Alaska Gov Sarah Palin

There has been much speculation and hope that Senator McCain might name Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his VP running mate. While I am still an Alaskan at heart and believe that the governors credentials are very commendable I don't think she should be the running mate for several reasons.

Just as I don't believe that Obama is qualified to be leader of the free world I also don't believe that Palin has the experience to step into the Presidency. Alaska is a state of 600,000 people and while politics can be every bit as rough and tumble (and corrupt) as Chicago's, Governor Palin is a big fish in a very very small pond. I may be wrong and she may be a very quick study on national issues but I fear that we will have a replay of the John Edwards/ Dick Cheney debates at some point before the election, and I'm afraid she wouldn't come across as Cheney. (Sorry Sarah I hate to compare anyone to JE.) If young and talented is what Mac is looking for, Bobby Jindal comes across as much more knowledgeable, is a better public speaker.

Adding a little known governor from a small inconsequential state such as Alaska would be strategically inept. The three electoral votes are already in the McCain column and its not like the Starbucks vote in the Great Northwest will swing McCain's way with this nomination. He needs to look for someone that will actually bring something to the ticket. Unless McCain can prove that she is absolutely the most qualified for the position then no matter what spin he puts on the nomination he will be seen as pandering to the women vote.

.

So while my heart would love to jump on the Palin bandwagon because of my connection to the state of Alaska my mind just says no. However, I do hope that there is a place somewhere in the McCain cabinet for Palin.

.

Palin Mania:

"McCain Should Pick Sarah Palin for VP" Real Clear Politics

Palin for VP.com

The 1/2 Compromise

I caught the opening statements of Howard Dean on CSpan yesterday at the Democrats Rules Committee Meeting to determine the fate of the Florida and Michigan delegates. Now I must admit Howard has always reminded me of Barney Rubble. Don't get me wrong I think Barney is a hell of an actor but Dean has the same grin, mannerisms, and they both talk out of the side of their mouths.

As his Iowa WOOHOO moment proved Dean can also be just plain annoying. He used the term "extraordinary"15 times in the course of the speech. I know because it became so glaring I had to go back and count. Someone please get the man a thesaurus.

However, beyond my petty nitpicking Dean also had the audacity to state that 5 supreme court justices were 'Intellectually Bankrupt" for their decision in the 2000 election. Can Dean really believe that or is pandering pablum to the putzes so ingrained in his psyche that he can make such an idiotic pronouncement in a public forum without a second thought. I believe it is just a case of the the pot calling the kettle black. This is after all the the party that just yesterday decided to count the voters of Florida and Michigan at 1/2 of a person.

This decision hearkens back to 1787 when a similar compromise was reached. "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

This time the compromise reads: Representatives shall be apportioned among 55 of the States which may be included in the Union according to the their respective numbers. Florida and Michigan shall be determined by adding the whole number of free super-delegates, bound to service for a term of years, and 1/2 half of all other persons.

Intellectual Bankruptcy for sure, and this New York Democrat would agree, as she was being escorted out of the proceedings.

The Politics of Regret

It is difficult for me to see the appeal of Barrak Obama if for no other reason than his resume is so glaringly thin for a person applying for the position of Leader of the Free World. I can understand why he is drawing the majority of the black vote simply because we naturally gravitate to what we identify as own cohort. However, that doesn't explain his other major voting block which are educated upper class whites. White guilt is often noted as the cause for their support but guilty for what? I recently ran across this piece, "I was a Red-Diaper-Baby" by Erica Manfred, which might explain it.

I was a Red-Diaper-Baby O.K., so my parents were Communists. But at least they believed in something.
I never thought I would feel nostalgic about Communism. As a 60's activist and child of lefty parents, I once took as gospel beliefs that now seem quaint: human beings are basically good; if people, not capitalists, owned the means of production, poverty would disappear; economic equality could cure all social ills. Misguided and dangerous though Communism was, the passion for social justice and compassion for working people that it represented is gone from the planet, and I, for one, miss it. Although to their deaths they never admitted it to me, my parents were both card-carrying Communists. How do I know? I can't tell you. I was brought up never to reveal such information. When friends visited my parents, instead of telling me to put out the cheese and crackers, I was instructed to hide The National Guardian, a genuinely mind-numbing lefty publication. In addition to being told never to get into a car with a stranger, I was instructed never to answer a stranger's questions - the questioner might be F.B.I. As a teen-ager, I was secretly disdainful of my peers because they were oblivious to the suffering of others.

My family and I were part of a morally superior secret society that cared more about the fate of the world than did our bourgeois, materialistic neighbors. We - whose showplace home could have been in House and Garden - worried about poverty, racism and injustice, while they worried about how to keep up with the Joneses. Pursued by the evil forces of anti-Communism, we did not name names. As it happened, no one asked my parents to name anyone, but they swore they wouldn't have anyway. My grandparents were socialists who escaped the ghettos of Russia to fight for the right to unionize in America. My parents were Communists who fought for social justice in the 1930's. As the third generation of this proud leftist family, I wanted to make good. As an activist in the 60's, however, I lacked oomph. I missed out on the freedom rides - too obsessed with a guy in my math class. I overslept for a big civil rights demonstration. I did climb over the wall to the Pentagon in 1967 but was too chicken (and too cold) to stick around for the tear gas. I joined a women's consciousness-raising group but was so intimidated by all those fierce women that I dropped out.In 1968, I went to Cuba and signed up for the Venceremos Brigade, American leftists who were invited to help with the sugar cane harvest. That experience was my reality check. I'd spent my life on the ideological left in self-styled anarchist groups with Utopian dreams of participatory democracy. I discovered that an actual Communist dictatorship bore no resemblance to my fantasy. While the Cubans mechanically spewed forth the party line, the notorious Weathermen, who had joined the brigade to recruit new members, used Maoist brainwashing techniques, like all-night criticism and self-criticism sessions, to induce us to sign up. I realized I'd rather be ruled by Richard Nixon than by the kids in the Weather tent. At least you could vote him out.

When I got back, I traded in my politics and went into therapy. But I feared disgracing my family. I felt disloyal about being more concerned with my own turmoil than the world's. My mother wanted to know who was supposed to carry the torch of radicalism into the next century. But what torch? The Weatherpeople were clearly delusional as well as dangerous. My parents passionately believed that the Soviet Union was the promised land, another treacherous fantasy. I recognized that anarchism was a utopian crock.

What was left? Did political passion, no matter how idealistic, inevitably lead to fanaticism? I became a cynic, disbelieving any group's claims to a corner of the truth. What remains of the left in today's me-first political climate leaves no room for grand social visions. The younger generation of leftists has splintered into interest groups - each defending its turf with more arrogant political correctness than my die-hard Stalinist parents - without any unifying vision of a just and compassionate society. Though I long ago dropped the torch, my upbringing has had certain long-term effects. I cannot cross a picket line. I am constitutionally averse to Republicans. I feel guilty every time I miss a demonstration for a good cause. (Lucky for me there aren't too many of those these days.) As with other wishy-washy liberals, my political life consists of voting for the least objectionable candidate. I still long, though, for a political movement I could wholeheartedly embrace. In my fantasy party we would support the interests of the poor and working classes, not the rich; we would fight for the rights of animals and the environment; we would combat discrimination wherever we found it, and, most important, we would not only tolerate but encourage dissent. Maybe the next generation.

What Obama has tapped into it not so much guilt but regret. The regret that past candidates did not live up to the cause to which they still cling. Bill Clinton came closest and generated enthusiasm in the early years but it didn't take long for them to realize he was just in it for himself. Gore may have been a believer but he wasn't able to gain power after eight years of Clinton. Then theres Hillary, how does that song go? "We wont get fooled again." Obama on the other hand has tapped into the fantasy of people like Manfred and has generated cult-like dedication from a faction that HOPES for a relization of a dream.

Rope a Dope Redux

While yesterday's boxing analogy got a little out of hand the point was not lost on Robert Novak at the Washington Post. As he points out in today's op-ed McCain will not be playing by Obama's rules in the general election. Much to the chagrin of the Dem's who will yell "you can say that. Its racist" at every turn."

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- When one of the Democratic Party's most astute strategists this week criticized John McCain for attacking Barack Obama's desire to engage Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I asked what the Republican presidential candidate ought to talk about in this campaign. "Health care and the economy," he replied. That is a sure formula for Democratic victory, but it is one that McCain's campaign rejects. Obama embraced that formula once it became clear that he would best Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. He began pounding McCain for seeking the third term of George W. Bush. At the same time, Obama implores McCain in the interest of "one nation" and "one people" not to attack him. The shorthand, widely repeated by the news media, is that the Republican candidate must not "Swift boat" Obama. That amounts to unilateral political disarmament by McCain. McCain is not about to disarm. His campaign has no intention of fighting this battle on Democratic turf. During the more than five months ahead, Republicans will explore the mindset of this young man who is a stranger to most Americans. That includes his association with the Chicago leftist William Ayers, who has remained unrepentant about his violent role as a 1960s radical. This will not be popular with McCain's erstwhile admirers in the mainstream news media, but America has not heard the last of Bill Ayers in this campaign.

