Something Ain't Right

ELECTION 2008 Page

HOME

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE DEMOCRAT NATIONAL CONVENTION AND MICHAEL PHELPS

Michael Phelps' recent phenomenal record breaking Olympic performance has prompted the Democrats, who are currently at their National Convention, to take political advantage of this historical event and add another plank to their platform.

Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca), stated, "Michael's record breaking 8 Gold Medal winning performance at a single Olympics was unfair and is an indicator of discrimination against women and other underrepresented groups in men's swimming. This problem is endemic in this sport and reaches historically back all the way to the 1972 Munich Olympics and Mark Spitz' 7 Gold Medal performance. We must change the rules of men's swimming to allow equal access to women."

The new Democrat platform plank will read as follows:

We recognize that the right for men to win Gold Medals at the Olympics is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve the men's right to strive to achieve these medals. However, we believe that the right to win Gold Medals is subject to reasonable regulation. We can work together to enact and enforce common sense laws and improvements - like ensuring that there are enough Gold Medals awarded in men's swimming to go around to each American athlete regardless of sex, and that no American male swimmer should be allowed to be awarded more than their fair share of two Gold Medals at any one Olympics. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right for men to win Gold Medals and protect the self-esteem of our women athletes.

The Democrat plan, starting with the 2012 Olympic Games in London, will go as follows. Women will be allowed to participate in men's swimming and be given a half a length's head start in the pool. If a male swimmer with a similar superior overwhelming physical condition as Phelps participates, he will have to undergo certain restrictions before and during event.

For example, Phelps' well-known daily food intake of 12,000 calories, the equivalent of devouring one under-aged female Chinese gymnast, will be reduced by half. Barack Obama was actually in favor of pushing a more stringent diet of about 2,000 calories, the normal range for most adults. He quoted part of a speech he gave in May of 2008, stating, "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want, and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times." But the Democrat National Committee did not want to appear to be too severe.

Also, the male athlete would not be allowed to wear the new high tech sharkskin Speedo swimsuit, and instead have to compete in the event outfitted in a pair of Kim Kardashian's jeans.

If the male swimmer overcomes these restrictions meant to level down his performance, a certain amount of his winning medals will be set aside for the female participants.

Pelosi added, "Something needs to be done and Washington will do it. We have four years to work out the exact formula for set asides and will take in to consideration women's historical underrepresentation in the awarding of Gold Medals in men's Olympic swimming events all the way back to Mark Spitz' performance in Munich. Both Michael and Mark may have to surrender some of their medals."

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

REASONS WHY DEMOCRATS ARE ZOMBIES

1. They seek brains

2. They return from the dead and are able to perform simple functions such as voting

3. They practice weird religions like voodoo

4. They have no free will

5. They are relentless

6. They are slow moving, and wooden with minimal intelligence and speech (Think Al Gore)

7. They are unable to participate in reasonable conversation

8. Environmental disasters cause them to become animated

9. They are uncoordinated and unathletic

10. They are ugly and dress funny

11. They like to form into mobs

12. They smell like rotting corpses and are adverse to personal hygiene

13. Their souls are controlled by others

14. They want to destroy modern civilization

15. Arguing with a zombie is futile

16. They are incapable of understanding economics or logic

17. They refuse to confront reality

18. They have no sense of patriotism whatsoever

19. They are anti-military

20. They have no sex appeal

21. It is hard to tell zombie males from females

22. They have no sense of moral, personal responsibility

23. They engage in extremely offensive behavior

26. They insist you must experience being a zombie before criticizing self-destructive zombie behavior

25. They support gun control

26. They want to depopulate the Earth of humans

27. They wouldn't think twice about taking a baby from a womb

28. They want to take what is yours and redistribute it to the masses

29. Their mobs resemble labor unions

30. There is no leadership to speak of

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN CHOOSES SELF AS HIS VICE-PRESIDENTIAL RUNNING MATE

Senator John McCain has announced the selection of Senator John McCain as his vice presidential running mate for the 2008 Republican Party ticket.

McCain said that McCain was a natural choice for the ticket. Among the reasons he stated were:

McCain is already well-known

The selection of McCain saved both time and money in the vetting process

McCain appeals to the middle, while at the same time appealing to some of the conservatives who are not sold on McCain

McCain has military leadership experience and will give the ticket a deep, impressive bench

McCain is a safe, "conventional," white male candidate

McCain's selection will erase doubts and cynicism over the alternative selection of a less qualified younger person chosen solely to balance the age issue

McCain's age and experience will appeal to the Florida voters

McCain's ancestors were immigrants

McCain's blue collar Irish name will connect with ethnic, blue collar voters in key states

McCain is an accomplished TV debater. While McCain is debating Obama, McCain can debate Obama's vice presidential selection

McCain has an appealing and wholesome family with children serving in the military, and an attractive and classy wife with a solid business background

McCain is telegenic, appears at ease on television, likeable, and has a sense of humor the disarms critics

McCain has a tough on crime reputation

McCain is a stalwart defender of human life

McCain is a reformer who could help clean up Washington

McCain displays a mental and physical toughness from his POW days and cancer survival

The selection of McCain will really focus the Republican ticket and give the campaign a jolt of energy it needs and seeks

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ELECTION 08- 18 JUN

I have decided that I am not voting for John McCain. I am tired of the Republican Party with its pork, corruption, ballooning budgets, immigration problems, high taxes, tolerance of abortion, declining schools, socialism, global warming hysteria, and the economic ignorance of our so-called leaders. Neither party seems interested in correcting any of these problems nor I do not believe that there will be a big difference between his administration and an Obama administration. I am not ready to vote for a kooky, fringe 3d party candidate. So I will probably write-in someone else.

Other than the war, there is not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties these days, and I am tired of settling for squishy, arrogant conservatives. We got to this point because demoralized, short-sighted, right wing voters in this country have continuously voted for the Republican candidate who is "safe enough" to get elected, and this has resulted in a string of moderates. We never look further than the next election. Why don't we break the cycle this time and send a powerful message? We can suffer through four years of a liberal candidate if this helps usher in a change. Remember, it took a Carter to get us a Reagan.

I don't care who McCain chooses as a running mate. The conventional wisdom is that McCain needs to choose someone who will appeal to the conservative base. Isn't that backwards? Aren't candidates at this point supposed to be looking for someone who will appeal to the middle? Or someone who can help haul in a state with a large electoral count? McCain isn't looking for someone in the middle because he is in the middle. And who cares about the vice-president anyways? They are by nature very moderate and therefore very ineffective leaders. Have any of them made a difference in my lifetime? Dick Cheney was never interested in running for president. Al Gore marginalized himself by going off the deep end of environmentalism. George Bush the elder was hardly a Reaganite. Dan Quayle and Walter Mondale never made a difference in America's politics. Ford became an ineffective President and Agnew resigned. Humphrey did nothing after Johnson, and Johnson went far left after Kennedy. I could go on and on.

I am tired of seeing a president who is elected by a razor thin margin (Bush) or one who is elected with less than 50% of the vote (Clinton). I would really like to see a real leader who steps out and motivate the voters enough to give him or her a real margin of victory. One who will not suffer through record low approval ratings like our current President (and Congress).

