Politics as Usual

When did we get to the point that the style of the candidate superseded their substance? Right now we have liberals who are pointing fingers at each other and conservatives that seem equally intent on tripping up their rivals within the party. For the majority of us who are not political animals and who don't live for the subtle dagger of defamation, this has been a primary season that has left us all just a little woozy and the worse for wear. I consider myself a conservative. Not a die at all costs conservative. Not a one issue and I am done conservative, but a TRUE conservative. I think people should work for what they get. I think the military is there to defend our borders. I think that citizens should have the right to jobs, education and social welfare before we start giving away goods across the border or around the world. I think the government, like my family, should have to live within their own means. I don't want the government telling me what to do, what to wear or what to think. I don't want them meddling in my church and a surely don't want my church mixing it up with politicians. In short, I want old school constitutional justice and a Congress that understands the need for individuals to be accountable for their actions. And, right now I am considering voting for a Democrat.

Strange, you say? Not really. There's pretty clear evidence that the MainStreamMedia has gone out of its way to pump up the volume on the partisan rhetoric since 9/11. That has resulted in a variety of whispering campaigns that not only divide our nation into political regions, but that divides groups within these areas from each other. What used to be spicy, but liveable cocktail party banter has become a situation where you must tread on eggshell any place except home. And yet the vocal bullies on both sides try to sway and intimidate through a series of politically inspired antics that just leave a sour taste in my mouth. So the media has a great deal to answer for, including the unbelievable hype given to the early primaries. The anticipation of financial gain from such early voting led Florida and Michigan to move up their primaries, only to have their hands slapped by the DNC. So do you really think the DNC will deny entry and credentials of delegates from these two very important states? Or will Clinton's gamble to show up and "campaign" outside the realm of the acceptable primaries win her the nomination? And what of the Republicans. Several qualified candidates with measured and descriptive positions and platforms were ignored by a media that seems intent on choosing the nominee for the party by ignoring other contenders. And, not surprisingly, the Republican they support is the most liberal of the bunch. There's already talk of people simply staying home. And this could signal both a Democrat gain in the White House and a Democrat political bloodbath two years later in the midterms when "nice thoughts and pleasant behavior" doesn't produce magical changes in the way things are progressing domestically or internationally.

So, what to do?
Here's my plan. I do not trust Hillary Clinton. I think she's damaged goods with a mean streak that will lead to vindictive leadership in Congress. Punishing ones political opponents is not part of the job of President. I think John McCain is far more liberal and could probably run as a Democrat given his public stances on immigration and other topics. He's running on his legacy as a POW. And I admire his courage at that time BUT, that doesn't make him good for the position. In addition, he has a reputation for being very angry, very brusque and unwilling to admit his mistakes. If he was elected, he would enact most of the liberal agenda. But when that didn't work, the MSM and the pundits would still blame the Republicans-heck they will probably still blame President Bush-and nothing will change. The Congress would still be producing programs that we can't pay for and bills loaded with hidden earmarks that never make the light of day in discussion of their passage. The odd man out is Obama. Sure, he's liberal. But he is a former professor of constitutional law, which means he's studied the thing and knows the limits of power. He's not particularly tied to any one group of zealots such as Moveon.org or such. I am sure he would still push for a more liberal social agenda, but with a more measured eye towards the endgame. And if his agenda failed, the MSM could not blame Republicans and the midterms would give us an entire new Congress.

So it could be a rough couple of years boys and girls. Hold on to your hats, watch your backs and for God's sake, stop registering your guns, because that's the first thing they are going to pass.

Who Reads Newspapers?

I freely admit to lifting this from a post at FoxDFW and I am pretty sure they found it on some other blog, but this list bears repeating.

"1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.

2. The Washington Post is read by people who think they run the country.

3. The New York Times is read by people who think they should run the country and who are very good at crossword puzzles.

4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand The New York Times. They do, however, like their statistics shown in pie charts.

5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country -- if they could find the time -- and if they didn't have to leave Southern California to do it.

6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country and did a poor job of it, thank you very much.

7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who’s running the country and don't really care as long as they can get a seat on the train.

8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who’s running the country as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.

9. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country but need the baseball scores.

10. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren’t sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it; but if so, they oppose all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority feminist atheist dwarfs who also happen to be illegal aliens from any other country or galaxy, provided of course, that they are not Republicans.

11. The National Enquirer is read by people trapped in line at the grocery store."

My add-ins at #12. The Chicago Tribune is read by people who vote for Democrats but think, speak and act Republican.

#13. The Dallas Morning News is read by people who vote Republican but act Democrat.