Dear Editor

(Imagine my delight, when I discovered yesterday that the NY Times had some advice for Republican/conservative voters. Quotes from article in italics and block quoted. WC)


Dear NY Times Editor,
Thank you so much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to do an in-depth analysis on which Republican candidate is best suited to become the President of the United States and for whom I (we) should vote.

We have strong disagreements with all the Republicans running for president. The leading candidates have no plan for getting American troops out of Iraq. They are too wedded to discredited economic theories and unwilling even now to break with the legacy of President Bush. We disagree with them strongly on what makes a good Supreme Court justice.

Still, there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field.

Being the backward, bible-thumping, cousin-marrying, gun-toting, truck-driving, beer- drinking, country-music-listening, grade school-educated moron that I am, I truly appreciate your going through the pain of the selection process for me (us).

After all, there are only twenty four hours in the day and formulating vast right wing conspiracies take up a good portion of that, with precious little left for bible study and refining effective approaches to perpetrating hate crimes. So, as you can see, I don’t have the time to contemplate anything as inconsequential as who might lead the free world for the next four years.

To say that I am deeply touched by your concern for my political welfare doesn’t begin to describe my feelings about your ever-so-helpful article (endorsement) about/of Senator John McCain.

And what a candidate you have selected for me (us)! There is no Republican on Earth more like Hillary Clinton than Citizen McCain. His uncanny ability to co-opt liberal causes and betray his party and principles of same are unparallelled in the civilized world.

But Mr. McCain took a stand, just as he did in recognizing the threat of global warming early. He has been a staunch advocate of campaign finance reform, working with Senator Russ Feingold, among the most liberal of Democrats, on groundbreaking legislation, just as he worked with Senator Edward Kennedy on immigration reform.

Like Mrs. Clinton, Senator McCain has truly mastered the skill of talking out of both sides of his mouth whilst never moving his lips.

We have shuddered at Mr. McCain’s occasional, tactical pander to the right because he has demonstrated that he has the character to stand on principle. He was an early advocate for battling global warming and risked his presidential bid to uphold fundamental American values in the immigration debate. A genuine war hero among Republicans who proclaim their zeal to be commander in chief, Mr. McCain argues passionately that a country’s treatment of prisoners in the worst of times says a great deal about its character. …

Mr. McCain was one of the first prominent Republicans to point out how badly the war in Iraq was being managed. We wish he could now see as clearly past the temporary victories produced by Mr. Bush’s unsustainable escalation, which have not led to any change in Iraq’s murderous political calculus. At the least, he owes Americans a real idea of how he would win this war, which he says he can do.

For all I know, he is actually a marionette getting his jollies by having your hand up his ass. Which could explain that silly, goofy grin he often wears, as well as his Howdy Doody voice

You make a fine case for endorsing the Senator who never met a liberal cause he didn’t like and a very convincing argument to vote for him – And iff’in I was a Democrat, I certainly would.

Still, I do appreciate that a newspaper with the stature of The New York Times, would have my back in terms of my electorate health and I will check back later to see who you might be endorsing for the upcoming election of the local dogcatcher and the Hunkiest Garbage Man Contest.

It’s nice to know that a main stream publication can be fair and objective in its recommendations to one and all.

Sincerely,
Writer Chick – who apparently fell off the turnip truck yesterday.

If you want to read the article, you can find it here.

Update:

To read a little about McCain’s legendary temperment check this out.

Ah, the Primaries – Coming to a Town Near You

Okay, this post won’t mean much to you if you don’t reside in California – but for those of you who do, I thought I’d give you my take on what’s on the ballot for we who live in the land of nuts and twigs. 😉

I don’t know about you guys but I tend to be pretty suspicious of the propositions they place on the ballot, particularly when there are other more important things like picking candidates. But this year’s props are particularly smelly to me and I just had to weigh in on them.

