Rev. Erudite Redneck, B.S., B.S., M.A., M.Div.

Want to hear the worst of it from the other side???

Sean Hannity, this very afternoon on his radio program, in his opening monologue, ENDORSED McCain's brand of Conservatism, saying McCain was RIGHT about Amnesty... RIGHT about Guantanamo... Sleet has been sighted in Hell, and his callers, nine to one, have all voiced their dismay... in no uncertain terms. What's the point in watching Hannity and Colmes now? It's going to be Colmes and Colmes!!! What would truly make Hell freeze over would be to hear Rush echo Hannity...

...

...

.. It's just too frightening to contemplate!

I'm with you on the 'who to vote for thing.' I'm on the verge of just writing in a candidate on Super Tuesday. Better to give my vote to someone I genuinely like rather than fight back the bile while voting for the front-runners.

[fixly]
 

Still for Obama. Would have voted for him in our primary if our primary mattered, but it didn't, so I didn't. Instead, I voted for McCain, and will pay for that transgression with 4 years of wack-job Republican junk mail. I'm not really "for" McCain, but I'd choose him over, say, being smooshed by an anvil falling from the sky, a la Wile E Coyote.
 

Since I have an Obama banner on my blog, I think that's all I'm going to say.

ELAshley, I'm honestly curious - who do you support, or perhaps, in the past tense, did you support? Huckabee? Just information. No disparagement even implied.

Alan, I like your idea of a choice - McCain or Wile E. Coyote's fate, over and over again (not much different from Camus' view of Sisyphus in hell, if you think about it). Personally, I would choose Sisyphus' fate - at least one would be eternally employed . . .

ER, I have to say I'm honestly surprised at your support of Richardson. He is Clinton-lite, in many ways. While a superb UN delegate, and an able administrator in New Mexico, I really am not sure what else he brought to the table. While it is unfair the media kind of ranks the candidates and apportions coverage accordingly, depriving all the candidates of the ability to get their message out there - I first supported Chris Dodd because of his stance on restoring true Constitutional governance - but I just wonder what Richardson had to offer. Of course, one could say the same of the two left standing, since there is just no breathing space between their policy positions. I remember you once said that it was a regional thing; New Mexico is in the desert southwest, Oklahoma is in the midst of the vast Great Plains (once known as the great American desert, so there might be a connection there . . .) and so I don't quite see the connection.

Incidentally, I'm not supporting Obama because he's from my adopted home state. I'm not that provincial; my state loyalties, what there are of them, are to my home state of New York, anyway, so that would lead me to support Sen. Clinton, which I do not.
 

EL, Sean Hannity was being facetious.
 

"Alan, I like your idea of a choice - McCain or Wile E. Coyote's fate, over and over again"

Notice that I choose a Wile E. Coyote-esque anvil smooshing over voting for Big Love, Huckster, 9/11, or Capt. Ahab. ;)

By the way, does any one know what percent of the vote Giulliani actually got in Florida? I have a bet with someone that it was going to be somewhere between 9-11% of the vote, but I haven't been able to find the actual percent. Seriously.
 

Dang! You mean Sean Hannity didn't actually have a stroke? Sigh.
 

LOL, ER! Nope, sorry, no stroke! :)

Alan--In Florida, McCain 35%, Romney 31%, Giuliani 15%, Huckabee 13%

ER, I'm not tellin'--ya'll will just poke fun at me! ;)
 

On my erstwhile support for Bill Richardson: I think he had the richest and most varied resume of the bunch:

Governor of New Mexico; former Ambassador to the U.N.; former Secretary of Energy; former U.S. Representative, 3rd Congressional District, New Mexico; chairman of the 2004 Democratic Convention; chairman of the Democratic Governors' Association.


Plus, he IS a Clintonist type, which means not too far lefty.

As for the N.M.-regional thing: I grew up in the toehills of the Ozarks, which is very Southern, buit now have spent 24 years first on the prairie of north central Oklahoma, then 10 years in Texas at the southeastern edge of the Great Plains, now eight years in the OKC area, which is at the edge of the Great Plains -- all with a Southwestern orientation.

I think I have more in common with a New Mexican than I do a Kansas, in other words, but not by much. Has something to do with my falling in love with rangeland, grazing country, even though I grew up in general farming-stock country.

I admit that I think much more about where I am, in a cultural-geographical sense, than most people.

When I was desperately trying to get home from D.C. after 9/11, I drove farther, through Kentucky to get to Tennessee, then shoot west across Arkansasn, because I knew I'd feel closer to home there, than if I'd driven west from Cincinnati, near where I picked up my rental car. The Midwest ain't home. The South is. And the Southwest is.
 

Edwards was my guy but apparently people like $40 DVD players from Walmart more than they like earning a living wage when they work so....

I think we will see Edwards again if Barrack gets the nomination.

Richardson may crop up with a Clinton nomination but I think she will pick Wesly Clark as her running mate.

Go Obama, I guess.
 

Jolene, thanks for the numbers. Dang, looks like I just lost $9.11. :(
 

Alan - RFLMAO!

