The Anti-Palin Conspiracy

Since Senator McCain's nomination of Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his Vice-president, a move that many on the Right viewed with jubilant celebration and the Left viewed with unanimous despairing horror, the news media has quite frankly gone beyond belief in attacking her. Even Barack Obama made a questionable reference to her--he may have called her a pig--but more on that later.

Briefly, they claimed that her Downs-Syndrome son Trig, born in April, was actually a sham, and that the baby was really her grandson by her 17-year-old daughter (who did, as it happens, become pregnant--and decided to keep the baby and marry the father). How incredibly absurd. Unless she resorted to a fake pregnancy belly and kept the First Daughter of an American state out of photographich surveillance for months and months, it would be utterly impossible. What am I talking about, it IS utterly impossible. What a disgusting lie.

Then, they said, she fired her cop ex-brother-in-law, and his immediate supervisor who refused to fire him. (Innapropriately.) She did fire both of them, but in fact the cop in question was a known idiot, who shot animals illegally and used a taser on his stepson without legitimate reason; and his supervisor was obviously fired for standing in Palin's way over it. Frankly, I can see where the controversy comes from. However, she did the right thing. She knew the man was a moron, and she didn't want him as a cop in her state. So she fired him and his kvetching supervisor.

And there are far more:

• Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.

• She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.
  

• She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.
  
  
• Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.
  
  
• Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

This from factcheck.org.

Even The Obambi himself has made veiled insults, and some of the idiotic media sniffing around is certainly at his campaign's behest.



The story behind this video: In her acceptance speech at the convention, Palin told a joke about the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull. The answer was lipstick. Here Barack Obama makes a completely un-subtle attack on Palin, referring her to a pig. He insisted he wasn't talking about her personally, but watch the crowd's reaction: THEY thought he was talking about her.

And Obama's step down of late hasn't been limited to Palin. Oh, no. In a recent ad, Obama accuses McCain of being out of touch and incapable of leading the nation because he can't use a computer. That would certainly be bad under normal circumstances. But John McCain was a prisoner of war for years, and in the course of that sustained lasting injuries, one of which prevents him from being accomplishing complicated hand-motor skills, like typing on a computer. So McCain can't use a computer, but only because he suffered bravely under Vietnamese torture for years while Obama was in Muslim school in Jakarta. Quite a contrast, eh?

In conclusion, this media blitz like never before has highlighted the truly breathtaking bias in the news media. They hate Republicans, and Palin registers like a bogie on their radars. Attack her with everything we've got, they say, playing fast and loose with the truth along the way. An incredibly low and scary attack on a strong, principled woman, who deserves to be the next Vice President of the United States of America.

Will Hill Stay?

Barack Obama probably is now being called by respectable media outlets the presumptive nominee. He has surpassed the number of delegates needed, and it has been increasingly clear in the past months that he is the leader in this campaign. Now the question is: what will Hill do? She hasn't as yet conceded defeat, but most reports say she's angling for the VP spot, which Obama might just give her. Personal feelings between the aside, polls show that if Obama is the nominee, a substantial portion of HRC's hardliners won't vote for him. Depending on how much of that is dependent on racism or sexism, picking HRC as his VP would be a smart move--and bad for John McCain.

Was Barack Obama born in the United States? He says he was, in Hawaii, but the State of Hawaii refuses to release his birth certificate and is now no longer paying them any attention. It hasn't mattered up till now because, as a Senator, he is allowed to have been born outside this country, but as President, he can't. So, this is important. Chances are he is American-born, but this is a serious issue, and how much coverage of it have you seen in the We-love-you-B.-Hussein-Obama media? Zilch. Zero. Nada.

McCain's VP pick becomes all the more important if Hillary is Obama's Veep. Why? Because they would have a historic ticket. If I was McCain, I would choose someone young, preferably a woman or a minority. That seems a little cynical, but it's the way to win. Voters, starstruck by a black president and a female VP, would vote for Obama-Clinton on that alone.

Therefore, my two nominees:

Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. The first female governor of Alaska is also a fairly Conservative, pro-life, pro-marriage female, who became the first person to give birth while a governor. She gave birth to her son Trig on April 18th of this year. She's a woman, she's conservative, and in a recent poll she beat out everyone except the Huck as possible VP picks.

Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. Governor Jindal is thirty-six years old, and of Indian descent. He was, however, born in the United States, making him eligible to be Vice-President. He has bullied the reluctant and corrupt Louisiana legislature into passing sweeping ethics-reform bills in a state ravaged by Katrina and corruption. He's charming and personable, rather like a younger, Indian, Christian, pro-life Barack Obama.

So...You decide. Well, actually McCain does, but I'd like your input as well.

Summer!

For those of you who are as yet unaware of this beautiful new phenomenon, SUMMER is here. That's right, ladies and gentlemen. School. Is. Over. And I love it. The last weeks of May and the first weeks of June are really the most beautiful time here in Baldwin. After the cold and the mud, but before the oppressive, insect-ravaged heat. Early Fall, too, is beautiful, but in that season the glory of summer is declining, instead of growing as it is right now. This is my second official day of summer vacation, and I enjoyed it immensely, not least because we had the Renz over, and listened to some great muzak and played some great rounds of Halo 3 and Ghost Recon.

The political scene, my usual forte, has been abnormally quiet these last few days. Obama is now the presumptive nominee, but the CW is that Clinton won't bow out gracefully--her only reason to do so would be if she had a reasonable chance of becoming Obama's VP pick, which I and most pundits and Nancy Pelosi don't see as a real possibility--but will stick it to the bitter end, no matter what the cost to the Democrat's seemingly stellar chances in November.

Reading National Review on Monday, I found a rather profound statement regarding Obama's election by the establishment. If, or when, Obama becomes the nominee, he will be the only nominee from any party in the history of the United States to have lost California, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, and Texas--the biggest states in the Union, with the exception of their mutual home state and Obama's constituent state Illinois. When you think about it, that's rather stunning. Equally so are the several polls I've read indication that a substantial portion of Clinton's supporters will NOT vote for Obama. I think I remember 15%. That, too, is a staggering number, and could tip the balance in McCain's favor.

What else? Good question. I'm trying to think about ways to snazz up the blog. I think tonight or tomorrow I'm going to have a brainstorming session about topics, so look for more at Mosings in the future. Until then, my friends, live long and prosper.

HRC Slowly losing ground, End-of-the-year blues

First things first. Hillary Clinton scraped a two-point win in Indiana, but lost by a huge margin in North Carolina; the two states which held their primaries yesterday. This is probably the beginning of the end for the Clinton campaign: she's been a long-shot since Super Tuesday, but held on. This result was probably not the shut-out Obama was expecting, but does her already-faltering campaign a good deal of damage.

Robert Novak's Political Report said that we shouldn't be surprised if she drops our before the end of the primaries in June. I think he's underestimating the Clinton ambition; if I know her, she'll stay in as long as she has a mathematical chance--neither candidate can get the number of delegates needed for an outright win, so it could still get down to quibbling.

If Hillary sticks it to the convention, she does have a card up her sleeve: The Michigan and Florida primaries, which didn't actually count because of Democratic shenanigans, both went to her. We're talking about two of the largest states in the Union. With those delegates counted, she's considerably closer to Barack Obama. A contested convention would be a dream for Republicans, and make the odds much more even for McCain.

Besides that, the political scene has been quiet: no real scandals or even news since Eliot Spitzer.

I'm getting something I get every year: the blues. Every spring, it seems, I have melancholy periods. Tonight I had one because it was the last night of youth group. What a blessing that's been for me! It's a great group of people, and some of them are of course going off to college and other things. However, everything happens because God willed it, so I shouldn't really be melancholy. Life goes on, and it's my duty to show the Spirit in it. I really, really can't wait for finals and graduation to be over. School seems to be unraveling at the seams, yet the homework load is still oppressive. Now more than ever, I don't have the urge to do it. It pains me to admit it, but I did actually leave some assignments from Monday till the VERY last minute--and trust me, it showed. Why do I do that? Good question. My inborn procrastination, in my opinion my very worst fault, rears its ugly head again. I can't imagine becoming a respectable member of society with the almost fearful aversion I have to actually getting work done. Why, oh why, oh why? *Sigh*

How the Republican Party can win in 2008

Common knowledge has it that this year's elections, representative and presidential, are for the most part an easy win for the Democrats. This, presumably, you already know; if for no other reason than having read my earlier post, "Can the Dems Fumble the Ball?" So, here's a point-by-point analysis of the GOP's chances, and what it can do to win.

