Saturday, December 08, 2012

Michigan – Right to Work Passes Both Chambers - Union’s Will Lose another Battle as Right to Work States Increase - Unions No Longer Relevant

Map showing States with Right to Work Laws (Michigan Not Yet Added) - form the Bureau of Labor Statistics, via the Sacramento Bee

The State of Michigan is the scene of some protest from Organized Labor due to the recent passage of a Right to Work Act that will be signed into Law by the Govenor as soon as it hits his desk. The roll call and the text of the bill are available at What is surprising is that there are so few Democrats in the Michigan Senate, as well as the Michigan House, given the impression that the State of Michigan is a sold Democrat state. The Senate and the House went a step further, by extending the rights to work to Teachers and Government Employees in a bill that also passed without much resistance.

There are now 24 of the 50 States that have right to work laws, according to the Sacramento Bee. Those states are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, - South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming.

Other states that have introduced bills or considered: Rhode Island, specifically Teachers, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire(, however, those bills were either no introduced or rejected by the legislators – so far.

The premise of a Right to Work law is to allow employees the option of joining a union – or not. One of free to join a union if they so choose, however, it takes away the ability of unions to force new hires to join a union. One would think this would benefit both the union and the employee considering the union, if the union had a good sales pitch as to why the individual should join. Therefore, when unions protest the passage of such a bill, one has to wonder why the protest? If they had such a great product to sell (the fabulous pensions or what-have-you), then the fact that a state passes such a law, should be of no consequence. Obviously, since unions fear these right to work laws, there must be something wrong with their product. Perhaps it’s the fact that the individual, regardless of performance enjoys no chance of moving up or down the ladder. That forward movement from the mail room to the corner office is off the table, so to speak, if one is a union member (unless of course, one is protected by nepotism.) Perhaps one is a fan of one political party over the other, and as the majority of dues are used to support political campaigns of one party over another, that may be a huge deterrent. Perhaps if unions made better use of the dues they are automatically given from membership (in states where there are no right to work laws or states where there were right to work laws) they would be seeing a huge increase in membership rather than the steady and steep decline they have seen over the past few years. In fact, as of 2010, the percent of those U.S. workers enrolled in unions had dropped to 11.9% of the population, compared to the 1950’s when a third of all U.S. workers were enrolled in a union. (CBS News) There are two type of unions, private sector and public workers – one can understand that the public sector workers, dependent upon the government are faring somewhat better than those in the private sector, as the economy plays a factor, while the government workers live off the taxpayer, as long as the taxpayer exists or the government prints money. That said why the steep decline in private unions?

Understanding that the right to work laws give individuals a choice to join a union or not - should not be a factor, as again, if the product was worth it, those non-union workers would be signing up in droves. What happened? The demands of unions on private firms have driven many companies overseas, or out of business. One might point to the recent loss of Hostess Twinkies – where the company tried to reason with the union, yet the demands continued – the cost was a loss of 18,000 jobs. Hostess is no more, and the U.S. Twinkie consumer will now be eating Twinkies made in Mexico. This has also been the case with the auto-workers, as American car companies are making automobiles anywhere but the U.S. and those foreign car manufactures making cars in the U.S. are going to right to work states.

The reason that there is no need for a union at all: Unions, at one time, especially during the 1950’s were a necessity due to a lack of regulations concerning everything from hours to safety. There were no child labor laws, or laws protecting factory workers from 12 hours days, with zero breaks. In factories, accidents were rampant due to a lack of concern over workers safety. Unions were there to protect the individuals, and they offered more: financial protection in the form of increase in pay, benefits such as health care and pensions to protect one in their old age. Since that time however, laws were passed by the Federal government. There are now minimum wage laws in every state, companies offer 401K (pension plans); there’s OSHA, a government entity that ensures the safety of employees through inspections of work places. There are laws regarding the length of time one can work through at day and a set standard of breaks. There are laws against discrimination, laws that protect employees from sexual harassment, laws that require companies to grant certain types of leave (medical and so on) and guarantee the individuals job. There is now Obama Care, a law that guarantees health care! The laws have evolved to the point where the question becomes: What does the union do? It is still relevant? The answer is no, unless one views joining a union similar to joining a fraternity or other “club”. They have been legislated out of relevancy by the federal government (which begs the question as to why there are Government employee unions in the first place.)

