Two Schmucks for the Price of One



Thank you, Florida! I’m looking forward eagerly to the bye-ku’s on BOTWT for the two worst real candidates in the presidential race.

Dropping out on the left, John Edwards, a handsomely coiffed and handsomely remunerated trial lawyer decided to lead a populist revolt against corporations. His policies would have had the best chance of creating a massive recession: trade restrictions, environmental restrictions, financial market restrictions, and zero restrictions on punitive verdicts. Even Democrats rejected Edwards because he promised to govern on behalf of a segment of the population, not to be president of all Americans.

Dropping out on the right-center, Rudolph Giuliani, a hard-nosed scrapper who traded his way up by being a tough lawman. He was a poor judge of people - wives and police chiefs - and would have brought an ego and attitude the size of the Empire State building to Washington. The only way he could sell himself to the electorate, he found, was to be ever tougher. He promised to be tough on illegal immigrants and tough on Al Qaeda. But it's more probable that if elected he would have been tough on Congress, tough on America's allies, and tough to vote out of office.

We're a long way from having a president, but we're a little closer to having a good one.

Posted by Chops at January 30, 2008 10:33 AM
Comments
Comment #244264

With Mccain now 31 delegates over Romney, and his open door, sell out America track record, I don’t see how we are ANY closer to having a good president.

I have been so heartened by this election’s diversity of candidates and the way their strengths (and weaknesses) have fostered great debate on the issues, but now it is with great apathy that I resign myself to the conspiracy theorist camp and say “I believe the whole thing is a sham, designed to give us the impression that we have some measure of control.”

McCain is so bad for this country it makes my guts crawl, and the fact that he has gone from a was-and-should-have-stayed DEAD campaign to clear front runner for the nod, makes me question the integrity of the primary process. He was behind two of the worst possible pieces of legislation ever created - McCain-Feingold Campagin Finance Reform that means only EXTREME Millionaires can entertain leadership aspirations in this country, and the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty Bill which, thanks in no small part to bipartisan outrage from NumbersUSA, Talk Radio and a million fed-up Americans, died before it could be rammed down our throats.

I would rather have 4 years of misguided liberal policy under Obama, than 8 years of establishment-politican-sleaze and bloatation under McCain. He parades his war-hero status around like a shield that is supposed to nullify criticism, and I’m sick of it. He is not conservative, he is a slimy politician who happened to honorably suffer terrible war crimes decades ago.

It’s time to call a spade a spade. Any Republican candidate who thinks Hilary would make a great president (McCain) has two mouths, and any Republican candidate (hell, any candidate) that would fight and fight the American people to shove open borders down our throats has two faces, and we don’t need that representing the conservative movement. I’ve had enough Bush policy.

Posted by: Yukon Jake at January 30, 2008 3:10 PM
Comment #244278

Yukon

It seems you have had an epiphany. You have finally come to the realization that your party is very broken. It no longer has any clear direction or really stands for much of anything of substance. They wasted so much effort in their attempt at political dominance that they lost their way. They foolishly removed the word compromise from their dictionary and allowed unfettered greed and corruption to overtake their sensibilities. It seems it is time for a re-examination of just what their principles have evolved into. As a result they will have a long road in convincing anyone that they are once again a credible party with good intent. After all the last congress unquestioningly marched in lockstep with the white house for six years. Not only has our country suffered greatly under GW, but so it seems has your party.

Posted by: RickIL at January 30, 2008 6:03 PM
Comment #244289

RickIL,
I don’t think I’ve had any epiphany about “my” party. I am not a Republican, I am an independent Conservative, and I’ve been as hard as anyone on George W for the war and most of his ridiculous social policies… I just didn’t state it with the useless and childish emotion bashing that bores many and inspires no one (most often found in watchblog posts above the names of liberal authors)

The Democratic Party is in no fair shape itself, as the headlines of the last month show.

What scares me is not the party (I’ll vote for the person I believe will do the best job) It’s that I genuinely wonder if there is any integrity in the representative selection process anymore.

There is no logical reason for John McCain’s dramatic numbers. He hasn’t said anything to address his awful record of undermining conservative principles, and partnering up with the most radical-liberals in government - with the goal of swaying voters to overlook it. History and his record simply hasn’t had any effect, and that’s not how it works. Something smells rotten to me…

People motivated enough to caucus et cetera, usually are motivated by politics and change and hope and John McCain provides none of those for the Conservative movement.

As for throwing away the word compromise, it is a trick they learned from democrats. Filibuster, filibuster, filibuster. Polarize, polarize, polarize. I love it when I hear the words with which liberals describe conservative politics: THE POLITICS OF FEAR!!!!!! As though the fear of global warming and destruction, or the fear of no medical care are not the bedrocks of their ideals.

I do however agree with you, that the “Republican party” no longer has good intentions for America. Its only intent is on increasing its power and its influence and its money. And Reagan would be ashamed.

Posted by: Yukon Jake at January 30, 2008 8:04 PM
Comment #244295

Yukon

My apologies for the misconception as to your party affiliation. Without really knowing each other it is often easy to make assumptions based on ones writings.

As for McCain, he also scares me. I find him to be genuine in his statements and ideals. It is those ideals of supporting a neocon agenda that make me believe our direction with regards to foriegn policy will remain the same or worsen.

I am well aware of the failings of the democrat party. What ails the republicans also ails the dems. I am and have been for a long time an advocate of ethics reform. I can not see how our government can once again become functional until a degree of honesty and accountability can be applied to our legislators. They have become an entity unto themselves living by a separate set of rules arranged to serve their sometimes less than respectable personal needs.

The word fillibuster is what happens when one party is so heavily stacked against the other that they totally ignore the ideals of the other. They accept no compromise and leave the other with no choice. In effect rendering the lesser party pretty much non existent in regards to policy decisions. The dems until recently suffered for more than a decade with the aforementioned under republican rule. A fillibuster was the only way they could make themselves heard.

For many fear of no health care is very real. Fear of getting sick because you may not be eligible for care or may owe the medical industry for the rest of your life is very real and a genuine concern. The verdict is still out on global warming. But none of this really matters as we all know that there is no clear immediate solution to either problem. Any one who claims differently is only blowing smoke up our asses and taking us for fools. The fact remains that until we can come up with a legislature and executive branch capable of cooperation and compromise we can make no credible headway on any of these serious concerns. We will have only a continuance of the status quo. Our status quo certainly is nothing to be proud of.

Posted by: RickIL at January 30, 2008 10:03 PM
Comment #244306

Chops,

You may have been correct about the threat of John Edwards fiscal and trade policies, although I’m not sure I’d agree.

Tonight Ron Paul made the salient point of the need of returning to stronger property rights to offset the advantage that corporations have had in the last century.

I think we do need a bit of a rebel to stir things up a little. The current balance is squeezing out the middle class, which is death to economic and political stability.

Posted by: googlumpugus at January 30, 2008 11:56 PM
Comment #244311

googlumpugus,

There are two questions I believe which should go off in voters minds like a bomb everytime they hear a candidate use the words: ‘tax cut’ or ‘help’.

Candidates using the words tax cut should immediately be challenged to list what programs would the cut to bring the current budget into balance, and what ADDITIONAL programs would they cut to offset their tax cuts? If they don’t answer forthrightly and honestly -DONT VOTE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVEN’T A LICKING CLUE HOW THEY WOULD BALANCE THE BUDGET.

Candidates like Edwards who use the word ‘help’ must be asked the same questions. Who would they tax and how much to bring the current budget into balance, of what other ‘help programs’ would they cut to balance it? Then, how much would their ‘help’ program raise taxes and who would pay those taxes?

VOTERS - WAKE UP! ASK the obvious questions, demand the obvious questions be asked. And if the answers don’t suit you, find another candidate or run yourself.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 31, 2008 4:51 AM
Comment #244312

The debate last night …

McCain did it again. He is lying about Romney & he will keep doing it because he believes he won Florida with it and it will win super tuesday for him.
The man is a broken record. He doesn’t say anything except I am a war hero and I led a squadron.
Not all privates become generals.
Yet another subject that is hands off…

He keeps saying he was involved in every policy effecting foreign affairs over the past 20 yrs.. WHY doesn’t someone point out that he is a BIG part of the mess we are in today??

