Scott Brown as the”Carpetbagger”, Politico Asks – “So What?” – Valid – Are you listening New Hampshire?

Politico’s article on Scott Brown, Republican running for Senate in New Hampshire, offers some valid points as to his “residency” in the state, and the moniker of “carpetbagger” that some have attempted to attach to Brown. The article states what anyone living between the Granite and the Bay State understands – we travel. Most of the Massachusetts residents living on the border or near the border of New Hampshire, have, over the years, moved next door, over the state line, escaping the extreme liberalism that is the Bay State. Friends have gone over the border, no excuses, for better schools and nicer real estate options, and all were, to the point, conservative in nature, although most “unenrolled” or independent minded. Scott Brown, therefore, has a lot of company in New Hampshire that is extremely like minded.

Never mind that the State flipped houses, that was due to those tax-hating liberals who thought nothing of going over the border as well – short commute to Boston and all. One might think that there were enough of them that would not appreciate Brown as an alternative; however, one might be wrong in that regard.

When Brown broke on the political scene in Massachusetts, weeks before he announced his run in 2009 for the Senate, he was a curiosity as a State Senator - with many wishing their state senator would be so attentive to constituents needs. That was the big reason Brown was so popular in MA – he was genuine. He did not work for one group or the other, he was not a brand X and that is what got him into some hot water with the Political “you own me” groups. Let alone, once elected, those who were “late to the campaign dance” declared their victory in getting Brown elected (State Republican Party, for one, Tea Party for two). Brown, with the help of a few trust aides, did it himself.

Yes, guilty, a Scott Brown fan, because is actually is a legislator. One might not care for everything Brown suggests, or the way he votes, however, since all of us, (the State in question), are not of the same political mind set, or share the same needs, one would think a legislator who walked the walk for all of their constituents would be welcome. One hopes the residents in the State of New Hampshire recognize what they have in Brown giving himself over to a race, to represent them.

Very rarely are there those who will not vote a party line, one way or other, just visit Thomas.gov, the congressional record, and look up ones Representative or Senators and find a party line state of mind. It is “us versus them” that get’s nothing accomplished. Brown manages to straddle the middle ground without comprising his principles or his constituents, and plays to no particular group.

It cost him the Massachusetts election - simply because he was accused on one side of being party line, and on the other – no so much. One might hope the New Hampshire streak of independence would allow them a tad more intelligence than their taxing neighbors to the south.

In a word this former constituent is jealous – look at what Massachusetts has to offer in its senators – both progressives, one running for the 2016 nomination (although denying) – Senator Warren, and the other – invisible in most of what he does – Ed Markey. Think long and hard, New Hampshire, you too could be just like your neighbors, which may not be the most envious position to achieve.

Then read the article at Politico to find how many real “carpetbaggers” are in the Senate, State House, et al –it might surprise.

Good Grief –WAPost, suggests GOP Trouble with No Clear Front Runner – the Tea Leaves

The Washington Post is suggesting that the GOP is in “turmoil “as there are no clear frontrunners yet for 2016. They go on to explain that the “elders” of the party, are not happy unless there is a clear front-runner before the nominating process begins – keeps it neat, sweat and no messy primaries – since this may not be the case, chaos should reign and the Democrats should be sitting pretty. The reason is that Hillary Clinton has an unprecedented lead in early polling.

It may be best to recall that Hillary Clinton had an astounding lead going into 2008 – she also had the popular vote, until the Democrat Super Delegates went nuclear and nominated Barack Obama. That would be turmoil. Yes, Obama won, but one might hazard to guess the GOP’s next in line for the nomination theory didn’t quite pan out with John McCain. One might also suggest that a messy primary was not the problem with Mitt Romney’s loss –moreover it was those within the party that viewed the man as belong to a Cult –and 20 some odd evangelicals just could not vote for him. There may have been a few million Tea Party people viewing him as a “Rhino” that would not vote for him either –t he end result – Obama won a second term. Now that was unprecedented.

There will always be names bandied about 3 years prior to any one seriously considering a run, and of course, they all say yes. But when push comes to shove, the field narrows, and the people are left with a variety of choices, as it should be.

