What Would a Paul Presidency Look Like?

Ron Paul earned a solid 22% third place victory in Iowa on January 3rd, but the headlines went directly to a Santorum surge that has arguably been a "no-show" one week later in New Hampshire, where Paul is finishing 7% better than his polling average. Paul finished a very strong second tonight in the Granite State, but already the headlines are reading like a Huntsman/Romney head-to-head heat. Huntsman, of course, is finishing about 22% behind Romney and about 8% behind Ron Paul. And yet the media black-out continues. In fact, when watching the results on FoxNews, any mention of Ron Paul was met with "who will not be the nominee". Romney has had an array of "Not Romney" contenders, but no one has consistently finished stronger than Paul, and no one has the organization and momentum that Paul has after the first two contests. Arguably, after Iowa and New Hampshire it is clear that the true contender to take on Romney is and has been Ron Paul.

Ron Paul polls favorably against Obama in a head-to-head contest. Paul has the youth and Libertarian votes locked up. Paul is a true anti-war candidate, which would make Obama the war-candidate, locking up leftist anti-war support in a general election. Paul is the one candidate who speaks across the spectrum. He fits into no political mold. He is the true Libertarian. In a time when the electorate are so fed up with the status-quo, Ron Paul is the most dangerous man running for the American Presidency - because he will annihilate the status-quo.

Assuming a Paul victory in November, what would America look like on January 21, 2013 and for the first 100 days of his presidency? What about beyond?

Moments after being sworn into office, Ron Paul would issue an executive order repealing the Patriot Act. He would follow that immediately with starting to roll out his Plan to Restore America, his $1 Trillion budget cut, by ordering the systematic closure of several of the Executive Departments of the Federal Government. The restructure of the government would be done in such a way that State Governments and Private Business would be required to immediately step up to take the rolls of those efforts necessary enough to survive the transition - that is right - the free market will eliminate the waste. Within weeks, several US military bases overseas will be targeted for closure as part of a first wave, followed quickly by other waves of foreign base closures. Energy prices would dive, as Paul's America First energy initiative would stop the export of US energy, aiming the US onto a track of self sufficiency, thus putting an end to our dependency on foreign oil, and the need for defense of Middle Eastern oil.

The military would be strengthened by consolidating our currently overstretched resources. The closure of foreign bases and the immediate end to decades long unconstitutional regional wars would free up resources to focus on American infrastructure and defense. The military industrial complex would be slowed to a grinding halt as US involvement in missions like Tomahawk Bombing Libya and Drone attacking civilians in Pakistan would immediately cease. Our global mission would truly go from one of aggression to humanitarianism. Where governments ask us to leave, we would respectfully exit and allow them to handle their own affairs. We would cease to be the police, and once again lead by a strong example of civility and liberty.

The Native Tribes would be cut loose from the racist policies of the Dept. of the Interior, as it would be eliminated. In accordance with Article 1 section 6, treaties made with the native Tribes would finally be upheld, and the Supreme Court ruling of 1982 regarding the Lakotah Sioux would have a chance to be realized. The US would have to face the issue of Reservations and Native land once and for all.

The US monetary system would be transitioned back under the control of the Dept. of the Treasury, thus ending the privately owned National Banking System known as the Federal Reserve. The US dollars would become real money, and our debt would be painfully real - eliminating the annoying ability of Congress to pay off debt with borrowing fake fiat money. The US would experience deflation over time, and the value of the US Dollar (not the Federal Reserve Note) would increase on the strength of our growing economy.

We would see the US debt being paid down. We would see the end to banker-owned Congresses and the era of Bail-outs. In fact, I'm almost willing to bet that Paul goes after the companies who took taxpayer monies with the expectation of collecting those debts and returning the monies. We would see the tax system completely revamped, eliminating loopholes and reducing overall taxes. We would see a bare-boned Federal Government and a rise in the importance of state and regional governments.

A Paul Presidency would be dangerous to the status-quo, which is why paul is feared amongst those in power. It would be a transition toward a smaller federal government and lower regulation of personal affairs (like taking off your shoes to board an airplane). It would be a return to Constitutional sanity... to checks and balances.

It would be the best chance America has to survive another hundred years. It would be the best chance we have to remove the burden of debt from our future generations. It would be an era of a quieter and more competitive America, a renewed era of American Exceptionalism... one of American peace and prosperity... one where America returns as the shiny city on the hill for all the right reasons... one where we are followed out of respect, not followed out of fear.

Am I being overly optimistic? Sure. As a realist I understand that there would be push back from war-hawks in Congress, lobbyists, big labor, etc. The system that has grown too large to fail would fight so very hard to keep the pork barrel full, even if this fat hog was eating the citizens out of house and home.

So the honest answer is that there would be struggle. There would be news stories of doom and gloom as the fat cats began getting isolated and eliminated. There would be a period of struggle and strife as we shake off the dirt and get to work on truly restoring our country. There would be work, transition, and a whole lot of personal responsibility - a broom in every hand to clean up this country!

We just may, through all of this, find ourselves the leaders of the next great generation of Americans.

Of course, this is all only a possibility if Ron Paul is given the fair shake he deserves as a true front runner and presidential contender. A Ron Paul America... can you imagine?

2012 Presidential Speculation

I last wrote a full article on 2012 Republican speculation in early October of 2009. Arguably, this is a different world than 13 months ago. The rate of change in the political spectrum over the course of the 2010 cycle has been so much so that one should stop to ponder some scientific source of free energy from it! That being said, it is time to look at some serious and not so serious issues facing the presidential elections of 2012.

To begin, one has to wonder what the current President is planning for 2012. Early speculators for the left are suggesting that Hillary is ready to jump in and save the party and the unpopular president, while others are publicly calling for the president to announce that he will not seek re-election now in order to stop short of absolute destruction of the Democratic Party. A saviour he was not! Of course, barring any major changes on the left, we should expect to see a very weak President unable to control his divided legislature and thus enter the race as a weak incumbent. His performance at the G20 summit and throughout Asia last week indicate that the world is no longer smelling what Barack is cooking!

The GOP faces two camps of contenders for 2012 - those who fell short in 2008 and those who are new to Presidential politics; Each has a strength and a weakness. Those who are past failures have name recognition, but also suffer from burn-out or simple distaste from the people - hey, we already said we didn't like your brand of politic. Those who are up and comers have the fresh sense of something new, but may struggle with name recognition on a serious national scale. For the old, they suffer from the changes over the past two years, as anyone can clearly tell 2012 is definitely no 2008 in the political world!

So, who is in and who is out for the GOP?

Fox News is running a series called "12 in 2012" where they highlight 12 candidates:

Those candidates includes: Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, South Dakota Sen. John Thune, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
McPike reports, “A thirteenth story is also planned with long-shots such as former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, and others like Donald Trump.”

I had looked into the campaigns of some potentials (mentioned in my 2009 article linked above). Idaho Gov. Otter is out, carrying only 59% of his state when the Republican Senator snagged 71%. ND Gov Hoeven easily won election as the US Senator from ND with 76% of the vote. Some time on the federal stage could lend credence to his libertarian tilt. Gov. Luis Fortuño of Puerto Rico is single handedly turning the liberal state into a conservative economic model, and his campaigning in 2010 with others around the nation have lended credence to him as an early pick.

