Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Wednesday Smorgasbord

1) An American Carol--This movie looks awesome!! It is a comedy that makes fun of Michael Moore and the left. It is coming out on October 3rd. I will be sure to go see this and bring lots of friends.
Video Hat tip: Patrick

2) Obama's VP pick--The word is out that Obama has made his pick on who his VP will be. There is some pretty heavy speculation that he has picked Joe Biden. I hope it is true because that would be a disastrous pick. Biden is a bitter, hateful senator who doesn't bring anything to the ticket, IMHO. I can't imagine that he would be dumb enough to pick Biden, but I wouldn't put anything past Obama.

I think that Kathleen Sebelius or Evan Bayh would be much better choices. Sebelius is a Governor, a woman and she isn't that extreme and she's from Kansas. Bayh is also a moderate and would add some balance to the ticket. Whether Obama is smart enough to pick someone like them remains to be seen.

3) My recent thoughts on McCain--Many people who were skeptical and had doubts about McCain were wowed by his performance at the Saddleback Civil Forum. I'm not sure that I can say that I was "wowed" but I was pretty happy with his answers and the way in which he dealt with the questions.

If he can continue to show us the McCain that he did at that forum, he might have a chance of winning some of us over. On the other hand, he could throw it all away by picking a liberal/moderate VP for his running mate. Rush brought this up yesterday and I couldn't agree with him more. McCain has a chance now to solidify some conservative support, I hope he doesn't ruin it.

I'm still hoping for him to pick Governor Sarah Palin, but I'm not sure he'll be that smart. I can handle Romney but Pawlenty is not going to thrill me. The real disasters, as I've said before, would be for him to pick someone like Lieberman, Ridge or Huckabee.

4) None of the Above--I heard just a little of Sean Hannity's interview yesterday with Joseph Farah. I'm not a big fan of Farah's and I have been pretty upset with him in the past for his criticism of George W. Bush, but he makes some valid points in his new book.

Right now, I am very close to unenthusiastically supporting McCain because of the threat that Obama poses and the fact that McCain might actually come through on some of the things he's said.

Yet, Farah makes some points about the race that I have been saying for months now:
"Only twice in my lifetime has America experienced the kind of clear political choice for president that I would like to see routinely – that we should expect to see routinely.

The first time that happened was when Ronald Reagan captured the Republican nomination for the presidency and faced incumbent Jimmy Carter. The second time was when Ronald Reagan ran as an incumbent president in 1984.

What was it that set us up for that memorable choice in 1980?

I'll tell you what it was. It was four years of hapless Jimmy Carter. In 1976, Americans were tired of political corruption and incompetence and took a chance on an unknown governor from Georgia. He seemed like a breath of fresh air. He seemed honest. (At least he kept telling us he was honest.) He promised "change" – without providing too much in the way of specifics.

He got the Democratic Party presidential nomination and challenged unelected President Gerald Ford, who had been appointed vice president and successor by Richard Nixon before he resigned in disgrace. Carter went on to beat Ford.

But the change he promised was not the kind Americans had wanted. Jimmy Carter was a pushover for America's enemies. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, on a march they expected to make right into the Middle East, Carter's impotent response was to boycott the Olympics. When Iranian radicals took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, kidnapping U.S. personnel and holding them hostage for 444 days, Carter's response was his famous "Rose Garden strategy" – he would not leave the White House until the enemy capitulated. Needless to say, the enemy never did give up during Carter's term of office. Instead they watched an ineptly planned rescue effort go up in flames and praised Allah for their good fortune.

Meanwhile, during those four years of Jimmy Carter's presidency, Americans, for the first time in history, began measuring their distress and suffering. This may seem like satire for those too young to remember these days, but the Carter administration prompted something called "the misery index" to measure Americans' woes and anxiety.

For his part, Carter blamed the American people for being in a "malaise." Of course, they were in a malaise. They had to wait for another election to be rid of the bumbling rascal who had fooled them into thinking he had real answers to America's problems.

I present this history to you to make a point. I believe the best way to get another choice like we had in 1980 is for Americans to have the opportunity, if you want to call it that, of seeing someone very much like Carter back in the White House and working with a House and Senate dominated by his own party.

Don't get me wrong: I believe four years of Barack Obama will be terrible for America – in the short term. But the suffering we will experience as a result of his governance could prove to be very positive – in the long term. Why? For the same reason the Jimmy Carter years were terrible in the short term and positive in the long term.

Obama's policies of taxing and spending and clamping down on freedom in health care and other areas will prove massively unpopular when Americans see them fail as these discredited ideas always do. Obama and the Democrats will try to blame past administrations for the problems, just as Jimmy Carter tried to do. They will try to blame the people, just as Jimmy Carter tried to do. But with Democrats running Congress and the White House, it will be easy for Americans to see who is to blame.

I can almost promise you Barack Obama will not be elected to a second term. He will, in all likelihood, just like Jimmy Carter, pave the way for a real Republican president in 2012 – if indeed there is one in the wings.

On the other hand, let's pretend John McCain wins the presidency in 2008. In all likelihood, there will still be a Democrat-dominated Congress. While U.S. policies under McCain and a Democrat Congress will be nearly equally disastrous, it will be the Republican president who bears the brunt of the blame in 2012. Guess what we'll get then? We'll get Barack Obama anyway. Or, perhaps, Hillary Clinton.

In effect, by electing McCain, we are only delaying the inevitable day of reckoning. McCain won't change a thing. His election will only delay what almost certainly must come.

Politics is a cyclical business."

No comments: