March 3, 2008

Ohio Primary: Why I’m Voting for Fred Thompson Tomorrow

It’s tempting to ask for a Democratic ballot on Tuesday to vote for the candidate I refer to as BOOHOO (Barack O-bomba Overseas Hussein “Obambi” Obama). That would help ensure that the candidacy of the person I refer to as HR4C (Hillary Rodham Cackling Crying Complaining Clinton) is not merely dead, but really most sincerely dead.

The problem is that if Obama wins in November, and his presidency turns out to be as bad or worse than currently indicated, I would have to own up to having contributed to it. I cannot, and will not, bear that responsibility.

So I’ll stay on the GOP side for the time being. Now what?

The candidate I refer to as JS3M3 (John Sidney the Mad Maverick McCain III) will not get my Ohio primary vote.

He hasn’t earned it. He needs to understand that he hasn’t earned it.

In fact, he seems to care very little whether he gets my vote.

He has done little since he became the presumptive nominee on Super Tuesday to bridge the divide he has built over the last decade between himself and mainstream conservatives.

His “repudiation” of Bill Cunningham for daring to use Obama’s middle name should not have been a public rebuke. Take your pick — It demonstrates shocking tone-deafness or callous indifference to what should be his base. McCain, who feels that Obama’s real middle name shouldn’t be used (heaven forbid) because it is somehow provocative (a position I totally disagree with), should have advised Cunningham of the impropriety either after-the-fact to the press or in private.

McCain will come perilously close to losing my vote if what Bob Novak has written comes to pass:

Former White House political guru Karl Rove is urging that Sen. John McCain pick Mitt Romney as his running mate, writes veteran Washington columnist Robert Novak.

According to Novak, Rove and other GOP bigwigs want Romney in the No. 2 spot despite the bad blood that exists between the former Massachusetts governor and McCain, an enmity that grew out of their heated rivalry during the Republican presidential primaries.

Despite the hype about his alleged conservatism, Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney is more liberal than John McCain. A McCain-Romney ticket combines an all-too-likely failure to control illegal immigration; a total surrender on social issues (based on what Romney has done, which is infinitely more important than what he has said); increases the chances that McCain would give in to the taxoholic-spendaholics in Washington; puts a person from a culture that gives little heed to national sovereignty one heartbeat away from the presidency; and sets the table for inflicting the scourge of RomneyCare on the entire nation.

If the Global War on Terror weren’t in progress, and the other party’s candidates so pitifully weak on national security, a McCain-Romney ticket would be a bridge too far to cross. I hope against hope that McCain has the sense not to do what Rove suggests.

Voting for Mike Huckabee could have been a legitimate temptation. After all, he’s the one still running. But in the two months-plus since it was revealed, no one that I know of has tried to claim that the story of Huckabee receiving hundreds of thousands in consulting and speaking fees while governor is wrong, or explain why it’s okay. Without any kind of attempt to defend it, the presumption has to be that it’s indefensible. Team Huckabee seems to think the whole thing doesn’t even deserve a defense. Fine: Mike Huckabee doesn’t deserve my vote. With a BizzyBlog Dealbreaker like this, I don’t even waste my time looking into where a candidate stands on the issues, because it doesn’t matter.

That leaves the only other GOP candidate who maintained his viability up to South Carolina. He is also the only candidate who had both a solidly sensible platform and a track record showing that he actually believed in it.

Fred Thompson gets my vote on Tuesday, because no active candidate has done more to earn it up to and including today than Thompson did through January 19.

I strongly suggest that anyone receiving a Republican ballot tomorrow who doesn’t think John McCain gets it yet send Mr. Maverick a message. Vote for Fred Thompson.

Share

5 Comments

  1. Does Fred Thompson ever qualify as being an active candidate?

    Comment by Brian — March 3, 2008 @ 10:10 am

  2. #1, you’ll note that I did not make an affirmative statement to that effect — only that McC and Huck are still active. :–>

    Comment by TBlumer — March 3, 2008 @ 11:03 am

  3. [...] the false “Muslim” smear) than in the truth. Many of them are upset at McCain for condemning these kinds of smears. (I don’t use my middle name colloquially, so if someone else was, I’d think they had [...]

    Pingback by Plunderbund - » Evidence that smears against Obama work — March 3, 2008 @ 12:42 pm

  4. Team Clinton doesn’t realize we all didn’t fall off turnip trucks out here. They also don’t realize most of the people can’t be fooled most of the time. Yet, Team Clinton, relying on Mark Penn’s Focus-Group polling, decided from the beginning to discover common gullibilities and then exploit them. It’s proved to be a miserable failure, first because it didn’t work. Second, because it proves how inauthentic Team Clinton is.

    Team Clinton woefully underestimated the American skill at detecting snake oil. We may buy it for a while, but don’t keep shoving it down our throats after we’ve seen it for what it is. Mrs. Clinton didn’t get that memo.

    There are basically two areas that Team Clinton claims to have experience in – foreign affairs and economics – that seem to be convincing some people of Mrs. Clinton’s superiority. But a brief reading of some historical documents, and many individuals have come to realize just how damaging the Clinton Administration was.

    First, Mrs. Clinton has insistently claimed that she didn’t know that W was intent on going to war with Iraq, which is why she voted to give him the power to go to war. This is clearly not true. In 1998 the Project for the New American Century – a Neoconservative think-tank with Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz as members – wrote Bill Clinton a letter, urging him to seek regime change in Iraq. See: http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm .

    In Dec., ‘98, as a result of the Neocon pressure to attack Iraq, Clinton conducted Operation Desert Fox – the bombing campaign against Iraq (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Desert_Fox ). Then in ‘00 the same team that had urged Bill to attack Iraq moved into the White House. It was only a matter of time before W was going to attack Iraq and both Clintons knew it. By ‘02 Mrs. Clinton had no doubt whatsoever that W and his Neocon Administration were inevitably going to attack Iraq.

    There may be an argument for attacking Iraq, but there’s no defense for Team Clinton’s deceit regarding the issue. Also, what her flipflopping has done, which she never seems to realize, is that, like the previous Democratic loser, she was for the war before she was against it. How will that fare against McCain if she were to win?

    Team Clinton also exhibits a disturbing pattern of deception relating to Bill’s Administration and Mrs. Clinton’s original support for NAFTA. First, the econmy wasn’t doing well mostly because of Bill, but because of the prevailing circumstances in the country. They included, oil that was $10 a barrel, a computer and digital revolution, low interest rates, low inflation, early golbalization, inflation of housing prices that bolstered home owners’ portfolios, as well the deregulation of financial institutions. That deregulation, in part, set the stage for the current subprime meltdown.

    See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-leach-bliley . This bill enabled banks and lending institutions to restructure and focus on credit and debt. It repealed Glass-Steagall, which had been constructed specifically so the country could avoid another Great Depression. It all changed, however, because of Bill’s allegiance to Big Business and to the Third Way (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_%28centrism%29 ) – a capitulation to right wing economics.

    If you’re happy with the Neocon foreign policy of the past 8 years, if you’re content with the loss of American manufacturing, static and lower wages, trade that disproportionately favors Big Business, cheap labor, illegal immigration, and weakened unions, then, by all means, vote for Clinton. If you’re unhappy with those conditions, then there’s only one choice – vote Obama.

    Comment by sayno2clinton — March 4, 2008 @ 5:15 am

  5. #4, you’re hysterical. The dirty little secret of Iraq is that Clinton would never have even bothered with it if not for the need to distract from Monica/impeachment and look presidential. He said all sorts of aggressive things he would have preferred not to (things like “Iraq has WMDs”), and other things he really didn’t mean but made him look like a leader.

    Years later, he got quoted as proof that everyone knew about WMDs all along — along with various congressmen and senators who came along for the impeachment-defense ride. In 2002, of course the Senate and Congress had to support the war, or they would have had to repudiate their best bud and their own words from only 3-4 years before.

    In the real world, the bipartisan support inoculated Bush from criticism that he was launching a GOP war.

    Who says that what goes around doesn’t come around? :–>

    Comment by TBlumer — March 4, 2008 @ 9:15 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.