1) The Economy: I was perversely satisfied when polls showed that most voters believe the economy is the most important issue facing them this election, rather than what I would have expected: the war. The economy is taking a definite down-turn, and that's bad for all of us. This is an advantage for the liberals because a bad economic situation makes people yearn for New Deal-like government intervention. However, the refund-thing-check that many taxpayers will be getting this year is a good thing: it's putting more money back in the pocket of the consumer, rather than the government. This is a sure-fire, old-fashioned way to stimulate the economy, and will probably be popular. So, my analysis is that this issue could go either way, but still leans left. What that means is that voters who think the economy is the greatest concern will probably go Democratic.

2) The War: It was on everyone's minds in 2006, and the liberal media forecasted that it would be the deciding factor in 2008. That doesn't look like it will happen, but it's certainly a nearly-top priority. Many Americans see our presence in the Middle East as a greedy intrusion, only to safeguard our oil. Frankly, they might be right about the oil part. I mean, think about it. Darfur and North Korea and other places have more or equally tyrannical governments than Iraq or Afghanistan. However, we leave them pretty much alone. Why? Because, in my opinion, they don't have oil. Black gold. I don't see much wrong with this actually. We secured a needed resource and liberated two peoples in the process. I don't think that's a problem. It's as defensible as a nation invading its' corrupt, evil food-producing neighbor with two motives in mind, (1) liberate the people, and (2) safeguard our access to a vital resource. Which brings me back to my central view on the war: we can't lose, we can't leave, so we might as well win. Losing would end America as a world power. Leaving would abandon Iraq to the dogs--the very tyrants who had power before we invaded. Winning, however, would bring one more functioning democracy into the world, give us another ally in the middle east, and make quite certain that our oil supplies are not impeded. This, I think, should be clear to most people--even the voting ones--and thus although at first glance it seems like a cert for the Democrats, I think that we can convince voters of this view. Conclusion: This issue tends Right.

(3) Health Care: HillaryCare, the debacle that sounded the end of President Clinton's honeymoon back in 1994, has been resurrected by Hillary Clinton as one of her campaign promises. What is HillaryCare? Quite simply, it's a complete socialization of the health care system, making it a government program instead of a private sector enterprise. At first glance, that seems ideal. Something about health-care-for-profit does tickles a deep, Robin Hood bone in me, but I have to suppress it. The government would ruin health care like it has ruined public education, and like every other wealthy, industrialized nation has ruined health care. Our health care system is the best in the world, and getting better. Canada, for example, instituted socialized health care and now many citizens are calling for the old system. I won't go into it here, but for an in-depth analysis of the subject, I suggest David Gratzer's "The Cure." His conclusions are interesting, not necessarily a good way, but his data on socialized health care is eye-opening. Not wanting to be left of the band-wagon, Mr. Originality Barack Obama has also started trumpeting a version of socialized health care. However, if the issue gets accurate reporting, the Right has the advantage: if socialized health care gets the stigma it deserves, this issue is a cert for the Right. Conclusion: Right-Leaning.

4) Abortion & Euthanasia: The country has mixed messages about Abortion: polls indicate that a majority of Americans strongly support Roe, but are in favor of restricting Abortion. This is an interesting side-effect of the deification of Roe, and an interesting cultural phenomenon. The partial-birth abortion debate turned the country right-ward on Abortion, and that trend continues. Informed-consent laws, a dearth of government funding for abortions, and a general skittishness about the whole issue have turned the tide against the so-called "Pro-Choice Majority." Re-reading Ponnurru's "Party of Death," I'm confident that Abortion will one day be seen as a national nightmare--on the scale of slavery. Euthanasia, brought into the headlines with the Terri Schiavo debacle, is another issue the Democrats have embraced. Ponnurru reports that a Democratic operative reported, in the wake of the controversy, that "We can't just be the party of death all the time." Which brings me to my conclusion: the Republicans can win this year. We can win by exploiting these issues, and by pulling no punches on anything.

In conclusion, liberals make up a smaller portion of the electorate than conservatives. Hypothetically, that means that they must work harder every election. Forty-five years ago, this was opposite. What changed? The Democrats became the party of death. Although the tide is against us this election year in many ways, we can win.

The 100th Post!! Hurray!

Well, although the media coverage of this event has been a little less than expected, Mosings on Life has reached an important milestone: the 100th post. Mind you, that's not as good as the 200th, so we'll keep going. ;) It's been about ten months since this blog was founded, and I think I've managed to shed some light on the political scene; or at least make it comprehensible to the layman. My mission was always to make current and political events easy to understand and fun, and I hope I've succeeded.

