Interesting Facts

Some unreported stats about the 2008 election
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:

-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30
-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000
-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million
-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.


The original posting with this information is below at this link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/163337.

In Keeping With the Topic of the Day

J.D. Pendry has some advice:


This is my country…
Posted: 03 Nov 2008 07:32 PM CST
J. D. Pendry

Happy Election Day Eve. I have gone into self-imposed media blackout. I have grown tired of pollsters, pundits and political strategists. I have voted. The bottom line up front is that I cannot do more than that. The outcome is not in my hands nor is it in any mortal's. That is how I see it.

If you have not voted, forget the blasted polls, do not listen to the media leaking exit poll information and calling the election one way or the other. Instead of taking in all of that, just go vote. I take my obligation to vote personally and seriously. I hope you do the same.

I turned 56 years old not so long ago. Twenty-eight of those years were spent in the United States Army. The people I served half of my life with in the Army are special people. They were my extended family then and now. When I cast my vote, I weigh my choice heavily in their favor. In good conscience I could never vote for a Commander in Chief or a political party that has proven by words and deeds to be harmful to the people who would risk their lives so that these same people might hold political office in a free nation.

I could never vote for the party that is already bragging about cutting military funding by one-fourth.

Likewise, I cannot support a potential Commander in Chief who states that he will reduce defense spending by tens of billions of dollars, slow development of future combat systems, stop development of the missile defense system and dismantle our nuclear weapons. The same man who said that the lives lost in Iraq were wasted and that our military in Afghanistan was air raiding villages and killing civilians.

My brothers and sisters in uniform deserve better leadership and the endorsements from political generals do not change my opinion. I cannot support someone for Commander in Chief that cannot bring himself to give credit to our serving men and women for the tremendous success they have delivered.

It especially concerns me that when I hear that we need a Civilian National Security force that is as strong as our military and is as well resourced. For what?

I need to decide whom with and how I share my wealth. I saw the public tax return information from the candidates. I share more wealth than both Obama and Biden combined each year. I decide where it goes.

All Americans have an obligation to pay taxes that are needed to fund services provided by government. We do not have an obligation to provide money to politicians to support failed government bureaucracies and social programs and we most certainly are not obligated to provide welfare checks to someone who did not earn it.

I believe in giving and sharing. I have worked hard most of my life and am probably more blessed than I deserve, so sharing those blessings where I believe they will do the most good is a choice for me to make. One is not selfish because he does not support forced redistribution of wealth through higher taxes. Our forefathers demonstrated how unpatriotic they believed unfair taxation is when they tossed British tea into Boston Harbor.

I have learned some important lessons over the past few years paying attention to politics. The most important is that we all need to take a closer look at home. The important elections we can most influence are for Congress.

In West Virginia, we have two Democrat Senators and two of three Democrat Representatives. Our state legislature has been Democrat controlled for decades. We rank 49th or 50th in every category that measures the quality of life in our state, except for taxes where we are near the top.

Politics has been a wealth producing business for our Congressional delegation, except for our New York transplanted Rockefeller who was already wealthy. They've brought plenty of pork to the state, but they have created no wealth the constituency. They have provided no vision for a state that sits on one of the largest energy reserves in the world. No future vision to modernize that industry for liquid fuel production. No, instead each of them and our Governor endorsed the man who said that he would purposely bankrupt our coal industry. Our state is the number 2 coal producing state in the union. Union coal miners will probably vote the party line.

This is my country. I am not going to give it away willingly. Regardless of the outcome tomorrow we need to start taking our country back from the socialists and career party politicians.

Go vote.

McCain at Sturgis

"As you may know, not long ago a couple hundred thousand Berliners made a lot of noise for my opponent. I'll take the roar of 50,000 Harleys any day,..."

"Drill Here, Drill Now!"