The battle therefore, is for power – power over politician’s, and power over their memberships – the premise, if one has power over a politician (by delivering votes for example through power over the membership), then the union bosses (many of whom are degreed professionals, non union members who have rather hefty salaries), get legislation passed on a local or state level that benefits the union – such as exorbitant pensions. If one lives in a bankrupt city, then one can understand that said bankruptcy involved – pensions of public employees. As these cities go into bankruptcy, they will no longer be able to pay the pensions, or the salaries of said public employees. Some desperate cities are asking for a bail out from the Federal Government (which is somewhat cash strapped) – The big question is: what happens when the taxes can no longer support the unions? Would an employee, public or private, be better off managing their own funds, and wage negations and holding onto their job, rather than find themselves out of a job and a pension. The truth is not of the matter is the private and public sectors no longer can afford, nor is there a need for unions. Should the laws change and say, work place protection no longer exist, or 401K’s would be banned, or Obama Care would cease to exist, or the Family Medical Leave Act, or a host of other Act that protect the worker, all be repealed, then there would be a need for workers to band together and demand a better environment which would then help the company and the employees. Until that time, the relevancy of the once powerful unions will continue to prevail until they simply cease to be a factor.

Disclosure: Blogger is a former member of the ILGWU, daughter to a member of the defunct but powerful AMCU and AFLCIO member who has witnessed, first hand, the corruption, ineptitude and lack of relevancy of said unions over a period of 40 years.

Friday, December 07, 2012

Update Syria 12 7 12– Assad using Chemical Weapons on his own people (Unconfirmed by U.S. Press), Clinton: events on the ground are accelerating.

What once was a neighborhood in Syria, complete with families, reduced to rubble by the Syrian Regime -image: ipnews

CNN World is reporting that according to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, the situation is Syria is getting worse:

"Events on the ground in Syria are accelerating, and we see that in many different ways. The pressure against the regime in and around Damascus seems to be increasing," Clinton said before meeting with Russia's foreign minister and the U.N. special envoy to Syria.

The New York Times adds that the despite the growing concern from the Obama Administration, there is a “shifting” of the position on Syria, which the White House suggests is flatly untrue. Rather that the Times is interpreting the White House use of language incorrectly. The closing paragraph from the New York Times article:

“Mr. Panetta said Thursday that the administration was “very concerned, very concerned” that as the opposition fighters close in on Damascus, the Syrian capital, the Assad government might actually use a chemical weapon. Over the past four decades, Syria has amassed one of the largest undeclared stockpiles of chemicals in the world, including huge supplies of mustard gas, Sarin nerve agent and cyanide, according to unclassified reports by the C.I.A.”

Which leads one to believe that threats by the administration, “veiled” or not, as suggested by the Times, are indeed threats. Telling the Syrian’s that there will be consequences, without be specific about said consequences is enough. The Times, one is certain, would like the details spelled out, as to the exact nature of the consequence, the day, time and exist strategies, etc. It would behoove the Times to recall that President’ Obama’s favorite President was Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln, leading up to and during the Civil War, would jail, indefinitely, those newspaper editors that wrote disparaging articles about – Lincoln! Lincoln suspended the constitution – period.

The situation is more precarious as there are several situations in the Middle East, one of which it he Syrian, Turkish conflict, and now, the Syrian Rebels are fighting on two fronts, with the regime and now with the Kurds.. (New York Times)

Meanwhile, in Lebanon the Daily Star is reporting that the U.N. is asking the Palestinians to stay out of the Syrian Conflict. As if the Palestinians will do anything to jeopardize their source of bombs, chemical weapons, etc. - which, the U.N. should be keenly aware come from Syria and Iran – the two power brokers who support the demise of Israel.

Speaking of the land of Persian, which, with the help of former President Jimmy Carter, is now an Insane Islamic State of Iran – best friends with Syria. The Iranian “Press TV” article below treats the current situation (Chemical Weapons for use against the Syrian People, and possibly Turkey, further shipment to said Palestinians for use against Israel and who knows who else.

Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi has warned of plots against Syria, saying enemies are exploiting oil resources of Islamic countries to kill Muslims in Syria.

“There is confidence among the people and officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran that the Syrian nation will overcome enemies and the arrogant system and will be the final winner,” Rahimi said in a meeting with Syria’s Minister of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform Subhi Ahmad al-Abdullah in Tehran on Thursday.