So, who is in? Who is out? No one is talking just yet. Word is that some are waiting until after the first of the year, and after the new congress is seated. Some are waiting a bit longer to see who is jumping into the race.

Of the list above, who would I NOT support?
1. Mitt Romney. He is a big government moderate who has gained nothing since 2008, and remains somewhat of an elitist with respect to the people and the media. He has nothing good to offer the GOP... unless you need someone to sell you a used car.
2. Bobby Jindahl. Anyone who votes 'yes' on making the Patriot Act permanent will never get my vote. He would be the Bob Dole of 2012, and is not significant enough to move this country back into the hands of the people. His horrible state of the union response in 2009 was both the beginning and the end of his national level political career. He is best left to the people of Louisiana.
3. Sarah Palin. I know Palin is a fan favorite, but she cannot beat Obama, and she cannot unite the base. Her career move to leave Alaska's Governorship in 2009 (after just two years) destroyed her credibility as an elected official. For whatever her purpose, the end did not justify the means. Her re-election campaign in 2010 would have been the training for 2012, and her two more years running up to that election plus two more ahead of the 2012 election would have given her significant executive experience. Instead she became a cheerleader for the tea party, in my mind washing away all the hope and respect I had for her as an elected official.
4. Newt Gingrich. He may have been third in line for the top spot in the nineties, but this is not the nineties. Newt Gingrich is a relic, and does not have what it takes to 'right' the sinking ship.

Who would I support?
1. Luis Fortuño. A Puerto Rican bid for the presidency would send a shockwave through the nation. A territory of the US for over one hundred years, the island's population are US citizens, but hold no vote in the US federal government. They pay no federal taxes, but receive federal funds. Fortuño has spent the last two years reforming the island commonwealth into a tax haven, and has worked to drastically cut the size of the island's government - and the jobs that went with it. He is a rising star, and his campaign would not only draw a latino voting bloc, it would change the debate to one focused on our imperial policy of territories.
2. Ron Paul. His economic forecasts proved to be true. His foreign policy stance is very isolationist, much like most Americans pre-WWII. His followers have taken root in local and state parties across the nation, moving into key leadership positions. His backers have never quit the 2008 campaign. Ron Paul's followers are the reason for the Tea Party. The Campaign for Liberty has millions of followers. Ron Paul's appointment as the Chair of the Sub-Committee on Monetary Policy, which he will use to go after the Federal Reserve lends credence to his gain in popularity and credibility within the party, and the outcome of his crusade of the Fed could put him in a strong place to lead the field in 2012.
3. John Hoeven. If he can do something strong and dramatic within the Senate, he stands a chance to make a national name for himself. He is easily in the libertarian camp; arguably able to become the Ron Paul of the senate (notice Rand did not get that distinction). He did a great job in North Dakota, and could do a great job taking that same policy to D.C.

Others who Intrigue.
1. Lou Dobbs. There were feelers put out when he left CNN last year that he may be setting up for a 2012 run. Dobbs would do a great job in the mix.
2. Joe Arpaio. The Arizona County Sheriff will play the part of Tom Tancredo, getting tough on immigration. He holds general favor across the nation, and is already making the rounds.

Wikipedia is tracking 28 potential GOP contenders, with the prospect of a few more waiting in the wings. As the dust settles from November 2010, it will surely be interesting to see who decides to put a horse in the race for 2012.

Obama kills NASA's Human Arm - Private Sector Must Carry Torch

It is official. The American Space Program, a dream inspired by the likes of John F. Kennedy himself, has been killed today as a non-essential government expenditure. The Obama administration has announced that it will defund the Constellation Program, the follow-on Human Space Flight Program intended for lunar colonization. FoxNews reports:

The key elements of Constellation include the Orion crew capsule, its Ares 1 launcher, a larger rocket dubbed Ares 5 and the Altair lunar lander. Obama's top-line spending proposal for NASA is expected to increase slightly over the 2010 appropriation of $18.7 billion and would including some funding for an alternative means for transporting crews to and from the international space station

Facing a federal deficit of $1.26 trillion in 2011, Obama is proposing a three-year freeze on most non-defense discretionary spending, a move the president believes will save $250 billion over the next 10 years, Orszag said. In addition, the White House is proposing more than 120 program terminations, reductions and efficiencies that together are expected to save $20 billion in 2011, Orszag said.

While Obama is picking off major programs at $20 Billion a pop, he is still pushing an increased expenditure on the order of a trillion dollars. I digress.

As I stated in my previous post regarding the early reporting of this information, I applaud the cancelling of the NASA Human Space Flight division (though here I found it to be a bad idea). This is said as a former employee of Lockheed's Ares/Orion team. The program was a mess - extremely overbudget, attempting to make a horribly designed system work. We have Mike Griffin to thank for that - but we have NASA to thank for driving impossible requirements changes, making a state of the art system nothing more than a "larger Apollo" on an underpowered candlestick. We were heading the wrong direction... and instead of throwing money at a bad Government Problem - me, like any like minded fiscal conservative and libertarian should embrace the surrendering of a government agency to the free market.

Could Obama have simply directed the cancelling of Ares I and embrace Ares 5 as a multi-purpose Moon/Mars launch vehicle? Should he have? Or is this the motivation the private sector needs in order to begin the free market colonization of near and far space? Let's take a look at what is on the horizon:

1. Space X is within 1-3 months of the inaugural flight of the Falcon 9 - a private, green, and reusable launch vehicle built with the intention of human passengers. They are already in full scale production and have a launch manifest planned out to 2015 covering over 26 flights of varying payloads. SpaceX, owned by Google, has drastically reduced launch costs - estimated at a 90% cost savings over NASA programs, while focusing special attention on safety and reliability. This private sector innovator stands at the ready to take immediate ownership of NASA astronauts, and is slated to act as a launch platform for prefabbed/inflatable space infrastructure built by Bigelow Aerospace.

2. Virgin Galactic, though not able to attain full orbit, is nearing the end of their test flight phase for their sub-orbital commercial space vehicle. Private citizens, the first space tourists, can catch a ride on the ship for a mere $200,000. I am sure that full orbital trips will be just around the bend.

3. SpaceDev is working with Lockheed Martin and Boeing's United Launch Alliance in order to man-rate their Delta and Atlas launch vehicles. I wonder, however, if a collapse of NASA Humans Space Flight, if "man rating" will be a necessary regulation for future start-ups. This falls under the realm of "how congress reacts" - if a launch vehicle is safe, reliable, and has a great service record - what more do you need to 'over-engineer' the launch vehicle for human safety?