"My opponent wants to set a date to come home. I want us to come home with victory and honor so we will never go back again,"

"I told her with a little luck, she could be the only woman ever to serve as both the first lady and Miss Buffalo Chip."

Likes Harleys, wants to drill, demands victory, and likes topless beauty pageants and thinks his wife would win it....

He's growing on me.

Should Iran Last Another Year

My friend and former Marine door gunner has some interesting observations about Monkey Boy Imeanajihad.

From the Talon

Suppose John McCain becomes president next January.
Suppose Iran is still training special hit squads to enter Iraq to kill our troops? The stated purpose of this tactic is to keep adding to the American casualty count as the Iraqi Army gets better at its job, with Iran hoping the US will leave before the Iraqis are capable of holding their own.
I ask about McCain because he apparently is the only presidential candidate who has plans to smoke Iran if necessary, offering neither remorse nor apologies.
It is an important question because Iran is acknowledged by just about every thinking person in our solar system to be instigating the violence against us in Iraq, with the ultimate goal of forcing us out of the region, obliterating Israel and eventually ruling the entire Middle East.

The Paulistas Are Going To Be A Problem

First is this follow-up from Jonn at This Aint Hell about his experiences after covering a Ron Paul rally in DC.
Then we have this from Michelle, about the Neveada State GOP Convention being shut down early. Seems some folks were having trouble playing well together.

Million-dollar Clintons

Banner Headline on Drudge:
Clintons Show $109M in Income Since Leaving the White House

From the article:
"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Clinton report nearly $109.2 million in income for seven years in newly released tax data.

The Democratic presidential candidate and her husband paid $33.8 million in taxes from 2000 through 2007. They listed $10.25 million in charitable contributions during that period."

I think that amount of money classifies her as one of "the rich" that they keep complaining about. She and her husband complain about people who make millions in a year, and they make that same amount over 100-times over? When are Bill and Hillary going to give away all that excess that they have to "the poor" and live like the rest of us? This proves one thing: over the years -- even through the Clinton presidential co-partnership -- the "rich" got richer and still are! They, themselves are now the best living evidence.

Taking the money out of politics my a$$!

Obama; Unifying America Into Sections -- Again

B. Hussein Obama was much bally-hooed as being "the great unifier" -- the man who would put the final nail in the coffin of racism, by virture of simply being elected. After all, America couldn't possibly be a racist country and have a black man elected as president, could it?

But, as life would have it (or the Democratic Party would have it) we are once again mired in a verbal quagmire of racism the likes of which have not been seen since the O.J. trial. One can scarcely tun on the television, open a (descent) newspaper, or jet over to Drudge, without hearing about the latest un-earthed comment from one of the batty, racist pastors of one of the members of the "big tent party." With shrill screams of hate echoing from the pulpit, they seemingly want to burn crosses on the lawn of white people, black Republicans, and in the case of Clinton's pastor -- on Hussein's front lawn.

If this is the Democrat's idea of imporving race relations, I might as well invest in a few select futures now; the gun industry, hospitals, and funeral homes.

Obama is a menace.

Barack Hussein Obama is a dangerous man. This video spells out why conservatives need to suck it up and vote for McCain. Obama is too dangerous to this country to get near the Presidency.
Actually, this is why EVERYONE needs to vote for the GOP. I'm calling on all Hillary supporters to vote McCain if Hillary does not get the nomination.

1) "Opposed this war from the beginning and I will end it." He plans to surrender in the
GWOT.

2) "cut billions of dollars in wasteful spending." And then picks nothing but defense
spending.

3) "Cut investment in unproven missile defense systems." He's going to cut the ONLY
purely DEFENSIVE program we have. The "unproven" missile defense system. Hey, Barry,
did you notice that satellite shot? Oh, and how do you "prove" something if you don't develop it?

4) "I will not weaponize space." Too late. Space was "weaponized" when the first ballistic missile was launched and when defense satellites went up. What does he think our major advantage is? The M-16? Democrats talk about Bush being "unilateral." Obama is going to UNILATERALLY surrender the high ground. Got an enforceable treaty with Russia and China, did you?