"Are you ready to rumble?"

Barry and the Rope a Dope.

Now that Barry has relented and is wearing a flag pin again doesn't that paint him as the same kind of pandering politician that he was trying so hard to transcend? Or perhaps that's the strategy. While the media and the blog o sphere spend thier days jabbing away at his little irrelevancies he deftly plays the rope a dope on what he is really all about. Jab, Does he smoke? Jab, did he give Hillary the finger? Jab, does he really believe there are 57 states? Jab, Hey he's wearing flag pin!!! When he gets popped with a real roundhouse he responds with "let me eat my waffle" or "later sweetie." Then the waffle and the sweetie becomes the jab of the day while he shuffles merrily away for an afternoon of bowling or round ball which again become the jab of the day. He then backs into the top rope and waits for the next flurry from an increasingly arm weary opponent. A couple of uppercuts landed with the one two of Wright and Ayers and for a moment it looked like the contender was staggered but Barry sat in the corner while his trainer took one for the team.

In any campaign the one that controls the narrative is the one that wins the bout and so far Barry has excelled. He has excelled at redirection and dictating the rules of engagement, fighting his fight. He has been able to lay on the ropes and deflect the blows with a taunting smile while we all flail wildly, unable to penetrate his defences. He has gone the distance with Clinton with this strategy and until he is forced to come off the ropes in the next bout his opponent will suffer the same fate.

A Great Obama Video, Via: The Urban Grind.

Does Tom Harkin Hate the Military?

The last time we checked on the Harkster he had earmarked $500K for his constituents at The National Council of La Raza". So it’s been a while since the inanity of Tom Harkin has reached a level worthy of wasting valuable blogging space. However, this week Tom again proved why he is the lapdog of the Democratic leadership when he drew the short straw and got the assignment of attacking John McCain’s fitness for the Presidency because he is a veteran. John Murtha ironically got the job of saying McCain is too old. From the Des Moines Register;

Washington, D.C. — Republican presidential candidate John McCain's family background as the son and grandson of admirals has given him a worldview shaped by the military, "and he has a hard time thinking beyond that," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Ia., said Friday."I think he's trapped in that,"...

Harkin said in a conference call with Iowa reporters. "Everything is looked at from his life experiences, from always having been in the military, and I think that can be pretty dangerous."…

Harkin said that "it's one thing to have been drafted and served, but another thing when you come from generations of military people and that's just how you're steeped, how you've learned, how you've grown up."…

He said that "I just want to be very clear there's nothing wrong with a career in the military" and that he has friends who are generals and admirals who have served the country well."... (Doesn't qualifying a statement that you have friends in the group you are lambasting indicate a deep seated prejudice? )

But now McCain is running for a higher office. He's running for commander in chief, and our Constitution says that should be a civilian," Harkin said. "And in some ways, I think it would be nice if that commander in chief had some military background, but I don't know if they need a whole lot."

I’m not sure how Mr. Harkin believes we can quantify sufficient military background. In fact neither if the two democratic candidates have any experience. Should we at least make them attend boot camp before they take office? In Harkins own run for the White house he evidently didn’t feel he had enough military gravitas and trumped up his own military record to appear more experienced. For a party that has endlessly laid the chicken-hawk label on the current administration it would stand to reason that in a time of war a military background would be an essential qualification for the job.

Using Harkins reasoning he shouldn’t be allowed to work on farm legislation because he has a background in farming. Hmmm, maybe this does make sense, but I digress.

According to my pocket constitution the first duty of the President under Article II, Sec. 2 states, “The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States” It would seem that familiarity with the military would be a vital attribute in fulfilling that part of the job description. In fact Americans, knowing that security is the main function of government, have consistently elected men with military experience to the presidency. Only ten men that have served had no military experience, seven in the last century. The last guy that didnt have a day in uniform sent the troops into more situations than any previous president. Therefore, at this time it is important that the trend towards military experience is vital.