In short - this is the perfect opportunity for the private sector to shine. We can smack Obama around for cancelling the JFK Moon Dream, and chastise him for putting America behind the Chinese or the Russians (the only two countries in the world capable of currently launching humans to orbit - after our remaining three launches this year exhaust our Shuttle fleet). But what we are bearing witness to in our protest is the hypocrisy of our "cause" - that is, give up government bureaucracies - so long as you don't touch the things WE want you to keep. Obama should take notice of his own maneuver, and don't stop until Education, healthcare, identification and the like are off the payroll of the federal government.

We stand, dear readers, at the beginning of something grand. So long as private ventures see a profit or need in Human Exploration - it will be so. This is our opportunity to take the government to task and do it right! Instead of writing your congressmen, write the start-ups like SpaceX and ask what you can do to invest and help drive human space flight on a private level. In the mean-time, write your representatives and remind them to keep their regulatory paws out of what will be an explosion in private space exploration.

Vetting a 2012 Republican President

Today's post will act as a conversation piece. With the 2012 presidential campaign due to start moments after the 2010 elections are over, now is a great time to look at the field of contenders and what their run or nomination would indicate. I am going to explore strategic significance, principles of libertarianism as it relates to the Tea Parties, and any noticeable advantages. One thing you may find interesting is that I have mostly found ALL mainstream "knowns" unsuitable to lead in a manner needed to fix the wrongs of the current state of the union.

Firstly, my list is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by Governors of States. It is my belief that executive offices require executive experience. Obama, the first Senator to be elected since JFK, has proven the point that Senators make bad Presidents! (I have not included Ron Paul because of his age... he is the only other candidate with impressive ideas of drastic changes needed to return Liberty to the People.)

Secondly, this list is in no particular order - but I will offer up a top three, as I see them.

Thirdly, Governors with re-elections in 2010 stand to lead the pack, as they will be backed by momentum, and could go hard against Obama on a national level during their campaign... something to watch for - but not necessarily the biggest factor!

My conversation piece of potentials:

Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell. She has the ability to draw much attention due to her state's Civil Union laws - a break in ranks from hardcore Social Conservatives, leaning toward a Libertarian ideology of Personal Liberties (even in the bedroom) - This alone would make for great debate and give a good representation of the future make-up of the GOP. She is very moderate, and a nomination would not be in support of the general agenda of the Libertarian Movement. Definitely not one to win, but one to draw attention to Political Parties using Govt. to force Social Agendas. Her re-election campaign in 2010 may be an indicator as to her future aspirations.

Idaho Gov. C.L. Otter. He is a little known one-term Governor, but his early Congressional opposition to the Patriot Act and many of Bush's policies are signs of his promising Libertarian streak. He is up for re-election in 2010. There is nothing highly controversial, nor glaringly spectacular about this potential candidate. Busted for DUI and married to a much younger woman... other than that he is a fairly conservative "no-namer" with a libertarian streak that could sit well with a country ready to reduce the role of the Federal Govt. He is up for re-election in 2010. How he runs that campaign could make or break it for this Libertarian minded Republican.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels. Mitch has been pinged a number of times for 2012, and has denied interest in running. He is a reformer in Indian, and could bring some energy back to the GOP in that region - however, a Daniels presidency would grossly resemble a Bush presidency. There is no indication that Daniels would openly support Libertarian ideals in eliminating the Federal stranglehold on the Union. This guy may be one to watch, but not for reasons of support... we should be wary of this "Bush Republican".

North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven. The longest serving governor in the United States, Hoeven is a Libertarian minded Conservative. His support of strict state's rights in control over drug policy, health care, gun issues, etc make him a glowing prospect to carry the Gadsden flag to the White House. As a former president of a state owned bank, he has the right credentials in times of economic woe - which I still see us being in as we approach 2012. Hoeven's term is up in 2012, so he will have to make a move on his own to rise to the national stage.

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. Until recently he was my favorite for the 2012 campaign. However, the handling of his affair may have ended his political career. Regardless, he may be the best and most outspoken Libertarian Republican we have in the field... If we can get around the fact that he, like most Americans, is going through a divorce, there may be time to rebound by 2012. Pending results of a possible S.C. impeachment, I would keep Sanford on my watch list.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry. I mention Rick Perry hesitantly, and only because of his "secession" talk of late. A governor who truly understands the intent of the 9th and 10th amendments to the Constitution makes for a great President. There are, however, two drawbacks. He is from Texas, Bush was from Texas - I can already hear the Dems battle cry "we don't need another Texas Governor running this country like Bush"... It's all the dems have, and they will not be able to resist running another anti-Bush campaign in 2012. Secondly, "independent" Texas governors tend to forget the concept of state's rights once they transition into the white house... Perry may very well end up taking the reigns of tyranny without remorse, and controlling the population under the guise of "I know best" - something the Federal Government excels at.

Puerto Rico Gov. Luis G. Fortuño. Though only newly elected as Governor of PR, Fortuno's leadership experience and commitment to service of Puerto Rico's community is stellar. He leads the "New Progressive Party" of Puerto Rico, which caucuses with the Republicans and advocates for PR to become a state of the Union -the opposite mind-set of the secessionist movements. His election would quell the battle cry for freedom from the Federal Government, as it is his policy to reduce the size of government - if only for purely economic reasons. Also, as you may be wondering, he is a resident of Puerto Rico - which is a US territory and NOT a state. This would open some of the most pressing and relevant Constitutional discussions regarding the presidency in the history of the United States. If the left thought Palin caught them off guard, just try a liberty minded territorial resident aimed at healing the Union by putting to rest the policy of territories, US expansionism without representation, and re-emphasising the importance of sovereignty and autonomy while supporting a limited Federal Role. This guy may be the real ticket to a New Republican Party focused on renewed state's rights.

Guam Gov. Felix Camacho. Though less likely to stir the pot than Fortuno, Camacho has the ability to draw into question the 50 state policy of the United States, the way the US deals with territories, and the ever important role of state sovereignty and autonomy. Camacho is term limited in 2010, but could make a name for himself by challenging the Federal Government and the United States on the territory policy. This is less likely to happen in Guam as it is in Puerto Rico, but Camacho may ruffle some feathers.

Who I definitely DO NOT want to see in 2012. Jindahl, Pawlenty, McCain, Romney, Barbour.

Jindahl just doesn't have what it takes, and his hype by the GOP in 2008 for VP made me very aware of his "puppet" status as a candidate. His response to the State of the Union was weak, and he has done nothing of significance. He gets a Libertarian rating of F from me, and would prove to be a continuation of Bush Era policies. Jindahl voted yes on making the PATRIOT Act permanent, voted in favor of the 2006 Military Commissions Act, supported a constitutional amendment banning flag burning, and voted for the Real ID Act of 2005. Not a Small Government activist in the least.

Pawlenty is a McCain moderate that adds nothing inspiring to the field of potential candidates.

McCain has no chance of ever again getting the Republican nomination and should strongly consider leaving the national stage for his direct responsibility in electing Obama.

Mitt Romney has never won me over, is too similar to John Kerry, and his one term in MA Governorship was indicative of his inability to hold the line on a position. He never was and will never be a good candidate for presidency.