5) "Slow our development of future combat systems." Well, now we know what he
considers "wasteful spending." And since these systems are already in development, he will
do nothing except make them more expensive. He needs to be forced to justify which systems he's going to cancel. Except, he won't be.....

6) "Set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons." Very nice. I guess Santa is going to
give him that one. The "messiah" is hoping to change France, England, Iran, North Korea,
Isreal, India, Pakistan, Russia, and China into a nuclear free zones. Is that like "gun free"
zones? He is, again, unilaterally, surrendering to China and Russia. He will allow our weapons to degrade.

7) "Seek a global ban on fissile materials." That kills the entire world nuclear energy
program.

8) He thinks that our missiles are on "hair trigger" alert. He's going to negotiate with
Russia about this. How about China? This does nothing about Iran and North Korea. Russia
hasn't threatened us lately.

9) "Achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal." More of the waste cutting. Its ok if the
other countries have them, but he knows that we have TOO MANY.

Barack Obama is living in a socialist dream world. His ideas are not based in reality. Combine the information you have with everything else you hear from him. Do you think that our ALLIES are comfortable with a man that states he will pull out of assorted mutual defense and trade treaties?
Eastern Europe is depending on our missile defense systems. Iran IS a threat. Russia IS a threat.
Whether you think NAFTA is a good idea or not, pulling out of a binding trade treaty sends the message to the rest of the world that our word is no good. Same thing with the defense treaties.
He wants to reorganize our military and treaties purely because he wants to be the "anti-Bush." It does not matter if a program or treaty is to our benefit. If Bush approved it, he wants it gone.

He out Clintons Billy. He will say anything, no matter how damaging to the US, to get elected to the Presidency.

Think about the world as it really is. Now tell me, is Barack Hussein Obama the man you want to be the most powerful man in the world?

Really?


h/t Last of the Few

The McCain Rally

Senator McCain flew into town yesterday. The venue was fitting: The Aviation Museum at Richmond airport.

Framed by an enormous American flag and an A-4 Skyhawk once flown by another former Vietnam war POW, LCDR Galanti, the GOP heavyweights of Virginia rallied to support the front running candidate. The McCain team was introduced by LCDR Paul Galanti. Delegate Chris Saxman, a co-chair of the McCain team, spoke about why he supported John McCain. He said that it was Senator McCain's example that inspired Del. Saxman to serve others....
The other co-chairman, Jerry Kilgore spoke next, getting a round of applause with the line,"We don't need inexperience on the job." Another line that received applause was, "John McCain will reject higher taxes."

The list of GOP stalwarts on the McCain team includes former Governors Gilmore and Allen, Senator John Warner, John Hager and former Secretary Lawrence Eagleberger . Former Sec. of the Navy William Ball was in the audience in support.

The crowd was very enthusiastic. Critics, conservative or otherwise, did not make an appearance. Military veterans made up about5-10% of the crowd, per a show of hands. Many of the audience, including Mr. Wayne "Bubba" Ozmore, the former chairman of the 4th Congressional district, emphasized that the overriding priority for them was the Global War on Terror, and more specifically the Iraq campaign. Mr. Ozmore said that, as a veteran of the Gulf War, Desert Shield/Storm and Operation Provide Comfort, he feels that Senator McCain supports the "military wing" of the GOP. Other vets seconded that opinion. He was "glad to have one of our own up there." Mr. Ozmore and other conservatives expressed concerns about
Senator McCain's stance on other matters, from immigration to 1st Amendment rights, they felt that the war is priority and that any alternative would be a disaster. Mr. Ozore said, "Its critical that Senator McCain picks a solid social and economic conservative for Vice President."