So I will not vote for McCain and I am removing my endorsement from my homepage (Not that anyone will notice.). I am tired of being an enabler for the broken Republican Party. I will even consider crossing the aisle and voting for Obama if he selects Clinton as a running mate (highly unlikely). I would even consider sending them a campaign contribution. I would pay to see that three-ring circus. Unlike the liberal Democrats I am not so partisan that I would vote to elect an obviously unqualified candidate. I do not like the direction the country is moving right now and Obama would speed up the process. It would be better to have a Democrat at the helm when the train goes off the tracks. This would open the door for a real conservative to rise up. Maybe someone like Bobby Jindal in 2012.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ELECTION BLOG- 30 APRIL

I haven't posted anything to my election blog in a long time. I have just been sitting around bitter, clinging to my religion and my guns. That is, I am one of any number of Americans that does not agree with Obama's radicalism. Here are some thoughts on the presidential race.

The Democrat nomination process is a big mess. We are getting late in the season and two Democrats are still left tearing into each other. The Democrats have played identity politics for so long that when it becomes time to make a decision between a woman and a minority, they are paralyzed. There are also arguments about the use of super delegates to supersede the will of the voters, and changing the rules of the Florida and Michigan non-votes. If the Democrats wanted a smooth process then why did they put screaming Howard Dean in charge?

Isn't it funny to listen to three multi-millionaire lawyers accuse each other of being elitists. Each of these candidates needs to be briefed prior to a public appearance so that they know what to say in front of middle America. The reason they have to raise hundreds of millions of dollars on the campaign trail is so they can buy a media image that makes them appear to be like one of us.

All of our candidates like to talk about the evilness of special interests. That is, the evilness of their opponents' special interests.

They also talk about the problem of lobbyists. There is nothing wrong with having lobbyists. Lobbying is just another way for American companies or grass roots organizations to participate in the democratic process. They problem is the number of lobbyists we have. We have too many because our federal budget is too big. If you want to reduce the number of lobbyists, cut the budget.

I am so glad the Reverend Wright issue was exposed. It certainly helped to put Barack's and Michelle's anti-American attitudes into perspective. I could never figure out how two very rich Ivy Leaguers could have so much disdain for the country that made a path to wealth possible for therm. Their relation with their pastor helps to explain everything from Barack's refusal to wear a US flag lapel pin, his "typical white person" comment, and his comments about bitter Americans clinging to guns and religion to Michelle stating that we live in a "mean" country and her comment about being proud of her country for only the first time.

As divisive and angry a racist Pastor Wright is, at least he is a real Pastor who is highly educated. I actually enjoy listening to his misguided point of view. He is a welcome break from the ignoramuses "Reverend" Jackson and "Reverend" Sharpton.

I know that this is getting real personal, but can you imagine the Obama's bringing their two young daughters to church to hear one of Pastor Wright's hate filled sermons?

McCain has so far has held back from criticizing Barack's radical views. Hopefully he is just standing by and letting Hillary do the dirty work. Once the general election starts I hope he wakes up and loses his politeness much like he did with Mitt Romney. Obama's radicalism must be exposed.

And speaking of the "hate America first crowd" (this goes for all of them), why are they even living in this country if they hate it so much? How can they hate the country while enjoying the opportunity for prosperity that only America offers? Why don't they move? They won't move because they can't find a better country. So if they hate America and are living here, that says more about them than it does about America.

How come there is outrage when Republican candidates go to Bob Jones University, which has a history of racism, but it barely raises an eyebrow when we learn Obama has been a member of a racist church for 20 years?

Obama's carefully crafted mainstream media image is one of a uniter. But his inner circle consists of radical left wing anti-American dividers.

If you try to dig deep into Obama's personal background, lack of experience, liberal voting record, and his radical group of friends, he responds with a well rehearsed cadence of catchy phrases such as "politics as usual," "Republican tactics," "we need change, etc." This is just a tactic to deflect a deep look into his background.

The expert commentators say that the country is not ready to elect a black president. No, they are not ready to elect a very liberal black president with a Muslim name.

Hillary's lie about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia was not a simple misspeak or exaggeration. It was pathological. She knew that such a lie would be easily exposed and went ahead and said it any way. I guess maybe she thought that the mainstream media would cover for her just as they did throughout her husband's presidency. But the rules have changed. Their favorite candidate is now Obama.

Hillary has a reputation for being a strong woman who overlooked her husband's numerous infidelities. That does not sound like the actions of a strong woman. That sounds like the actions of a woman with low self-esteem, a cowardly enabler.

If you vote for Hillary just because she is a woman, that is okay. But if you don't vote for her just because she is a woman then that is sexism. If you vote for Barack just because he is a black man, that is okay. But if you don't vote for him just because he is a black man, then that is racism. Both sides of that type of reasoning is wrong, but that is the confusion that political correctness has given us.

I often wonder why blacks continue to overwhelmingly vote for Democrats when the Democrats have never really come through with any substantive solutions for them. Then I remember that I continue to vote for Republicans who promise a lot of things (ending abortion, school prayer, marriage amendment, etc) and they too never come through with any substantive solutions. The so-called Pro-life Republicans need to change their title to Pro-indifferent.

Anybody who gets polled on voting day and states that they haven't made up their mind yet is either an utter moron, or someone who has made a decision but is too embarrassed to share their decision. If you don't want to answer the pollster then just say so. If you haven't made up your mind before you enter the voting both then maybe you shouldn't be voting.

Why is it wrong for the government to play on our fears to justify a war, but it is okay for them to play on our fears to enact dumb environmental, economic, and nationalized healthcare policies?

Why was it okay to use religion in the public battle over Civil Rights, but you are crossing the line between religion and politics when you are using religion to battle abortion or any of today's conservative causes?

The so-called historians, who judge George W Bush's presidency as among the worst, are just showing their political leanings. I believe you need to wait at least one generation before you judge a president's effectiveness. These leftist never seem to mention Jimmy Carter's presidency, and we know that one was among the worst. If you don't remember the inflation, unemployment, interest rates and feckless foreign policy, then maybe you remember his landslide defeat for re-election. Probably one of the worst political defeats of an incumbent, ever. Now he is also working hard to solidify his legacy as one of our worst former presidents as well.

During George W Bush's Presidency the Nobel Committee has given Peace Prizes to both Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. If McCain wins, look for them to give the next one to John Kerry. The last three Democrat losers.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ELECTION BLOG 13 FEB

Last week was mighty crazy. GOV Romney unexpectedly dropped out of the race, President Bush promised us a bunch of money the government doesn't have, and the Democrats are still being liberals. I also attended Colorado first Presidential Caucus. The Republican side was very unorganized and the Democrats seemed to be more motivated. Colorado Springs' citywide results had Romney defeating McCain by a 4 to 1 margin. Now I thought the conventional wisdom was that evangelicals would not support a Mormon. Colorado Springs is very evangelical. So what happened? I know there is a Mormon population in town, but I don't think they were the deciding factor.

As much as I liked Mitt Romney and hoped that he would become president, I really don't think that he stepped aside for the good of the Republican Party. He stepped aside because he did the math and realized that he probably couldn't win. It was purely for personal reasons. I think if he was in it for the Republican Party he should have stayed in longer. That way it would keep John McCain's name in the news. With the Republican primary now settled, nobody is going to pay attention to McCain. All of the attention will be on the Democrats, and that eventual winner will have a lot of momentum going into the summer campaign.

All of these candidates are not running for us, they are running for themselves. Not to serve, but to rule. All of them. A good example was when Hillary started to cry when the polls were stating that she would probably lose NH. She gave a tearful response at a press conference or campaign stop and said, "She had so much to offer." Not really. She just doesn't want to lose. That is why she cried. Not for us, but for her.