It would be naïve of me to say that the man has no shame, he is after all a politician, but how can Harkin make this argument with a straight face unless he actually believes it? And...Is Tom Harkin really a reflection of the good folks of Iowa? I don't think so.

Updated: From the desk of Geroge Santayana

"A mans memory may almost become the art of continually varying and misrepresenting his past to his interests in the present"
George Santayana

.

.

.

Update:


A timely example of the insight of George Santayana which I posted yesterday. Thanks Hill, your the gift that keeps on giving.

Update II: I Don't know who would put out such a obvious attack video as the one posted above, but I am glad that someone has set the story straight.

The Obama Speech

The hoo ha over Barack Obama’s minister and his resulting explanation has been dissected from every conceivable angle but I will, I hope, add one more. As I recently watched the video two things were glaringly absent.

First, the church experience for a young family such as the Obama’s extends beyond the spiritual. Religion is often seen a social and educational opportunity for parents seeking to build a moral base for their developing young children. The media have focused on what did Obama know, when did he know it and how could he have stayed in a church that espoused such radical views. But where was Michelle in this relationship with the Trinity United Church of Christ? What role did she play in the decision to attend this congregation?

A family’s religious choice does not happen in a vacuum, yet nowhere in this speech is there a peek into their religious expectations or decisions. Nowhere is there a reference to a night where the couple sat in front of the fireplace with a cold bottle of Chianti and debated the tenets of their church or whether it was an appropriate atmosphere for their daughters. From some of Michelle’s remarks, which echo the rhetoric of Pastor Wright, she may have been a bigger factor in remaining in this church than her husband. But we don’t know that... Obama never tells us.

Second, although he states that he disagreed with the messages emanating from the pulpit he only now disavows the sermons of his pastor. Nowhere does he mention that he and his minister ever discussed the messages that he found troubling. This is a person that reportedly touched Obama’s soul, yet nowhere is there an indication that the man he portrays as an Uncle ever spent an evening in front of the fireplace with a case of Colt 45 passionately debating the fact that it is ’08 not ’68 and the experience of the black man in America has evolved in the last 40 years.

You are left with the impression that Obama was on the outside looking in during these events. He was simply a detached spectator to the people (including his Grandmother) which played such large role in his life. Perhaps if he had exuded a sense that he was an active participant in this he may have some credibility. Without it the speech was little more than a history of race relations in America or a well written campaign stump speech.

If he didn’t have the personal courage to intervene in dialog that he so passionately disagreed with in a small intimate group like his family or church how can we expect him to do the right thing in the White House?

Mark my Words...

The voice on the other end of the line was obviously distraught. " I FEEL SO DIRTY" whined my brother from Texas after casting a vote for Obama " Buck up little camper, it will wash off and being a good Catholic you always have the penance option." I assured him.

I was glad to see that at least one person had the sense to follow my advice to vote for Barrak. However, on my way to the dump yesterday I had the rare opportunity to listen to talk radio and a women with a drawl as thick as Texas chili was lamenting to the host, (Rush supposedly called in sick yesterday) " I feel so dirty, I sure pray that Rush is right about this." So the Rushbo was telling people to Vote for Clinton?

I'm sure he probably has a larger reach and obviously more influence than I do if he has little old ladies in Amarillo doing his bidding. At this early hour I don't know what affect the crossover vote had on the outcome. It pains me to say this but I have to agree with Hillary's statement (now I feel dirty) on Fox this morning. "Be careful what you wish for Rush".

It's libel come back to bite you in the butt.

I don't know if Rush is the origin of the theory which proposes that by helping Clinton win a few primaries the Dems will stagger on in state of chaos which will ultimately benefit the republicans. Foolish. Foolish. Foolish!

Get Well Soon Rush.

Texans,Vote early, vote often and vote Obama.

The caller ID tipped me off to the call from my younger brother in Texas. Being the funniest guy I know I answered as the Obama donation hotline. “Knock it off smart ass this is serious. The election is next week and I don’t know who to vote for.”he said sternly. “Haven’t you been reading my blog?” I ask incredulously. “Ya Ya, but have you looked at this guy? He is to the left of Lenin and plans to spend billions of dollars and, and, and …..” Take a breath my brother and let me explain.

Some have argued that Republicans voting in the Democrat’s primary is just silly gamesmanship or dirty pool. I would call it politics. I look at this as an opportunity for the people of Texas make history. They can tell their kids and grand kids that they changed the tone of politics of America. Returning the Clinton's to the White House means at least four more years of the divisiveness of the nineties on a scale that would make the Bush years look like a day at Disneyland. I don’t know about you but the noise and drama of that duo has grown tiresome.

Those that agree with me and have already voted feel like we are watching a movie where the heroine has the opportunity to kill the monster but hesitates with a tinge of compassion and the monster takes her moment of indecision and proceeds to eat her ass. I am in the audience screaming “JUST DO IT!”. Pardon my derangement but I just want to see the Clinton Machine and all it embodies run out of town before sundown.

I am not naive enough to believe that an Obama or McCain presidency will mean that the loons will tone down the vehemence but at least it is a new start. I do believe however, that the mushy headed middle of the American electorate will by election day see the hollowness of Obama and McCain will ultimately prevail. If I am wrong of course I always have the fall back position that the Senate Republicans will continue to yank Harry Reid’s chain at every opportunity and the damage that the democrats can inflict, the descent into a socialist state, will be kept to a minimum.

So remember my Texan brethren. Vote early, vote often and vote Obama!

Update: Texas Republicans are crossing over to Obama. "But a significant proportion say they are temporarily backing Obama for strategic reasons. They plan to vote Republican in November, but for now, their goal is to try to make sure Clinton cannot win." Via Hot Air

" Our long national nightmare may soon be over. Via Hugh Hewitt

The Clinton Record

When Hillary states that she will be able to hit the ground running, be ready on day one, and wont need help finding the bathroom she may be right. She had an eight year apprenticeship and the record to back it up. It's time for that pesky performance review.

Another of Hillary's assumed duties was directing the 'bimbo eruption squad' and scandal defense:
---- She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. ---- She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs. ---- Then they had to settle with Paula Jones after all.---- And Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury ---- And Bill was impeached by the House.
---- And Hillary almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice (she avoided it mostly because she repeated, 'I do not recall,' 'I have no recollection,' and 'I don't know' 56 times under oath). The Alzheimer's defense S.

...Read the whole thing at Maggies Farm

Loons: Making my dreams come true.

I have to head on down the highway to the U this morning and don't have much time to comment on this. The other day I posted a recurrent dream that the Democratic convention would be a re-enactment of the Hoo Haa of 1968 in Chicago and it seems that my dream may come true

A coalition of anti-war groups is vowing to protest this summer’s Democratic National Convention in Denver under the rubric “Re-create ’68,”

Organizer Barbara Cohen formerly of those great 60's rockers the SDS will be joined in this years festivities by Green Party Cynthia McKinney, The Code Pinksters and a special guest appearance by Mad Man Ralph Nader. One show only! Be there! Be there!

Huck has Jumped the Shark.

As obvious as it is to everyone else that the campaign is over, Mike Huckabee inexplicably hangs on to the hope that somehow his efforts are still relevant. Huckabee's appearance on Saturday Night Live, lampooning himself over the fact that it is mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination was truly his "Jumping the shark moment". (Sorry UTube has removed the video by order of the NBC copyright police.) I do have to say that Mike was genuinely funny and may have a career in stand -up since the president gig didn't work out for him.

From Wiki: The term jumping the shark alludes to a specific scene in a 1977 episode of the TV series Happy Days when the popular character Arthur "Fonzie" Fonzarelli jumps over a shark while water skiing. The scene was so preposterous that many believed it to be an ill-conceived attempt at reviving the declining ratings of the flagging show.

Since then, the phrase has become a colloquialism used by U.S. TV critics and fans to denote the point at which the characters or plot of a TV series ( or in this case a political campaign )veer into a ridiculous, out-of-the-ordinary storyline. Such a show (or candidate) is typically deemed to have passed its peak. Once a show has "jumped the shark" fans sense a noticeable decline in quality or feel the show has undergone too many changes to retain its original charm.

Mike, we are sorry to inform you that the charm that won you Iowa has run its course, you have been cancelled.

Holy Blazing Saddles!

Like a love sick armadilla, Barrak has been a trailin Hillary cross the great state of Texass. and as luck would have it the duo squared off at sundown on the dusty streets of a little ramshackle West Texas town. Fortunately, the Salmon was on the scene and as the townsfolk ducked for cover we caught this exchange between the two candidates.