Senator McCain's arrival on stage was greeted by wild applause and whistles. With the Navy jet as backdrop, the Senator thanked his team and joked with the governors. Appearing relaxed and energetic, Senator McCain's passion for the defense of this nation shown through. One of his first statements, "As President, I will never surrender in Iraq or set a date for withdrawal."
While stressing the War, he put forth his platform. He is due credit that he did not claim to be the "2nd coming of Reagan." However, as he did admit, he does steal Reagan's lines and ideas, "Always steal from the best."

"We are not safe, but safer." was the quote when the Senator asked the crowd to give President Bush due credit for no more attacks on US soil.
"If I have to follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell, I'll get him."
"General Patreaus is the only man who should decide when and where troops should leave, not a senator running for President."

His conservative critics will demand action and not words, because of the Senator's history. But his words did sound the right note. Less government. No socialized medicine. Make the tax cuts permanent. Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. Because the USA has the 2nd highest corporate tax rate, cut corporate taxes to keep jobs in the US. Lower taxes and less regulation to attract more businesses to America.

"We're tired of borrowing money from the Chinese" brought forth cheers from the crowd. As did the phrase that he would control spending. "When we came to poser in 1994 to change Washington, Washington changed us. We became spendthrifts. President Bush signed $36 billion in earmarks and pork. In 36 years in Congress, I never asked for or received a pork barrel project for Arizona." "I will veto any bill containing earmarks or pork and publicize the authors."

While conservatives worry about the judges he would appoint, he stress that he would appoint judges in the mold of Roberts and Alito.

One very popular program that he on which he was very specific: Expanding the VA care and allowing vets to go to the doctor of their choice for their VA care.

Overall, Senator McCain is definitely the more conservative and experienced of the candidates. He appears to be striving to show his conservative credentials. No controversial topics came up in his speech or in the following press conference. I spoke to many people that were originally Thompson or Romney supporters, but, feel that McCain is the only alternative. They hope that, as a leader instead of just one Senator of 100, that he will be forced to fight for more conservative ideals or fight the left in Congress.


He has nine months to convince me. Senator McCain says, "I would rather lose a political campaign than the war." If he loses THIS political campaign, we may lose the war.

Was a deal made? War for the GOP

Bill Quick of DailyPundit has an interesting take on the current turmoil in the GOP.

Do not be fooled. What you are witnessing today is a war for the soul, if it can be said to have one, of the Republican party. One one side is the GOP machine establishment - represented by the Bushes, the Roves, and all the family and political dynasty politicians and their strategists who have tried to keep control of the party over the years.

On the other side are those whom the establishment regards as the barbarians at the gates: the rabble who listen to the conservative talk shows, the talker hosts themselves, the “Reagan Republicans,” the Gingrich revolutionaries, and now the bloggers and their readers.

This is, in a nutshell, a war between those who value principle over power, and those for whom power is first, foremost, and nearly everything.

I have felt for quite a while that the Bushes made a deal with McCain - that in exchange for his support of the establishment (McCain is about as much a “maverick” as George Herbert Walker Bush or Bob Dole), Bush and the establishment would back him in his run for the Presidency this year. I’ve seen nothing to disabuse me of that notion.

An Idea whose time has come

SURVIVOR - THE PRIMARY

OUTSTANDING! How do we implement it?


Oh, and CLOSED primaries, while you're at it.

Who do we vote FOR? Candidates positions spreadsheet

UPDATE: link goes directly to candidate spreadsheet. Take a look.

This guy has done the work so YOU don't have to.

He's come up with a spread sheet of every candidate's positions. Check it out. Hope it helps.

"Now, with just eleven days until ‘Super Tuesday’, I am facing a quandry I have never faced before in my life.

Who the hell do I vote for?

I have been voting in presidential elections since 1984, which means I have voted in six previous presidential elections. Each election cycle I would take a look at the candidates and choose the best one for the job. That’s the way it should be, isn’t it? Shouldn’t we always vote for the person who best represents our own views, and who we trust to lead our nation? This process has always worked well for me, and it worked again this time, right up until the time that Fred dropped out of the race.