Don't you love it when conservative stalwarts like Dr. Jim Dobson or Ann Coulter threaten not to vote because they don't like McCain? Talk about a temper tantrum. Jim and Anne, what do you think the soldiers fighting in Iraq for democratic freedoms for the Iraqi people would think about that? They are dying and being maimed so that foreigners will have the right to vote. Let's act like adults. Not a spoiled child that is taking his toys and going home.

For all of those people who complain about McCain (including myself). You had your chance to help your favorite candidates in the primaries. Did you do everything you could for them? Did you volunteer hours of your time? Did you send them the maximum amount of campaign money? Did you vote in the primaries? Maybe if you did all three of those, you could complain. But how many of us did all three?

In November I will vote for John McCain. I might have to bring my eleven-year-old son with me into the booth, close my eyes and hold my nose while he guides my free hand to select McCain. But I will vote Republican.

McCain has a lot of work to do. He seems to assume that since he has been crowned, that it is up to us to join him. He needs to work hard and convince the fractured Republican Party to join him. This will especially be difficult since this is the time of the year where the Republican primary winner is supposed to move to the center and gather more votes from the undecided. McCain hasn't yet to even shore up his base.

President Bush called John McCain a true conservative last weekend. What would President Bush know about conservatism? He justly sent us to war and cut taxes. But other than that he has been a disaster. Our government is more intrusive than it has ever been and is growing exponentially. Come to think of it, why do conservatives stick by the Republican Party year after year? They fail to deliver on abortion, school prayer, limited government and federalism. We are just as dumb to stick with the Republicans, as Black America is to stick with the Democrats who promise to make life better for them each election year.

Do you like President Bush's tax rebate plan? Where is the government that is trillions of dollars in debt going to find this money? Why is it called a tax rebate if most of the families receiving a check don't even pay income tax? Isn't that called welfare. It is nothing but cheap election year politics made by a president and congress with the worse approval numbers in American history.

Their excuse for the rebates is to shore up the economy. Well you don't grow the economy by redistributing income. You do it by growing income. By removing economic constraints such as taxes and regulations. Not by shuffling income around, creating inflation, and growing the deficit. Besides, if Democrats admit that this will prime the economy, then why don't they believe in tax cuts?

Why is Barrack Obama having more success in the allegedly racist south than the self-proclaimed progressive north?

Obama won the South Carolina primary and started talking about unifying rich and poor, black and white, male and female, etc. Sounds like a great idea. But the Democrat establishment probably won't allow this. This is where the get their political power, by playing these groups against one another. This was once called Marxism.

Democrats have practiced groupism and identity politics for so long they have a lot of confused voters running around trying to figure out if it would be best to be considered a racist or a sexist.

Why does Hillary still get credit for being a strong woman who was able to overlook her husband's unfaithfulness? Isn't that a sign of a weak woman with no self-esteem?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

My Real Campaign for President

Two weeks ago I published the official version of my campaign for the presidency. Now that I have fooled the citizens of this great nation, I will now share with you the real plan for my campaign and first term in office.

The reason that I am running for president is because I have a tremendous ego and seek political power. I am simply mad with power and my first impulse is to rule, not serve.

I say that I want to be president in order to help you. But what I really want to do it rule over you since you are a helpless twit who can't take care of yourself and I am an elitist and therefore know what is better for you. Washington DC must rule the United States just as Rome ruled the Roman Empire.

I believe in continuous polling and focus groups so that I can learn what to say in order to get more votes.

I will keep my real agenda hidden by giving vague answers during the debate and not giving direct answers during any interview.

Pander will be my watchword.

I will promote class envy to help me get votes and gain the support of the mainstream media.

I will convince you that the economy (that is humming along just fine) is in a shambles and only I can fix it.

I will complain about the role of money in the election but will exploit every loophole in current campaign finance laws.

I will pay surrogates to engage in dirty campaign tactics so that I can publicly deny involvement and avoid getting my own hands muddy. I will claim that I am the most qualified to lead and manage the government, despite the fact that I can't seem to control my own surrogates.

I will claim that I support the poor by stating that I am not taxed enough, but will continue to take every deduction possible on my IRS form, and utilize tax shelters to protect much of my income.

I will claim that big businesses are exploiting the common man and should be taxed more, while profiting handsomely from ownership in their stock.

I will spend $100 million in order to convince you that I am no different than the guy who earns $35,000 a year.

I will make empty promises, spin unfavorable media coverage into positive treatment, be vague and play both sides of the issues, and use enough demagoguery to confuse you on the issues. All to convince every side that I am on their side.

I will justify my position on ethical issues like abortion by claiming that although I am personally morally against it, it is the law, and I will respect that law. Similar to the way slaveholders justified their position.

I will raise the issues of your special interest, not to offer solutions, but just to exploit your problems for my political gain.

I will campaign as an outsider, but once elected, settle comfortably into the establishment and exploit all of the advantages of that position that have evolved over the years.

My mastering of the ethical tightrope will make the Flying Wallendas envious.

If I suffer any primary setbacks I will claim that wasn't an effective enough communicator to get my message out. Which is code talk for not using the right propaganda.

I will make up stories about my childhood and formative years that nobody can verify or discount, just to make me look like a regular person.

I will use coaches, advisors, and carefully selected wardrobes and make-up artists to project an image of sincerity and spontaneity.

I will only help those voters who will probably vote for me become eligible to vote.

I will not stick my neck out in the general election, for that would show leadership. I know a razor thin victory is just as good as a landslide.

I will choose a vice presidential running mate who will bring me additional votes based on more polling. I am not interested in his qualifications or how he would run the country if I died in office.

I will only investigate charges of voter fraud and intimidation if I lose the election.

Once I become president my first priority will be to work for changes that are best for my political supporters and me. My second priority will be my reelection.

I will deal with unpopular legislation during years that do not have elections.

I will protect the Constitution. That is, the parts that I agree with. I will selectively enforce the Bill of Rights.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

John McCain is a Scoundrel and Should not be Elected President

Outside of five years in his life where he was the epitome of human courage, uncommon valor, and perseverance while suffering as a POW in North Vietnam, there is nothing appealing about the life and politics of John McCain. Let's review his life and career

John McCain came from a Navy family and decided to attend Annapolis. Despite graduating near the bottom of his class, he got selected to attend jetfighter pilot school. That privilege is usually reserved for naval grads that finish at the top of their class standings. It helps to have a father and grandfather who are both admirals.

John McCain graduates jetfighter pilot school and manages to crash a few multi-million dollar jets early in his career. For most people, that would be the end of their jetfighter pilot career. But not for John, John's father and grandfather were both admirals. Did I mention that already?

John gets married and starts his naval career. He volunteers for combat duty, fights courageously in Vietnam, and then undergoes a hideous POW ordeal that would have killed most people.

The North Vietnamese offered John an early release because of his special status of having a daddy and granddaddy that were both admirals. But John refused this early release. Now to most civilians, this act appeared to be a sign of courage and unselfish devotion to his fellow POWs. But most servicemen saw this as an exercise in saving face. If he took that early release, he would never be able to live it down with his fellow officers and men.

John is eventually released and returns home. His picture is taken while he is on crutches shaking hands with President Nixon. It is a heartwarming picture and because iconic for our returning heroes. A legend is born with one photograph.

John returned to normal life with a wife who was still suffering lingering injuries from a severe car accident she was in while John was in Vietnam. He returns her faithfulness by having self-admitted affairs and ultimately divorcing her in order to marry a very wealthy woman 17 years younger than him who came from a well-connected Arizona family. So now we have a military hero + an iconic photograph + a marriage into a well-connected family = the springboard for a political career.

