B202, Thanks for the link to the hilarious - but true - Rudy ad.

I think McCain squandered a lot of independent support when he pandered to the evangelicals early this year. Even worse, it doesn't appear to have done him much good among them.

But it sure dramatically tarnished his "straight-talking" image.

stan.lenart says - "McCain really does call it like he sees it."

I agree that he is probably the most forthright. That said, the reason he won't get the nomination is not that he calls it like he sees it, it's that he needs a pair of glasses all to often.

vbhoomes asked - "Dems help me understand you? why would you hurt the country when Obama, Biden, Richardson and Dodd are all honorable people and would not divide the country if they won."

I'm not a Dem but I would suggest that whoever wins, Republican or Democrat, will continue to divide the country. Bush was the "uniter", remember? He even had bi-partisan success, apparently, in Texas prior to 2000. This country will be divided for the foreseeable future and it does not matter if it's Clinton or Biden, McCain or Giuliani. Would Clinton be more divisive? Perhaps. But don't start thinking everyone will be sitting around holding hands singing Kumbaya if Obama, Biden, Richardson or Dodd got in.

Although I disagree with most of his positions, McCain is the only Republican candidate who is not afraid to speak his mind on the difficult issues.

Romney and Guiliani will say anything to get a vote; they continually pander to the right wing.

McCain really does call it like he sees it. And for this reason, I think it inconceivable he will get the nomination.

2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll

http://www.votenic.com

The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Every Tuesday Evening.

Good to hear from you, Mark from Austin: Yes I agree my language about the Clintons is a little over the top but they do bring out the worse in me as with 50% of the country. God help this country if the Clintons regain the White House, it will be ugly. Dems help me understand you? why would you hurt the country when Obama, Biden, Richardson and Dodd are all honorable people and would not divide the country if they won. I am beginning to think you really do enjoy partisan warfare.

jimd52 | December 3, 2007 08:32 AM

JimD, that is an interesting summary of the GOP race in NH. Do polls reflect your assessment? i.e. is Rep Paul getting a significant percentage of the vote, representing the libertarian wing of the Rs/Is up there? Even without supporting data, your comments make sense, I'm wondering if the data supports or contradicts your view...

Jimd and drindl - I believe Biden is running a print ad in Iowa with the same theme - but it's not likely to be as effective as video. (Full disclosure - Hoping it's not fruitless, I decided to contribute to his campaign...)

2 weeks --that's the problem. it hasn't got enough circulation or media attention. well do what you can and pass it along. sometimes viral maarketing works...

drindl

I have seen that ad, it has been out for a week or 2 at least. I would vote for him in a heartbeat but it doesn't look good for his chances.

Jimd-- biden has a great new ad out--brilliant. he can't afford to put it on TV -- so pass it along to everyone you know:

http://darrylwolkpolitics.blogspot.com/2007/11/good-ad-joe-is-right.html
l

On the "...bad Bill" thread Friday I posted this from Clinton's op-ed supporting Blair's decision to invade Iraq:

From BC's March 18, 2003 Guardian op-ed "Trust Tony's Judgment"

"Saddam has destroyed some missiles but beyond that he has done only what he thinks is necessary to keep the UN divided on the use of force. The really important issues relating to chemical and biological weapons remain unresolved."

"There is, too, as both Britain and America agree, some risk of Saddam using or transferring his weapons to terrorists."

"I wish that Russia and France had supported Blair's resolution. Then, Hans Blix and his inspectors would have been given more time and supprt for their work. But that's not where we are. Blair is in a position not of his own making, because Iraq and other nations were unwilling to follow the logic of 1441."

"In the post-cold war world, America and Britain have been in tough positions before: in 1998, when others wanted to lift sanctions on Iraq and we said no; in 1999 when we went into Kosovo to stop ethnic cleansing. In each case, there were voices of dissent. But the British-American partnership and the progress of the world were preserved. Now in another difficult spot, Prime Minister Blair will have to do what he believes to be right. I trust him to do that and hope that Labor MPs and the British people will too."
-------------
bhoomes, he is not trailer trash, just the most charming political liar
of our time. Bob Kerrey was the first D to make that assessment public.
I sought that op-ed when BC announced last week that he opposed the invasion of Iraq.