In a nutshell I am voting no on all of them. The particulars below:

Proposition S
Is essentially a scam to reinstate a previous illegal tax hike from 2003, which was thrown out by the Supreme court. Right now the tax does not exist. If you vote yes, you will enact the tax. They present it as though it is a tax cut but what that really means is that they are deciding to add only $9 onto your telephone bill rather than $10. Oh and as an added bonus, this prop will also tax internet use. Yay!

Proposition 91
It attempts to make a new law of one that already exists and protects our transportation funding taxes. There is probably some loophole that enables the policitians to get their hands on it – so vote no.

Proposition 92
It is essentially locking California into committed spending with no way to pay for it and will require a tax hike of some sort to fund it. It also provides more funding to public colleges so that college students pay less for courses, which mean our taxes are paying the part they aren’t paying. Not to mention the fact that they will create a new formula which will require a new infrastructure to administer it. Which of course means somebody has to pay for it and it will be you and me, make no mistake.

Proposition 93

This is another scam dressed in what appears to be restricting career politicians from holding office for years and years. It offers a max of 12 years of service, HOWEVER, that 12 years doesn’t include time served. So, let’s say politician X has already served for 12 years, enacting this law would enable him to serve an ADDITIONAL 12 years. You see, it’s a scam to enable termed out politicians more time on the public payroll. And they thought we weren’t paying attention. Tisk, tisk.

Propositions 94, 95, 96 & 97

On the face of it, these seem like good ideas. I mean what better way to asuage our white guilt than to let the Indian tribes increase their revenues, right? And all that revenue means more revenue for the state in the form of taxes, right? Not really. First of all, it cherry picks only 4 tribes – the largest and most prosperous – the other tribes are left out in the cold on these. Also, the revenue projections are greatly inflated and there are loopholes in the language that would allow these particular tribes to get out of paying much of this supposed revenue for the state.

As to a candidate?????

I have to honestly say, I’ve yet to really pick a candidate. There are a couple I am leaning toward but I’m still not decided. For me, so far, there is no clear choice. Which doesn’t thrill me, but there you have it. So, for now, Writer Chick endorses no particular candidate. Shocked? Me too.

Boo Hoo, Hillary

Okay, so Hillary had a great photo op today and managed to get her eyes to well up enough to fool people into believing she might actually be crying. Right, and I just won a million bucks on Deal or No Deal. If she was feeling any emotion, I’m sure it was sourced more in the fact that her lead over Obama has evaporated. And apparently, Bill who has been a notorious brilliant campaigner isn’t doing her any favors either – word has it he is speaking to half empty meeting halls and some people even snuck out halfway through his speech. Maybe Hillary is just too brilliant, eh Bill?

Could it possibly be that Obama is right and it really is time for a change? Is it possible that people are finally through with the Clintons? I dare not let myself get too excited about that prospect, since the Clintons are notorious for comebacks and their opponents and detractors often end up ill, injured, disappeared and in some cases, dead. I surely hope Mr. Obama has a good security detail – you can never be too careful.

But whatever happens, I’m pretty sure Hillary is starting to feel a little desperate, since this guy is supporting her. One of the worst mayors ever. A guy who though he was able to take advantage of many affirmative action programs failed the bar the first four times he took it. Oh yeah, and then there was that extramarital affair with the Telemundo reporter. Funnily enough, the reporter was demoted and yet the Mayor received not even a formal rebuke from the state congress.

Will the tears and emotion work? I dunno, I seem to recall an emotional outburst regarding the vast right wing conspiracy some years back. And then there was all that betrayal and shit she felt when Bill cheated on her – so maybe just maybe this emotional tactic will work for her for a little while. But the thing about Hillary which is really her downfall is that she cannot maintain this sort of thing for any amount of time. All it will take is for her to beat Obama in some primary. Then she’ll be the bullet-proof, teflon-coated, come-back-kid. Her taste for blood will return and the shit will start to fly once again. Quote: Now the fun part starts. (Hillary Clinton) So, are we having fun yet, Hillary?
No, my friends, we can’t count her out yet. And I think Mr. Obama still has a tough road ahead of him because he is tangling with one resourceful, manipulative and relentless woman who likely won’t quit until they carry her away in an ambulance and even then it’s doubtful.