Look for front runners to begin to emerge after the mid-terms, when they should make some noise not before. There will be talk of this one and of that one, there will be favorites, but, the more the merrier – just this humble opinion. Recalling the 2012 primaries, it was difficult for those political junkies to watch the painful process of Mitt Romney slowly making it to the top – surely if he could run the gauntlet of fierce competition, he should have had answers for everyone – yet, it was not to be, and through no fault of him own.

2014 is the time to concentrate on who might be the next speak of the House or Senate Majority Leader –and once that dust clears, the nation will look at who moves them. One can bet it will be one that is pro-growth, more libertarians, less party faithful that will have more of the juice, so to speak, that’s wild guess. One will just have to wait it out. As to the party “edlers” – they should go on vacation – until 2017.

Sarah Palin – What If She Decided To Join/Work with a Third Party? – The Writing Has Been On the Wall Since 2010.

Sarah Palin pictured with Ted Cruz (R-TX), both Constitutionalists - image pat dollard dot com

There’s been a lot of speculation the past few days over former Governor of Alaska, and 2008 GOP VP Candidate, Sarah Palin’s remarks regarding leaving the GOP for greener pastures. The remark about starting a “Freedom Party” came as a Q&A, and, as a good many situations arise out of Washington, or either major political party, that irk Palin, it appears that the focus is on her stance on the Republican’s who voted for the Senate Immigration package bill. (Seattle Post)

The political analysts over at the Christian Science Monitor ask the rhetorical question: “Why is Sarah Palin saying she might leave the GOP?”, and go on to answer that with a “not likely”.

Why would the Christina Science Monitor or any news outlet believe that Palin was not serious? Although no one, especially anyone in media, new or old, knows what’s on Governor Palin’s mind, if one were to take a look at footage of her speaking at rallies prior to the 2010 elections; one might have a different point of view as to whether or not she may be considering ditching a major party.

Upon introducing herself to the U.S. Political stage (outside of the State of Alaska and the Governors Associations), Palin has been a virtual unknown entity in the lower 48. How many people even know the name of the Governor of an adjoining state, let alone the name of their own State’s Govenor (given the absolutely pitiful rise of the low information voter.) Therefore, Palin, an unknown, with zero interest from the media (other than to make her look as incompetent as possible), remains that way today.

With the exception of those who have been lucky enough to hear that woman speak about what our nation should look like in a political sense – straight from the Constitution – without the powerful two-party machines, rather, with citizens who actually have more interest in their nation, than in getting more from the trough. Those that may have been at one of the events, from one end of the coast to the other, would have heard a sane and sensible message, one that was inspiring, and more bi-partisan, or anti-party, than anticipated. A message of hope for the future, of building a better society, and overall, one that was welcoming to anyone, any race, creed, color, or political affiliation.

Therein lays the danger in Sarah Palin – were she to take the GOP infiltrated Tea Party, and motivate those millions of activists hoping against hope for a return to Congressional and Senatorial sanity, to form, precinct by precinct, state by state, a solid alternative to not only the GOP but the DNC, it would have a general appeal that one might suggest would pull from both parties, and especially from those who consider themselves unenrolled, unaffiliated or independent.

Perhaps she was, at the time of the query, just voicing her frustration over the ridiculous situation in Washington. The immigration bill is only a tiny part of what is wrong –there’s the waste, and the downright stupid decision that are made on a daily basis, that not only cost the taxpayers’ money, but are generally embarrassing for those whose State or Congressional district sent said Legislator to D.C. in the first place. (Of course, they would have to know what that individual did that was so lame, but, unless it’s a Republican stuck on stupid, the media wont’ report it, there, if one is questioning why we have low information voters? – They are turned off – so the tune off the news – in droves- and are so disgusted, they don’t even vote, or are peacefully and blissfully unaware of what’s going on in DC or their State Capitol, that is making life so unbearable.)