Incidentally, I changed my registration from independent to Republican in 2000 so I could vote for McCain in the primary. Unfortunately, the race was essentially over by the Florida primary. .

bhoomes

I tend to agree with you, to a point. The Clintons are adept at gutter politics. However, I don't think they begin to approach Bush-Rove - see South Carolina 2000 and the 'poll' asking voters if they new McCain fathered a child with a black prostitute would make them less likely to vote for him.

Ah yes, but you have to look at it from the standpoint of who does Wall Street want? Because that's who will win. My guess is either Hillary or Mitt. Maybe Rudy, although his volatility and unpredictability and loony 'foreign policy' [the more wars th better] might spook them a bit.

and bhoomes, you make me laugh with your hyperbole. Nobody holds a candle to Dick Cheney in the evil department. And nobody is cheesier, or mor trailer-trashy than the two-headed Rudy/Judy monster.

HILLARY OPENLY QUESTIONS OBMAMA's CHARACTER. You got to give the Clintons their due, nobody can get lower than these two. The two biggest scumbags in National Politics since Joe McCarthy will stop at nothing (see dishwashers giving $2000)to regain power. Shame on anyone would even consider voting for this white trailer trash couple.

I agree with the folks who say this is less of a good thing for McCain, but a very bad thing for Romney. It looks more and more that he is losing Iowa to Huckabee and now it seems that NH is moving more and more back to McCain. The real question in NH will be where do the Independents vote? I think that if Obama wins Iowa (looking more and more likely everyday) then the independents will vote democrat for Obama. That would hurt McCain since the die-hard GOPers will fall to Huckabee (evangelicals) and Guiliani (pro-buisness). And without the libertarian vote which Ron Paul has locked up, McCain has to have a strong independent vote to win NH.

In the end I still think that the GOP ticket of Huckabee/McCain will fall to Obama/Edwards (or Obama/Bloomberg maybe???)

I think Obama has much more "upside" than Clintion. Depending on the identity of the Republican nominee, Obama could win by a very comfortable margin. If Giuliani wins the nomination and there is a third party Christian right candidate, Obama will definitely win the South. I think Obama's appeal to those sick of partisanship will contrast nicely with Giuliani's pugnacity. I also think that many people are over-estimating the race factor as a negative.

I think Giuliani can win the nomination. The emergence of Huckabee works to Rudy's advantage. So does Romney's weakening position in New Hampshire. Should no clear front-runner be crowned after Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, Giuliani is well positioned for a big win on February 5. At that point I would expect McCain and Thompson to fold leaving Romney and Huckabee. Huckabee may, at that point, have attracted the funding he needs to continue. Romney's whole strategy is to win Iowa and New Hampshire in order to gain national recognition. Romney's candidacy could be doomed if he does not win any of the first three contests. The question is would he self-finance to continue the quest.

Both Romney and Huckabee have some problems in casting themselves as the "true conservative" alternative to Giuliani. Huckabee is vehemently opposed by the Club for Growth crowd and many other conservatives are suspicious of the depth of Romney's convictions. Furthermore, the anti-Mormon prejudice of many evangelicals will work to Romney's disadvantage against Huckabee. If the race narrows to Romney and Giuliani, Romney has a chance of winning some of these voters. But if Huckabee remains viable, then it becomes far more difficult for Romney.

LV wrote to me:

"...look up articles by respected conservative economist Bruce Bartlett."

I had read a WSJ op-ed from him. I will look for more, after I finish Boortz. Thanks - because I forgot Bartlett's name...

It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate. However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a "crime does pay" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKK or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKK and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for "gang stalking" to see the tip of the dirtberg. Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22.
.

If this election is McCain v. Obama we're probably looking at the biggest Republican landslide victory since Nixon beat McGovern.

"There is only one great man running for President and that is John McCain."

_________________________________

Apparently, the bar for "greatness" has been lowered to about one inch from the ground.

There is only one great man running for President and that is John McCain.

Obama got some great news of his own today, when the Des Moines mayor endorsed him. It could be a major development in the caucuses: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/sunday-round-up-national-poll-and-north.html

That isn't an endorsement of McCain as much as it is a setback for Romney, who has tried hard to promote his connection to New Hampshire because of a seasonal home he owns about an hour from Manchester.

Nothing but good news for Democrats here. The only Republican whose star is on the ascent is Mike Huckabee; a McCain nomination would probably not go as well as Dole running against an incumbent Clinton.

Has anyone been able to listen to McCain talk for more than 30 seconds?

Now think of nearly a solid year of campaigning, and how tired McCain looks and sounds, and how little he brings to the discussion. Tough this and tough that. Yawn.

Very recently the price of kerosene has jumped to $3.60 per gallon around here. At minimum wage that is around one-half hour of work to keep a family warm by a kerosene heater for about 8 hours. Space heaters being electric or fossil fuel driven have certain risks, consult your local fire company.

This week, Canadian authorities are predicting a return of artic air masses this winter which have not been seen in the last 15 years. Prediction is that we will be experiencing cold weather this winter not seen in the last decade and one-half.

To me, neoconservatives acted in a herd behavior mode. Once in my lifetime, from the cab of a locomotive, I witnessed a herd of antelope dazed and confused crossing the tracks in front of our train. Before we could counter-act a slaughter by throwing the airbrakes into emergency, at least 20 antelope were killed instantly following the leaders onto the tracks. The herd split, some paralleling the tracks beside us while others continued to run onto the tracks in front of us or hitting the side of the train being pulled under the wheel of the cars. I don't wish to convey the cleanup in the aftermath.

I have seen worse. On one late night in a remote enginehouse, an old school tobacco chewing engineer brought his power into the yard. He said, "Hey kid, you got and paper towels ?". "Sure, I said what do you need ?" He said, "Well a guy jumped off a bridge in front of us committing suicide, how about cleaning his brains off that snowplow". On one rainy afternoon, riding in the cab of a locomotive, a man was killed before my very eyes. Pulling out onto the tracks, seeing us coming, hearing the deafening blow of air horns at close range, and in the glare of the headlights, he remained frozen with fear. Not being able to move himself or the car he was driving (as a deer stuck in headlights) we hit him. As the train grinded to a stop some 250 yards later, which seemed like eternity to me, the engineer being experienced at railroad crossing fatalities, told me to sit still, the guy was a goner. I also investigated another crossing fatality whereby a distraught and depressed woman committed suicide by parking on the tracks with her 2 year old daughter in the seat beside her.

For all the aformentioned experiences, and along time ago, I started writing snail mail letters to Legislators. The incidence of railroad crossing fatalities was unacceptable to me. The reaction, policy and procedure to an impending emergency on the tracks was unacceptable to me. Human error combined with old school practices taught from generation to generation of engineers combined with oversight by federal authorities needed some changes through my eyes. I think we made some changes, but I won't go there.

For all the glitter that is gold (bling-bling), I premise that no one can buy a stairway to Heaven. Maybe some don't care. Thing about it is, that numerous leaders of the past tried to breakdown Cold War barriers. Reagan was very popular, except in Ireland maybe, but supply-side spending was voodoo. Was a noble effort to suggest that supply used to generate revenues would have benefits trickling down to average and below average Americans. Today, we have no supply or surplus and deficit spending continues through demands such as war and higher costs of living for government, industry and consumers alike. That vetoing SCHIPs on budget concerns alone shows trickle down policy did not work for Uncle Sam. Some working poor are being punished because a proven fallacy employed again did not work again, imagine that. Some people are stuck in a denial stage that cost of living has increased across the board for Americans no matter geographical location. Isn't it true that only fools make the same mistakes twice ?

Check-n-Balance is supposed to keep a handle on fallacies created by individuals or groups of individuals prone to make mistakes. We are only human.

In a perfect nonpartisan world vision one could see McCain as President, Senator Clinton as Vice President and the Govinator as Chief of Staff for the first four years. Mixing talents devoid of politics and combining Patriots as co-equals in America was derived from Tom Delay's farewell address. Now according to job description there are assigned tasks per Constitutional authority and responsibility for executive branch office holders. B. Franklin, a Quaker, was our first foreign diplomat. Foreign policy is a task function of the President of the United States right and in that regards Joe Biden would do well. And Dobbs would make an execellent monitor of the Federal Reserves among other things. I suppose Obama could gather more experience serving in Congress, on the Cabinet or as a Govenor himself. Don't want to pass up a quality guy like that (in a perfect world I would not recognize him as an african-american).