He expressed Iran’s strong opposition to any foreign interference in Syria’s internal affairs, saying Tehran supports the implementation of reforms to resolve the ongoing crisis in the Arab country.

Al-Abdullah, for his part, said the Syrian nation has a resolve to counter enemies and added that Syrians are taking steps in the path of defense for the oppressed people.

The Syrian minister hailed Iran’s stance on support for reforms which are beneficial to Syria’s territorial integrity and the Arab country’s people. Syria has been experiencing unrest since mid-March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of army and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

Apparently, certain leaders in certain nations have little to no access to what might be happening outside of their borders, or, more to the point, the Iranian’s who use Syria as a proxy in all fights in the Middle East, is posturing, as they continue to accelerate their nuclear capabilities.

Meanwhile: Assad continues to drop phosphorous on the rebels (See Video Below)

The Washington Post Weighs noting that this may or may not be a valid video as it comes from an opposition source. – The Post goes on:

White phosphorus can cause severe chemical burns, and the smoke vapors can cause illness or even death. There also is a risk that white phosphorus residue can poison food stocks or water sources and lead to later poisoning.

Shades of Iran’s Green Revolution in 2009 – when the rebels and protestors spend weeks on Twitter and YouTube, uploading atrocities as they were committed, and the U.S. Media, sat silent, along with the administration. One would bet the house, that the rebels may have a reason to put that info on You Tube for the world to see – they want help. It appears that Assad may already be using chemical weapons against his own people.

The opposition YouTube channel is

Thursday, December 06, 2012

Syria - U.S. Intel Suggests Sarin (Mustard Gas) Loaded On Bombs Readied at Airfield – WMD’s to target citizens – The Timeline and the Threat the Opinion.

Political Map of the Middle East - image

The Relationships in brief: Syria, Iran, Russia and China are friendly to one another. The Iranians aid Syria and Hezbollah allowing for attacks on Israel and Turkey. The U.S. strongest ally in the Middle East is Israel. There are conflicts in Egypt and ongoing problems in Lebanon. Al Queda and other terrorists groups operate throughout the Middle East. In short – the Middle East is a mess and the U.S. is “The West”, along with Europe.

On December 4, 2012 Voice of America reported that the U.S. had growing concerns that there was “movement” around Syria’s chemical weapons sites, and that the Assad Regime might use them against the Syrian people (VOA). This was followed by a suggestion from Russia that “The West is aware that its’ claims about the threat from the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons does not stand up to scrutiny, the Russian government has said.

Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov declared that there had been an exaggeration of the threat faced by Turkey to justify Nato’s deployment of Patriot missile batteries and the move will end up adding to the tension in the region; “any such deployment is creating the risk that these arms will be used” he maintained.
(Belfast Telegraph)

However, an article from Foreign Policy suggests that the Obama Administration has had concerns regarding the Syrian use of Sarin, in general, since August of 2012 when it movement was detected around Syrian chemical weapons sites”

On the 5th of December the world is watching, including the Israeli’s who share a border with Syria. (APA News) NATO moved Patriot Missiles to Turkey to protect its airspace as there has been more than saber rattling between the two nations (WA Today).

On the 6th: According to the Saudi Gazette, Turkey knows where all of the Syrian Chemical Weapons are stored. Further: ““Assad has about 700 missiles... Now we know the exact location of all of them, how they are stored and who holds them,” Davutoglu was quoted as saying by the Sabah newspaper.

The comments emerged the day after NATO ministers approved Turkey’s request for deployment of Patriot missiles along its volatile border with Syria, a move that has angered Damascus and its allies.

Davutoglu said the international community feared possible attacks from Damascus against countries such as Turkey which were pushing for the toppling of the regime, if it felt the end was near.”>
.(Saudi Gazette)

The U.S., including President Obama and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton hadalong with NATO, warned Syria against using these chemical weapons.(New York Times)

It was then reported by NBC News that the Syrians had loaded these chemical weapons onto bombs.

Now, the Washington Post is reporting that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be meeting with the Russian envoy today.

Within days the Russian’s went from the “West exaggerating” to a hurried meeting, suggesting that the situation has become more unstable and the time for hubris is past.

The fact that Syria, long an aggressor with its ally Iran against Israel and it’s neighbors, has a regime with its back to the wall fighting a war with its own people which has been widely condemned,, and an ongoing conflict with Turkey to its north, the desperation may trigger the use of these chemical weapons against its own people. There should also be concern over the fact that this nation has an immense stockpile of chemical weapons, and that the danger may exist that the regime might also strike at its neighbors as well (Israel, Turkey).