So now what? While I can name several reasons why I would not vote for any of the remaining candidates, I found that I could not name one single reason to support any of them. Fred was my only choice. Off the top of my head I had no idea which candidate I would support because I had no idea which candidate best represented my views.

While researching their positions I stayed away from their official websites as I did not want their campaign rhetoric to get in the way of how they truly stand on an issue. I spent hours on Google, Yahoo, congressional record & political action sites, as well as blogs searching for quotes and voting records from each of the candidates to compile my list. I sat at the computer for over 6 hours working on the list and what I came up with was a concise, easy to read, spreadsheet that told me at a glance how each candidate compared to the others."

Ron Paul Meltdown: Bigoted past exposed?

Just links. Take a look. Frankly, Ron Paul has never sounded like the libertarians that I know.

"The bigoted past of Ron Paul."

A damning New Republic expose on Ron Paul shows the “libertarian” Republican candidate to be a racist, a homophobe and an anti-Semite.

Republican Primary Schedule

Republican primary and caucus schedule

January 2008
5 - Wyoming Republican Convention
8 - New Hampshire Primary
15 - Michigan
19 - Nevada, South Carolina
29 - Florida

February 2008
1 - Maine

Super Tuesday - February 5th
Alabama, Alaska , Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah

Later February 2008
9 - Louisiana, Kansas, Washington (18 of 40)
12 - D.C., Maryland, Virginia (not that far away) Go Fred!
19 - Wisconsin, Washington (19 of 40)

The rest of 2008
March 4 - Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Texas
March 11 - Mississippi
April 22 - Pennsylvania
May 6 - Indiana, North Carolina
May 13 - West Virginia, Nebraska
May 17 - Maine
May 20 - Kentucky, Oregon
May 27 - Idaho
June 3 - South Dakota, Montana, New Mexico
June 6 - Hawaii
June 28 - Nebraska

Later events

* August 25 to August 28, 2008 - 2008 Democratic National Convention, in Denver.
* September 1 to September 4, 2008 - 2008 Republican National Convention, held in Saint Paul, Minnesota.
* November 6, 2008 - Election Day.
* December 15, 2008 - Members of the U.S. Electoral College meet in each state to cast their votes for President.
* January 6, 2009 - Electoral votes officially tallied before both Houses of Congress.
* January 20, 2009 - Inauguration Day. A New Beginning for our nation.

Senator Thompson sets the story straight

Two weeks ago, I wrote about how the idea that conservative voters were not backing FDT because "they were waiting to be excited by him" was so much crap. I found the reality repugnant that conservatives were buying into the media misrepresentations because he wasn't matching their idea of a campaign, even though those "conservatives" professed to want a conservative candidate. WELL, HERE YOU GO. IF YOU ARE A CONSERVATIVE VOTER THAT DOES NOT WANT A CANDIDATE THAT WANTS TO RUN EVERY ASPECT OF YOUR LIFE, THAT BELIEVES THAT PRESIDENTS ARE NOT THE ANSWER TO LIFE'S EVERY PROBLEM, HERE IS YOUR CANDIDATE. IF YOU ARE STILL WAITING TO GET EXCITED....GO SURF THE INTERNET. YOU'LL FIND SOMETHING.

Getting the Story Straight

By Fred Thompson

Every once in a while I am more thankful than ever for today’s technology which allows me to talk to you directly instead of having to go through the filter of the main stream media.

Some of them are intent on making the outcome of the campaign dependent upon their pre-conceived notions. Every once in a while their incomplete and slanted coverage makes this clear.

Today I had this story written about me regarding what I said at a Town Hall event in Burlington, Iowa by a reporter who wasn’t even at the event. Incidentally, I declined to be interviewed by this particular reporter yesterday for reasons which will soon be apparent.

