home > weblog > 2007 > june > blog062607.php
Time to rant again.
Why? Who knows. I don't need a reason. It's my site.
What to start with?
It's time to start thinking about next year. I know it's early, but we can't be too carefree with this wonderful country. So, I'm going to start handicapping the race for the President now.
So, who do I like, and who do I not like?
Let's look at some of the candidates. I know I'm not looking at them all, there's too many to consider, and not all of them have ANY chance of being elected to anything. I reserve the right to pick and choose who I talk about, since this is my site.
So, let's start talking about politics:
First, I'll mention Kubby. Who is he? Well, he's a Libertarian hopeful. Yes, my party has actual candidates. Kubby is a front-runner among also-rans, unfortunately. The day and age where Libertarians can get elected are not yet here. Too many people still vote for parties, and not for candidates. He's got some good ideas - and some frightfully BAD ones. He's on probation - not exactly a ringing endorsement for someone who wants to be the President. Then again, Clinton has never denied raping Ms. Broderrick, and Kubby is only on probation for marijuana. Still, he's trying to compare himself to Nelson Mandela, and he's not a martyr with a clean slate either. While I believe in a VERY limited Federal government that enforces a LIMITED set of Federal laws (reserving power mainly with the States), Kubby has more skeletons than I do - and that's saying something. We need a man who believes in appropriate Federal limits, but one who also understands the realities of today's world, and the need to sometimes do the right thing and contribute to peace in a bigger sense.
Who next? Well, I might as well mention Hillary Clinton, since she is running (even though she promised her constituents in 2005 (when running for the Senate) that she would NOT seek the Presidency, and complete her term in the Senate. What do I think of her? I'd rather lick my dog's ass than vote for her. She's the WORST of all of the possible candidates, and the MOST DANGEROUS of them. She gets a bigger boner at the thought of being President than Jeffrey Jones taking class pictures at a daycare. If you don't get that, don't worry - you're stupid (probably). Hillary has no morals at all - and do you want a lustful, power-hungry Socialist with her finger on the nuclear trigger? Oh wait, she'll just give all our nuclear weapons to our "comrades" in China - for some campaign contributions. This woman has more skeletons in her closet than the Titanic and U.S.S. Arizona put together. She sells influence, our security, nights in the Lincoln Bedroom - you name it. With her, anything's for sale for power. If you want to turn the U.S. into a second-world nation, vote for her. She'll cripple our economy, ruin healthcare forever, and ensure that only SHE has everything that she wants. She has no feelings for anyone but herself. What self-respecting woman would let her husband commit perjury and lie to the world on national TV about fucking around on her, and not leave his sorry ass? If I cheated on my wife (don't worry - it won't happen) and lied to the world about it, she'd leave me right before she shot me in the groin. I guess her marriage is a sham. She probably only had Chelsea to prove that she had a uterus. She certainly doesn't have closeness with her daughter, and I've never seen her look at her daughter with any kind of love. I feel sorry for Chelsea. My daughters know that I love them FIRST. If I had to choose between work and family, I'd get another job. Hillary cares more about power than her family. Any expression of shock or surprise she shows in purely acting.
Hillary's latest quest to ruin our country is through our educational system, which she wants to turn into birth-to-death government-funded indoctrination in Socialism. She wants equality for everyone - except her. This woman stole everything she could from the White House - that is OUR house! She's just another liar, thug, bully, cheat, and lawyer. Lawyer is the NICEST thing I can say about her. How bad is that?
B. Hussein Obama - he plays the race card when it suits him, the Muslim card when it suits him, and then tries to distance himself at other times. He has limited experience in politics, and comes off as thin-skinned (don't try to turn this into a racial issue!) and shallow. He has no deep convictions. He doesn't stand for anything grand. He's trying to run on the "black" ticket, while not coming off as an Affirmative Discrimination candidate. He wants to use his race when it suits him, but is that really a qualification for being President? He's come out with his big campaign issue - "free" healthcare for everyone. Too bad we already ran this experiment. Hillary tried it in 1993. It bombed for her. The citizens of Tennessee tried it as "TennCare" - where it ran huge amounts of money out of the state's coffers and has led to an underground drug operation that wastes yet more of the taxpayers money. The people who are on TennCare (now renamed, hoping its new name will help people forget about what an abortion the idea was to begin with) demand the finest healthcare that they can't afford. They demand brand-name drugs, while people who pay for their healthcare have to accept generic drugs. TennCare was endorsed by the healthcare and drug companies, since they get to peddle their top-costing services at taxpayers' expense. Oh yeah - people who can't afford healthcare still get healthcare - they show up at emergency rooms all the time, and don't pay for their healthcare. But with BHO, he wants to give this away as an entitlement to people who are too lazy (or many times can afford it, but choose not to since we're dumb enough to give it to them for free) to pay for it themselves. Another bad idea, that's not needed. Do we really want to elect someone who's middle name is "Hussein" while at war with Muslim extremists?