Video courtesy, Mel Brooks

Hey, Don't Poke Me Bro.

Clinton Pops a Heckler.

From MSNBC.
“I asked the president to please stop the bickering between the campaigns,”
Holeman said in an interview afterwards. “All this name calling is like the
bully in the yard. He can’t get his way, he can’t get nothing done.” Holeman
said he thought Clinton was “gasping for air.”

Holeman said that Clinton responded by saying Obama came after him first.
Holeman also described Clinton’s reaction to him as “irate.”

“I think he even hit me in the face with his hand,” he said. “He did give
me a little pop. It was okay, because I understand his tenacity for his wife.”
Clinton did engage Holeman for a few minutes, at times pointing directly at him.
It was unclear whether he did make physical contact, however.

It's pretty easy to play the bully when your posse with the ear buds are packing Uzi's.

Colorado Dreamin.

It seems like only yesterday that my brother in Texas was lamenting the fact that the nominating process would be over before he had the chance to vote. With the McCain nomination secured and with Texas an open primary state my brother and his fellow Texans, have the opportunity, no the duty, to drive a stake through the heart of the Clinton campaign by voting for Obama. Knowing that Clinton will not go silently into the night could be the impetus for the train wreck scenario I envision for the Democratic Convention. I am dreaming of something akin to Chicago in 1968.

Chicago 1968: Television loves pageantry, spectacle and action. Chicago delivered in ways that were unsettling to Americans. The streets of the great Midwest city were unsafe, middle-class values were ridiculed by unkempt youth, uniformed police acted like thugs, the mayor cursed a U.S. senator on the convention floor, disillusioned young people sought comfort in their leader, Sen. Eugene McCarthy, who won primaries but had no chance at the convention. In the hot, sweaty, and jammed convention hall, adjacent to the old Stockyards, delegates and media milled about, pushing and shoving for air as earnest speakers implored them to reverse President Lyndon Johnson's policy on Vietnam.
Downtown, television cameras were trained on the Hilton, the convention headquarters, when violence erupted between demonstrators and police. Some 17 minutes of clubbing and screaming were captured on film and shown on national television. In the steamy convention hall, action stopped and delegates denounced what was happening downtown.
In his notebook that night, the reporter-historian Theodore White jotted a terse, "The Democrats are finished." Floyd J. McKay

Denver 2008: Senator Clinton who won some primaries refuses to concede the race and takes the campaign to the Denver Convention. A raucous floor fight over Super Delegates and disenfranchised voters breaks out. Her husband curses reporters and is arrested for punching out his former Vice-President in an argument about who really deserved to win the Nobel Prize. Pushing and shoving breaks out between the faction of Hope and the faction for Change. Fortunately no one is injured as both groups were bused in from San Francisco by Nancy Pelosi wearing a leather dominatrix costume. (shiver) During the chaos John Edwards storms the dais declares a coup for the sake of the little guy and then annoints little guy Dennis Kucinich as his Vice President. (No one notices) Obama in his first real test suddenly realizes that you can’t talk to a recalcitrant enemy as Hillary throws him in a headlock her eyes bulging and manically screaming "It's my turn. It's my turn you bastard. You were supposed to be the vice president!"

Meanwhile outside the convention center, Code Pinksters are imploring someone, anyone, to stop the war. Harry Reid is burned in effigy. (OOPs it wasn't an effigy, even with his pants on fire no one could tell.) Marcos Zuninga, protesting that Bush stole the 2000 election is tazed by an overzealous Denver Riot Policeman for "being frigging annoying". The incident is caught on a cell phone video and played in continuous loop on all the cable networks in prime time. The left wing blogosphere is outraged and demands the end of the fascist police state of George Bush. Again, no one notices. But like the fiasco in '68 the voting bloc that Richard Nixon called the silent majority will notice and are repulsed by the spectacle. Once again the Democrats are finished. Hey its just a dream!

Campaign Ramblings

*I have to say that I am sorry to see Govenor Romney drop out of the race. If I was doing the hiring he was the only one in the entire field with the resume to do the job. Unfortunately when we look for a leader we are also running a beauty contest and Mitt didn't connect with the electorate and that is a loss for us all. As Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in 1835;

On my arrival in the United States I was surprised to find so much distinguished talent among the citizens and so little among the heads of the government. It is a constant fact that at the present day the ablest men in the United States are rarely placed at the head of affairs; (Democracy in America, Ch.11)

Romney is certainly a distinguished talent, perhaps too much buisnessman and not enough politician. He bowed out at the right time and with a grace rarely seen in politicians. Since he and the press are already talking about a bid in 2012 is it possible that McCain has shared plans to be a one term president? (Eternal optimist that McCain will win?) Perhaps the fix is in for the VP slot.