Palin may be as frustrated as the rest of the nation who is even semi-aware of the nonsense created by both major parties. Or, she may be serious. If she is serious, she would be much maligned (which by now, the woman should be used to the vitriol), and she would be a patriot under any guise, as she would be attempting to taka the countries governance on the Federal level back to its founders intent.

Should Palin decide to take it one the road and organize, one might find that she’d soon have company, and that she may draw equally from both parties – thus castrating the two major parties, and leaving them each with one-third of the nation – imagine, not over night, but in a decade or less, the ability to send a third party candidate to the White House, not one beholden to one party or the other, but one that would be representative of the People. Whether or not Palin actually decides to put herself and her family through a national campaign of such a scope is another thing – however what a great thing it would be.

Health Care Fix Bill to Return to House Amidst Alleged Threats to House Democrats - Analysis

Progressive Democrats, Blinded by Ideiology, Failed to Understand the Angst of the American Elecotrate, and are now suprirsed by threats - image icis.com

The Health Care Reform Billis going back to the House, due to amendments that violate Congressional Budget Rules. Senate Republicans found two rules in the Bill that involved the government takeover of the student loan industry. Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, will remove these provisions and a vote is expected in the Senate today. The Health Care Reform bill was signed into Law by President Obama prior to any “fixes” taking place – the bill, moved through the House as part of a reconciliation or budget procedure. Once the Senate approves the bill it goes back to the House for final approval. The House approved the bill only after Obama promised Pro-Life Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak, that he would sign an “Executive Order” banning the use of public funds for abortions. The Executive Order carries little to no weight as it is not considered a “law”. In addition, Stupak’s district received several million dollars in grants two days prior the House vote. Once Stupak agreed to a “yes” vote on the Bill, the balance of the pro-life Democrats followed suit, votes which were critical for passage. Now that the bill goes back to the House a second time, the question remains, if the House does not approve the Senate version, does the Bill Obama sign have legs to stand on?

Certain members of the House are now claiming that they are being threatened for voting yes on the original reconciliation bill. Alleged threats to members of Congress, made by unknown sources, have apparently become so severe that Democrat Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer (MD), has decided to use the issue as a political football, asking Republicans to condemn attacks on Democrat House members. Hoyer, a day late and a dollar short, missed the fact that Minority Leader, John Boehner (R-OH), had already done so, explaining that American’s are angry but should channel that anger into the voting booth. Boehner has emerged as a solid leader in the Congress and will, in all likelihood, become the next Speaker after the 2010 elections.

The threats range from a coffin placed “near” the home of a Missouri Democrat, to threatening calls placed to members including the author of Deem and Pass, Louise Slaughter (NY). How concerned are Progressive Democrats? A Colorado Representative Betsy Markey, has asked for increased security around her home – just in case it might be vandalized. Why the focus on tying the Tea Party to the Republican Party in these alleged threats? It is a matter of self-preservation for the Progressive Democrat Party.

Progressive Congressional Democrats should have been prepared for this type of backlash. Over the summer of 2009, scores of Town Hall meetings were held across the country, where citizens from all political parties gave voice to their concerns and rejections of a nationalized health care bill. Some of these forums became so contentious that many of the House Democrats cancelled or refused to attend Town Hall meetings. In addition to pressure from those who did not support the bill, the pressure on the same Democrats from members of unions, special interest groups and especially the White House and Congressional Leadership was just as intense. They knew, well in advance, that this type of backlash was probable. However, the Democrats, instead of admitting that the bill is a problem for more than half of the population, (including members of their party), pressed ahead, with ideology a major motivator for some, and bribery for others.

Who do Progressives blame? They blame members of the “Tea Party” movement, which is wrongly and intentionally tagged as part and parcel of the Republican Party. The Tea Party movement is a coalition of citizens who are disenfranchised from all political parties, and will only support incumbents or candidates that have similar ideals. The makeup of the body is a combination of Republicans, Democrats and especially independents or unaffiliated voters. The Tea Party movement is running its own candidates in several districts, which gives rise to the theory that the “movement” will eventually evolve into a political party, if it has not has not already done so.

The threat to the Progressive Democrats is significant; it appears that they will lose the House and possibly the Senate in 2010, which will allow the Tea Party to grow its base as a significant third party. Should the trend continue and the Progressives lose additional seats in both the House and the Senate (it is almost certain at this point the White House will have a new occupant in 2012), the party will be marginalized to the point where an opening exists for the emergence of a new strong national party. This is where the “alleged” threats are being used to try and demonize and marginalize both the Republican and Tea Parties at the same time.
Therefore, when the bill goes back to the House on Friday, House Democrats “defying” threats and voting for Reform, may see themselves (or be promoted as) hero’s for facing down the “angry mob”, that said, the American Public has already formed an opinion on this particular issue and those not in favor of the Bill, will simply use the ballot box in November as a way to make their point. As to those threats, should they prove credible, it is the level of anger and angst by members of all political parties, including the unaffiliated that gives rise to these actions.

No one individual’s fringe reaction makes an entire political parties or movements responsible and the public is well aware of that fact. They are also aware that those who voted Yes most likely would face threats from the less than sane citizens on both sides (Progressive who did not think the Bill went far enough and members of all parties who felt the Bill went too far), and should have expected the backlash, and taken measure ahead of the vote, to protect themselves. Therefore, to cry foul now, makes those who should have been prepared, appear foolish in hindsight. To hold press conferences and release statements, these members are setting themselves up for more of the same, it is most probable that public sympathy may not improve; Congress is shown in the polls as the least liked body politic in the nation.

Therefore, a simple statement of facts, lacking hysteria and finger pointing would have done more good for the Progressives (Democrats) than the current tactic. It is doubtful that any members of the House who voted yes on Health Care Reform, will change their vote, therefore, this is all politicized eyewash. Additionally, those who feel the need to threaten an elected official and especially a family member of an elected official should be shown to the nearest rubber room.

Sarah Palin – the Modern Maggie Thatcher

When Sarah Palin was announced as the choice for running mate, misgivings came from both genders within the Republican party, fueled by a relentless press that questioned how someone with no background (they neglected to use Google), could be elevated to such a lofty position. Then she spoke at her introduction and set the Republican base at ease, but not the media (that body she does not court), which works for her in this instance. The worry that a woman would not be able to stand up to the opposition and/or to lead in any event has taken hold of the press, regardless of party affiliation (evident during Hillary Clinton’s candidacy), fell on deaf ears as Palin spoke with television viewership that rivaled that of media darling, Obama. The questions are still there, in the papers, or the blogs, or the cable news outlets – is she capable of sustaining this level of statesmanship?

Photograph of Margaret Thatcher wedding day 1951

Apparently, she is given more credence by the British who have already compared her to their own Margret Thatcher, and with good reason. From the book, “Queen, Empress, Concubine” by Claudia Gold, Thatcher’s life and rise in U.K. politics is given excellent, albeit condensed treatment. Thatcher was the first woman that lead a political party in the UK, her background one of simple means; her father was a local grocer who instilled in her the value of hard work and self-reliance. She worked her way through Oxford, studied chemistry and joined the Conservative party. She won a seat in Parliament, at the age of 34. Thatcher was also a wife and mother, and a reformer. The Press did not treat her kindly. There are similarities – therefore the comparisons.

Women here, stateside, have looked for a strong, conventional, yet independent leader who was in that very mold. Is Sarah Palin another Margaret Thatcher? Humble background, mother, and a conservative streak would lend to the comparison – that said, Palin has an endearing indentifying quality, which leaves no doubt that she will lead with grace, style and yes, wit – but with integrity from a position of strength.

It is not the fact that Palin is a woman that is her political strength - her strength lies in her accomplishments as a reformer, her fearless and capable speech, and her ability to actually indentify with those in the trenches. She just happens to be a woman, and women just happen to have been waiting for “not any woman” but a woman who could lead. There will, of course, be the one issue that separates (or appears to separate) women in the U.S. and that is the issue of abortion. How important is that issue to the independent and unenrolled women? That is the unknown. The committed left and the committed right have already chosen sides on this issue in regards to Palin - ( some on the left going to far as to worry over her hairdo (without first checking fashion trends) as if a choice of hairstyle somehow has relevance to governing. Independent minded and Unenrolled voters look to character, accomplishments, and of course, the entire ticket, and yes personality. In that case, Palin should do quite well; regardless of (or perhaps because of) how hard the left leaning media works to portray her in a negative light.