John Edwards - Mr. "Two Americas" himself - wants to end rich people's grand living - except himself. He represents all that is wrong with the legal system. He was a trial lawyer who used him charm to make money while not considering the long-term harm he served to the rest of us. He's the reason you have to sign 1,000 forms before giving birth in a hospital - and the reason you see lawyer's commercials on TV all day long, looking for anyone who took some medicine and had some medical problem. He is a hypocrit of Olympic proportions. He has no real qualifications to be President - except "the hair." He is cuter than a Hillary Clinton, but has less substance. At least Hillary has a [twisted] goal at the end of her Socialist rainbow. He is empty of content and substance. I'd say more about him, but there isn't much to go on. He is too stupid to understand something as simple as Muslim Extremism. He's stated that if we pulled our troops out of Iraq, that al Qaeda would leave us alone. He's never heard about 9/11, apparently - we weren't in Iraq in 2001 when al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 innocent people who's only crime that day was being on-time for work. He's too stupid to spend more time on.
I could say something about the other Democratic wannabes, but they combine to add up to less than not much. Dennis Kucinich? He's a crazy moonbat. He makes Cindy Sheehan seem ALMOST sane. But not quite. Al Sharpton stands a better chance of being elected than Kucinich. He's just plain loony. Someone should drug test him. Soon.
Ron Paul? Sure, let's go there. He's trying to be the "uncandidate." Good luck. He's another idiot who thinks that placing some insiders on digg.com to digg up his every move will create a "viral campaign." Influenza stands a better chance of being elected than he does. And Influenza makes more sense. At least it has a purpose. Ron Paul can't understand something as simple (and blatant!) as 9/11. If you're still talking conspiracy theories, you are NOT qualified to be President of the Free World. Sometimes you have to just admit that people who have said they want to kill you, and admitted trying to kill you, just want to kill you.
John McCain - he is to the Republican party what I am to professional basketball. Notice I'm not on any trading cards. He claims to be a Republican the same way that Hillary claims to be a mother. The fact that he joined the party does nothing when compared to his record. And the McCain-Feingold Act was the worst piece of legislation since the 16th Amendment. While I applaud his distinguished military career, I'd rather see him in a Vietnamese prison than in the White House. He makes bad laws. He's chosen a bad career path.
Mitt Romney - he sounds good only by comparison. He is a Mormon, which doesn't bother me - except that someone with religious views that follow a guy who thinks that Utah is the "promised land" shows a lack in judgement. I don't have anything against Mormons, except that they spend their time going around trying to convince everyone else that they don't understand their religion, and that everyone else is wrong. This is the same argument I have against all of the other Christian faiths, but Mormons in particular come across as haughty and creepy. Also, they are known for putting their religion first, and we need someone who respects the Constitution as the law of the land FIRST.
Rudy - I like the man, because he's a no-bullshit kind of New York Italian who would stand up to terrorists and other dipshits (like Castro, or Chavez) and tell them to go pound sand. That being said, he's a little to abrasive to be called a "diplomat." Plus, he's used to a big-government town, and we need a smaller government. New York has more laws and rules than many countries. And their gun laws have further hampered crime-fighting in the Big Apple. I think he'd be a fun guy to hang out with, but I'm not sure he'd make a good President. I just don't know if I want him picking Supreme Court Justices, and negotiating with world leaders. He doesn't come across like a Statesman. I just have a fear that he wouldn't work hard enough on the "Big Issues", and would be another Ford.
So what's a person to do? Well, there's always Fred Thompson. He is touted as "the next Reagan." I hope so. We need another man like him right now. We need someone who will do what it takes to win against our adversary. In Reagan's day, it was Communism. Today, it's Muslim Extremism. Both are evil, and both seek to end our Freedom-loving ways. Reagan wasn't popular when he was elected in many areas, but history is showing what he really got accomplished. Reagan's power lay in getting the best people he could to achieve his goals. He was a true chief executive. The President can't do everything himself - and shouldn't be doing everything. He's a leader - his job is to lead.
Want an example of leadership? Reagan's first cabinet meeting he instructed his staff that he didn't like Communism, big government, etc. - Then he told them to do something about it. He was a visionary, but not a micromanager.
I think Fred might be the best person today to try to reign Congress back in, and restore some Freedom to the people, and limit the expansion of the Federal government. In fact, I'm COUNTING ON IT.
So, at this time, I think I'm with Fred.
Think I'm wrong? Well, I'm not.
Previous day's rant
Go to Top
If you have ideas, comments, or criticisms, tell me about it.