John served in Congress for a couple of terms and then became a senator when Barry Goldwater retired. John got into early trouble by becoming involved in the Keating 5 Scandal. Charles Keating ran a Savings and Loan that went under due to dubious financial transactions. Five members of Congress tried to protect Mr. Keating, a former Congressman. It turns out they were all recipients of hundreds of thousands of dollars of campaign donations from Keating. Keating was ultimately convicted for fraud. Four of the five members of Congress were out of officer within a few years. Only McCain managed to survive the scandal.

John gets a reputation for being a maverick Republican politician. A maverick Republican politician as defined by this author, is one who votes to benefit his own career, rather than working within his national party's conservative agenda. I fully understand that each politician does not have to walk lock step with his party, but John walked across the aisle and joined the Democrats on some core conservative issues. This made him a darling for the mainstream media. The liberal mainstream media love a maverick Republican politician but will always help excoriate a maverick Democrat who crosses over to the Republicans.

John sponsored the McCain-Feingold Bill (aka the incumbency protection act), which was constructed to limit soft money donations to Congress and silence free speech criticism of the candidates in the days leading up to an election. Its unintended consequence was the creation of "527" organizations that now take all of that the former soft money and run nasty campaign adds. Some conservative pundits tell us to ignore this little point because the bill is largely toothless. But I can't. That bill is boiling my frog when it comes to my constitutional freedoms. John also supported the Senate Amnesty Bill, which provided perpetual Z-Visas for illegal immigrants. This is called amnesty, despite what McCain and others want to call it.

John ran for President in 2000 and was defeated in the primaries by George W. Bush. Some people speculate that the reason John votes with the Democrats on key issues is that he is still pulling a tantrum over that loss.

John is pro-military and pro-life so all of us conservatives are supposed to line up behind him and support him. But he is a scoundrel. Last week the New York Times endorsed him. If that doesn't sound a clarion for conservatives, I don't know what else will get their attention

So, in review, this is why McCain is a scoundrel and should not be elected.

- John's military career, though stellar at times, was embellished a bit and helped along by having a famous daddy and granddaddy. Reminds me of John F Kennedy.

- John divorced a woman with medical problems and married into privilege. Reminds me of John Kerry.

- John was a philanderer. Reminds me of Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

- John was the sole survivor of a political scandal. Reminds me of John Murtha (ABSCAM).

- John is on the side of the global warmers. Reminds me of Al Gore.

-John wants to give rights reserved for uniformed soldiers (Geneva Convention) and US citizens (due process) to a bunch of cowardly, civilian murdering terrorists.

- John's 25 years in Washington has made him the consummate DC insider; insulated from the real world. Giving him the presidency is not going to change the direction of this country. He should be a candidate for term limits, not the presidency.

- John's liberal voting record on a couple of high profile issues is hardly appropriate for the heir to the Barry Goldwater Senate seat.

- John supports amnesty for illegal aliens (the Z-Visa was amnesty)

- John is a favorite of the mainstream media. That should frighten any serious conservative voter away. They like him because they think he is the most liberal of the Republicans

Some Republican politicians and pundits are telling us to sit down, shut up, and fall in line behind McCain for the good of the party. We've been told before to sit down, shut up, and fall in line. That was during the legislative battle over the Amnesty Bill.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If I choose to run for President:

My Campaign for the Presidency of the United States

THE CAMPAIGN

1. I promise to replace poll results and focus groups with something called leadership.

2. My campaign events will be authentic and my responses spontaneous. I will not use "planted" questions from demographically selected audience members. I will not bus in out of state supporters or voters to these events. I will not set up a phony protest that I have a rehearsed and ready response response for.

3. I will not use demagoguery. Words that cannot be well-defined such as greed, exploitation, fairness, worst, and equality will not be part of my vocabulary.

4. There will be beer at my inauguration ball instead of champagne.

AS PRESIDENT

1. Campaign Finance Reform-You cannot remove the influence of money on campaigns. Restrictions on hard money led to the creation of soft money. Restrictions on soft money led to the creation of 527s, limits on free speech, and a system that favors the election of only the wealthy. If you don't like the role of money in politics than what are the alternatives? Would you rather have media, the politicians themselves, or the military control politics? Money is the least dangerous of all of these. We just need full disclosure so at least we know who owns our politicians. If you think that political system could or does run on higher ideals than money, you are just fooling yourself.

2. I will not promise unity or cooperation between the two parties. The ability to disagree is what makes a democracy great. Those who are trying to use unity as the political high road are really saying that you must agree with them.

3. I will move immediately to federalism (more state power) for three important issues.

a. Abortion- The reason abortion is still a controversial issue 35 years after Roe v. Wade is that the courts handled the issue. No one voted on it. Either the state legislatures or voters themselves must decide this issue. This issue continues to hang over us today and affects every single appointment to the Supreme Court. That is stupid. Let's move past it.

b. Education- Monopolies are bad, except for public education. This doesn't make any sense. Allow the states to run their own schools, and promote school choice. Eliminate the Department of Education.

c. Street Drug Laws- Street drugs are bad. But the extremely expensive War on Drugs has made the situation even worse. Let's give the states a chance to come up with their own innovative solutions.

4. Foreign policy

a. I will continue to aggressively pursue the War on Terror, aka World War IV. (World War III was the Cold War)

b. I will continue to protect Israel. There will never be peace between Israel and the Arabs if the Arabs continue to believe that Israel has no right to exist and must be eradicated.

c. I will normalize relations with Cuba. The only thing sanctions have accomplished over the years is harm for the Cuban people. Their ruling class (in their supposedly classless society) still maintains a luxurious lifestyle. Sanctions have also helped to keep Castro in power. They have provided him an alibi for the Cuban economic condition (Blame the US!).

d. I will withdraw troops from South Korea. South Korea can protect their border. That way North Korea will no longer be our problem. It will be the problem of China, South Korea, and Japan. Let them deal with it.

e. I will continue to do what is best for America. America has done more good for more of the world than any country in history. I don't care about our reputation with the socialists from Old Europe. The only reason they despise us is envy of our political (military) and economic power.

f. Foreign Aid.
i. I will re-evaluate all of our foreign aid. Foreign aid is US taxpayer money. If you bad mouth our country, you will to lose your foreign aid.
ii. There are two reasons why the third world is stuck in a never-ending cycle of grinding poverty. First, their governments are corrupt and squander most of the assistance. Second, direct food aid makes the problem worse by promoting more population growth (creating more starving poor.) Give the poor local control of the money and resources and let them strive and learn how to grow an economy by themselves. And they cannot do this without property rights.

5. Economics-I will travel to each state and highly recommend that at least one class in economics becomes mandatory for every high school and college graduate. I recommend a Thomas Sowell book for high school and a book from Friedrich von Hayek or Ludwig von Mises for college.

a. Every American citizen and politician must understand that a government has no source of income. The only way the government can help your neighbor is by taking money from you.

b. The reason we have two Americas is that the wealthy are allowed to live under a system of capitalism and the poor are forced to live under a system of socialism. Our government should provide temporary assistance to the poor and avoid creating a generational cycle of dependence. It is time to stop focusing on the complex cause of poverty and focus on the simple cause of wealth; work, low taxes, delayed gratification (living within your means) and savings.

c. You can tax big companies all you want, but just remember that the consumer will end up paying for this tax by paying for the added production cost, and suffering through a lower standard of living.

d. Income Tax- The government does not have first right over your money. How much money you earn should be none of the government's business. The government has created a complex income tax system which they may manipulate each year for their political favorites. We must do away with the income tax and simplify our tax system. Heavy taxation of the wealthy does not help the poor. It is merely the politics of envy, and a short sighted vote gainer.

e. The Farm Bill- Our Farm Bill would be the envy of a 1930s Soviet apparatchik. We have to fix this and allow more free market influence into our agriculture network. This results in higher prices and hurts the developing world, which cannot afford to send their crops here.