In July 2009, a Rasmussen Reports poll indicated that 34% of registered Republicans have a favorable view of Mississippi Gov. Barbour. However, 37% dislike him, which is the highest unfavorable percentage among 5 other possible Republican candidates for 2012: Dick Cheney, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Tim Pawlenty. Also, 21% of GOP voters would least like to see Barbour win the party nomination in 2012. Including the Liberty Republican.

I have left Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin until the end for a reason. She was my pick for VP, he was my pick for President.

Huckabee, at this point, lacks the willingness to end entanglements with foreign countries, reduce the size and control of the Federal Government, and eliminate the Federal Reserve. He is a proponent of the Fair Tax, which is promising. However, I fear that after Obama, a Huckabee message of Hope and Change (as in 2008) will not get far, and that his intent to use the POTUS platform to enact a strong Conservative Social agenda does nothing to advance True Libertarianism and reduced Federal Government.

Sarah Palin, the bull-dog, is a rally cry for state's rights and perceived change within the ranks of the GOP. She is the manifestation of discontent with the status quo within the Republican Party, and lacking an alternative may be our next Presidential Candidate, ensuring Obama a two term presidency. Palin cannot win votes from the left. She doesn't represent enough of a Libertarian change within the ranks of the GOP and she has not made decisions that inspire confidence in her ability to lead the nation. As a VP, perhaps... but she has yet to indicate that she has what is needed to return the Presidency and the Union to a settled state. She is too polarizing, and for all the wrong reasons - a distraction as I see it at this point. As much as it pains me to say it, She has a lot of growth ahead if she is going to win my endorsement again.

My early picks, then, would be as follows:

Puerto Rico Gov. Luis G. Fortuño

North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven

Idaho Gov. C.L. Otter

I will start watching these early picks to see if they have what it takes, and if the political climate is conducive to the type of campaign that they are capable of running and winning!
*****************************

h/t to PuertoRico.com blog:

Fortuno was born in San Juan, in 1960. He attended the School of Foreign Service (Georgetown University) where he received his bachelor’s degree and went to the University of Virginia Law, to obtain his Juris Doctorate. Politics became a part of his life early on, when he was voted Vice-President of his Freshman Class, and later became the Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Conference. He also played a significant role in the establishment of the Congressional Friends of Spain Caucus. While working his way up in the Republican Party, Fortuno held various positions throughout his career including member of the House Republican Policy Committee, member of the Executive Committee of the National Republican Congressional Committee, served on the Committee of Education and Labor, Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Tourism Company and was the President of Hotel Development Corporation. His position as Department of Economic Development and Commerce Secretary came in 1994 and in 2005, he was elected to Congress. With the various positions held over the years, Fortuno has gathered a wealth of knowledge in various sectors and it is believed that if anyone can bring about change in Puerto Rico, it would be him.

Obama's Iconography - Branding America the Fool

H/T to MAinfo for providing this video. It needs to be seen... it needs to be aired in its entirety on all Conservative TV News shows. It should be aired in primetime... an 8 minute buy on all stations across the nation to discus the danger of Obama's Iconography.

Watch the video in its entirety. It is powerful!

Feel free to use the following image at your leisure:

That is that... America has a New President - but, what did he say about tribes?

Listening to the Obama speech after his (late) inauguration, it is clear that he is a smooth talker - though evident that he heavily relies on the teleprompter... I listened very carefully to each and every word - and though I agreed with some and not with others - there was one comment in particular which should stand out as a warning to states, Indian tribes, and territories of America who pride themselves on their individual differences... Obama said:

"The lines of Tribe shall dissolve"

This is the fundamental problem with Obama and the Democrats - they believe that Central Government trumps State, Local, and Tribal governments... there is no lower level sovereignty - only cogs in the machine that make the federal government work.

Let me tell you why it is important that the line of tribe NOT dissolve.

* We are a nation of free individuals who CHOOSE to support a common goal - freedom, peace and prosperity.
* We are a nation who has a government - NOT a government who has a nation.
* We are a collective of individuals representing local differences - regional defining factors - specific needs and wants as a resident of our region and community - not a collective of drones.

The "melting pot" signifies the importance of commonalities as a nation, but it does not indicate the need to dissolve ties to regional needs, regional norms, regional values. To expect rural Kansas to accept the norms of San Francisco is absurd - though we should be able to come together in peace and debate our differences... THAT is the real intent of the government.


I would assume that Obama picked his words very carefully - so why would he specifically mention "tribes" if not for a warning to the Indian Nations that their differences will not be resolved under his administration - and almost as a threat that their nations will be dissolved, and the reservations - the last of the lands promised to their sovereign governments - will vanish like the rest of the once great nations that inhabited these lands.

Let us hope that his words are not "just words" - and that this is not an affront to the Indian Tribes of this land.

The Future Is Now

Hollywood has consistently used the election of a Black President (or a woman) to indicate a future scenario...

* Morgan Freeman is President when the world is threatened by an Extinction Sized Asteroid in the near future of Earth in Deep Impact.

* Dennis Haysbert is the President in the near future terrorist fighting storyline of 24.

* Tom Lister is President in the sci-fi comedy (?) set in a time of flying cars and interstellar conflict - the Fifth Element.

* Terry Crews is President in the horribly idiotic futuristic Idiocracy.

* James Earl Jones is President in The Man, after a series of deaths leaves him as the next in line for the seat.

There is no doubt that Hollywood has been a major player in bringing about the social change in the idea of a Black President, and their efforts are applauded. In a country whose founding documents included a 3/5 clause, it is a milestone for skin color relations to have a President who, at one time, could not live freely in certain parts of this nation.

That being said, according to Hollywood standards, we are now in the Future - and in the future there is nothing but catastrophe, despair, and end-times scenarios... Keep your eyes on the skies in search of asteroids, flying cars, and alien creatures bent on interstellar dominance.

Otherwise - for us non-Hollywood types... just keep your eyes on your wallets! Obama will need to pay for his social programs somehow... and the only drilling he supports is in the pocketbooks of Americans...

End of an Error

Let's face it - Obama is not what put "Conservatism in Exile"... it was Bush. George W. Bush killed true conservatism, and replaced it with the idea of "Neo-Conservatism", where strength of nation is not imagined, it is realized - through war, authoritarianism, and increased "national Intelligence".

I voted for Bush - twice. Once in 2000 as the lesser of two evils (Bush or McCain), and once again in 2004 (where Bush or Kerry didn't offer much more alternative than 4 years prior). This is why I worked extremely hard for Huckabee's campaign in the primaries - with my alternate vote being for Ron Paul. My thought was simple: if we continue to front bad candidates, we truly get more of the same.

This blog was inspired by the latest from the Southern Avenger - and when you are right on, you are right on. His video is here:


Bush almost single handedly is responsible for the implosion of the Republican Party. His increase in spending, larger government, authoritarian, Orwellian, Open Borders, war mongering presidency led me to want to leave the party a number of times (unfortunately alternative conservative parties are extreme and ineffective) - but instead of leaving the party, I chose to get involved, in an attempt to drive home some reform from within our own ranks.