ER - thanks for the extended explanation.

Incidentally, on traveling in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, I was scheduled to leave the next day to travel to my parents for my Dad's 80th birthday. I sat and watched events unfold that day, like everyone else, with one ear as to whether the Governor of NY would close all the highways in the state, not just the bridges and tunnels in and out of Manhattan. Driving east all day on the 12th, I was near Toledo, listening to a Detroit AM station when the strangeness of what I was not seeing hit me - there were no trucks anywhere. It hit me because on the line was a truck driver complaining about the long wait because the border was closed, and his reefer was running out of fuel, and he couldn't leave the line to fill it.

I met a group of men in suits at a rest area in PA who were traveling from Chicago to Boston via the interstate. They did not know each other, but had pooled their credit cards because their flight to Boston had been canceled. Strange events in those days.

Also, I hit Cleveland at what should have been rush hour, and flew through the city on I-90 without a care in the world. The highway goes through the heart of the city, and my older daughter, who was then 4, asked me as we drove by the office towers, "Is this New York City, Daddy?" I choked up, when I said, "No."
 

Was for Edwards...now for Obama.

Would have to hold my nose to vote for Clinton..hope I don't have to.

If it came down to Clinton vs McCain...I'd have to make a decision somewhat akin to sitting on the edge of the bed with a gun in one hand and a bottle of pills in the other.

Sort of like the time I voted for George Bush senior over Dukakis...then spent the rest of the week thinking I should have written in Bugs and Daffy.
 

At times like that, with choices like that, party is the tipping point, for me.

No office holder is free of party influence. So I pick one of 'em and hold my nose a lot. And the one I pick is the Dems. The candor ad honesty of Carter hit during my formulative years (plus there's that Southern thing, oh, and the Baptist thng), and Reagan scared the hell out of me at the exact time of my life when my "journey," as they say, had me at my largest and God at God's smallest (and I never saw Ronnie's wood-choppin' horsey faux Western manliness as anything but a put-on).

Oh, and I read Goldwater's "Conscience of a Conservative," agreed with it, and then immediately spent four months as an intern with a Repub congressman (from Georgia), and came away appalled, repulsed and signed, sealed and delivered as a Dem.
 

Its all sort of an odd thing this primary system is. Being from CA, our votes never really mattered before. Now, next week we'll actually have to make an informed decision? I'm not so sure about this democracy thing if I have to do homework :)

That said, the default is Obama at the moment. He makes me want to vote. Besides, his wife may be the best option out there. I really hope she gets a chance to do something.

There is a big "thank you" on Obama's website right now... not that anybody should be reading into that..

A bit of an aside, McCain's military star logo makes me think he's going to "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran". Really, can you make policy out of song lyrics? And this monetary sinkhole that is our invasion strategy is really getting us nowhere.
 

It is math really. Clinton has the math. Not only will she get the elected delegates (according to the polls), she has the party faithful delegates that aren't elected as well. The Democrats watched the primary system screw them when it chose McGovern. Ever since then party central has held enough delegates in their local systems to undo a unthinkable thing like that again. She has the math.

But she doesn't want Obama as her running mate. He is too ambitious and would conflict with Bill. No she had to create enough conflict to have the rationale not to select him, and that has worked well. She will take the knowledgeble but workable Bill Richardson on as her VP, and thus obtain the Hispanic vote. The black vote will go to her because they have nowhere else to go.

Ah the Repulicanos, talk about eating your own. Exactly what do Hannity and Limbaah etc. think they are doing? Just who are they going to run for Pres....? Are they trying to just stay pure? Have they been bought? Where is the memo? Who the hell do they think are voting for John McCain, illegal aliens? Ah, yes, I forget they han&lim are the party. Finally meglomania shows forth. Unless, unless they plan to keep Bush. I mean with the Warner Act, they could you know, it is not too wild, maybe just maybe they do have a plan. Naw! They wouldn't would they?
 

There are no good choices for me... in terms of voting for a Conservative candidate. McCain is more Liberal than Conservative. Huckabee is more Liberal than Conservative. Romney is more Conservative than Liberal, but he's got this whole Mormon thing hanging over his head. Thompson, a genuine Conservative, bailed. Giuliani, more Liberal than Conservative, showed very poor campaign judgment, and had Bernard Kerik hanging over his head. Paul is attractive, but not electable. The only other real choice for me is a black man. No, not Obama... Alan Keyes.

So. In the primary next week, I have two choices for conscience-sake: Paul, or Keyes. And neither of those choices will win.

In the general, I'll likely hold my nose and vote the lesser of two evils. Having said that, allow me a moment to qualify that statement: There is a high likelihood of me voting Democrat this fall assuming HillBilly gets the nod. Don't be so surprised. My reasoning is that: Better to see the country tank under a Liberal Democrat named Clinton, ushering in hordes of Republicans back into the House and Senate, than see even more losses in both houses when a Liberal Republican named McCain tanks the country.

That's how I see it. That's my strategy at least. But I don't even know who I'm voting for next Tuesday, let alone next November.
 

Geoffrey-- I thought Dodd was the only decent Democrat running. He is also the brightest and most honest.

DrLobojo-- I listen to Rush near daily... NO... not to get marching orders! Anyway, he's not in anyone's pocket, he's sticking to principles. He believes in Conservatism and doesn't see a single Conservative running. Besides which, he's stated over and over again... to the Paulistas especially... that he does not endorse candidates during the primaries (and I've never, in the twenty years I've listened, heard him endorse a candidate before the convention) and rarely after.

And I'm not at all sure Hannity's performance today was a put on. He seemed genuinely affronted by all the callers who called him crazy and/or threatened to stop listening.

It's going to be an interesting campaign season... One of the most exciting in almost 30 years.

My only complaint in all this is that everyone is so enamored of Hillary. Do we really want to end up 28 years post-Reagan, having seen the White House swapped back and forth between two families? I think this is what has prompted prominent Dem's like Caroline and Ted Kennedy to support Obama.... they desire new blood in the Oval Office. Hillary keeps talking "Change" and many Liberals seem to be thinking the very same thing, though not quite in the same context. On top of all that, if there were one candidate that could galvanize the Right into action, regardless of the Republican candidate, it would be her. And I think that frightens many on the Left.
 

"On top of all that, if there were one candidate that could galvanize the Right into action, regardless of the Republican candidate, it would be her. And I think that frightens many on the Left."

Yup.

Given the Shrub's performance over the last 8 years, the Democrats should be able to nominate Huckleberry Hound and win by a landslide. However, if there's any way for the Democrats to once again snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, it's to nominate Hillary. They're not really that stupid, are they? Oh... um... forget I asked.
 

I wouldn't vote for Clinton for that reason, alone, Eric. Even if I liked her (and I don't), I hate the idea of having two families run our country for so long.

If Clinton gets the nod and it's her against McCain, the Republicans might actually have a snowball's chance (pretty amazing considering that Team Bush has done for us as a nation what a rapist does to his victims). The progressives will vote against Clinton(or they may all stay home), the conservatives will vote against Clinton (or they may all stay home) and her race will be very lackluster, I'd suppose.

Being a Greenie-type, Kooch was my man, but he of course never had a chance.

I won't feel bad voting for Obama. He doesn't have all the policy stances I'd prefer (why are NONE of the major candidates talking about peak oil, energy reform sustainability and conservation?? These are THE major issues to confront us in the coming decades!), but he strikes me as presidential and dang it, I think we're way overdue to be led by an African American. Amongst the remaining candidates, his policy positions seem the least dangerous and damaging.

I like the fella and am hoping the Dems don't shoot themselves (and all of us) in the feet and nominate Clinton. I'm feeling good that Obama will win the majority of races and it will just come down to whether or not the Clinton/DLC can rig the vote at the Convention to swing things their way or not.
 

If either Edwards or Richardson is on your state's primary ballot, vote for the candidate you liked to begin with. Edwards "suspended" his campaign, which is another way of saying he's not releasing his delegates yet (and he does have some). If he can pick up a few more next week he'll have more bargaining power to get social justice issues into the platform at the convention.

Besides, if you aren't that thrilled with either Hillary or Barack, why rubber stamp either one?
 

Nan, they are still on the ballot. So, I might very well do that.

I would not be surprised if Richardson or Edwards actually gets the most votes here.
 

ELA said: "I think this is what has prompted prominent Dem's like Caroline and Ted Kennedy to support Obama.... they desire new blood in the Oval Office."

The only "bloodline" the Kennedy's want in the Presidency is their blood line. That's the only game they play. Bank on it, if they are supporting Obama, they have a deal. What I don't know.

By February 6th it will be Clinton/Richardson verses Romney/Huckabee.

The Republicans will principle themselves to death in a self righteous purge and internal hate fest. We only hurt the ones we love.

The Democrats will win hands down, just as soon as the Jewish vote in the East comes to understand that for Romney "Zion" actually means "Independence Missouri".
And also as soon as the Baptist finally recall that he must claimed to believe that Jesus his own living human form divine self helps choose and personally anoint the next President of his Church (an event happening as we speak). The problem is of course all the words are spelled the same but don't mean the same.

These things will come forth no matter who says what. They and many others from both sides are packaged ready to go.

Just pray to God, that it will not be 1968 again.

Vote No For President.
 

Ron Paul for President! The problem with thinking that he is not "electable" is that it is a self fullfiling prophecy. I vote for Ron Paul because he speaks to me. I want less federal government, less taxes, less war, the internet, more freedom from Big Brother, no national i.d. (shudder). If I have to, I will be saying after the election, "It's not my fault, I voted for Ron Paul."
 

Ron Paul for President! The problem with thinking that he is not "electable" is that it is a self fullfiling prophecy. I vote for Ron Paul because he speaks to me. I want less federal government, less taxes, less war, the internet, more freedom from Big Brother, no national i.d. (shudder). If I have to, I will be saying after the election, "It's not my fault, I voted for Ron Paul."