In referring to me, she reported “he doesn’t like modern campaigning, isn’t interested in running for President, and will not be devastated” if he doesn’t win.

Below is a transcript of what I actually said in response to a question by a local Burlington resident which was the basis of the reporter’s story.

It is clear that there are those in the media who will exact a high price for candor and from those whom they consider to be insufficiently ambitious. But it is with increasing amazement that we see that those who are willing to slant or leave out important parts of a story to make their point.

If a candidate succumbs to this he will be reduced to nothing more than a sound bite machine.

As for me I am going to continue to say exactly what is in my heart and is on my mind and give straight and honest answers to those who ask straight and honest questions.

Incidentally, the audience in Burlington broke into applause in the middle of my answer. The reporter wouldn’t know that because she wasn’t even there.

Q: (Courtesy ABC News) My only problem with you and why I haven’t thrown all my support behind you is that I don’t know if you have the desire to be President. If I caucus for you next week, are you still going to be there two months from now?

That is a very good question, not because it’s difficult to answer, but I’m gonna answer it in a little different way than what you might expect.

In the first place, I got into the race about the time people normally get into get into it. The fact of the matter is people get into it a lot earlier than they used to. For some of them, they were juniors in high school.

The first place, I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t. I wouldn’t be doing this. I grew up in very modest circumstances. I left government and I and my family have made sacrifices to be sitting here today. I haven’t had any income for a long time because I figured to be clean, you’ve got to cut everything off. I was doing speaking engagements and I had a contract to do a tv show. I had a contract with abc radio…and so forth. A man would have to be a total fool to do all those things and to be leaving his family which is not a joyful thing if he didn’’t want to do it.

I am not consumed by personal ambition. I will not be devastated if I don’t do it. I want the people to have the best president they can have.

When this talk first originated from people around the country both directly and through polls, liked the idea of me stepping up and of course, you always look better form a distance.

But most of those people are still there. I approached it from the standpoint of a deal. A kind of a marriage. If one side of a marriage really has to be talked into the marriage, it probably ain’t going to be a good deal. But if you mutually decide it’s going to be a good thing. In this case, if you think this is a good thing for the country, then we have an opportunity to do some wonderful things together.

I’m offering myself up. I’m saying that I have the background, the capability and concern to do this and do it for the right reasons. I’m not particularly interested in running for president, but I think I’d make a good president.

Nowadays, the process has become much more important than it used to be.

I don’t know that they ever asked George Washington a question like this. I don’t know that they ever asked Dwight D. Eisenhower a question like this. But nowadays, it’s all about fire in the belly. I’m not sure in the world we live in today it’s a good thing if a president has too much fire in the belly. I approach life differently than a lot of people. People, I guess, wonder how I’ve been as successful as I’ve been in everything that I’ve done. I won two races in TN by 20 point margins in a state that bill Clinton carried twice. I’ve never had an acting lesson. I guess that’s obvious by people who’ve watched me…

When I did it, I did it. Wasn’t just a lark. Anything that’s worth doing is worth doing well. But I’ve always been a little more laid back than most. I’m only consumed by very, very few things. Politics is not one of them. The welfare of our country and our kids and grandkids is one of them.

If people really want in their president super type-a personality, someone who has gotten up every morning and gone to bed every night and been thinking about for years how they win the presidency of the united states, someone who can look you straight in the eye and say they enjoy every minute of campaigning, I ain’t that guy. So I hope I’ve discussed that and didn’t talk you out of anything. I honestly want – I can’t imagine a worse set of circumstances [than] achieving the Presidency of the United States under false pretenses. I go out of my way to be myself... (continues at update)

via REDSTATE

Update: more from this speech at NRO: (emphasis mine)

because I don't want anybody to think they're getting something they're not getting. I'm not consumed by this process, I'm not consumed with the notion of being president. I'm simply saying I'm willing to do what's necessary to achieve it if I'm in sync with the people. And if the people want me, or somebody like me, I will do what I've always done with everything else in my life. I will take it on and do a good job. You'll have the disadvantage of having someone who probably can't jump up and click their heels three times, but will tell you the truth. And you'll know where the president stands at all times."