He said that states should make decisions on their own - California doesn’t want to drill off the coast but Louisianna does - He votes against Anwar … isn’t that up to the people of Alaska?
According to his own words it is …
He agrees with CA making it’s own decision because it is the one he wants but the Alaskans want to drill in Anwar and he stops it.

He is a seasoned politician who knows when to throw jabs & can speak out of both sides of his mouth with the best of them ….

Again the debate was BAD!! Four men on the stage & two given all the time with one given the biggest share.
CNN baited another fued and actual issues were not discussed.
Pathetic.
No wonder Huckabee & Paul were looking at each other and shaking their heads.
They should have stood up and said they were going somewhere where they could have a real debate and walked off the playground.

Posted by: Dawn at January 31, 2008 8:33 AM
Comment #244313
VOTERS - WAKE UP! ASK the obvious questions, demand the obvious questions be asked.

It’s a sure thing none of the obvious questions have yet been asked in any of the so-called “debates”…not of either major party…but, they’re just following along with the manner in which Bush has demonstrated his lack of ability to deal with anything but a canned and fully supportive audience and protesters limited to a fenced in area miles from where he might be.

Our media, TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, have not done their job…their only drive is to make money, not ask questions and get the truth before the populace.

No wonder the news spends so much time on Ms. Spears and so little time actually explaining our rule by corporatocracy.

Posted by: Rachel at January 31, 2008 8:35 AM
Comment #244329

googlumpugus,

There are two questions I believe which should go off in voters minds like a bomb everytime they hear a candidate use the words: ‘tax cut’ or ‘help’.

Candidates using the words tax cut should immediately be challenged to list what programs would the cut to bring the current budget into balance, and what ADDITIONAL programs would they cut to offset their tax cuts? If they don’t answer forthrightly and honestly -DONT VOTE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVEN’T A LICKING CLUE HOW THEY WOULD BALANCE THE BUDGET.

Candidates like Edwards who use the word ‘help’ must be asked the same questions. Who would they tax and how much to bring the current budget into balance, of what other ‘help programs’ would they cut to balance it? Then, how much would their ‘help’ program raise taxes and who would pay those taxes?

VOTERS - WAKE UP! ASK the obvious questions, demand the obvious questions be asked. And if the answers don’t suit you, find another candidate or run yourself.

Posted by: David R. Remer at January 31, 2008 2:06 PM
Comment #244331

Yes, WAKE UP ! Or suffer the consequences that you may not see yet, but you will over the coming years.

Regardless of who the next president is, that president will probably be unable to stop any of these abuses, if the president is still saddled with the same corrupt, FOR-SALE, incompetent, irresponsible incumbent politicians in the two-party duopoly in the Do-Nothing Congress, that enjoys a cu$hy 96.5% re-election rate (on average since year 1980).

The best thing voters can do is to encourage their friends, family, and associates to do the one simple, common-sense, logical, peaceful, and responsible thing the voters were supposed to be doing all along:

  • STOP Repeatedly Rewarding Incumbent Politicians With 96.5% Re-Election Rates!

It will take more than one election, but the sooner, the better, because some painful consequences are already in the pipeline due to repeatedly rewarding corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election. Reward your children for bad behavior, an increase in allowance every year, and other perk$ and benefit$, and observe the result.

Either way, the voters will have the government that they deserve.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 31, 2008 2:13 PM
Comment #244337
DONT VOTE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVEN’T A LICKING CLUE HOW THEY WOULD BALANCE THE BUDGET.
They know.

They simply refuse to balance the budget.

In addition to that, 38 states (more than the 2/3 required) filed a BALANCED BUDGET amendment, and Congress flagrantly violated the U.S. Constitution to call a convention to ratify the BALANCED BUDGET amendment (among other amendments).

Yet, nobody seems to care that Congress has violated Federal Criminal Law, and not held accountable.

So, good luck ever getting a BALANCED BUDGET amendment since Congress has flagrantly decided to violate the Constitution.

And, since most voters are deluded into repeatedly rewarding the incumbent politicians for all of it with 96.5% re-elecion rates, we can only expect things to get worse.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 31, 2008 2:32 PM
Comment #244341

Where is the ‘NONE OF THE ABOVE - START OVER!’ chad???