Boo hoo, Hillary. Nice try. Got anything a little more convincing?

WC

Caucus Schmaucus

While I know that the media is salivating because of the Iowa Caucus results, methinks they celebrate too early. What is the deal with Iowa, anyway? I mean, why on Earth does anyone put so much stock in this silliness? While it delights me that Hillary came in third, I am by no means confident that it means she won’t end up as the Democrat candidate. In fact, I’d bet the ranch on it, if I had one.

But this weird idea that Iowa is somehow representative of the rest of the country, that it is a microcosm of America is just wrong. Its population is approximately 2.9 million people, less than a third of the population of Los Angeles. The city. You know? It is 94% white, of those only about 3% hispanic and 2.5% black and primarily agricultural. How does that equate to being representive of the whole country? Answer: it doesn’t.

From the LA Times: If history is any guide, only about 200,000 of Iowa’s 3 million residents — or about half the population of Long Beach — will actually turn out for today’s caucuses. Will this handful of voters really decide the winner of the 2008 presidential race, as the media hype and furious campaigning from contenders in both parties seem to indicate? Of course not, though there’s a chance they could help determine the losers.

So, how good have they been at picking/prediction our next Commander in Chief? Since 1972, only once has a winner gone on to the presidency – George W. Bush in 2000. Jimmy Carter’s presidential victory in 1976 is said not to count because though he was the top Dem finisher in Iowa, more voters chose the “uncommitted” category (so, he won because the uncommitteds voted for him? I confused) therefore there was no clear Democratic winner that year. In 1988 George H.W. Bush, who went on to be the 41st president, finished behind Bob Dole and Pat Robertson. In 1980, George H.W. Bush beat out Ronald Reagan in Iowa Republican caucuses, but ended up as Reagan’s vice president. In 1992 Bill Clinton only got 2.8% of the Democratic Iowa vote, losing to Tom Harkin of Iowa and behind Paul Tsongas.

So, I’d have to say based on those statistics, they ain’t batting a thousand. In fact, based on my math it looks like they get it right about 3% of the time. Now, tell me again, why they are popping champaign corks and going wild all over the place?

The fact is, if you want a caucus such as the one held in Iowa to really measure anything, to really mean anything – it would have to be held in a state perhaps just a little bit bigger. Say, I don’t like…California, New York, Florida, Ohio…you know a place that actually has a population and a cross section of same. I’m loathe to use the D word but how does a small bunch of white farmer dudes have the pulse on the nation?

Frankly, I think the caucus tradition as it is practiced today is utterly worthless. It simply sets up certain geographical locations to get a buttload of money and tourism every four years and feel important.

And unfortunately, it’s not likely to change – it seems a pretty sure bet that Iowa won’t be letting go of that gravy train any time soon. So every four years we’ll be subjected to this false indicator of American politics.

Like so many others, it only serves to excite the media and rarely influences the rest of us.

Word of advice to the bass player and the rock star – your fifteen minutes may be up sooner than you think.

WC

If you want to know a little bit about the history of the caucus, read this.

We, the People…

How many of you out there has read the Constitution? I have, but to be honest it’s a bit of a blur and I didn’t retain much understanding of it – if I ever had any to begin with. The language is archaic and far from modern day nomeclature. Yet, it the foundation upon which our country is built.

There are those out there who like to think of the Constitution as a ‘living document’ which is code for ‘I can change it to suit my current political ambitions’ and there are endless interpretations of the documents. There are lawyers, judges and others who specialize in it – and every Tom, Dick & Harry – or every Tanya, Diane & Henrietta love to spout off about their Constitutional Rights.

Yet, how many of you really know what your Constitutional Rights are? I don’t mean what the likes of Al Sharpton or Jerry Falwell may spout, I mean straight from the source?