Bush Bashing - not without a purpose... To speak the truth should never be ostracized - though this is now a common tactic within our own party (and society as a whole). Bush may not have been the worst president, but he has been a bad one - bad for the party, bad for conservatism, and bad for libertarianism.

I echo the sentiments of my friend - the Southern Avenger - in bidding farewell to the End of an Error... in hopes that we learn from our mistakes and RETURN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO A PARTY OF LIBERTARIANISM and TRUE ECONOMIC CONSERVATISM.

McCain/Palin: It's Official - GOP Runs Reform Ticket

John McCain made it official tonight - he has accepted the call to duty as the candidate for the Republican Party!

But he did not do it quietly. John McCain issued a warning to all politicians and lobbyists - "A Change Is Coming". That change is in the form of a new deal, a break from Partisan Politics and a break from corruption and business as usual in Washington DC. John McCain promises to lead the nation in a much needed reform of her leaders and their corruption.

How better can John McCain, Republican Candidate for the Presidency, show the citizens of this country that his promise of actual change - of actual reform in DC - is true? Sarah Palin.

John McCain and Sarah Palin represent the most frightening duo to the status quo in the District of Columbia, quoting John McCain:

"I’m not in the habit of breaking promises to my country and neither is Governor Palin. And when we tell you we’re going to change Washington, and stop leaving our country’s problems for some unluckier generation to fix, you can count on it. And we’ve got a record of doing just that, and the strength, experience, judgment and backbone to keep our word to you.”

For years I have held a disdain for Senator John McCain - for his often liberal legislation that struck at the very core of what I believed. And I will make the admission now that this ill feeling was partisan in nature... McCain broke ranks with the Republicans on one too many issues.

However, with the selection of Sarah Palin and the message delivered tonight, I believe that I can truly support the mission that John McCain is taking on - a mission of reform.

The GOP needs reform from her ranks swollen with corruption.

The Democrats need reform from their corrupt dealings within the once highly respected offices in the federal government.

Washington DC needs reform from it's Pork Barrell ways, aimed at encouraging lobbyists and providing a breeding ground for scandal and corruption.

And the federal government needs reform from a set of rules and regulations put in place in a time when business and the world worked much differently under very different technologies.

John McCain is taking the mantra from Obama - and promises to deliver true Change.

Obama's change is that of increasing government influence in our daily lives - changing from a libertarian based society to a socialist based society.

McCain's change is that of fixing the ills in the government, reducing it's size, and ensuring that the citizens are released from the authoritarian society we fear, and are allowed to live locally under more personal responsibility - the way this country was intended in it's founding.

Sarah Palin was the ticket for me. John McCain has won my endorsement and my vote!

McCain's VP Pick Could Rally Conservative Base

CQ Politics has been conducting a bracketed system of voting to determine who would best support John McCain as the Republican Veep Nominee. The final round of voting is currently underway, and ends tomorrow night.

Click here to Vote

The final match-up, which is no surprise to me, is between Gov. Sarah Palin and Gov. Mike Huckabee.

I was a steadfast supporter of Mike Huckabee for President, and have been a steadfast supporter of Palin for VP even before McCain won the nomination.

If I had to pick two of the most top notch candidates for VP, never a finer match existed.

Sarah Palin will bring youth, energy, and can-do conservative principles to a largely independent GOP candidate.

Mike Huckabee will bring faith, oratory skills, and a positive approach to bringing the conservative principles that this country was founded on to the forefront of our society.

Alone, McCain is a vulnerable candidate. But with either of these two as the Vice Presidential nominee, John McCain stands to rally the conservative base and ensure victory in November over Barack Obama.

It happened in the USSR...

When the USSR collapsed in the late 80's, the Cold War ended. The United States was filled with joy of the end of the CW, but new threats began to arise.

Those threats were rogue states, unstable nations, and civil wars throughout the old soviet republics.

What would it look like if the US government, and it's complacent voters, continues the gap between the people and the leaders... What would it look like if the gas prices reached $4.00 a gallon and drove the nation into an economic panic, as the lower and middle class could no longer afford the basic necessities. What would it look like if the lower and middle class was systematically uprooted from their homes because of government mingling in the private housing market?

What would it look like if the US ceased to be a union of peaceful states, and instead became a series of independent states fighting for resources enough to survive?

It is not crazy... we have done it before... and as the people are less and less able to thrive, let alone survive, we march forward along the same path that destroyed the Soviet Union.

We are truly at a pivotal point in our nation's history... and our nation's existence.

Here is an interesting timeline starting in 2008... it is from a video game, but is hardly unlikely.

Democrats Debate - Government the Answer

I was watching the Democratic debates last night, and wanted to share a few comments today.

During the first hour, the theme of the debates was "Integrity" and "Electability". Obama made reference on a few occasions that these topics were distractions, and the real discussion in the campaigns should be "the issues".

The fact that Mr. Obama doesn't seem to think that integrity is an issue MAKES it an issue!

When a candidate for president lies about being fired at and having to run for cover, but then gives a statement that she mis-remembered... well, it has the same integrity of a president asking what the actual definition of "IS" is... There needs to be a new occurrence in US politics: If a politician lies, it should be our duty to reply, "That sir (or ma'am) is a lie!"

Imagine the flashbulbs going off as they try to fix the statement on the spot... I'll tell you what, holding our elected officials accountable to their words is a great way to truly find out who the characters of substance are, versus the trash we see today.

In fact, Obama's lies are worse than Clinton's... Clinton at least knows that she is a liar... Obama believes that he is actually telling the truth. And if you believe it, it must be true... Ask Kucinich about his UFOs.

For instance, Obama should come out and say, simply, that the speech he gave in SF was meant to be heard only by those in the city. He was simply trying to tell the city folks that he believes they are living a better life for deciding to live blissfully in dense urban areas... meanwhile, he believes that those who live a rural lifestyle are bitter and angry that our lives do not amount to that of the city-folk... and as such, we cling to the bare-bone, knuckle-dragging basics of sentient beings: religion and guns. If he told the truth, THAT is what it would sound like.

Unfortunately, there is not an honest or moral bone between the two of them... IMHO.

The common theme in the second hour was that "government is not doing enough to make life better". Government is the answer. There is no way that the people can be trusted to improve their own lives... the government needs to step in and help.

I saw a great sign in front of a church last weekend, which read: God does not promise a smooth flight, just a soft landing.

That is wisdom! The trials and tribulations of day-to-day living ARE life! As people of high moral fiber, we should take the challenge of the storm and sail on, learning the lay of the land, and becoming wiser as we fail and try again.

But to be at a point where you can no longer stomach the fight, and you beg for mercy from government, you are no longer a citizen... you are a subject.

A citizen tells the government how it is going to be.

A subject is told by the government how it is.

To expect the government, an entity that is fastly becoming uncontrollable, to be the savior of the people is the suicide of liberty.

Hillary Clinton and Barry Obama both stated last night that the answer to the woes of the country is bigger government. Economic crisis - More government regulation and intervention. Fuel prices - more government regulation and intervention. Mortgage issues - more government regulation and intervention. Higher Taxes, more government social programs... rob from the rich to house, clothe, educate, feed, bathe, enrich the poor... Give to those in need from those who have the ability. The very basic principle of Socialism.