What is telling is the speed in which the U.S. Administration has addressed the issue once there was confirmation through Intel that the weapons were loaded onto bombs. The U.S. has, since World War II, taken a larger role on the world stage when it comes to the protection of the innocent and the protection of key allies. Today, with the emphasis on the “West” and the threat of terrorism against the U.S. and it’s allies very real, there appears to be a continued need for the U.S. to continue in that particular role. Historically, the U.S. did not involve itself with other nations – the First President, George Washington, suggested that the United States stay out of conflicts outside its borders as the nation was in a stage of growth and had neither the finances nor the manpower to involve itself.

A side note: there are those who are starting to draw comparisons between President Obama and George W. Bush re: Weapons of Mass Destruction as a means to begin a war. In both cases, one might suggest that regardless of the fact the Intel is not necessarily perfect, that to do nothing might not only be immoral in the broadest sense, but also present a threat to the very basement from which those detractors of the aforementioned Presidents reside. It is not that any President seeks a war, the cost in human capital and to the taxpayer is too great a burden to do so recklessly. Therefore, to those who are drawing comparisons (as well as to those who railed against George W. Bush as if it were the Viet Nam War revisited) might be better served reading up on the use of said weapons since World War I. It is clearly unacceptable. Time to put partisanship aside, review the reports (there is little one can do to determine fact from fiction and that includes the Administration.) and pray that Assad seeks asylum outside Syria and that the stockpile of weapons is then destroyed by a willing and able coalition.

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

Follow the Money – States Opt out of “Obamacare”, Individuals Opt Out for Religion, the Penalty and Who will Pay.

Where you State Stands – image from: Avalere Health

According to Forbes States that Opt out of the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare), are doing so because it is a fiscal incentive. The premise of Obamacare is that states must set up insurance exchanges allowing consumers to buy at all levels, including those on Medicaid (the expanding Medicaid). Once a State is signed on, and has an exchange operational, the Federal government may supplement the costs for Medicaid participants, and, if for some reason the Fed’s can’t or won’t cover the bill, those states are obligated to do so.(Forbes)

The States opting out to date: Wisconsin, Maine, Ohio, Texas, Alabama, Nebraska, Louisiana and Alaska. Those on the Fence: Florida, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. The balance of the states will be setting up exchanges and those who don’t, will allow the Federal Government to do so (there really isn’t a choice, or Health and Human Services. Avalere Health is the consultant. (Huffington Post)

Some, according to MSNBC will be able to opt out of the mandate including : objections for religion reasons, financial hardship, American Indians, those without coverage for less than three months, undocumented immigrants, and incarcerated individuals. . Those opting out without the benefit of an excuse, but not holding coverage will pay the penalty which, according to MSNBC

In 2014, the most you’d pay for not having health insurance is 1% of your taxable income; 2% in 2015; and after 2016, the maximum penalty will be “increased annually by the cost-of-living adjustment,” according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

So which is makes less of a dent in your wallet—the penalty or the plan?

The average employer-funded plan costs about $2,200 a year. So for those making $100,000 or less, it’s technically cheaper to go with the penalty. As for plans not funded by an employer, those average about $4,300 a year.

Welcome to Massachusetts!!

So where does that money go? No one can tell you for sure, however, it is estimated that six million individuals will be paying fines to the Feds.(Huffington Post)

In Massachusetts fines are paid directly to the State Department of Revenue. One would think that these collective fines would be used to pay down the deficit, fund something, similar to Health Care – yet – there are no answers to that question.

Obamacare, with the loads of regulations on employers and taxes that will affect businesses tied to Health Care, and individuals who are caught in a public plan (Medicaid expansion), Public (watch those premiums skyrocket), or paying the piper for lack of insurance (giving a large donation to the Federal Government) should be taken back to the drawing board – post haste.

Tuesday, December 04, 2012

Pope Benedict XVI on Twitter – First Tweets December - 12-12-12 – Twitter Handle “Potifex” Confuses “The Masses”. - The Reason and the Translation.