The truth is, that most Americans if quizzed on the Constitution would likely fail that quiz even if they were looking at the document during the test. We don’t really know what’s in it or what it means.

My friend Dave Kluge had this and many other realizations one day while watching a Presidential debate. Each debater was citing the Constitution and yet were at odds with each other in what they were saying. Dave found this confusing and it made him stop to wonder if people, generally really understood the Constitution and what the Framers intended.

Long story short, he started to research the document and continued to make some very interesting discoveries. His research ulitmately turned into a book The People’s Guide to the United States Constitution.

It’s very exciting to know any author who has had their book published, especially if you’re an author yourself – but I was excited about this book for many more reasons than that. I realized that it was something I wanted to know about, to learn about and ultimately understand. So, I happily attended his book signing and bought my very own copy – which the author was happy to sign.

The book is clear, concise, very reader friendly and informative.

A lot of us out here in blogland bandy about our political views and cite the Constitution, yet I wonder how well we know it. I’m going to know it a lot better once I finish this great book. Check it out. You may find it’s something you just have to have too.

WC

Meet Your Candidates!

I guess you could say that election 2008 is in full swing now. At least, that’s what the media seems to think. Yawn. I don’t know about you, but I can’t really get excited about any of them, regardless of race, creed, political persuasion, dietary needs or style sense.

Nonetheless, let me introduce them:

Barak, jr. senator from Illinois

How this fellow has gotten into the front runner section, I’ll never know. He is, I believe, a first time senator, inexperienced and makes some statements don’t make a whole lotta sense to me. And while it may be cool to see the first black president (though Bill Clinton seems to think that’s him) I think there might have been better choices. Still, he’s good looking, charming and the ladies seem to dig him. Will it be enough?

McCain bitter, indecisive senator from Arizona:

Embittered and resentful loser of the 2000 run for president – a man who espouse conservative values when it’s convenient but whose voting record shows an inclination toward whininess and socialism. His love-hate relationship with the president, his party and his constituents makes him a volatile choice in anyone’s book. Though I respect the fact that he is a war hero who survived unimaginable indignities during the Vietnam war, he may have too many ocd tendencies to be put in charge of things like bombs and budgets.

John Edwards, senator from S. Carolina

While the man has great hair (if you don’t believe me, just ask him) and some may find him cute in a leave it to beaver sort of way – the guy doesn’t seem to understand that suing people who don’t agree with you is not the way to go when it comes to national politics. He is a dichotomy at best and an idiot at worst, who uses cliche slogans to get his message across.

Rudy Guliani, former Mayor of New York, named Mayor of America by some magazine whose name I forget

I have to admit I like Rudy. He seems like a nice enough guy, has a fair amount of personal scandal in his past and handled what happened to his city on Sept 11th as well as I think anyone could have. But he’s awfully liberal for a conservative and will likely just confuse the voters with his widely diverse positions.

Hillary Clinton, senator from New York, former First Lady

Her ability to change positions on issues and to speak out of both sides of her mouth are her strong suits. Certainly the most polarizing of the ‘candidates’ this woman seems to elicit strong reactions – you love her or hate her but there seems to be no in-between. How or why the people of New York decided to elect her to represent them in the Senate and how or why anyone would think she has any qualifications to run a country is beyond me, but apparently some people think her proximity to Bill Clinton is enough. Like Barak, it would be a milestone in American politics to see our first woman president, but I can think of several other women who have more experience, knowledge, and ability to lead than this woman.

Other candidates:

Fred Thompson – he’s an actor, he’s a senator, he’s an actor, he’s a private citizen. What is he? And why does anyone think this guy would make a good president? And how on earth can they compare him to Ronald Regan? It’s all beyond me. He is beyond boring and couldn’t be bothered to attend the debate, opting instead to appear on a late night talk show to announce. So, I say, no picture for him.

