Iowa paper: Let's bet the worst horse, please

Tuesday, January 01, 2008 at 06:38 AM

Yeppers. Seems the editorial board at the Des Moines Register want to sweep into effect a Rethug win come November.

I pray the Iowa voters are much smarter, and play long ball.

Editorial page editor Carol Hunter composed this fairy tale. I call Shenanigans, of course. Methinks she's not seeing what some of us call "playing long ball".

See, the Democrats can, if they play this hand correctly, take the White House away from the Rethugs. How to pull that off will require playing one mean hat trick, which, sadly, many inside the party, many on the Beltway, many in Hollyweird and the so-called centrist portion of the party (Rethug Lite, just as fascist, without so many calories..) seem to think that nominating Senator Clinton is the way to go.

It is. If their game plan is to lose.

See, we do not elect a president based on popular vote. Somebody, ages ago, got that idea removed. We, instead, vote based on the electoral crap. Thus, we have to play this game much as Patton would deduce how to whip Irwin Rommel: It then requires a "long ball" strategy to win.

Now, some states, like my home South Carolina, are going to go Rethug regardless. You can bet the Cessna on it. And win everytime. The liberal camp here is measured in "dink" values. Meaning, we ain't much, but we are all we seem to have. Other states, yes, will chase the Blue. Or will they?

And what about the swing or Purple states? How will they go?

Now, me, I'd be thinking like Patton about here: The last thing we want is to present a candidate that is a sure-fire.....loser. And mark my words, Senator Clinton, if nominated....will deliver a Rethug landslide about like Reagan-Carter did. You can take that to the bank.

How is this possible? Simple, we do the math:

Number of Rethugs who hate Clinton: 100%

Number of liberals who don't trust her any, if at all: 74%

(The math is a loose guess)

Outside the beltway, outside the Hollyweird parties, outside the DLC, there exist the remainer of those who consider themselves liberal, progressive, along with many registered Democrats. Now, a fool can guess why the Rethugs don't like her, she's a Democrat, that's sufficient enough for them.

But, why don't those of us outside that loop like her? Answer: She's not a "real" liberal. It's a bumper sticker deal. Like Joe Lieberman?

To us, her record speaks and quite loudly:

-During her old man's first term, she totally blew health care reform, and according to sources, they are her best pal these days. There goes me and others believing she'd fix our sorry system, betcha.

-She is too aligned with Chimp, Iraq and a darling of Boeing, Carlyle, Raytheon, yeppers, the whole damned military-industrial complex.

-We could mention more, but all the data says "Yes, I'm really a Rethug, how did you guess?"

And these items are the very thing that has hurt the Rethug cause for years now: Too aligned with Wall Street, too attuned to the Rockefellers, nodding and braying to the whimpers of Exxon-Mobil. Rethugs, by their party "image" call to mind Ebenezer Scrooge, Jake Marley and Marie Antionette: To heck with the taxpayers. Not exactly a cool image to own this year, eh?

Too, like Patton, we have to then analyze the "Rommel" strategies. Who are the Rethugs going to offer? Romney, Hucklebee or Julie. Sad to say, those names do inspire the fundies to run out and sign off on Fascism II, but that's them. Ron Paul? Hooboy. Paul might be the upsetter, but then, his appeal is far wider.

Appeal. That's how you win an election. Who is going to appeal to the most voters, party lines aside?

Thus, we put the ball into play, if only in "thought experiment" mode:

-The states that are traditionally red will stay that way. No surprises.

-But, the swing and blue states, how will they go? Enough of us liberals, oh, yes, might swing to the Rethug category. Independents and the "undecided" can also swing to the right. Enough of these states go red? Well, guess what, sports fans!

Is such a forecast likely? I've always had an excellent track record in this. Based on what I have read to date, on the many blogs, and around the nation, yes, I feel 100 percent accurate with this forecast: A Clinton nomination will park the Rethugs back into the White House, and worse, it may drag some loose senators, reps and others...into the wake vortex trailing, oh, yes. I may back down some on my "Carter debacle" comparison, but my seer sense says....landslide loss.

I then hope, I then pray, Iowans, as well as other states vote for a chance at a win, not a chance at a huge loss. If we liberals want the White House back, a Clinton a guaranteed....loss to the other side.


The dollar slid across the board on Friday as data showing a 9 percent decline in sales of new U.S. homes last month heightened concern about the economy, putting the greenback on track for its worst week in more than a year.
The housing report, which was weaker than economists had expected, also bolstered the case for more Federal Reserve interest rate cuts in 2008. Earlier this week, the S&P/Case-Shiller index showed a record decline in U.S. home prices in October.