Speaking of political events, the race for the nominations on either party has reached that rather annoying stage of tedium that makes it boring. Both parties have all but selected their nominee: they must now meet the voters. I'll admit, an McCain vs. Obama showdown was NOT what I expected at the beginning of the race. In fact, I don't think anyone expected it. However, now we have it.

You may wonder why I'm so quick to dismiss Clinton. Some people, myself included on several occasions, have considered her to be locked in for the nomination at various points during the campaign. However, Obama's EIGHT STRAIGHT wins since Super Tuesday have made me eat my words. I make this prediction cautiously, because it is entirely possible that the Clintonator could win either Ohio or Texas, thus giving a shot of life to her ailing campaign, but I seriously doubt it. Since McCain, who is, let's face it, an improbably vanity candidate on an improbable vanity run. I really have NO IDEA how he came to be the nominee. NONE AT ALL. He's completely unappealing. And since he has NO chance against the Obama machine, you better start reconciling yourselves to Barack Hussein Obama, the 43rd President of these United States. Oh, boy.

What else? I think my upcoming research paper deserves a little space. My topic, at the moment, is the Athenian democracy/republic and specifically its' influence on our republic/democracy. To that end, I have attained quite a few rather thick books on the subject, most on a trip our class took to the McIntyre Library on the UW-Eau Claire campus. For the record, that place was AWESOME. Anywhere with books is good for me, but five floors of them? Heaven on earth. What else? I failed my driving test, unfortunately, but I've rescheduled. I made several stupid mistakes, the chief one being (in my view) taking the test somewhere where I had not only NOT driven before, but never BEEN before. Needless to say, I learned my lesson. I rescheduled in Menomonie, where I have not only driven but where I took my Driver's Ed class instruction and behind-the-wheel.

I had an interesting experience while on an early fact-finding mission on the internet, with a quote about Democracy. I give it to you here as it is most generally seen:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapse over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the worlds greatest civilization has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence:

*From bondage to spiritual faith

*from spiritual faith to great courage

*from courage to liberty

*from liberty to abundance

*from abundance to selfishness

*from selfishness to complacency

*from complacency to apathy

*from apathy to dependency

*from dependency back again to bondage."

I won't even begin to tell you how much trouble this quote has given me, and I still don't know where it came from. It was attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, a Scottish nobleman and historian, who said it (reportedly) shortly after the American War for Independence. This seems to be disproved by many scholarly sources, including a Q & A session at Edinburgh University, where Tytler was a professor. The quote, however, remains unexplained, but dates back to the fifties at least, when an obscure person named, "R.F.K." wrote in to the New York Times Book Review asking about its origins. They were unable to answer, and neither am I. But it's a great quote, don't you think?

Iowa Caucus Results

Although it appears that no one reads this blog anymore, I decided to post the results anyway.

Republicans:

With 25 percent of the results in, Huckabee was the clear winner, with 35 percent. Romney was second, with only 24 percent. Thompson placed third with 14 percent, and McCain ran fourth with 12 percent.

My Take:

This is almost unbelievable good for Huckabee. He went from the "top of the second tier" as I characterized it earlier in the campaign to running first in many polls. And now, he's won Iowa. I'm wondering if he can keep it up through New Hampshire and the other early primaries.

Obviously not so good for Romney. To lose by that much to Huckabee is certainly rather embarrassing, but he can recover and I can see him winning New Hampshire.

Third is good for Thompson, it will give him much-needed momentum.

Fourth for McCain is disappointing. Many analysts thought he would take third. Fred Thompson obviously still has the fire to beat him.

The Democrats:

Barack Obama took the Iowa Democratic Caucus, with 34 percent. Clinton and Edwards are in a dead heat for second, each with 32 percent.

My take:

This is good, but not unexpected news for Obama. He's been polling ahead of Hillary in Iowa for a while now, and I think he can keep up the momentum.

Bad, but also not unexpected for Hillary. She still has a lot of campaigning oomph and better connections than Obama.

This is very good for Edwards. If he places second, which Bob Novak predicted, it would be phenomenal and probably vice-president material. He's too annoying to beat Obama, however.