Mitt Romney – governor of Massachusetts. Good looking, a bit indecisive and apparently the fact that he is a Mormon worries folks that we may end up with multiple first ladies. Interestingly enough, no one worries about Barak being a Muslim and his insistence on swearing in on the Koran. Go figure.

Dennis Cucinich – still trying to figure out what he is – I think he is in Congress, though I can’t imagine why. But I like a little fruit every now and then, so why not?

Joe Biden – mean Joe. Even when he smiles he looks like he wants to slug you.

Ron Paul – more froot loops anyone? This dude just seems pissed off and condescending to everyone and everything. Seems like he just wants to hermetically seal off the borders, forget that there is a whole big world out there and have us all stick our heads up our collective butts.

Tom Tancredo – Congressman from Colorado? Intelligent and passionate about his one issue, but one all-consuming issue ain’t gonna fly.

Finally….Algore – former Vice President, former loser of at least two presidential elections and perhaps still the senator from Tennessee.

While he insists he isn’t running, the rumbling and rumors continue to fly. Apparently those in the Dem party who don’t like Hillary want him. Since he is now a celebrity, a film maker and the green God of the universe he may indeed feel that the presidency is beneath him. Time will only tell.

So there you have it, the candidates as we know them. I may have overlooked a couple but if I have it’s only because they haven’t really hit anybody’s radar. To say I am disappointed in our apparent choices puts it mildly – I haven’t seen a such a large group of yawn-meisters in quite a while. In my mind, our only hope is that some dark horse, independent will appear out of the blue and save us from this sorry lot of wannabes and bring the country to a new era of American politics.

So…what do you think?

WC

A Candidate Abreast?

This morning, the host and hostess on the radio station I listen to were chatting up the ‘cleavage incident’ involving Hilary and the Senate floor. She was pro, he was con. No suprise there.

He made the argument that someone running for President should show more decorum and she accused him of objectifying her because she was a woman. Typical he said, she said argument – at best a draw and really does nothing for the debate. Each were too defensive about their view to really get anything out of it. Yawn.

I didn’t have time to check it out before I went to work, so when I got home – I did a search and there it was (the above picture). Now, call me crazy, but I can barely make out whether or not the woman even has enough cleavage to be making such a big whoopty doo about – the picture isn’t good quality and the outfit didn’t exactly advertise the goods, as they say – but so what? Hilary has breasts. Are we all shocked?

Apparently we are. At least it’s being talked about a lot and for the life of me I can’t figure out why. Was it tacky? Maybe, I mean if Teddy Kennedy or John Kerry showed that much chest on the Senate floor while discussing an important issue – it would seem inappropriate to me. Besides that, it’s just too much information. If they were wearing tight, form-fitting slacks I’d find that a little icky too.

I’m not really interested in the sexuality of any legislator. I don’t want to know what kind of underwear they put on in the morning, what their cup size is, or what condom they prefer. You know why? Because it’s private and it falls into the category of their private life. I don’t want to know. I’m more interested in what they are voting for on the Hill than in what they are wearing or not wearing on the Hill.

Yet, the media has gone hog-wild over the fact that Hilary has cleavage and she dared to show it. Was it a ploy on her part? Trying to attract male supporters? I know that actresses and singers go that route – do political candidates? Should they? Is it tacky or no big deal? Personally, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was a tactical move on her part, maybe she was testing the waters. Maybe she felt it would make her seem more youthful, more real, more feminine – and maybe it does. But for me, I’m thinking she should stick to the proper attire that all the other law makers stick with. While it may not be exciting, it is certainly less distracting.

Frankly, I want to know what’s on a candidate’s mind, not what’s under their clothes. I’m not interested in dating them, you know? I’m interested in what they would do in a leadership position – not ah…er…well, any other position.

So my advice to Hilary is put it back where it was. Use your mind and your passion to guide you in your campaign – we all know you’re a woman, no need to prove it.