Tancredo drops out. Loses mind in process......

Rep. Tancredo finally accepted reality and dropped out of the race. I'm sorry to see him go, as he brought important issues to the forefront. But WTF? He endorsed ROMNEY? What was he thinking? I thought that Tancredo would endorse a fellow conservative. Politics makes strange bedfellows......

Hopefully this will turn into more support for Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson.

Fred does not pander

The good fellows over at Society for Independent Thinking put out a good description of Fred Thompson and why he's not getting any press:

And, of course, there’s the AP dog-and-pony show, wherein they ask the candidates stupid yearbook questions, instead of dealing with substance. Thompson’s responses, while certainly not pleasing to the AP (that is, they wouldn’t have been had the AP gotten the joke) were sure-fire crowd-pleasers to those of us who understood where Thompson was coming from:
What’s your favorite joke? Presidential debates.
What’s your favorite keepsake? Trophy wife.
What’s your favorite nickname? Mr. President.
And, of course, there’s my new favorite poke in the eye: What do you like to do on a ‘lazy day’? Campaigning.

Huckabee is a fool.

UPDATE: From Riehl World View: Pardons for Cash? Sounds familiar.......

And from Opinion Journal via Freeman Hunt, an Arkansas blogger:

Betsy Hagan, Arkansas director of the conservative Eagle Forum and a key backer of his early runs for office, was once "his No. 1 fan." She was bitterly disappointed with his record. "He was pro-life and pro-gun, but otherwise a liberal," she says. "Just like Bill Clinton he will charm you, but don't be surprised if he takes a completely different turn in office."

Phyllis Schlafly, president of the national Eagle Forum, is even more blunt. "He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party a shambles," she says. "Yet some of the same evangelicals who sold us on George W. Bush as a 'compassionate conservative' are now trying to sell us on Mike Huckabee.

Paul Pressler, a former Texas judge who led the conservative Southern Baptist revolt, told me, "I know of no conservative he appointed while he headed the Arkansas Baptist Convention."

I've said it before: Huckabee is a GOP Jimmy Carter. He may be religious, but he does not seem to have the courage of his convictions. He wants to be "nice" and "liked" by all the right people.

Huckabee sees WH 'Bunker Mentality'
By LIBBY QUAID

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - Mike Huckabee, who has joked about his lack of foreign policy experience, is criticizing the Bush administration's efforts, denouncing a go-it-alone "arrogant bunker mentality" and questioning decisions on Iraq.
"American foreign policy needs to change its tone and attitude, open up, and reach out," Huckabee said. "The Bush administration's arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. My administration will recognize that the United States' main fight today does not pit us against the world but pits the world against the terrorists."

Is it an arrogant bunker mentality when the US seems to be the main target of AL Quaida? Is it an arrogant bunker mentality when the US is sometimes the ONLY country that stands up for principle? Is it an arrogant bunker mentality that has US troop assisting Muslim countries during disasters?
Go-it-alone? WTF? He sounds like Hillary Clinton! We seem to be alone because our military outclasses all of our allies. But they are still there! Go-it-alone is always about Iraq. Well, Canada and Britain are finding out just how alone we are in the world. Other than the above two, NATO is NOT pulling its weight in Afghanistan. Change OUR tone and reach out? Last I looked, Germany and France have elected PRO American leaders. North Korea is giving up its nukes. Libya did that years ago. If the NIE is to be believed, (yeah, right) our invasion of Iraq halted the Iranian nuke program.
And that quote! "Pits the world against the terrorists!" If the world is not against the terrorists now, why would they join in later, with him as President? How is that different than "if you're not with us, you're for terrorism" since WE are most definitely against terrorism. However, he will need to convince countries that have a vested interest in supporting terrorism against the US to join with us. Last I looked, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and China like the status quo.
He's stating that our present course is the US against the world. Way to go is providing propaganda to the enemy, Mr. MoveOn......