My predictions: McCain, who finished disapointingly in Iowa, has been campaigning hard in New Hampshire and is currently ahead according to the latest RCP poll. He swept the New Hampshire newspaper endorsements, and has rocketed up in the polls because of it. Romney is biting at his heels, with Giuliani, Huckabee, and Paul in a tight race for third. Thompson is barely above the margin of error. He's hoping his Iowa momentum will last him until South Carolina.

The Democrats are more widely spaced in New Hampshire, with Clinton ahead by a decent margin, and Edwards ten points behind Obama. If Obama can manage a win in NH, he will be unstoppable, but if Clinton wins, they will be neck-and-neck going into Michigan. I haven't seen numbers, but I tend to think Michigan would favor Obama. Edwards, although he finished well in Iowa, is not really a contender in my view. He's probably going for VP again.

My Predictions for the Nominee: Democrats: Easy. Obama. Barring anything unforeseen, his defeat of Clinton in Iowa was a major upset, even if most people saw it coming. It's possible he'd go for Hillary for his VP, but I think Edwards is a more likely choice. In the event that Hillary gets the nomination, I think she might get Richardson. He has the credentials of Biden without being old. Plus he's Hispanic.

Republicans: This is harder to call. I can see it going to Romney, Huckabee, McCain, and even Thompson at a stretch. My dream P/VP match would be Thompson-Huckabee, but Huckabee-Thompson might actually happen. Romney-McCain would be a nightmare.

Well, there you are! Hope you enjoyed it.

The Candidates: Where are they now?

It's been several weeks since my last post, and several months since I really went into detail about the Presidential candidates. I deeply apologize.

The election, of course, is closer than ever, and in that time period, the campaigns have really got off the ground.

So, let's begin.

THE DEMOCRATS
They are heavily favored, but one scandal could drag them all down.

HILLARY CLINTON
She continues to lead in the polls, with a fairly substantial margin over B. Obama. So far, her campaigning has been relatively flawless, as one would suspect. Especially since she's been planning it for decades.

BARACK OBAMA
He is still a force to be reckoned with, and I can easily see the nomination going to him. He's "inexperienced," but compared to Hillary's record, that's definitely a good thing. Especially if he's running as an outsider; someone who says he wants to turn Washington upside down.

JOHN EDWARDS
He's a long-shot, but he's played all his cards in Iowa, and that could get him almost onto the same level as Obama and Clinton. Even more than Obama, he's running a populist campaign. He was on the cover of Esquire, for crying out loud. Honestly, though, for an unprincipled former trial lawyer, Edwards has made it far. Too far. I almost hope he'll get the VP ticket again--he lost his own state in 2004.

THE OTHER DEMOCRATS
No one really stands out, but I think that's because the Democratic Party has two dream candidates in Obama and Clinton, and a third one for the racist bigots "yellow dog" 'crats who won't vote for the other two--Edwards. Biden continues his straight talk, but it's getting him nowhere fast. The others: zilch.

THE REPUBLICANS
Even though they are a long-shot for the presidency, we have a reasonably strong field, with something for just about everybody.

RUDY GIULIANI
...Is fighting for his life in the polls. Fred Thompson, who has only JUST started campaigning, is already close to him in the polls, and that combined with his liberal views makes me very doubtful of his chances.

JOHN MCCAIN
Is dead. Not literally. He'll probably still get about six or seven votes; all old Texan men with big belt buckles.

MITT ROMNEY
It's hard to categorize Romney. He flip-flopped on Abortion, and he has a liberal spending record, but who knows? He's running third in the polls and leading a flawless campaign. Still though, he seems lackluster.

FRED THOMPSON
He finally announced his candidacy, and none too soon. He'll have to play a strong game, especially as he is seen as an establishmentarian candidate. Not a good thing for a candidate campaigning as an outsider. He was a Washington lobbyist too, which is a yellow card. I think he has wide appeal, and he's probably my pick for nominee.

MIKE HUCKABEE
Has made a serious play, and is now in the top of the second tier, or the bottom of the first tier, and upwardly mobile. A bass-guitar-playing former Baptist minister from Arkansas? Every liberal's worst fear. He's even slime and mildly photogenic. Go Mike!

THE OTHER REPUBLICANS
Are preeety sad. We'll see though.

Sorry for all the time I've been gone. School's started and put me in a bit of a time-bind. I'm going to try to be more regular in the future. Believe me, I have lots of ideas.