And shame on the media for acting like it was real news. It was salacious and pretty much crying wolf – on a slow news day you may want to actually look for something good or positive to report – I’m pretty sure we’d rather know about that, than how much giggle a presidential candidate has and any opinions regarding same.

So…what do you think?

WC

Why Hillary Won’t Get My Vote

The 08 elections aren’t too far off and the campaigning will really wind up once Labor Day weekend hits, so I’ve been thinking politics lately. Not the day to day stuff, sometimes I can’t keep up and frankly, sometimes, it’s just too much. But I do like speculate and look at the landscape sometimes.

I’ve made no secret that I’m not a Hillary fan and have gotten in my cracks about her with the occasional post – but this time I want to spell out why I feel as I do. Don’t worry, it won’t be too political. And really some of my reasons may surprise.

The reasons (incomplete and in no particular order) why Hillary won’t get my vote:

1. Mean eyes. It’s one of those things that can’t be covered up with makeup or false smiles, photo lenses or filters. Even when she smiles, her eyes don’t. I could never trust someone who had mean eyes.

2. Hillary-care. A behind-closed-doors health plan with the 1st Lady as its architecht? It was so bad, apparently, that even her cronies couldn’t vote for it. And it was the first attempt (of thousands) on her part to be the President of the United States without having been elected. A blatant attempt to use her husband’s power to serve her own ends.

3. No sense of humor. Even when she tries to make a joke it’s forced and usually denigrates someone. People who cannot laugh at themselves have serious problems in my estimation. Too much ego to ever have any humility and probably feels they are incapable of making a mistake.

4. Doesn’t believe in anything (no real position on any issue). Aside from (obviously) wanting to run the free world, the woman is without purpose and position. Like her husband, her position on issues change with each new audience and demographic. Everything is surveyed and polled in order to determine what position should be taken. This means there is an utter lack of conviction in anything she says. She is apparently for everything and against everything equally.

5. She cheated. A resident of Arkansas one day, then after getting a multi-million dollar advance on a tell-all book (which apparently didn’t tell all), a purchase of a multimillion dollar home and voila, she was a New Yorker. So she could run for a Senate seat that was vacating. How does that classify her as representative of the people of New York?

6. She lied. About many things – but in particular, when she ran for re-election of above mentioned Senate seat, she said she would serve her full term. That she had no intention of seeking any other office during her term as Senator. Yet, somehow she is considered the front-runner for the Democrat party. Eh? I could spend a lot of time and space on this point, but I’d need a whole blog to do so and there are others out there who do it much better than I, so I’ll leave it at that.

7. The Two-fer. During Bill Clinton’s campaign, there were countless interviews, wherein they discussed their ‘co-presidency’ and how America would be getting two-for-the-price-of-one. In my mind, junk is still junk, no matter what you paid for it.

8. The Vast Rightwing Conspiracy. While I’ve no doubt that there are millions of conspiracies where politicians are concerned, this was merely a well-orchestrated ploy to take the heat off of her and Bill during the whole Monica-gate, perjury-gate, impeachment-gate fiasco. And the general incompetency of the Clinton presidency. Yet another attempt to blame others for a mess wholly and completely created by them.

9. Righteous Indignation. First of all, few people can carry this off and those who can, use it sparingly. That aside, this woman has no moral highground (at least as far as I could ever see, read or find out about) from which to pontificate. She criticizes the president for going to war, yet she voted to go to war (as did 98 out of 100 fellow Senators) then changes it up by saying he isn’t executing it wrongly. This, from a woman who has no military background whatsoever and whose husband did all he could to dismantle same. And whose largest accomplishment with the Department of Defense was to enact the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. Exactly, what knowledge, experience, understanding and expertise is she employing in making such a declaration?

10. She cares about no one. I dare anyone out there to find any truly selfless or caring act on her part. Without there being a ulterior motive for the action. And I mean acts not words. Words mean nothing if they aren’t backed up by actions.