The summary of the debate: We cannot, as Conservative Americans, stand by and let one of these two Socialists step a foot inside the White House.

Democrats Play the Fool, while McCain gets Presidential

John McCain, seen in this picture with Lieberman at the West wall in J'lem, has taken a huge advantage in his early nomination from the GOP and begun an international tour. He recently met with the military leaders in Iraq, made a public statement regarding Iran from Iraq, visited with leaders in countries like Jordan and Israel, and is giving policy speeches on the future of the Middle East and US involvement in the area. In the hearts and minds of the people of the area, this visit is seen as that of the next President of the United States.

Meanwhile, back in the States, Obama is left to make apologetic speeches about his pastor "damning" America, and Clinton is left giving her feedback on the strength of Barack's speech.

The longer that the two democrats continue this epic battle, the less time they will have to start strengthening foreign relations... the very thing they both promised, but neither one is able to do...

All the while, McCain is doing a great job of showing his strength on foreign affairs.

Before the results, my thoughts on Super Tuesday II

This could very well be my last post on Mike Huckabee and his bid for the GOP longshot nomination. Mike Huckabee's remaining in the race has been for the sole purposes of giving conservatives a voice as McCain moved towards the nomination. Pulling in 41% in Virginia and 38% in Wisconsin should be enough of a message to John McCain that he needs to pick a cabinet, and run a White House that will not isolate the conservative movement.

We will have from tomorrow until November to determine if John McCain is going to reach out to the right as hard as he has reached out to the left.

Regarding today... can Mike Huckabee pull an upset? With Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Vermont on the chopping block, I see Huckabee doing well in Texas alone... the rest will go to McCain overwhelmingly... likely giving McCain his required delegates to secure the nomination. But I have to give Mike Huckabee kudos for running an honest, positive, and on message campaign, while sticking to his word that he would stay in it to ensure the conservatives have a voice.

I'm not eulogizing Huckabee's campaign yet... but regardless of the outcome, I have much respect for the man, for his message, and his willingness to listen to the people, the bloggers, and the late night comedians... which has always been entertaining.

Elections in the North East - States won update

Below is an update of the states won by each candidate. Romney is out, McCain and Huckabee are soaring in the polls as the last two contenders... and state after state is dishing out delegates. Mike Huckabee continues to win in the southern states, and McCain edges out Huckabee in Washington state by 200 votes. Virginia, Maryland, and Washington DC vote today, likely to be a sweep for McCain. But perhaps the Potomac region has some tricks up it's sleeves?

I will continue to update this map as results come in.

As well, Democratic results are below. With these two candidates fighting for a majority, and in a very clear delegate tie with the potential for legal battles to come up should Hillary lose, The Democratic party is not in a good position. They spent the early part of this campaign season berating the Republicans for a hotly contested seat, but now find themselves in the only non-civil contest at risk of dividing their party. The Potomac contests seem to favor Obama, in another round of the Clinton machine self-destructing in the public forum.

Thoughts on West Virginia Speeches

West Virginia is clearly a Huckabee / Romney state. The speeches were great, the crowd was pumped up... and now the delegates vote for this winner take 18 state.

I predict that Huckabee will win. He had the advantage of speaking last, jazzing the crowd, and speaking to the hearts of the delegates. That being said, Romney supporters had to sit through the lack-lustered McCain presentation by McCain's surrogate. The fact that Huckabee had the chance to wake this crowd up may pay big dividends!

WV gives out 30 delegates, but only 18 are being pledged today by the convention. Nine more are being handed out based on the Primary results in May... and three stay unpledged and belong to the state party... perhaps for bargaining tools.

The results should be out before 12:30 ET. That is one hour away... breath is officially being held!

Super Bowl, Super Tuesday

Coming from Seattle, I have been trained to have a natural disdain for anything coming out of New York. However, like any reasonably stable individual, I understand that there are times when one should support a team, despite their New York status.

Add to it that I just LOVE an underdog, and I will have to admit that I was pulling for the New York Giants to upset the Pats. Let's just say that it was a very vocal and entertaining Super Bowl party at my house yesterday! What an historic game, and a very dissapointing showing from the team that was crowned the victor before the show even began.

Which leads me into Super Tuesday. Granted, the house parties will be few and far between... but I am hoping for the results to be the same.

I am invoking the name of the Underdog... who's spirit is alive and well in the wake of the Giant's upset of the Pats.
When it comes down to selecting a candidate, electiblity comes with support... it is the message that matters! Anyone is electible, if they can overcome their hurdles... what is important is the consistency of the message.

This will be the big show for both the Dems and the Republicans... and where the Democrats once lauded the GOP for such a contested race with no clear front-runner, they find themselves up to their ears in the same mud!

Who will play the role of the phoenix? Who will rise from the ashes of Super Tuesday and claim victory? Will it be Obama over Hillary? Will it be Huckabee over McCain and Romney?

The first contest is in West Virginia, whos convention concludes at 12:30 ET tomorrow. According to this WSJ site, the West Virginia contest is still wide open between all three candidates. The way West Virginia is voting is a convention, where the candidates are granted 20 minutes each... if they decide to show up. They can use that 20 minutes to woo the delegates, and go for a first round win early in the day. Romney and Huckabee are leading the state, but most delegates are uncommitted. Any candidate who shows up, especially if uncontested, will likely win the convention.

The next state to close is Georgia. Huckabee must win in this state. Georgia is a pulse on how the other Huckabee sympathetic states may vote. Since Iowa, Huckabee has failed to win any states. South Carolina was a bad blow to his momentum, and since then his supporters have been looking for a sign that his campaign has not been critically wounded. Polling shows Huckabee up in Georgia, Tennessee, and Arkansas... though his lead has eroded away since SC and Florida. Huckabee needs to make headlines today if he plans to win tomorrow!

Mitt Romney is also battling the McCain monster across the US. In my previous post, I did not predict a strong showing for Romney... But Romney has some momentum, coming out of a Maine win... (yeah, Maine voted this last weekend... who knew?)... Romney's struggle is for the top of the ticket. I have said it a number of times, Romney has made no friends in the field of candidates... should he come out behind with delegates, he may as well throw in the towel, because he can't and won't get the VP nod.

McCain has the momentum, but it may be a little too sugar coated for a lot of voters. They still remember 2000, and then the bills that he led since then. Folks are heistant to support McCain because he truly is a Republican Maverick. Can a maverick lead the party, or levaae it in disarray?

And then there is Ron Paul. I had originally counted him out of all the state contests, but he is rising in the polls as an alternate to the three that are above him. He stands a decent chance to show strength in an independent state like Alaska... I originally was calling this state for the Independent minded McCain, but Paul is the only candidate with a campaign office in the state, and any real organization on the ground. Could Ron Paul pick up Alaska?

Of course, as I said, today is the day for the candidates to make some headlines. Press conferences are nice, but resounding policy speeches are better! Now is the time to be blunt, be presidential, and hope that you can pick up those undecided voters!