6. The environment and global warming-If you want to stop waste and pollution, become a capitalist. The market place is the fairest and most disciplined way to stop wasteful use of resources. You can't survive if your competitors are more efficient. Waste is money.

7. Congressional corruption-The reason we have so much corruption is that our lawmakers control too much of the wealth in this country. If we cut the budget, we will cut the amount of lobbyists and political favoritism.

8. Voter ID- If you need photo ID to get a job, open a bank account, or receive government assistance, you need it to vote.

9. Illegal aliens-Build the fence, deport those you catch in the normal scope of duties, and punish the employers heavily. Arrange for seasonal visas and managed immigration. Anyone one who violates this will be permanently deported. We have become the enablers of a corrupt and inept Mexican government. If we force their citizens to stay home, they will force changes in their society.

10. Energy-You think we have energy problems? Well let's solve them by drilling for our own oil and building new refineries. That way we don't have to support Arab terrorists and Central American despots. That oil will eventually become too expensive, so let's build clean burning nuclear power plants.

11. Affirmative action- this program has to go. I don't see how you can help a particular race in this country by taking opportunities from other races. This promotes ill feelings, mistrust, and lowered expectations. The overwhelming problem for most poor blacks in this country is their own self-destructive behavior. They have ignored the sacrifices (lynchings, death, state-sanctioned police beatings, arrests and real discrimination and prejudice) of their forefathers, abandoned their own Civil Rights, and looked too often to government for help.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I have been neglectful of my election blog. I, like many Americans, have overdosed on election coverage, so is hard to be inspired enough to write about it. This extra-long election season is like nausea. You just want to run to the bathroom and get it over with. Here are a few random thoughts:

It seems that for both parties, it will not be the person who wins, but rather the person who doesn't lose. There is no leadership. I was hoping for something better, especially for the Republicans since there wasn't a presumptive candidate (No running sitting president or vice president).

Too many conservatives keep wishing for another Ronald Reagan. Too many of the Republican candidates think they are Reagan. There will never be another Reagan. This works the same for the Democrats and John Kennedy. They call this leadership?

Both parties lack the courage to tackle illegal immigration because they are afraid of the rising Spanish voting block. They don't understand Middle America. Middle America is going to select the strongest anti-illegal candidate.

The candidates are withholding their deepest convictions. They lack the courage to speak about them honestly. They are afraid that the fringe elements of their opponents will use sophistic attacks on these convictions and hurt their election chances. No leadership.

Historically, in order to get past the primaries you had to present yourself far enough to the left or right to please your base without saying something so outrageous that you would not appear to be other than a centrist in the general election. But modern political campaigns have devolved past that and now focus on a candidate's ability to spin words into quick sound bites and confuse all of us. That is why so many candidates can be called flip-floppers. It doesn't seem to matter to a candidate that he or she should give us a consistent and meaningful solution to any of our problems.

It is hard to run for president. You have to "create" a lot of problems for the country that only you have the solution for, without appearing to be pessimistic.

The Hollywood writers' strike has added another dimension to the campaign. There are very few television talk shows influencing the election with their jokes and interviews. So this is why you are seeing talk shows breaking the picket lines. They want desperately to influence the election. So much for supporting their unions.

The Democrats like to talk about an alleged recession and a coming economic disaster. They want this to happen. First, they think it will help their election chances. Second, they want to see the US go through a crisis in order to level down our productivity and wealth because they think it isn't fair that we are so successful.

The Democrats keep complaining about the tax rate on the rich. They complain the taxes are too low and not bringing enough revenue to the government. If they really believed this, as they often publicly state, then they would have cut spending every time there was a tax cut. But they don't believe this because deep down inside they understand that tax cuts actually do help raise more revenue. But they don't care. They want the rich to continue to pay high taxes because they think that is a fair way of conducting business. They are willing to handicap our economy just to watch the rich squirm under a heavy tax burden.

Former President Clinton made a speech a few weeks back and complained that he doesn't pay enough taxes. No one asked him the obvious question. What kind of deductions did he take the last time he filed? You don't have to take any deductions. They are voluntary. He is a hypocrite.

As Rush Limbaugh says, If Hillary's last name was not Clinton; nobody would pay attention to her. Despite her claim of working for 35 years in the public sector, can anyone point to specific accomplishments?

A couple of months ago Hillary got caught planting questions in her audience. She had her staff draw up the "right" questions and select people in the audience who represent the "right" demographic (white, black, male, female, senior, college student, etc). I am sure more of them do this. They are so arrogant that they think that they can get away with it. Do you wonder why we grow cynical about the political process?

John Edwards claims that there are 35 million starving Americans. That would be about one in ten. That is ridiculous. But you can't challenge this argument publicly because you will be called heartless.

John Edwards claims that there are two Americas, rich and poor. He is right, but he is wrong about the causes. The wealthy are rich because they have chosen to practice capitalism. The poor are in poverty because we force socialism on them.

GOV Huckabee said that we should give anchor babies all the rights of American citizens and that we should not punish the children for the sins of their parents (breaking immigration laws). First of all, if their parents did not consider the impact of their illegal actions on their own kids, then why should we? Second, the parents benefit from the anchor baby benefits such as public school and healthcare. We really have to get rid of the anchor baby rule.

Remember the MoveOn.org GEN Petraeus (betray us) controversy? These groups get their instructions straight from the Democratic National Committee. They put out these ads so that the Democrats can have plausible deniability and not get their hands muddy.

If republicans are the party for the wealthy, then how come so many of our wealthy states are blue states and so many of the democrat supporters are people of wealth?

On the eve of the Iowa Caucus, I thought I would say, "I HATE IOWA!" Nothing personal for all the fine Middle Americans living there. It's just that I believe the only reason why we have a stupid ethanol program in the United States is because of Iowa's prominence in the political process. Ethanol is not the solution and even if it was, corn ethanol is much less efficient than ethanol from Brazilian sugar cane. But we slap a tariff on foreign ethanol in order to protect the Iowan corn farmers. The only thing that ethanol does for us is drive up the price of corn and beef. I hate Iowa and the other electorally important farm states like Florida, Illinois, and California. These states hold too much political power and that is why we have a Farm Bill every five years that would make a Soviet central planner envious.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I haven't felt inspired enough lately by the presidential race to put together a lengthy blog entry. Most of America is not inspired either, as the television ratings show. The reasons for the apathy are that the race started too early, there are too many debates, and there are few candidates who are actually acting like it is a primary. For the most part they have been attacking the other party, not debating each other. These primary debates are supposed to be used to thin the herd of each party. The candidates are supposed to go after each other. It is almost like the ten or so candidates from each party are trying to get the whole group elected as a committee. No one has shown the courage with any consistency to really hammer those within their own parties.