11. Makes no difference. She has virtually made no difference or improvement in conditions in this country during her Senatorship. While it’s true that that could be said about many politicians – I’m talking about someone who wants to run the free world. Hell, even Teddy Kennedy tries to do something and authors bills that at least somehow agree with his rhetoric. If you don’t believe me, look it up. Look up how many bills she has actually authored. How many solutions she has actually tried or succeeded in implementing of her own origination.

12. No imagination or vision. We all know she wants to be the next President, but why?What vision does she have for the future of the country? What imagination has she ever demonstrated beyond envisioning herself in the Oval Office? In my mind, the great ones (and even some of the not so great ones) all had a vision. Ronald Regan envisioned a shining city on the hill, for example. What is her vision? Free healthcare for everybody? Nothing’s free, someone will have to pay for it. Don’t you think it’s going to be you and me? No involvement in Iraq and withdrawal of the troops? Is that a vision or a catastrophe waiting to happen?

13. No skill. Aside from talking a pretty good game and having lots of black pantsuits what skill does she bring to anything? She’s already said she isn’t Suzie Homemaker, she doesn’t cook, doesn’t seem to have any interest in children, education, the environment, etc. She just wants everything to be free for everybody except for those who have to pay for it. She hasn’t worked a job since the Rose Law Firm about 20 years ago – she and Bill have been living off the taxpayer for decades. She can’t dance, tell a joke decently or put people at ease. She can’t write, both her books were written by ghostwriters. She can’t even do her own hair and makeup (don’t believe me? look at some early pictures of Hillary).

14. Has no self-respect. While the woman has an ego bigger than the great outdoors, the woman has no respect for herself. She has remained married to a man who has continuously, openly and publically cheated on her. Why? You have to ask yourself what self-respecting individual would remain married to a cheating, lying, unrepentent spouse? The answer – power. She is willing to give up her integrity and self respect for power. To me, not a good reason and one which will cause heartache to the nth degree.

Okay, those are my reasons why I would never vote for Hillary and I suppose an explanation of sorts of why I find her nauseating. Nope, she’ll never get my vote. Will she get yours?

WC

Update:

Apparently, someone has pasted this post into a myspace page where Hillary Clinton supporters go. As flattering as that is in a way, if anyone is using my content, without my consent, I insist it be removed. Several bloggers have linked to this post, properly, and I have no problem with that – but I do have a problem with bloggers who feel they’ve a right to go sneaky and underhanded and to use my content for their own purposes. If you have any information regarding has done this, please contact me.

Thanks,

WC

Zelda for President!

 

I don’t know about you but I’ve been looking over the candidate lists of likely runners for the White House in 2008 and I’m simply not impressed.

It seems with the Democrats that it’s going to come down to Hillary and Barak. Of course, there are the usual second string of snoozers, Kerry, Dodd, Edwards, Algore, Biden and so on. The ones that just have to keep trying and never seem to get there – usually because they tend to eat both of their feet at the same time.

Not really sure what’s up with the Republicans – there is no clear front runner. McCain is the Republican version of Gore, always running and never winning and a sore loser. Rudy is too middle of the road. Tancredo is interesting but probably won’t get enough traction because of his immigration stance. Pataki ain’t nothing to write home about. The two who strike me as interesting are Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrinch. Fred because he has that easy going southern man thing going and seems to be a true conservative. Newt because, well he’s Newt. Certainly as polarizing as Hillary and the idea of the two of them duking it out sends me into absolute glee.

That being said – it bores me. I want a real candidate, just once in my lifetime. Not a politician, not spinmeister, no a liar or a dancer or a campaigner – but somebody real. Know what I mean?

Therefore, I have a new candidate to offer. Sure, she doesn’t have a chance in Hell but this is my blog and it’s filled with all my other fantasies, so why not this one?