On Iran, for example, he makes a case for diplomacy by saying, "Before we put boots on the ground elsewhere, we had better have wingtips there first."

He adds that the U.S. can exploit the Iranian government's hunger for regional clout, saying, "We cannot live with al-Qaida, but we might be able to live with a contained Iran."

And just how is his "wing tip shoes" going to stop Iran from being a nuclear armed belligerent state? What can he offer or threaten that does not include military threats? Is this the same "vigorous diplomacy" offered by Clinton? Someone should ask Huckabee how his ideas differ.

Last week, Huckabee missed a report the White House released saying Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program; one day later, the candidate said he was unaware of the report and had been campaigning too hard to read the newspaper or be briefed. The Foreign Affairs article seems to have been written before the report was released, citing "urgent concerns about Iran's development of nuclear weapons."

If Huckabee has not been briefed, how can he offer an informed opinion on Iran? Is he just mouthing platitudes, hoping to appear different from the supposed war-mongers in office?

In his article, Huckabee also thumped Bush for failing to pursue al-Qaida in Pakistan, noting recent terrorism plans, since thwarted, that were planned there: "Whereas our failure to tackle Iran seems to be leading inexorably to our attacking it, our failure to tackle al-Qaida in Pakistan seems to be leading inexorably to its attacking us again."

So, this SOUNDS like it makes sense, but, now he sounds like OBAMA! Doesn't he have an original idea at all? Is he advocating an attack on an, admittedly weak, allied country? He appears to want to send troops into Pakistan. What is HIS strategy for attacking Al Queda? Does he want to use Special Forces or an Armored Division? And since he does not seem to be well briefed, how does he know if we are NOT sending special forces into Pakistan, seeing as how that would be a very discreet activity.
And what does he mean by that quip on Iran? If his logic is played out, he's saying that our failure to attack Iran and letting them build up is leading to an inexorable attack by us to stop them.

Mike Huckabee want to be President. His recent rise in the polls seem to have gone to his head., for which I'm really glad. The increased exposure has shown us his flaws. And they are serious. For those of us that remember, he most reminds me of Jimmy Carter. Do we need another Jimmy?

"I'm waiting for Thompson to get me excited...." BULLS#&T!

I am so sick and tired of supposedly conservative voters saying in some form or another: " I want to vote for Thompson, but, I'm waiting for HIM to get me excited....He just hasn't excited me.....I'm waiting for him to get exciting...."

What the hell is this? A freaking porno? This is the PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION!

IF YOU HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT THE ISSUES WITH EACH CANDIDATE BY NOW, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!

Its not a candidates job to "excite" you. His job is to present his response to the issues of the day. Its your job to make a LOGICAL, NON-EMOTIONAL choice, to the best of your ability. Pick a candidate for his character, his skill in diplomacy, his knowledge of the issues that are important to you, etc....But don't wait FOR THE CANDIDATE to excite you. If you wait that long, the democrats will win. THEY PICK THEIR CANDIDATES BY EMOTIONAL APPEAL. Do you want to be like a democrat? I like Fred Thompson. I like Duncan Hunter. Between the two, I like Fred's presentation of the issues and his responses to the campaign situations the best. If you do not support the candidate that you like best, but pick the most "electable" because they seem to be more exciting or have more momentum, well, GIVE YOUR CANDIDATE MOMENTUM! SUPPORT HIM! But stop with all this crap about excitability being your criteria. It makes you look stupid.

Or worse, like a democrat.

Fred Thompson's campaign apologizes......

Since many of the Presidential candidates are offering apologies, the Thompson campaign decided that it was time for them to also offer theirs.