The race will probably stay on the back burner until after the holidays. The only big event that may changed this will be the Iraq war report that General Petraeus is going to publish soon. You can already anticipate those results. The general will report that things are going well (and rightly so), and the Democrats will disagree and try to discredit him. The Democrats feel that they cannot get elected if there is a war going on. Richard Nixon was elected twice during an extremely unpopular war. He beat two anti-war candidates (Humphrey in 68 and McGovern in 72)

Here are several random thoughts from the campaign so far.

Have you noticed that all of the big names in the presidential race are multi-millionaires? They need those millions to finance public relations campaigns to convince mainstream Americans that they are just like us

I still stand by my conviction that if a candidate makes border security their main issue it will get them elected. This is an excellent chance for a second-tier Republican (you know, the real conservatives like Huckabee and Hunter) to cause an upset.

John Edwards is finished. You can tell by this quote of his in early August. "If we don't stand up to these people, if we don't fight em, if we don't beat them, they're going to continue to control this country. They're going to control the media. They're going to control what's being said. They do not want to hear us talking about health care for everybody." Ah, John, they are not trying to control you, or silence you. They are ignoring you. Liberals like to say they are being silenced when they are just being ignored.

About the mainstream media coverage of the Democrats. Why don't you stop trying to fool people and just put up Hillary posters in your television studios? Everybody knows that you are not the least bit impartial by your treatment of the candidates. Some conservatives believe that there is a left wing conspiracy in the media. I don't. They are obviously biased, but I think it is because they are stupid. You have to be stupid to believe in the Democrat version of national defense,.economics, environmentalism and healthcare. Stupid people couldn't build a conspiracy.

Have you noticed the mainstream media treatment of the candidates' spouses? Mrs. Obama is the epitome of elegance and grace, and Mrs. Edwards is a courageous fighter. On the other hand, Mrs Giuliani is a home wrecker, and Mrs. Thompson is a trophy wife. No bias here.

If Hillary is elected, Chelsea would become the first and second-most ugliest first child

There's a lot of talk about having the first woman or the first black president. But the liberal media doesn't talk about the first Italian (Giuliani) and the first Mormon
(Romney). That is because they are white males

Did you catch the Democratic debate that had lesbian activist Melissa Etheridge asking questions? She asked Governor Richardson if he thought that homosexuals are born that way or become gay. When Governor Richardson did not give the party line answer, she asked him if he understood the question. Would she give a conservative a second chance at such a question?

Healthcare-How can anyone believe that the federal government should handle our healthcare system? Just look at the inefficiencies is big programs such as Social Security and FEMA. And when I hear a Democrat saying it would be free healthcare, it makes me scream. Economics 101-The government has no resources, it cannot provide anything for free. Any money the government raises to give to one American, it must take from another American. This is called taxation. Why is that so hard to understand?

Democrats love to talk about class warfare. Class warfare in politics was first popularized by Karl Marx.

I really thought that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would not support Obama. If he is elected he would become the de facto leader of blacks in America, and they could not live without that title. I really thought that they would wait and only join his bandwagon if he became the obvious frontrunner. But Jesse has announced his support for Obama. I bet that there was either some kind of financial arrangement or a promise to make Jackson's son (a Congressman) a big part of Obama's administration.

My favorite Dennis Kucinich quote so far. "You need a president who didn't fall out of a Christmas tree. You need a president who doesn't have a key in the back being wound up by special interests." Yes, Dennis put those two sentences together.

The Republicans like to channel Reagan and the Democrats like to channel JFK. Few of these Republicans are qualified to lace Reagan's shoes. Hillary and OBama want to lay claim as being the new JFK; JFK was the first Catholic president; Hillary would be the first woman, and Obama the first black. But wouldn't it be more accurate to call Mitt Romney the new JFK? Romney would be the first Mormon president. Your religion is a choice. Your sex and race are not.

Why does anybody give any credit to a candidate who states that they are against abortion on a personal level, but supports abortion law? What they are saying is that legality trumps morality. This was an argument that was once made for slavery.

Rudolph Giuliani is a Republican and Catholic who supports abortion. I think I figured out why. It was strictly a disgusting business decision on his part while he was mayor of NYC. 10% of all abortions in the US occur in NYC. That is big business for the city.

If the Democrats are for the common man than how come the blue states tend to be the richer states like California, New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts?

For years Republicans have been vilified for mixing faith in politics. But now the
Democrats are openly campaigning in churches and it isn't even the MLK holiday. They are doing this to try to reach the faith based voting block that the Republicans have controlled for all these years, not because religion is an essential part of their lives. If you listen to them describe their faith, It is obvious that they are Christians, but they won't come straight out and say it because they will lose a lot of votes in the primary. The next time they start talking about their faith someone should ask them if they are Christians. If they don't give a straight answer they should ask them three times if they are denying Christ

I have no use for polls- There is an art and science to making a poll result reflect
what you want it to reflect. Polls are for liberals and strippers.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP

While watching the Democrat Presidential Debates I hear a lot about the "achievement gap" or "opportunity gap" that exists in this country. Apparently the liberals believe that the disparity in education and career success between white males and minorities in this country is an ingrained part of our culture created by whitey to keep the minorities down. The issue came up quite a bit during the debate at Howard University in late June. Each candidate pandered to the black audience and gave their version on how government programs can help.

Well, government programs have been trying to help for the last 40 years. They have been quite unsuccessful and have cost us trillions of taxpayer dollars. The liberal government solution always makes the same mistake. They assume that the problem is deep-seated in our American culture (blame whitey), so they feel they must change the culture. Since they misidentify the problem, they are doomed to offer the wrong solution. Their solution always treats the minorities as a group (instead of individuals), always involves an entitlement (which removes incentive to improve your own life), and always involves a redistribution of income (which hurts the economy and creates resentfulness and suspicion). It never works, but they keep trying because these problems and their solutions provide the liberals with a livelihood. This is what a liberal wants, political power, not solutions. If they actually solved these problems they would lose their power.

The people who have the hardest time overcoming this "achievement gap" are those who are being helped by entitlement culture. But the entitlements that are supposed to repair the gap are just making it worse. Entitlements remove the incentive for the beneficiary and this eliminates their incentive to become an achiever. As the entitlement culture becomes generational the cycle just continues to spiral downward. This solution, the bigotry of lowered expectations, becomes part of the problem.

Well I have the real solution to this problem! It is a secret that only white males know about. And I am going to share it with everybody for free. I thought about going on a late night TV infomercial and offering it for sale, but I'm not a liberal and I don't want to become wealthy and powerful off of the backs of the poor.

A black conservative pundit Walter Williams once offered 4 rules to avoiding poverty. First, graduate from high school. Second, get married before you have children, and stay married. Third, work at any kind of job, even one that starts out paying the minimum wage. And, finally, avoid engaging in criminal behavior.