I give you Zelda. And who is Zelda, you may be asking?  Obviously, she’s my friend. She’s funny in a goofy, absent-minded sort of way. And she doesn’t suffer fools gladly. Good start, don’t you think? She’s, self-sufficient, can drive any vehicle known to man, has all her survivalist gear (for the ultimate Armageadon) in place and ready to roll when the time comes, has a big-ass Blazer which she calls Chomp, is very smart, logical, has a buttload of common sense and makes her living telling other people what to do. And they pay her a lot of money to do so.

What kind of platform will she run on? Why CHANGE of course. Change is the buzzword of the new millenium and we (of course, I’d be her campaign manager, right?) intend to take advantage of change for all it’s worth. Change what? Why everything of course. Once upon a time politicians promised a ‘chicken in every pot’ (I think this was during a time when people were living on spam and white bread), Zelda will:

1. promise to take all the chicken-shits and put them in a pot.

2. She’ll get rid of the IRS in favor of a National Sales Tax – sure a lot of useless government workers will be thrown out of work and nobody will be able to milk the tax issue anymore, but we like to live dangerously.

3. Public Schools will become a thing of the past. Property owners will no longer finance schools that act as babysitters and teach children nothing but how to waste time. School will be voluntary and only those who want to learn will be allowed to go to school. People who want their children to go to school will have to pay for it, but since they will only be paying consumption tax, they will have a lot more disposable income and besides their kids will actually be learning something, so it’s a win-win situation.

4. Stupid people will be forced to work at places like McDonald’s, Burger King and El Pollo Loco. They will not be paid minimum wage because there will be no such thing. They will be paid whatever said businesses feel they are worth. Which should result in a surge of young people wanting to learn and return to school so they can get jobs that actually pay them enough to live on.

5. People who are afraid to drive will have to walk, take busses, cabs or get rides from friends. The morning and evening rush hours will become a thing of the past. Which will result in fewer accidents and lower insurance rates.

6. Newspapers and news outlets will be held to the truth. They will be fined for every falsehood they publish, promote or forward. Consequently, there will be fewer newspapers and news outlets and people will be thrown out of work. Which is okay, because there are plenty of positions open in the Circus and Gameshow industries.

7. All road construction will be done at night, when there is no traffic and the work can be done quickly and efficiently.

8. Government workers will no longer have a union. They will work as public servants. They will not get cost of living raises, free medical, mandatory benefits, or free passes on performance. They will be fireable if they are incompetent at their jobs. They will not be able to take the case to the Supreme Court or the ACLU. If they suck, they are out.

9. Doctors will be allowed to practice medicine.

10. Cops will be able to do their jobs.

11. The southern border will no longer require border guards or fences. Instead, a canal will be constructed and filled with pirhannas, sharks, giant squid and other scary creatures. Anyone who manages to cross it will automatically have earned citizenship and we’ll call it the Lotto.

12. Congress will actually be required to attend sessions and if they don’t attend said sessions and voting periods they will be docked accordingly.

13. Congress will be required to submit a balanced budget and if they don’t they will be docked accordingly.

14. Members of Congress will not be allowed to act stupidly in public – if they do, they will be docked accordingly.

15. Hot dogs will no longer list, mouse ears, pig snout and cockroach legs as ingredients.

16. The government will no longer bail any private industry out of trouble. This may result in fewer banks, airlines, railroads, NPR, museums, utility companies, phone companies, etc. But the ones that remain will be solvent and likely far more popular.

17. Supreme Court Justices will be required to remain awake during all sessions and if they don’t will be docked accordingly.

18. Animal cruelty will still be against the law, however, animals will not get the right to vote.

19. Hypocrites will be fined and ordered to rehab until they have only one face and no longer speak out of both sides of their mouths.

20. Anyone who takes a hair dryer into a shower with them and turns it on, will be on their own and financially responsible for any damage caused.

So there you have it, Zelda’s platform. Any questions?

WC

Aren’t You Glad…

we gave control of Congress to the Democrats? Hasn’t life been oh so much better since then? Can’t you hardly wait til Baraka or Billary is Prez?

WC