Super Tuesday is a Three Man Race

Pundits say what they will, but Super Tuesday is a Three Man Race... and as such, the GOP race is as well.

John McCain picked up the endorsement of Rudy Giuliani, Fred Supporters have moved into one of the other camps, or undecideds, and the race is marching on.

John McCain surely has all the momentum going into Super Tuesday... but to call the race over is very much a jump of the gun. Not even 10% of all the delegates have been allocated, yet everyone wants to throw in the towels.

To look at who could come out on top, we need to look at the next contest. As the contest is spread out over 21 states for the GOP, it is clear that the campaign with the most money can advertise in the most locations... and that is Mitt. Unfortunately, Mitt's coffers are about as dry as the other campaigns, so each candidate is focussing on states that they need to try and win.

If all three candidates (Huckabee, McCain, Romney) come out with equal states, regardless of delegates, then Super Tuesday is a wash. If one candidate can claim victory by overwhelmingly winning the majority of the states (not just delegates), then the balance of power may shift.

Remember, these three candidates ALL look great going into Super Tuesday... They are all hovering around 20% nationally, and all seem to have a few states locked in Super Tuesday... but the close races will make or break some campaigns!

Let's take a look at the states, the challengers in those states, and the expected outcome.

Alabama (primary)- 48 delegates: Huckabee v McCain
Neither candidate is campaigning hard in this state, but Huckabee has the advantage as a Southern Governor. If Rudy's 9% jump to McCain, McCain wins the state. If Romney supporters see McCain winning the state as a bad thing, they may decide to support Huckabee as a blow to the McCain campaign. Romney holds a distant third in the state with no hope of winning. I give this state to Huckabee.

Alaska (caucus)- 29 delegates: McCain v Romney v Huckabee v Paul
This state has conducted no polling that is on record. It is a tough state to call, as it is a truly independent minded state... so much so that as recently as 1990 it elected a governor from a third party: The Alaskan Independence Party... not Independant, but independence... The party pushing for secession from the Union... like I said, a tough state to call! But I give it to McCain.

Arizona (straw poll)- 53 delegates WTA: McCain (solid)
Enough said. This is McCain country!

Arkansas (primary)- 34 delegates: Huckabee(solid)
Again, enough said. Huck holds a commanding lead on his home court!

California (primary)- 173 delegates: McCain v Romney
McCain holds the advantage going into Super Tuesday, as the Governator and Rudy both endorsed him. Good news for Romeny (projected 2nd place) and Huckabee (projected 3rd) is that California is no longer a WTA state. It is a WTA by district, which means that Romney and Huckabee can both pick up some delegates... Emphasis on "can"... Huckabee does not have the funding to campaign in this state, nor the momentum to make up a 15% deficit.

Colorado (caucus)- 46 delegates: Romney v McCain v Huckabee v Paul
This is a red state turning blue... but independents and democrats would have had to have registered as Republicans at the beginning of December if they intended to participate in caucus. Romney holds a strong lead, and will likely win. Though, word on the ground is that Ron Paul has very strong grass roots in this state, and could come out big in the straw poll. This is a state that is tough to call, though I see Romney and Paul doing well here. That being said, Romney wins CO.

Connecticut (primary)- 30 delegates WTA: McCain (solid)
McCain has risen to leads of around 20%. This is his state. Winner takes all.

Delaware (primary)- 18 delegates WTA: McCain v Romney
Huckabee is not a contender in this New England state. This was a sure Rudy win, but now the state is up for grabs. Much of the state is still undecided, but I see McCain coming out ahead.

Georgia (primary)- 72 delegates: Huckabee v McCain
This is not a WTA state, but Huckabee seems to be getting all the votes. McCain has made strides in the state after South Carolina and Florida, but Huckabee looks good in Georgia. The delegates could split between them, but I see Huckabee winning the state and taking home these Georgia delegates.

Illinois (straw poll)- 70 delegates: McCain v Huckabee v Romney v Paul
Ron Paul has polled well in this state, though he will do nothing more than play a spoiler. To whom? That is left to be seen. With Rudy out, McCain will do well in this state. I see Huckabee finishing a strong second, with Romney close behind at third. This is a tight state that has fluctuated in the polls based on who is leading the national polling. I see it as McCain, Huckabee, Romney - in that order.

Massachusetts (primary)- 43 delegates: Romney v McCain
This is a New England blood match. Romney will come out on top, but he has not been as strong in his home state as Huckabee and McCain have been in theirs. This is very telling. This is a two man race in MA. The winner, Romney.

Minnesota (caucus)- 41 delegates: McCain v Huckabee
This state is a McCain strong hold. They usually are more liberal voters, and McCain appeals to their needs. McCain will win this state, with Huckabee finishing a strong second.

Missouri (primary)- 58 delegates WTA: Huckabee v Romney v McCain
Huck and Mitt both have this state in their must win bags. McCain is strong because of his recent big wins, but the state may be more inclined to follow Huckabee. I see Huckabee and McCain battling it out for the win in this state, with Romney taking third. For now, I give the state to Huckabee.

Montana (caucus)- 25 delegates WTA: Huckabee v Romney v Paul v McCain
This has not been a widely disputed state. The voters tend to be both strongly conservative and independent. Huckabee and Romney should do well in this state. Huckabee may win.

New Jersey (primary)- 52 delegates WTA: McCain v Romney
With Rudy out, McCain will win this state. Winner take's all, so Romney should spend his money elsewhere.

New York (primary)- 101 delegates WTA: McCain v Romney
The state that Rudy could not win, yet it was his home turf. Another WTA state, Romney is going to finish at least 15% back. Again, that is money better spent elsewhere.

North Dakota (caucus)- 26 delegates WTA: Huckabee v Romney v McCain
As another WTA state, Romney and McCain should seek delegates elsewhere. This is Huckabee country.

Oklahoma (primary)- 41 delegates: Huckabee v McCain
These delegates will be split between Huckabee and McCain. I predict a Huckabee win, as he has held up well against McCain despite the momentum of the Mac. Huckabee wins Oklahoma.

Tennessee (primary)- 55 delegates: McCain v Huckabee
Since Fred left this state wide open, Huckabee and McCain have both polled very well amongst voters. McCain will likely win, but not by much. I call this state a virtual tie between the top two contenders.

Utah (primary)- 36 delegates WTA: Romney (solid)
If there was any doubt here, the doubter was in trouble. Romney will take all the Utah delegates.
West Virginia (convention)- 30 delegates WTA: Huckabee v McCain
McCain will likely win this state, as it liked Rudy early on. Huckabee will do well, though he won't likely spend any money here... Romeny will finish third. Unfortunately for Huckabee and Romney, this is a winner take's all state.