Joe Lieberman – Introducing the New Independent Republican Party.

Last night Joe Lieberman addressed the Republican Convention and made a direct appeal to moderates across the nation, regardless of party lines, to take a long look at McCain and cast their vote in November for a Republican. Although the party faithful Democrats are up-in-arms about Joe’s speech, those Progressives who would have replaced him in a heartbeat with an Obama clone two years ago, one can’t be sure how that appeal affected the likely voters that are on the fringe - moderate Democrats as well as Independents. In contrasting the speech given by Zell Miller in 2004, which was a fiery lecture regarding the basic values that Miller felt had been abandoned by his party, Lieberman looked to history and gave a spot-on analysis of what the first President felt was wrong with party partisanship and how one-day it that partisanship – putting party first - might lead to a division within the nation that would cripple the government. His references to Barrack Obama were polite, yet they pointed to the lack of experience and the partisanship shown in Obama’s short time in his national Senate seat.

Lieberman is being called “Brave by some for crossing the aisle and incurring the wrath of his party. Threats have been made, by the likes of Harry Reid, that Lieberman could face the loss of a coveted Committee Seat should he not blindly follow the party. The fact that anyone would think a place of prominence in a given political party should concern an American or hold a Public Servant hostage is mind-boggling. When one compares the various “Party” experiences of both McCain and Palin with those of Joe Lieberman - a theme of true independence occurs. Many in the within the rank and file of the Democrats feel, and rightly so, that their party has been hijacked by Progressives (Socialist-Communists), turning the once inclusive party into a elite machine (See DNC Reform and PUMA), while most within the Republican party have been Independent (the rank and file and those outside of the Beltway), and the party, although much maligned, was the original party of inclusion and has historically, done more to promote those who may by gender or ethnicity, be targeted as “owned” by the other party.

Now that Joe Lieberman has thrown down the gauntlet, so to speak, and invited independents, rather those who care more about the country rather than a political party, to join with him in what amounts to a reform movement, a movement not only for the country but a movement within a party for the good of our nation.

As the far left members of the Democrat Party (or more appropriately the Progressive Democrat Party by virtue of its leadership), has, in recent days, shown that fascism and fanaticism know no bounds. In the past few days, Democrats have released the SS number and Home Address of VP Nominee, Sarah Palin, sympathetic media outlets such as Move-on.org, The New York Times, the Daily Kos (who works for Howard Dean, disclaimer on Home page), and the Huffington Post have placed unusual amounts of emphasis on Palin’s family personal matters – and Howie Carr, WRKO Boston, reported that one that had gone so far as to offer a reward to anyone who can come up with dirt on the family. Fascism anyone?

There has always been party rivalry, but that has been tempered with decency – within recent years, decency has fallen by the wayside, in favor of any tactic, including slander, in order to place the Democrat ticket at the top. As an independent minded American who, granted, leans conservative, the choice has become increasingly clear – there simply is no alternative to a McCain-Palin ticket – it is the New Independent Republican Ticket that offers real change that is backed up by the players resumes - not an empty “Yes we can” (borrowed from a Massachusetts governors campaign), that does not offer a resume or any certainty that there will not be four more years of the same partisanship that our first President, George Washington, predicted.

Massachusetts – 50.34% of Unenrolled Voters?

An interesting statistic regarding the electorate in Massachusetts: in 2004 the political party designation showed the following:
Of the 4,098,634 total registered voters 1,526,711 were registered Democrat, 532,319 were registered Republican, 2,000,062 were designated Unenrolled and the balance were of another party affiliation. Reference Mass. Secretary of State.

The latest figures show a modest change: ( PDF download and other voter information available click here) out of 4,011,551 total enrolled 1,476,133 are registered Democrat, 486,188 are registered Republican, 2,019,368 are registered as Unenrolled with the balance of another party affiliation.

