is not ahead in this race because she carries the name Clinton.  Her husband’s legacy of impeachment and scandal are reminders of what another Clinton Administration would be.  Is it possible that, like Benedict Arnold, people with the last name Clinton will forever be treated more harshly than those who are lucky enough not to carry that name?  Are we going to come up with a word for those who were affiliated with the former president and are now considered political pariahs?  It is not misogyny taking away Hillary's last chance to be the President of the United States - it is the American people's desire to throw out the dynastic players belonging to the Clinton and Bush families.

Dame Elton just needs to go home.  If some in the celebrity set really wanted to help Democratic candidates they should just be quiet because these endorsements have a way of backfiring (remember Whoopie Goldberg’s outburst for John Kerry).  There is a fine line before supporters become liabilities and for Elton John that line was crossed when he showed just how uninformed he was and declared the Democratic Party a place where women are unwelcome.

Hillary Clinton needs the votes of the people that Elton declared misogynists and she is not going to get them if the sequins jacket wearing poof comes to America bashing people in the very party he wants to replace President George Bush.

Steve Yuhas is a radio talk show host on AM 600 KOGO in southern California and may be reached atsteve@steveyuhas.com or www.steveyuhas.com

Former President Bill Clinton took to the campaign trail on Thursday and reminded people exactly why the Clintons should never be permitted back inside (besides the fact that the maids have to count the towels and comforters when they arrive and depart): they cannot tell the truth.

Here is what the former president told a crowd, “"I remember when we were young, right out of law school, she went down and tried to join the Army and they said 'Your eyes are so bad, nobody will take you.'"

I thought something sounded familiar about the story, but I did not remember the specifics so off to Lexis I went and there it was.  Hillary Clinton told a similar story back in 1994 that went something like this.

After she graduated from Yale Law School she walked into the Marine Corps recruiting office in Fayetteville, Arkansas and told the Marine inside she wanted to enlist.  The year was 1975 and the exchange that followed allegedly went something like this:

"He [the Marine recruiter] looked at me, and in those days that was before I learned how to wear contact lenses; I had these really thick glasses on. He said, ‘How bad's your eyesight?' I said, ‘It's pretty bad.' …Finally said to me, he said, 'You're too old. You can't see. And you're a woman.…But maybe the dogs (Army) would take you.'"

Did nobody brief Bill on the lies told during the 1990s?  Did her campaign learn nothing from the gaffe over her Bosnia combat experience?  Since this is not the first time Hillary Clinton has had trouble remembering things having to do with the military – maybe someone should inquire further because if anyone keeps good records – it is the United States military.

First someone just needs to look at the facts: Hillary Clinton was just out of law school (and not just any law school – Yale Law School) and that would mean she would enter the USMC as an officer.  Recruiting stations (including the one that used to be in Fayetteville) were for enlisted men and women.  Lawyers go through an entirely different process when they want to serve – in her case she would have been permitted to commission as an officer as a Judge Advocate General (or JAG) and her age would not have mattered (and neither would her glasses).  Everything has an ability to be "waived" and that is as true today as it was as far back as the 1950s.  Do we really believe that the USMC would just say - "Nope" to a Yale Law grad who wanted to VOLUNTEER?

The problem with the story she was telling a group of female veterans is that whoever wrote the speech looked up the requirements for ‘enlisting’ in the military.  She was not going to enlist as a lawyer – she would have been a commissioned officer at a time in our history when the military needed volunteers to be officers (and enlisted folks) in the military.

Prior to Bill Clinton re-telling the story of his wife’s unfortunate inability to serve our country (something only brought up every decade and a half or so) the last thing military that Hillary Clinton did was take a wild ride into Bosnia in 1996.  She told the world, and she did it many times not just once, that she ‘mis-spoke’ when she talked about running to the waiting cars as they (she and her daughter) came under sniper fire. 

It is too bad that video was found that showed Hillary Clinton and her daughter accepting flowers from a little girl (or was that Hillary shielding her from the snipers) and having a little meet and greet when they arrived in Tuzla.

Far be it from me to be cynical about the Clintons, but all these stories do is remind us why they should not be put back in a position of power.  That is not to say that Obama is ready for the Oval Office either – his anti-Semitic awarding, Hamas manifesto printing, church membership is evidence of that, but the Clintons are pathological.

Hillary Clinton tells stories over and over and over again about arriving under fire when she visited Bosnia and it is called a mis-speak, but ask any member of the military if we do not recall the exact moment that we first felt in danger during our service.  During my program the other night I received no less than two dozen stories from veterans ranging from Korea to the present who remember their first contact with the enemy.  How does Hillary Clinton remember being fired upon to such a degree that if she were in the Marine Corps that she would warrant a Combat Action Ribbon and get away with calling it a mis-speak instead of a lie when it is proved false?

There were calls from the press (to be fair only some of the press) for John Kerry to release all of his military records (something he still has not done) and it is almost certain that John McCain will be asked to sign, if he has not already, a Standard Form 180.  That is the form used to release every record that the Department of Defense or any of the services maintain on members of the military – from the Revolution to the present.  What is unknown by some is that if you so much as step foot inside a recruiters office a form is generated and it is maintained by an office in St. Louis, Missouri.

So sign the form Senator Clinton and let’s see if your eyes were bad because no recruiter would tell you in 1975 that you could not join – they’re not qualified to do it.  Their job is to enlist men and women – not to turn them away.  It is asking the American people to engage in “a willing suspension of disbelief” to think that the military would ever turn away a Yale Law graduate in a time in our history when the military needed people to fill JAG positions like never before.

Bill and Hillary Clinton have told some real whoppers over the years, but nothing gets under my skin the way they talk about the military and the real life military encounters they allegedly had when, in reality, nobody has ever bothered to check.  The Clinton campaign will say that no records exist, but I know enough about military recruiting to know that they keep records on you from the minute you walk in the door and a recruiter (a retired Marine who was recruiting around the same time as Hillary Clinton walked in the door) told me the following:

Can you think of anything more idiotic than a Marine turning away a Yale lawyer who wanted to serve during the end of the Vietnam War?  He would have had his nuts handed to him for that.  We kept ‘contact’ sheets back then and they all got turned in, I’m sure it is somewhere in Saint Louis.  Maybe she remembers the name of the recruiter and if she doesn’t I’m sure the Corps does!

That’s true and he’d be young enough to remember since a recruiter would be about the same age as Clinton.  Surely the guys from Arkansas can be identified quite easily and we can put this story in the same bin as the one from Bosnia.  Let’s get this SF 180 signed and delivered to the records folks and will the reporters out there please start taking some notes because when a story has four endings it is a fable – not reality.  Start fact checking.  Why is it that talkers and bloggers can pick this stuff up, but journalists (you know the kind of people that write news) can’t seem to figure it out?

Steve Yuhas is a radio talk show host on AM 600 KOGO in southern California and may be reached atsteve@steveyuhas.com or www.steveyuhas.com