I would like to add a few more and round out the list at ten. Fifth, don't spend more than you earn, you might not like the lifestyle that your current income can give you, but going into debt is not going to help you. Sixth is deferred gratification; don't waste your money on temporal stuff you want, save it to get stuff you need. Seven, don't blame whitey! Take responsibility for your own self-destructive behavior and then change it. Eight, listen to honest criticism and don't call it racism. Nine, don't listen to the current black leadership in this county. They make a living off of your poverty. Ten, if you don't like the culture in this country, pick a better country. Here is a hint. You won't find one, so stay here and make yourself successful. No other country on this planet has the opportunities that we have here.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

HOW ELECTABLE ARE THE CANDIDATES? (PART II-Conclusion)

12. Media darlings. The mainstream media still has a lot of pull in this country and they are overwhelmingly liberal. They want Hillary elected but there is a large contingent of them who don't think that she is electable (i.e. likeable). That is why some of them are hedging their bets on Obama. The Republicans will have to develop clever internet strategies to help their campaigns. (C, O)

13. Alpha Male Characteristics. We want our presidents to be firm leaders. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Hillary is their Alpha Male, and we won't buy that. (G, R, T)

14. Impact of close family members. A candidate with a black sheep in the family, or an unlikable family member, is going to have a rough time. Billy Carter did not help Jimmy's re-election chances; Cruella Heinz Kerry did not help John's chances. I believe that Bill Clinton will be an albatross for Hillary. The conventional wisdom is that the country loved him, but he was elected twice with less than 50% of the vote. Rudy's family values will hurt him. Edwards, Obama, and Romney all seem to have classy wives. Fred Thompson wife is hot! That helps. (E, O, R, T)

15. Geography. We elect presidents from the south and west. Romney was the Governor of Massachusetts and the son of a Governor of Michigan, but most people associate him with Utah due to his Mormonism and his ties to the Salt Lake City Olympic Games. (E, R, T)

16. Temperament. We like even-tempered presidents who will be able to handle adversity without losing their cool. I think as the campaign gets tougher and the candidates grow fatigued, both Hillary and Rudy will lose their cool. (E, O, R, T)

17. The environment. The issue of global warming, or cooling or temperating or whatever the claim of the month is, does not seem to be resonating with the American voter. If it does, the Democrats have the advantage, even though they are so wrong about the issue. (C, E, O)

18. Does a candidate know how to campaign? Campaigning is an art and a science. The Clinton campaign machine is notorious. Edwards was a one-term Senator who already lost a presidential campaign. Obama had no opposition in his one Senate campaign. The strong Republican candidate, Jack Ryan, withdrew late in the race after details of his messy divorce with his wife Jeri (yes, that Jeri Ryan) were disclosed. The Republicans hastily replaced him with a crazy person, Alan keys, so Obama won an easy race and therefore has limited campaign experience. Romney came the closest to ever upsetting the entrenched Ted Kennedy in a Senate race where he was outspent. He then became a Republican governor in a heavily Democratic Massachusetts. Rudy was a Republican mayor elected in heavily Democractic New York City. Fred Thompson has a reputation of being an effective, hard-working, plain talking, street level campaigner. (C, G, R, T)

19. Immigration. This is going to be huge. Washington does not seem to understand that most Americans are fed up with illegal immigration and want serious, enforceable reform. We will probably select a candidate who is more of a hard-liner on immigration. (R, T)

20. The minority vote. Unfortunately minorities still seem to vote lock-step Democrat. (C, E, O)

21. Voter fatigue. Hillary this one's for you, and for any of the Republicans who are considering adding Jeb Bush to their ticket as vice-president. Since 1980 there has been a Bush or a Clinton serving in the White House. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination in 2008 and runs again in 2012 (which she would) that would be 36 years with only two families in the White House. That is not a democracy, that is a monarchy. I think this is a big strike against her. (E, O, G, R, T)

22. Hypocrisy- Most voters can spot a hypocrite. Under a microscope all of the candidates will fail, but three of them have obvious problems. Despite the huge Clinton spin machine, most people will finally figure out that the self-made feminist Hillary is actually just a former above average college student who hitched her wagon to a rising political star and then signed a Faustian deal with the devil becoming an enabler to her serial philandering husband. Edwards' entire campaign seems to be about compassion for the poor but that doesn't wash against his 28,000 sq ft mansion, $400 haircuts and $55,000 college speaking fees. Rudy's Republican family values are a joke. (O, R, T)

Abortion. The issue of abortion will probably be avoided in this campaign. I believe that the country is moving to the right on this issue and this is bad for the Democrats, so they will avoid it. All three of the Republicans have been wishy-washy on this issue throughout their careers. They claim that they are no different than Reagan who had changed his mind over the abortion issue, but he is different. He was politicking before the Roe v. Wade decision was (falsely) established as constitutional law. That court issue caused just about all politicians in that era to re-evaluate which side of the argument they were on. Today you can't alibi changing your mind unless you were in the political circle before that Supreme Court ruling, and none of our current candidates were.

So here are the results.

Clinton - 8/22
Edwards - 11/22
Obama - 12/22

Giuliani - 10/22
Romney - 17/22
Thomson - 15/22

MITT ROMNEY DEFEATS BARRACK OBAMA IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 2008!

Obama- Many people believe that Hillary is unstoppable. That is not true, the presence of Obama and Edwards in the race right now means that there are Democrats out there who don't think that Hillary is electable in the general election. Once Edwards drops out, all of his anti-Hillaries will rally around Obama's anti-Hillaries.

Romney- Many people believe that Baptists and other Evangelicals will never vote for a Mormon. But they will if he is running against a liberal secularist, which all three Democrat front runners happen to be.

What can throw this prediction off? I don't believe that last minute candidacies of Newt Gingrich and/or Al Gore will affect the elections. What may throw this whole thing off is the new primary schedule. 20 or more states are threatening to hold their primaries on Feb 5th. Ironically, each of these states is trying to make their votes count more by frontloading in the primaries with everyone else. But by all piling on one date, they are just making their own input irrelevant. No candidate can handle 20 states at once. They can't even do that in the general election. They usually identify which states they are going to win, which ones they will definitely lose, and then focus all of their resources on about 10 swing states. So how will this effect the candidates? They will focus all of their efforts on the first three contests in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina and hope to ride that wave through the meaningless Feb 5th "Super-Duper Tuesday." So every state that is trying to line up for Super-Duper Tuesday and reduce the impact that the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina have, is actually contributing to the opposite result. The other possible outcome of this primary mess may be even more interesting. No clear winner and that will lead to a raucous open national convention in the late summer. Something crazier than the 1968 and 1972 Democrat National conventions, or the 1976 Republican National Convention. If there are open conventions the Clinton machine will get Hillary nominated, but she will still lose to the Republican nomination.

It is going to be a long, often dull campaign season. The dullness is already showing in the debates we have seen. None of the candidates from either party are campaigning against their fellow party opponents. They have been focusing their attacks on the other party, which doesn't make much sense in the primary season. Aren't the primaries used to select one nominee from each party? By campaigning against the other party and not against each other, it is almost like they are trying to get a party committee elected to the presidency. This offers a good chance for a courageous second or third-tier candidate to stick their neck out on a specific issue and upset the big three in each party. That surprise may come from Duncan Hunter and immigration.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

HOW ELECTABLE ARE THE CANDIDATES? (PART I)

We have had an agonizingly early start to the 2008 campaign. Why? It is probably due to a variety of issues such as new campaign finance laws, the impact of the internet and other alternative news sources, the general population's cynicism about Washington lately, and our tremendously bipartisan nation. It might also possibly be due to the fact that we are facing the first presidential election since 1928 that doesn't feature the incumbent president or the incumbent vice-president as a candidate. In 1928 neither President Calvin Coolidge, who had finished President Harding's term in 1923 and was re-elected in 1924, nor his vice-president Charles Dawes, chose to run.

So who is going to win? I have broken down the electability of each candidate according to a number of issues that have historically impacted on presidential elections. Some of the issues are important and some are just an unfortunate fact of life in US politics. It is a big list so this will be a two-part blog entry. You will have to wait until next week (part II) to learn my prediction for the president in 2008 (I know the anticipation is killing you.).

The issues I selected may seem to lean to the right, but we usually do elect Republican Presidents. IN the last 60 years there has been 9 Republican Presidents and 5 Democrats.

