THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE

This has been a fairly exciting race so far. Right now I'm rooting for Barack Obama. I don't really think he'll win, but stranger things have happened (see '00/'04).

I'm frankly surprised that Rudy Guiliani has gotten as much support as he has, but encouraged to see him in dead last place. He stamps out strip clubs and "offensive" art and has a general temperament of dismissiveness. He is a slimy hypocrite who claims himself a Catholic, yet has affairs and gets divorced. He is against abortion...sort of...sometimes...His evoking of 9/11 is the stuff of legend and is the sleaziest kind of rabble-rousing. That said, I'm glad he's not going to be the Republican candidate because there are a whole lot of people who think he's a good, strong man who actually did something on 9/11 and will whip those bad guys into shape. These same people HATE Democrats and Rudy is the anti-bleeding heart liberal.

I just never understood people who thought we were lucky to have had Bush and Giuliani in office on 9/11. Bush could have prevented the attacks had he cared to and Giuliani's deafness to the Fire Department's pleas for better equipment would have saved hundreds of lives.

So right now Mitt Romney is doing well. He's the weirdest of the Republicans. I mean, on the Democrats' side, we've got a woman, a black man and John Edward in the forefront. The Republicans are, for the most part, standard Republicans. But Mitt Romney is a Mormon, which is not a woman or a black man, but still freaks people out. I mean, the religion is like a hundred years old or something. People don't like that. And he wears magic underwear. Personally, I don't care about the magic underwear. I think it's silly, but I think most religious affectations are silly (yalmukas, ashes on the forehead, turbans...). Romney has been defending his religion as well as his religiosity. He claims the Bible is the word of God and believes it in full. He thinks abortion and stem-cell research is WRONG and he wants to defend the sanctity of life. And yet he supports the death penalty. He believes Osama bin Laden should die for his sins. Doesn't the Bible say something like "thou shalt not kill" and "turn the other cheek" or something like that? Not being religious, I simply detest people who use the Bible to support the things they already agree with, but ignore the things that don't jibe with their desires. I suppose this dichotomy can apply to each candidate, on both sides, because our presidential hopefuls have to seem religious in order to get respect from the population at large. And nobody lives their life strictly in adherence to the Bible. If they did, they'd be too freaky to get elected. But not religious enough? Also too freaky.

Ron Paul is a force unto himself. He's really a Libertarian, not a Republican. He opposes most of the government's intervention into people's lives. He opposes the war wholeheartedly. And yet he wants abortion made illegal and stem cell research stopped. He doesn't support the party line that we were attacked on 9/11 because "they hate our freedom." There's a great clip from a debate in which Ron Paul explains that we were attacked because the Islamic fundamentalists hated our interference in their part of the world. Of course, Rudy G plays up the 9/11 card by responding with "As someone who was attacked on 9/11, I can't believe you would say it was our fault!" I happen to agree with Ron Paul on a lot of things. I think the country is spoiled. We expect the government to take care of us completely, as if it had infinite resources. There comes a time when sacrifice and personal responsibility should take root. He also wants to legalize medical marijuana and eliminate the death penalty. He opposes the gay marriage ban and wants the Patriot Act eliminated. I can see why people like him. Yet he wants prayer in schools. On the other hand, he wants to bring all our troops home and eliminate our military presence around the world, while eliminating the income tax completely. Considering the other Republicans, I think I'd like to see Ron Paul run against a Democrat. It wouldn't be such a crushing blow to lose to him. But he ain't got a chance in hell.

Mike Huckabee is a Baptist minister who opposes gay rights, gay adoption, abortion, stem cell research and pornography. He doesn't believe in evolution and wants the 10 Commandments displayed in all public schools. He wants AIDS patients quarantined from society. He thinks the war needs to continue in earnest and George W. Bush has been an excellent president. 'nuff said.

McCain is a fairly traditional conservative Republican. He wants the 10 Commandments in schools and believes schools have the right to decide if Creationism should be taught. He opposes abortion, except in the cases of rape and incest. He wants the war to go forward and thinks diplomacy is overrated. He thinks gay rights issues should be state-by-state issues, but he'd be fine with a gay president. He wants to ban flag-burning and thinks the Confederate Flag is a perfectly acceptable symbol of heritage. He wants to see the death penalty used more often. He wants to see us be independent of foreign oil in 25 years and wants to drill in Alaska. He wants stronger drug penalties. He is, in essence, a Reagan Republican...which we sure as hell do NOT need right now.


Now, Hillary Clinton is going to be the Democratic candidate. I think that's a pretty safe bet.
She is the typical Democratic candidate. She supports gay rights and gay unions with full benefits. She supports abortion rights. She claims to be religious and a Bible-reader, but doesn't brag about it. She believes the war in Iraq is wrong, but doesn't want to simply pull out. I believe Hillary is very similar to Bill in that they are both liberals but are willing to play the game and compromise easily. I also think Hillary is less charismatic than Bill, but the whole "first woman president" thing gets a lot of people excited. Though I imagine it pisses a lot more people off. If she runs, I will support her, but it won't be in earnest. Most likely it'll be to make sure the other guy doesn't get in...same as I did with Kerry last time.

John Edwards has barely made a blip on the public's radar. Yet he has some strong opinions. Similarly to Clinton and Edwards, he supports gay rights and abortion rights. He believes the war is wrong and we should get out. He wants a strong military, but feels it needs to be used better. He's a Methodist, like my wife. I know from experience that Methodism is a very laid-back and private religion. It's the kind of religion that I'd prefer my president to be, if he had to be something. He is strongly on the side of public schools as well as gun owners. If Hillary was out of the picture, I'd say Edwards would be the way to go. I say that because I think Obama will have a lot of extra hills to climb, being an outsider as well as a black man. I think the top 3 Democratic runners are worthy, but I think Edwards would have the easiest time getting his work done.


Barack Obama is a young guy who grew up hard. He was poor and black in America. He has risen above all that. He grew up aware of religion, but not immersed in it. He was exposed to both Christianity and Islam through his schooling, but was not enrolled in a madrassah, as Fox News would have you believe. He has always opposed the war and supported gays and abortion rights. Like any serious candidate, he is realistic about some things. He knows, for example, that America is not ready to accept gay marriage, so he has focused more on legal unions with benefits. Again, this is compromise. I just believe that Obama truly believes in bringing his goals to fruition and is ready to change a lot of things in government. I think Clinton and Edwards would try as well, but are too "of Washington" to really bring this country back to its former glory. Maybe I'm being naive. I guess we'll see.