The Pope who visited several nations last year, with the glaring exception of the U.S. - gave a mass in Cuba, calling for religious freedom - the article:The Pope at Mass Calls for Full Religious Freedom in Cuba Image and article at the National Catholic Reporter

CNET headlined “Holy Tweet the Pope Comes to Twitter With @ Pontifex and the rest of the world is waiting for his first official Tweet, which will take place on the twelve of the twelve month of 2012. Several questions, amid the “hate” tweets, have arisen the meaning of the Pope’s handle “Pontifex”. The reason for the confusion is that the word is Latin, a language that is no longer taught in public schools, but reserved for those who are in a private or parochial school. Latin, one of the root languages of all languages allows on to study historical documents as well as lays the foundation for language studies. Of course, the education level in the U.S. is on a par with most third world nations, so it is no wonder that adults who went through the education system in the U.S. after the teachers unions invaded via Philadelphia in the 1970’s know little if anything. (There is a study out of the University of Wisconsin that draws the distinction between that even and the free-fall of test scores over the following years.).

The Latin “Pontifex” translated literally means Bridge Builder. That is something to ponder for the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church as well as the Head of the Vatican State, a nation in its own right.

Which, as the masses in the U.S.(using their Progressive name, as those who are not Elite, or those that are but have been dummied down to the point where they have no critical thinking skills) are under the impression that anything religious must be dangerous, or derided, or what-have you. The problem lays in the fact that they know of the Pope, however, as an anti-cool, anti-fun individual. They also cannot recognize or do not know the following people: Their State Senator, their state Congressional Rep, the Vice President of the U.S. the Speaker of the House, the Senator Majority Leader , or any number of prominent individuals in the U.S., except for the President. They do know however, every five minute actor or actress or artist that is currently spewing garbage as music or art.

What would they know of the Pope then? The answer is obviously – nothing

What would they know about the significance of the Vatican and its historical archives? – Again, nothing.

Would their brilliant teachers who cannot even pass a test, have taught them that without a monk, Patrick, traveling against all odds across Europe to the further reaches of the Roman Empire, the British Isle’s where he set the impossible task of crafting – the Bible into Latin. That became, besides bits of scribbling on scrolls, the books that defined history and the world’s “enlightenment” through some very dark ages.

One could be completely secular or anti-Catholic for that matter and not fail to appreciate the fact that the center for learning was the Holy Roman Church and without it, man would have taken much longer to get to a point of knowledge where science was even a possibility. This is, of course, Europe, that advanced society so superior to the U.S. (from the progressive point of view).

Therefore it is not unusual for a Head of State to take to Twitter, and considering he is there to build bridges (generally a peaceful approach), and then it is a grand Pope that Catholics enjoy. Pope Benefit VXI, is one that is not without a bit of political wisdom at that. Some of those who are on Twitter “spewing hate’ might be shocked to learn that the United States has an ambassador installed at Vatican City Miquel Diaz, is the Ambassador, which as most of Spanish decent are also Catholic.

The first tweet, to build bridges of understanding , will again, take place on 12-12-12 and to follow Pope Benedict XVI merely go to his Twitter Account” go to

As to the significance of the Date:
Through the power of the associated gateways held open by the Archangels at the 11:11, a new force of the Christ Consciousness will be made available during the 12:12:12 Activation. The power of this awakening energy enables each person to have the experience of the Christ Light at the moment of the 12:12:12 Coding. Once experienced you will not fall back into old ways, as the Golden Christ Light literally expunges from your being frequencies that no longer serve you. Transformed by Light, the cells awaken to the coding embedded by your soul. This activation has been held in abeyance until the earth consciousness would support mass awakening. Awareness and preparation are key signatures for the transformation available through the Christ Light. That time is Now.... Read More

Monday, December 03, 2012

2016 Speculation: Palin, Cruz, Clinton, Bush, Warren, and the Race to the top.

Sixteen of the potential GOP 2016 Candidates imagined by Politico - image

The 2016 Presidential election may seem as if it is too far in the future for speculation to begin as to who will run in both parties, and to whom the two major political parties will “anoint” as the eventual winner, regardless of primaries. The speculation began before the first votes were cast in the 2012 election, as President Obama, as was the case with Bill Clinton and George Bush, will not be eligible to run for a third term (regardless of the rumors to the contrary regarding President Obama). Generally speaking those who appear in the early lists generally don’t throw their hats in the ring when it comes down to the wire (see Palin, Huckabee, and Jindel for example in 2011-2012), but for giggles, the early list:

From Politico: : Bobby Jindel (R-Governor of Louisiana) , John Kasich (R-Governor of Ohio), Bob McDonnell (R-Governor of Virginia), Martin O’Malley (D-Governor of MD), Vice President Joe Biden (D) Gov. Rick Perry (R-Governor of Texas) Mark Warner (D-Senator from Va.), Rick Santorum (R-2012 GOP Candidate), Rick Scott (R-Governor of Fl.), Jan Brewer (R-Governor of AZ),Scott Walker (R-Governor of Wisconsin, Susanna Martinez, (R-Governor of New Mexico) Hillary Clinton (D) and Andrew Cuomo (D-Governor of NY), Brian Schweitzer (D-Governor of Montana)(Washington Post), Ted Cruz (R-Senator TX) (Fox News), Sarah Palin (R)(Baltimore Sun), Jeb Bush (R), Marc Rubio (R-Senator FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), Bob Portman (R- Senator Ohio), Kelly Ayotte (R-Senate NH) (The Tacoma News Tribune) Mike Pence (R-Governor Indiana), Paul Ryan (R-Congress (WI), Brian Sandoval (R- Governor of NV), John Thune (R-Senate SD), Michelle Bachman (R-Congress MN), Chris Christie (R-Governor of NJ)(Politico), Julian Castro (D-Mayor of San Antonio) (USA Today), Newt Gingrich (R) (Politico) ,Elizabeth Warren (D-MA Senate)(Boston Magazine) - That’s the list for now.

If one were to consider that the GOP has a habit of nominating a candidate (or more to the point, appearing to push a candidate that has lost in a previous election (See John McCain, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney), then logic would dictate that the most likely of the bunch would be Rick Santorum or Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich), however, there’s Jeb Bush in the ring, so one may bet they’ll go the way of the dynasty. (Also consider that neither of the aforementioned would fit the GOP moderate mold.)

On the Democrat side, Hillary Clinton is already ahead in the buzz, however, the Democrats are going to need a hook, and they are going to focus, as they did in 2006-2008, on a little known woman, with little experience and very little national exposure – that’s Elizabeth Warren, darling of the Progressives.

That doesn’t stop the press from seeing a matchup between two political dynasties in a Bush vs. Clinton 2016 match-up(CNN).

What is interesting to this feminist is the fact that there are so many woman and much speculation as to 2016 Presidential runs on the GOP side: Bachman, Palin, Ayotte, Martinez, and Brewer, while on the DNC side one has Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. Of the women listed, one can see Palin, Brewer, and Martinez going the distance (basing this on experience as Governors and having as far as having a grassroots base in place the tow at the top would be Brewer and Palin). However, to have the party that generally get’s the women’s vote (silly, $9.00 worth of Birth Control is more important somehow than fiscal sanity – which is contrary to feminism as most women must support themselves and their families, being independent of the male), has only two females that are mentioned, Hillary who would fall into the “owe a Presidency” (if she were in the GOP) column, and Elizabeth Warren – who with zero experience, and one slogan (Billionaires!) will be the most likely nominee and one can see a 2008 Democrat convention all over again (where Clinton would be robbed a second time!).

Names no on the list: Huckabee, Huntsman, and those who have yet to crawl out of the political woodwork.

The bigger question, in the course of the next two years, is will a third party emerge, along with a third party candidate, that will fit the bill enough to give the major parties a run for their money. On the GOP: side, there are several that have Tea Party Connections that are strong enough to carry an independent bid, Palin, Perry, Rand Paul (son of perennial Libertarian-Republican candidate, Ron Paul). There is only on one that would hold an Independent party on the DEM side, and that would be Elizabeth Warren, the Progressive Party (should they decide to go that route, which is highly unlikely). It would be healthy for the nation however, to see the large political parties split, as now there is a schism in both (although that argument is rarely framed), the Progressive Socialists who are driven by Unions, versus, the other “groups” that belong to the Democrats, and on the GOP side, the moderate do anything, say anything to get elected semi-fiscal conservatives, versus the social and fiscal conservatives – who would be either an Independent or Tea Party.

In any event, start watching late night TV in February, for who shows up on Letterman, and Leno, and of course, starts making the rounds of all the talk shows – fundraisers aside, (which is how Politico judges who may or may not throw hats into the ring), it is face time with the public in general that usually is a hint of what is to come.. .and the beat goes on.

Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address