For brevity's sake, I will only discuss the top tier contenders in each party. Lower tiered candidates rarely make it in US presidential politics; name recognition is everything. Though the democrats do occasionally overcome this rule; Carter and Clinton were unknown governors when they made it through their respective election processes. Here are the candidates:

Top tier Democrats

Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Barrack Obama

Second tier

Dennis Kucinich (He has a third tier chance because he is so weird, but his name recognition from the 2004 election places him in the second tier)
Bill Richardson (Bill would probably make the best democrat president but he doesn't have the name recognition)

Third Tier

Joe Biden
Chris Dodd
Mike Gravel

Top tier Republicans

Rudy Giuliani
Mitt Romney
Fred Thompson

Second Tier

Duncan Hunter (My wish to be president, but he lacks name recognition.)
John McCain (The Maverick, aka self-promoter, was never a real contender in 2000. The mainstream media just played him up because he ran against the Republican establishment. He isn't going anywhere.)

Third tier

Sam Brownback
Jim Gilmore
Mike Huckabee
Ron Paul
Tom Tancredo
Tommy Thompson

Our candidates are scored using their initial (C-Clinton, E-Edwards, O-Obama, G-Giuliani, R-Romney, T-Thompson). The issues are discussed in no particular order (I wrote them as I though of them and was too lazy to prioritize them)

1. All of our presidents have been white male Protestants. I don't consider the Mormon faith as part of the larger Protestant faith, but I would assume that most Americans do. Who are the white, male Protestants? (E, R, T)

2. Who has the most name recognition? Hillary wins this one and Rudy has his 9/11 fame. (C, G)

3. Speaking of names. We don't elect people with ethnic sounding names. We elect people with names like Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, and Eisenhower. Some Irish and German, but not much else. Giuliani won't make it. Barack Hussein Obama is a definite no-go. (C, E, R, T)

4. Who can buy name recognition? (Ability to raise campaign money.) All of the candidates are tremendously wealthy. They need that money in order to spend millions of dollars to convince you and I that they are just like us. One of the main reasons why these candidates are in the top-tier is due to their ability to raise money or use their own. (C, E, O, G, R, T)

5. A candidate must have some type of charisma; good looks, personality, leadership, etc. Hillary is as charming as an eel. Edwards is too cute and most Americans can see through his Eddie Haskell charm, Obama is charismatic, Romney is squeaky clean, Rudy is a leader, and Thompson has stage presence (O, G, R, T)

6. Appearance. We don't elect bald presidents, especially since the age of television. Sorry Rudy and Fred, you need hair. (C, E, O, R)

7. Outsiders. We like to elect outsiders as president; mostly governors. Someone who is new to Washington. (G, R)

8. Experience doesn't seem to be that important. Along with governors of large states (CA, TX) we also elect governors of small states (GA, AK). This is good news for the Democrats since they are extremely thin on experience. (C, E, O, G, R, T)

9. Tax Policy- We like our tax cuts and a humming economy. Despite the overwhelming evidence that tax cuts spur more tax revenue and a strong economy, the backward thinking Democrats cannot wrap their brains around this issue. Most people are fed up with their redistributive economic policy. (G, R, T).

10. With the exception of George Bush the Younger, we usually select a candidate with a polished speaking ability. Hillary can speak, but she has an annoying, shreaky voice. (E, O, G, R, T)

11. War stance. The Democrats lose this one. They want the general population to believe that they are strong on defense, but they also want to appeal to their wacky, pacifist left wing base. The Republicans candidates win here, but they will each have to develop a credible war plan to present to the people who are growing war-weary. (G, R, T)

The running score so far

Clinton - 5

Edwards - 6

Obama - 6

Giuliani - 7

Romney - 10

Thompson - 8

Part II and the winner will come next week.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

BLOG ENTRY 2

LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE LAST 8 ELECTIONS

1) It goes without saying that the President is usually a white male Protestant. This year we have our first serious woman candidate running, a serious black candidate and a Mormon. (Jesse Jackson won a couple of primaries in 1984, before his "hymietown" comment, but I consider him to be a fringe candidate. Interestingly, Hillary and Barrack often compare themselves to JFK. I don't think that is accurate. Hillary and Barrack were born a female and a black. A person's religion is a choice. A Romney comparison to Kennedy would be more accurate.

2) Since 1976, who has been elected as the president?

Governors 7 - (76, 80, 84, 92, 96, 00, 04)

Other 1 - (88- Bush the Elder was a two-term Congressman from TX twenty years before he was elected. He was primarily known as a Washington bureaucrat: Vice-President, Ambassador to China, Ambassador to the UN, Director of the CIA )

Senators- 0

There hasn't been a senator elected as president since 1962. The top three democrat candidates this year (Clinton, Obama, and Edwards) are two current, and one former senator. We usually like to vote for outsiders for president, that is why there are so many governors. This will help Giuliani (mayor) and Romney.

3) What states do they come from?

Winners Losers

76 Georgia Michigan
80 California Georgia
84 California Minnesota
88 Texas Massachusetts
92 Arkansas Texas
96 Arkansas Kansas
00 Texas Tennessee
04 Texas Massachusetts

They don't come from the Midwest (Hillary and Barrack) or from the northeast (Giuliani and Romney)

4) Get a candidate with a personality

76- Carter, the charming southerner, beat Ford, the country club Republican.
80- Reagan's optimism beat Carter's malaise.
84- Reagan's optimism beat Mondale's liberal doom and gloom.
88- Bush the Elder had no charisma, until you place him next to Dukakis.
92- Clinton had charisma, no hope for Bush the Elder.
96- Clinton beat Dole and his annoying habit of referring to himself in the third person.
00- Bush the Younger's Texas charm beat Gore, the Mr. Spock of politics (minus the intelligence).
04- Bush the Younger again, over Lurch Kerry

5) Third party candidates

As much as I hate to compromise, if you are tempted to vote for a third party candidate during the presidential election, I must advise you not to do it. You are only helping the other party win. Perot was responsible for helping Clinton to victory in both 92 and 96, and Nader probably stopped a Gore victory in 00. If you want to cast a vote of protest, do it during the primary.

6) Political Dynasties

We really don't need another Clinton or Bush in the White House. Hillary is running for president and may also be a running mate. Jeb Bush's name gets tossed around every once in a while as a vice-presidential candidate. If we go back in time to George H Bush's vice-presidency, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White House since 1980. 28 years! Many Americans do not know an America without one of those two families in the White House. American is a democracy, not a monarchy.

7) Appearance

Unfortunately a candidate's appearance has a lot to do with their electability. We generally don't elect bald presidents, especially since the age of television. We have had a few balding presidents, but the last was before the age of photography. That was Martin Van Buren who sported a Larry Fine-style haircut. Eisenhower was the exception and he was the last one before television. The first television president was Kennedy and he had a healthy mop top. Johnson was nearly bald in 1964 but they really played up his ties to JFK, Ford was nearly bald when running for re-election against Carter in 1976 and he lost. Giuliani and Fred Thompson are balding but they are also the two toughest guys running. HDTV will hurt ugly candidates like Hillary. We will hear a lot of rumors about photoshopping, plastic surgery and Botox.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

17 MAY 2007- I have decided to start an Election 2008 page since the election is already underway. I will start by recalling highlights of all of the previous elections that I can remember. Here are some photographs and comments on the last 8 elections starting in 1976.

TOP

All Content©2005-2008 Something Ain't Right

All Rights Reserved