It should be noted that both major parties lost enrollment (Democrats lost 50,578 voters while Republicans lost, 46,131 registered voters, there was a shift to alternative and unenrolled voter status.) Therefore, the makeup of the state electorate, although touted as heavily Democrat by the media and the party, can actually be classified as “up for grabs” during a general election. Which begs the question: Will the RNC, who undoubtedly has access to these figures, finally turn their attention to the Massachusetts electorate and make a concerted effort to gain both house and senate seats? How vulnerable is John Kerry is Massachusetts? Additionally, are other “blue states” any different?


Kerry Democrat Opponent Ed O’Reilly on NECN “Kerry has no passion on any issue”

The HUCK PAC

Mike Huckabee, former Governor of Arkansas and 2008 Presidential Candidate, is back to work. The Huck PAC is designed to promote the ideals that resonate with values voters; family, national defense, tax reform, real border security. As the introduction states: “It is founded on the principles that make America great: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The PAC was formed to promote and financially support Republican candidates who “hold firm to these ideas and principals.”

John Linder

The first to gain support from Governor Huckabee is Congressman John Linder from the 7th Congressional District in Georgia. His voting record according to the The Washington Post shows that he has voted consistently with the Republican Party (90.1%) on issues. He has sponsored a number of bills, including H.R. 25: Fair Tax Act of 2007. He has missed a mere 3% of House votes since 1993.

For more on Huck PAC visit: www.mikehuckabee.com

The article in the New York Times that is receiving so much attention these past few days goes to McCain's character and his involvement with lobbyists, not necessarily his alleged affair with a woman, which both lack of character and adultery appear to be the norm for Washington politics. Isn’t this business as usual in American politics? Additionally, according to the Drudge Report’s developing story: (full text) “MEDIA FIREWORKS: MCCAIN PLEADS WITH NY TIMES TO SPIKE STORY
Thu Dec 20 2007 10:56:57 ET
Just weeks away from a possible surprise victory in the primaries, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz has been waging a ferocious behind the scenes battle with the NEW YORK TIMES, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, and has hired DC power lawyer Bob Bennett to mount a bold defense against charges of giving special treatment to a lobbyist!
McCain has personally pleaded with NY TIMES editor Bill Keller not to publish the high-impact report involving key telecom legislation before the Senate Commerce Committee, newsroom insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
The paper's Jim Rutenberg has been leading the investigation and is described as beyond frustrated with McCain's aggressive and angry efforts to stop any and all publication.
MORE
The drama involves a woman lobbyist who may have helped to write key telecom legislation.
The woman in question has retained counsel and strongly denies receiving any special treatment from McCain.
Rutenberg, along with reporter David Kirkpatrick, has been developing the story for the last 6 weeks.
Rutenberg had hoped to break the story before the Christmas holiday, sources reveal, but editor Keller expressed serious reservations about journalism ethics and issuing a damaging story so close to an election.
McCain campaign officials Rick Davis, Charlie Black and Mark Salter are also said to have met with the NEW YORK TIMES in an effort to halt publication.
Developing... “ McCain’s hiring of attorney’s to squash the story makes one wonder about his alleged innocence.

It appears that the Republican Party wants to push a candidate that has no chance in Hades of winning the white house in the fall. They are more interested in the 4 year backlash that they hope will occur with a Democrat in charge; providing the groundwork for a return to power in the house and senate. As a conservative McCain falls short of the mark, and is more appropriate labeled liberal. How much character can he have when he is sending out letters via Townhall stating that he is the nominee of the party? Frankly, last time anyone checked he has not received the delegates necessary to clinch the nomination - yet. I find his letter to be somewhat deceptive. I'm concerned that, for once, the sentiments of the NYTimes editorial board maybe on the right track. From Townhall email dated Feb. 21st, sent at 3:40 pm and entitled: “We must unite as a party: "My Friends,

I am writing to you because we must begin to unite as party and prepare for the upcoming election in November. If I am so fortunate as to be the Republican nominee for president, I will stand on my conservative convictions and offer Americans a clearly conservative approach to governing. But my friends, I cannot succeed in this endeavor without the support of dedicated conservatives like you. And today, I write to ask for your support."