This is what's happening to YOUR house. All the 'money' and 'equity' you thought you had saved - eliminated! The equity through falling house prices - and the money because we are DEBASING OUR CURRENCY. That low fed rate you're reading about gets created by printing money and lending it to people. With more money, the money YOU have is worth LESS. So your money is worth less and your property is worth less - where can you turn to keep ahead of inflation? I think you BETTER turn to Dr. Paul. He's the ONLY one running that has a HOPE of being able to deal with this.

to expand on a theme:

Just 40 years ago a coke or a cup of coffee costs 10 cents, a gallon of gas costs 30 cents, a new car costs $2,500 and a new house cost $25,000. Today a coke or cup of coffee is over $1.00, gas is $3.00, the new car cost is about $25,000 and the new single family house averages $250,000 or more. Over the last 40 years, prices for all these commodities have increased by a factor of about 10 times or more.

This means that in the last 40 years, the dollar has lost 90% of its purchasing power. Today you need $10.00 to pay for what you use to be able to buy for $1.00.

Why has the US $ lost 90% of its value? Because in the last 40 years the Federal Reserve has printed increasing amounts of paper money to fund excessive government spending for wars and welfare programs and this paper money has no gold backing. The result has been constant inflation.

The US is on the brink of a financial catastrophe. The dollar is in freefall on foreign exchange markets and there are increasing signs that governments and investors around the world are looking for alternative currencies to use for investment vehicles. The US government is in debt to Foreign Governments a total of over 2.3 Trillion dollars and that borrowed money has been spent on wars and welfare (yes that's 2.3 TRILLION dollars). And these foreign governments are not all friends almost $700 billion is owed to China and the Oil Exporting Countries in the Middle East.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that is discussing this coming financial collapse and understands the incredible economic dangers we face.

Just 40 years ago a cup of coffee cost 10 cents, a gallon of gas cost 30 cents, a new car cost $2,500 and a new house cost $25,000. Today these things cost 10 times more than that. The dollar has lost 90% of its purchasing power because the Federal Reserve has created too much money and the result has been constant inflation. The US is on the brink of a financial catastrophe. The $'s value is in freefall. The US is in debt to Foreign Governments a total of over 2.3 Trillion dollars. $700 billion is owed to China and OPEC Countries in the Middle East.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that is discussing this coming financial collapse and understands the incredible economic dangers we face.

Gee, Visitor, you wouldn't be posting these comments mechanically, would you? Or the low tech version of cutting & pasting?

Ron Paul is indeed the "gold standard" of the gold standard zealots. And just how will Dr. Paul make everything okay? Take two gold standards and call him in the morning?

Just curious: are you officially working for his campaign, or just one of the converted?

Couldn't help it, had to add this to the Ron Paul stuff:

Ron Paul thinks:

The key to sound environmental policy is respect for private property rights. The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while increasing the cost of polluting.


The federal government decided long ago that it knew how to manage your health care better than you and replaced personal responsibility and accountability with a system that puts corporate interests first.


It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails.


I share our Founders' belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms.

His web site's "Religion" page also offers up the following:

The language is clear- Congress simply is prohibited from passing laws establishing religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. There certainly is no mention of any "separation of church and state", although Supreme Court jurisprudence over the decades constantly asserts this mystical doctrine. Sadly, the application of this faulty doctrine by judges and lawmakers consistently results in violations of the free exercise clause. Rulings and laws separating citizens from their religious beliefs in all public settings simply restrict religious practices. The religious freedom required by the Constitution should not end the moment one enters a school, courtroom, or city hall.


I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.

Yet more Paulisms, all from the pages of his web site:

It is a mistake for Congress view the Enron collapse as an justification for more government regulation. Publicly held corporations already comply with massive amounts of SEC regulations, including the filing of quarterly reports that disclose minute details of assets and liabilities. If these disclosure rules failed to protect Enron investors, will more red tape really solve anything? The more we look to the government to protect us from investment mistakes, the less competition there is for truly independent evaluations of investment risk.


I rise today to introduce the Family Education Freedom Act, a bill to empower millions of working and middle-class Americans to choose a non-public education for their children, as well as making it easier for parents to actively participate in improving public schools. The Family Education Freedom Act accomplishes it goals by allowing American parents a tax credit of up to $3,000 for the expenses incurred in sending their child to private, public, parochial, other religious school, or for home schooling their children.

Ron Paul, the cure for all that ails us. If you think that government is all that ails us. To be aware that the economy is in terrible damn shape is not the same as knowing what to do about it. And Dr. Paul has far too many screwy ideas on other subjects for me to have any comfort level with him.