Posted by: Dawn at January 31, 2008 3:02 PM
Comment #244343

Dawn, “Four men on the stage & two given all the time with one given the biggest share.”


After hearing RonPaul get on Romney and McCain over little “who said what whens” and state his case on Iraq so well Im amazed the repubs even let him on the stage. They usually like to squelch that kind of truth. His rant was the highlight of the Q&A thing last night.

Posted by: j2t2 at January 31, 2008 3:12 PM
Comment #244345

j2t2,

I liked that moment myself!

When CNN runs a debate as if the only people watching are tabloid junkies …. most interviews are also run that way.

Posted by: Dawn at January 31, 2008 3:38 PM
Comment #244348

The MSM is trying, as usual, to influence the election. Sadly, it works.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 31, 2008 3:50 PM
Comment #244356

Dawn, If you keep saying debate enough times people will start to beleive that it was actually a debate not a Q&A session. Just because they say its a debate doesnt mean its a debate.

The way they neglected Huckabee was terrible, how the heck do they think McCain is going to win if they dont get Huckabee the facetime so he can pull delegates from Romney? Paul is used to being neglected but boy when he gets his chance he shines. Sorta made McCain and Romney look foolish during the Iraq moment, but it cost him big with the repubs.

Posted by: j2t2 at January 31, 2008 5:15 PM
Comment #244403

Ron Paul shines alright, like a clown in a circus. His devotee’s apparently haven’t an iota of ability to ask themselves critically and answer logically, what would happen if Ron Paul’s suggestion A or B were actually implemented. And he is offering no answers or details either.

No federal taxes. States would assume nearly all federal responsibilities save military, Congress and the Courts, treaties, and international trade tariff imposition and regulation. Think for just a couple minutes what this would mean in terms of consequences if enacted in 8 years under a Ron Paul administration.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 1, 2008 5:54 AM
Comment #244404

d.a.n said: “They know. They simply refuse to balance the budget.”

No, d.a.n, they don’t know. They don’t know how to cut spending without losing reelection votes, so they don’t even try to prioritize the spending cuts to make the budget balance. Doing so is too politically expensive for them. That is why voters have to make reelection depend upon balancing the budget. There is no other way balancing the budget can become politically affordable for Congress people.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 1, 2008 5:57 AM
Comment #244405

Dawn said: “He votes against Anwar … isn’t that up to the people of Alaska?”

NO, it isn’t. ANWR is held in trust by the all the people of the United States, just like our national parks are, and for future generations as well, to insure there are still a few patches of pristine wilderness and wildlife left for them to seek solace and peace and wonderment of nature in.

Besides, add up all the pork Sen. Stevens has taken from taxpayers of all other states over the years, and ANWR was paid for by the American people outright. I hope you are aware that though Stevens didn’t get his bridge to nowhere, he did subsequently manage to slip in a multi-million dollar ferry pork project for the same Island that was to get the bridge. Alaskans have a million ways to fleece the rest of America’s taxpayers, oil and pork are only two.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 1, 2008 6:04 AM
Comment #244406

Dawn, you may want to reflect on the following, courtesy of FactCheck.org:

* Romney complained that McCain used “the wrong data” about job creation to support his assertion that Massachusetts had ranked 47th among the 50 states while Romney was governor. Romney was wrong; McCain was correct.

* Romney said his hundreds of millions of dollars in “fee increases” merely caught up with years of inflation and weren’t tax increases in disguise. Independent budget experts contradict him on that.

* Romney said the over-budget costs of his Massachusetts health care plan were due to changes made by his successor. Authorities on the plan say that’s mostly untrue; costs went up because more people than expected signed up for state-subsidized insurance.

* Romney wrongly claimed McCain’s anti-global-warming bill would boost gasoline prices by up to 50 cents per gallon. Actually, the official estimate is 40 cents for most vehicles, and not until the year 2025.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 1, 2008 6:09 AM
Comment #244442
His policies would have had the best chance of creating a massive recession: trade restrictions, environmental restrictions, financial market restrictions, and zero restrictions on punitive verdicts.

Uh, whose policies are causing a massive recession?

Posted by: mental wimp at February 1, 2008 5:44 PM
Post a comment