Will you join my campaign today by making a generous contribution? We will have a hard-fought battle against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, and I know that by joining together, our party will prevail on Election Day.

Earlier this month, Senators Clinton and Obama raised over $10 million online for their respective campaigns in just a few short days. I know that I must take the time now to replenish my campaign's funds to prepare for what will undoubtedly be the most expensive campaign for president in our history. That is why I ask you to make an urgent contribution of $25, $50, $100, $250, $500 or more today.

This election is going to be about big things, not small things. And I intend to fight as hard as I can to ensure that our shared conservative principles prevail.

Senators Clinton and Obama want to increase the size of the federal government, raise your taxes, and withdraw our forces from Iraq based on an arbitrary timetable designed for political expediency. I intend to reduce the size of the federal government, cut your taxes and win this war. I have had the distinct honor of serving our great country for many decades and with your support, I will be able to serve her for a little while longer.

I am proud to have come to public office as a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution. My friends, twenty-five years later, I am still proud to be a conservative and it is my greatest hope that you will join me in this campaign today. Thank you.

Sincerely,

John McCain”

Is John McCain a man of Character? The party has a man of character, one that has strong conservative values and one who is more qualified than McCain. Mike Huckabee. The problem with Mike Huckabee is that although he is the better candidate, he won’t play businesses as usual with Washington. Will JQ Public wake up in time? There is time left. There is still time for Mike Huckabee to garner enough delegates to make it impossible for McCain to get the delegates to win the nomination. In an old-fashioned brokered convention, the delegates would have an opportunity to run a true conservative with a proven governing record instead of a feeble excuse for a candidate that one finds in McCain. It is not Mike Huckabee that needs a miracle; it is the people of this county and the Republican Party.

McCain Wins Wisconsin and Washington
Obama’s on a Winning Streak!
Timing in Life is Everything.

It was with shock and awe that I watched the results for the primary elections in Wisconsin and Washington State last evening. The speed in which all news outlets called the election for John McCain based on exit polls was simply amazing (the exit polls were based on interviews with approximately 800 voters)Fox News Exit Polls (CNN No Longer Available), it was barely 9:00 p.m. and the polls had been closed for less than one minute. What was more mind-boggling was the speed in which McCain took the stage to give his long-winded acceptance speech. It was 9:04 p.m. The raw numbers from precincts reporting in were not even showing at that point. How amazing it must be to be able to so clearly predict a win. (This is sarcasm). The general disillusionment with the system in general (on both sides of the aisle mind you), has grown from one of frustration the process, to one of utter disbelief!

Understanding that Mike Huckabee has always been an underdog, but actually does, even at this juncture have the ability to force this primary season to the fullest by garnering 51% of the vote and thereby, going all the way to the convention; it boggles the mind that the more Mike stays in, the more ridiculous the media, the RNC and McCain become.

On the other side, the constant downplaying of support, and displays of photo’s and video of Ms. Clinton that are less than say, charming, has become, from a feminist point of view, ludicrous.

This is the way I see it: The elite in Washington decided to hold their power one way or another and needed a lackey in order to do so. McCain was perfect, he didn’t stand a chance (in fact, less of a chance than Huckabee), and so given the carrot, he took the bait (and the money). These elite decided he would be their best chance at holding their own against Hillary Clinton.

On the other side, those that hold power in the DNC decided Hillary could be bested by some nasty old man, and so, they have rammed Obama down our throats.

Poll those of us who have voted long enough and this is what you find:
Clinton and Huckabee are the most acceptable candidates based on experience and policy.

Understanding that this is simply conjecture, but, other factors to consider:

With a loss of the white house, the RNC feels that it may be able to gain back its control of the congress.

The DNC feels that with a strong enough candidate they can consolidate their control of the congress.

Both parties help the media, who are helping them in turn, because left versus right has become a huge industry.

Enter the people:
Disenfranchised and Disillusioned.