You know though, it ain't a perfect world. Current President of the United States, the Conmmander-in-Chief and Chief Adminstrator of the Executive Branch is still trying to dictate the Congressional schedule up to the Christmas break. I did not know that it's in the President's official job description to administer Congress too. Of Course the Vice President is supposed to be President of the Senate but someone has been filling in for him for the last 7 years. I guess mulitasking while Vice President of the United States is very demanding. Anyone seen his earnings statement from last year ? At least Rusmfeld knew how to be a public servant. Oh well, who cares about Deviant Dick, as self-proclaimed, he is not part of the Executive Branch.

End of posts for me maybe, end of story, not hardly. Keep on managing up and remember that money feeds the beasts. I need to cut some wood now.

Here's 'conservatism' and corruption for you, in a nutshell. Vote for any republican [except for maybe Huckabee] and you'll have exactly the same thing all over again.

'Hoping to lock in policies backed by a pro-business administration, poultry farmers are seeking an exemption for the noxious fumes produced by tons of chicken manure. Businesses are lobbying the Bush administration to roll back rules that let employees take time off for family needs and medical problems. And electric power companies are pushing the government to relax pollution-control requirements.'

Gee, CC, if you really are a reporter, I think you should write your next piece on what a truly horrible week Rudy has had. Finally, a news outlets have started to report on the gigantic web of deceit, poor judgment, lies and corruption and illegality that Rudy represents:

'It's inevitable that presidential candidates will experience a certain ebb and flow as the process unfolds, but can we all agree that Rudy Giuliani has seen the worst week of any candidate in recent memory?

On Monday, Bloomberg News reported that Giuliani, despite railing against congressional earmarks on the campaign stump, and pledging to "get rid of" lawmakers' pet projects if elected, actually "sought federal earmarks for 14 companies this year, 11 of which hired [Bracewell & Giuliani] after Giuliani joined in March 2005." Republican consultant Eddie Mahe responded, "It's a bit hypocritical."

On Tuesday, Giuliani attended a campaign fundraiser hosted by a "man convicted in a notorious corruption case." An embarrassed Giuliani "came and went from last night's fundraiser without comment, ducking down in his car as ABC News cameras attempted to photograph him arriving."

On Wednesday morning, a new batch of polls show Giuliani's support fading in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

On Wednesday afternoon, the Shag Fund scandal broke.

On Thursday, while the Shag Fund scandal gathers steam, we learn that Giuliani's private security firm provided security consulting and advice in Qatar through contracts overseen by Sheik Abdullah Bin Khalid al-Thani, who is widely suspected of close ties to Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Osama bin Laden.

On Friday, the New York Times' Michael Cooper reported that Giuliani cites a series of statistics in his stump speech, most of which "are incomplete, exaggerated or just plain wrong."

On Saturday, the Washington Post's conservative editorial board noted that Giuliani's new TV ad is patently ridiculous, premised on tax policy assumptions that even the Bush White House rejects as foolish.

All the while, Giuliani and his aides try one defense after another for the Shag Fund scandal, none of which makes any sense.'

A *must see* campaign "ad" for Giuliani, on "Security". This man, uh, is going DOWN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0gzmBxsFMg

There will be another amnesty . With a Republican , it might be after the borders are secure . Maybe secured by China from the outside in .

"I alone have the experience, knowledge and judgment to lead as commander in chief from day one, and my candidacy will rally the Reagan coalition to win a great victory next November." ~ McCain

________________________

It's time for McCain and the other backwards-looking GOP no-hopers to realize that Reagan left office almost two decades ago.

As Maggie Thatcher's long time assistant, Cynthia "Crawfie" Crawford, said:

"It's no use looking backwards because we are not going that way."

PS: How many Republicans are longing for another Immigration Reform Bill like the one Reagan signed? It granted amnesty to illegal aliens.