*I always love a good analogy. Many times the connection is tenuous at best but in this case Peggy Noonan hits a humorous mark concerning the Clintons in this WSJ piece;

Deep down journalists think she's a political Rasputin who will not be dispatched. Prince Yusupov served him cupcakes laced with cyanide, emptied a revolver, clubbed him, tied him up and threw him in a frozen river. When he floated to the surface they found he'd tried to claw his way from under the ice. That is how reporters see Hillary.
And that is a grim and over-the-top analogy, which I must withdraw. What I really mean is they see her as the Glenn Close character in "Fatal Attraction": "I won't be ignored, Dan!"

*It was petty for the press and Governor Huckabee in particular to repeatedly say that Gov. Romney was "spending his kid’s inheritance" because he was willing to finance his own campaign. Although I have encountered the saying on a motor home bumper sticker from time to time, this was said with a tinge of jealously. Now that the Clinton Campaign has pulled five million Bucks out of the joint checking account, will the press have the same concern for poor Chelsea?

Co-Presidency Fears Gaining Momentum

I mentioned last week that I thought the idea of Bill Clinton back in the white house was pushing the envelope in interpreting the 22nd amendment. From the Washington Post Blog;

The real concern may be a co-presidency, which raises intriguing constitutional questions. Is Bill Clinton pulling a Putin -- or a Kirchner? The Russian president couldn't seek re-election again, so he tapped a relatively unknown crony to run as his candidate in March, and is largely expected to continue running the show behind the scenes (maybe even as prime minister). Nestor Kirchner of Argentina decided not to run for re-election last fall, but made way for his wife Cristina to win the presidency and keep the Pink House in the family.

They are tacitly campaigning for us to accept an oligarchy. I know, I know there is already a secret cabal of old white guys running the country now.) But there is little doubt that Bill would love to be the Power Behind the Throne, Constitution be damned. From Wikipedia;

The phrase power behind the throne refers to a person or group that informally exercises the real power of an office. In politics, it most commonly refers to a spouse, aide, or advisor of a political leader (often called a "figurehead") who serves as de facto leader, setting policy through influence or manipulation.

Off topic but an interesting take on Bill. From Victor Davis-Hanson;

4. The problem is not that Bill Clinton occasionally lies—he does. But instead, almost serially he exaggerates and fudges—and in ways beyond not inhaling or redefining “is”, or insisting oral sex is not sex. The result is a Forrest Gump like effect, that we are to believe he and Hillary were the font of every almost every liberal gift of the last quarter-century—Yale, then Arkansas being the Mecca of social change.
5. It would be cruel, but understandable to ask amid these long encomia on Hillary’s character, her talent, and her morality—prefaced by Bill’s commentary that he almost alone realized her singular gifts, why in the world, then, did he spend over thirty years trying to escape her in almost every way imaginable? Why if she walked on water, did he find company, carnality, conversation with Paula Jones or Gennifer Flowers, or feel the need to talk trash and more with Monica? In other words, he is asking the voter to take on a partnership, a political marriage if you will, that he, mutatis mutandis, never would or has.

Election Satire

Barrack Responds.

*I want to thank Obama for taking my advice and putting Hillary on notice that he's mad as hell and isn't going to take it anymore. His remark during Mondays debate that "its hard to tell who I am running against" was on target but I'm afraid that it may be too little too late. He is being double teamed in a steal cage death match. In the end they will kiss and make up for the sake of the country and he will become the bottom of the ticket.

*My contention that people are not attuned to a Clinton return engagement to the White House may be off base. A New York Times article states that up to 37% of SC primary voters don't care which Clinton they are voting for as long as they get their old job back. Sad.

*Fred Thompson: Outside of Fred's acting I really didn't know much about the Senator until he was asked to help with the Justice Roberts confirmation. I was struck by his demeanor and presence and thought at the time that he was a genuinely impressive individual and I hoped he would enter the race when he was toying with the idea. Unfortunately, reality did not meet expectations. He kept people hanging on for too long and once in he never seemed to generate much enthusiasm for himself or Republicans.