My Super Tuesday state count is as follows:
Huckabee: +7 states: AL, AR, GA, MO, MT, ND, OK
McCain: +11 states: AK, AZ, CA, CT, DE, IL, MN, NJ, NY, TN, WV
Romney: +3 states: CO, MA, UT
Paul: +0 states:

There are surely some close races, but this is definately a three contender race! After Super Tuesday, Virginia and Maryland vote on Feb 12th. Both states look good for McCain. A week later Washington and Wisconsin will vote, which will go to McCain and Huckabee respectively (if ST goes the way I predicted). Then comes March 4th, with Texas, Vermont, and Rhode Island. Huckabee and McCain are battling it out for Texas. Huckabee has led Texas for some time, and will likely win if all goes as above. This is a huge state for Huckabee. Vermont and RI are are McCain wins, hands down.

The way that I see it, where Romney and McCain face off, Romney is not doing so well. Romney has a solid base in his home states, but I cannot see him making up in the polls in all of those states. There are many where he is not even close.

The Convention could still be brokered, even though McCain will go in ahead. Should Romney drop after a poor Super Tuesday showing, it will be McCain and Huckabee, and the ticket will likely be set-up in that order. Should Romney upset McCain in a shocking reversal of fortune on Super Tuesday, The convention will be very close, but brokered nonetheless. Should McCain go in ahead, I do not see him picking Romney as a running mate. The only hope for Romney is a full out win.

GOP: So, Who Has the Momentum Again?

It is January 24th, 2008... Five days before the Florida showdown... Twelve days before Super Tuesday. A number of contests have cleared the field of candidates who failed to materialize, leaving behind a race that is as out of the ordinary as a San Francisco Conservative.

Huckabee claimed first blood in Iowa, taking the state from the long time favorite there, Mitt Romney. The Huckaboom had paid off, and Huck's momentum was back.

Fast on his tail was John McCain, perhaps in anticipation of his contest in New Hampshire, where Independents were able to rally behind their man as they did 8 years prior. John McCain's win in New Hampshire helped further propel his numbers in the positive direction, giving him the highest level of support since entering the race over a year ago.

Meanwhile, smaller and less contested races were taking place in states like Wyoming, Michigan, and Nevada... Victories out of these states heralded little notice by the press, but the delegates counted just the same as in the traditional early states. Mitt Romney's victories in these widely uncontested states did little to add to his momentum, though there is something to be said for leading the delegate count before Super Tuesday, and that is the headline he was hoping for.

Rudy Guiliani has yet to break 10% in a contest in the early states. His strategy of "Go Big or Go Home", where he is playing in states with only sizable delegate counts, has done little more than employ an army of campaign eulogy writers... but for Rudy, there is always Florida, right?

And all the while, Ron Paul and his supporters, after stacking every online poll in an attempt to appear as a front-runner, has been unable to muster more than 5% nationally in the polls, and has had his best showing in an uncontested Nevada, where he placed a very distant 2nd.

So I ask the question... Who has the momentum again?

The answer is simply: No One!

Fred Thompson's drop from the race, and lack of an expected endorsement, has left a large field of undecided voters hesitant to join any one campaign. The lack of a McCain endorsement has further served to help add gravity to McCain's falling national numbers, as voters remember why his campaign imploded over the summer: Immigration.

Duncan Hunter, yesterday, in an attempt to help swings some momentum in the direction of the Social Conservatives, endorsed Mike Huckabee... unfortunately this endorsement received little fanfare from the media, as they have all but declared the Huckabee campaign a bust. Huckabee is doing little to help his own campaign by not aggressively pursuing Thompson's supporters. Instead his campaign released a short press advisory welcoming support... while at the same time his campaign Chairman Chip Saltzman took a hit at Fred Thompson on the Mike Huckabee Campaign Blog. Huckabee missed an opportunity to claim victory in SC after the contest, by claiming that Fred's withdrawal, had it happened prior to the race, would have made him the clear victor.

Rudy's numbers have flatlined, which for him is a good thing at this point. A flatline is much better than the nose-dive he was seeing. This hesitation in the plummet may be temporary, unless he can pull off a come from behind win in Florida. Rudy's only source of momentum is anticipation of Florida... but all the momentum leads up to is a simple "no change".

Mitt Romney seems unable to break the invisible barrier of 16% in the national polls. His campaign had surged in the past, only to hit 16% and fall... rising again, only to fall again... he is at 15.8%, but the trend is ominous for his campaign!

It is hard to say what will happen in the debate tonight, but easy to see what must be done. There is a new flood of undecided Thompson voters that could cling to a new campaign and propel that campaign to the White House. Every person left on that stage needs to spend tonight aggressively wooing the ex-Fred-heads. The candidate who stands to pick up the votes MUST be conservative socially (this excludes Rudy and potentially McCain), must be strong, and must actually ASK for their support... no subtleties... now is not the time!

With no momentum from any candidate, no clear front-runner, and all candidates within 10% of being the leader on a very fluid scale... We start tonight at square ONE!

My Thoughts in a post SC world...

There are ten days between SC and Florida... and another week after that until Super Tuesday. So what do the next two weeks hold in store?

We have already seen Duncan Hunter drop the race after a predictably poor showing in SC.

So who is next?

The headlines of the morning papers today, as seen on eGOPnews.com, are hinting that Fred Thompson is considering dropping the race after he was able to do little more than play the spoiler to the Huckabee campaign... of course they hinted at that before... but Fred had said that he needed a win or a strong second in SC to have a chance. And anyone who watched Fred's concession speech were left scratching their heads, wondering if he botched a withdrawal speech, or if he was trying to rally the troops on into Florida:



The AP Reports:

Despite the situation, Thompson was expected to bow out after failing to
win the states where he had hoped to perform strongly, Iowa and South Carolina.
The former Tennessee senator and "Law & Order" actor returned home after
delivering a speech in South Carolina on Saturday that sounded like he was
calling it quits. He stopped short of doing so but some supporters suspected it
would only be a matter of time before Thompson withdraws.

Before South Carolina, several aides had said he probably would need to
finish first or a strong second in that race to go forward. Aides didn't expect
a decision from Thompson until sometime after the weekend.

With Fred Thompson out, the race will become a McCain, Huckabee, Romney, Rudy contest... heading into Florida where they are all within 7 points of one another, it will be a race to distinguish the have's from the have-not's in the GOP Primary.

Current poll averages have the top four hovering around 20%, and Thompson & Paul way behind the field with 8.5 and 5 points respectively.

Should Thompson drop, and likely endorse McCain, one would wonder if Fred's social conservatives could get behind McCain, who has been no friend to Social issues... Rudy and Romney will likely not benefit from Fred's voters as much as McCain and Huckabee will. Should those votes distribute evenly, we should expect similar results as we saw in SC happening in Florida.

If Fred does not drop out, it will likely only serve to keep Huckabee's numbers low and help his friend McCain, as was the case in SC.

Moving into Super Tuesday without Fred could definitely shake things up. None of the top four are out, but Rudy is close, especially without Florida.

We should all listen very hard to any chatter coming out of the Thompson campaign. Once he makes a move to stay in or get out, we can better handicap the Florida race.

One thing is certain... Romney is counting on a brokered convention, where his wins in uncontested states may help... at least until Super Tuesday... then he could find himself falling to the rear of the pack... But when you have a brokered convention, every delegate counts!

I will provide updates if any news breaks...