Political Analysis and Commentary

So here comes the Boston Globe telling us that Romney’s advertising is paying off in Iowa.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/29/with_iowa_lead_romney_faces_big_expectations/

I don’t want to be a know it all, but I’ve been saying for over a year that Romney will win in 2008. Here’s why; Romney provides the glue for Republican party. He captures both the interests of social and fiscal conservatives, who split the party in the last election. Mormanism isn’t a hinderance in the face of the alternative to a God-centered world-view. In fact, it throws enough wild card in there to make him appear fresh – different.

Finally, he’s a man. (And an alpha-male at that). Being a man is good in the world of terrorism – I’m trying not to be chauvanistic, just realistic. The greater the threat of terrorism, the more important the “man factor” will be to Americans.

The Democrats lack enough unity to get Hillary elected. Their interests vary from complaining about the war, to hatred of Bush, to a variety of random left-wing fringe interests. They don’t have the sticking power with that range of issues to hold it together, and their survival is dependent upon high-rolling, easy-going times.

My prediction is that Obama will go down burning – he’s too young, and the Dems can will need to choose their best “man”. If it’s not the primary, then suddenly someone will come up with something – maybe something he says, or something from his past that will disqualify him. What really will happen is that they are choosing their best bet.

I personally am not a huge Romney fan, but I do feel good about his chances.

Well, I’ve got it down onpaper now. Let’s see what happens in 2008!

Interesting editorial on the population gap of Democrats and Republicans. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008831
It almost seems either you were happy with the institution of the traditional family, or for whatever circumstances, you hated it and want to change it. Often people’s hatred of their own families causes them to lash out at what they see (or think they see) as those with similar values. The reaction is to abstain from family at all.

Now, is it any wonder that the Democrats staunch support of abortion, homosexual “marriage” and contraception (basically the culture of death according to John Paul 2) contribute to this trend?

Interesting article here on the Bigotry of the Left.
The Lebenon/Isreali conflict in some way, forces liberals to expose themselves. In Spain for instance the PM there has been unleashing all kind of anti-semitic statements recently. The libs will clearly choose Lebanon’s side in the argument for two reasons:

1. they are perceived as the victim more easily than the Isrealis

2. the Isrealies are backed by the United States, and this always becomes a point of disagreement for those who believe truth is completely relative, this is the “false humility” commonly seen with the Left. Plus who would ever undermine their own interests, right, it must be humility at work?

That’s the problem with defining truth on relative terms, and siding with whoever is perceived to be most pitiful. You can only agree so long with the underclass and the victims until the victims are patently wrong – then what do you do?

“This wouldn’t have happened if I were president” – John Kerry
I’ve been trying to get to the core of what I don’t like about John Kerry. Maybe one of the things that annoys me most is the same reason why folks in Massachusetts love him. Is he aloof? Or is he bourgeois? He’s both. That’s why I don’t like him. But, the bourgeois in MA actually ARE aloof, that their “ideas” are better than those country bumpkin, religious middle America folks, who they usually confuse the worst points of Catholics and Protestant fundamentalists together.

Those eyebrows.. those compasionate eybrows, that pity the materially needy… are those compassionate eybrows what would be responsible for the Middle East diplomocy that would have prevented Hezbolla and Isreal from going at it?

I believe that the middle class in Mass. have aspirations for the future – a world of holistic composting, garden growing, bike riding to work, occasional kid (but not too many), community focused, gay marriage embracing, back-to-simplicity life. Most of these are good things, in fact I’ve co-opted most of them myself. But we all know it’s not enough, is it? There are other things like ambition, growth, honor, courage etc. that get lost in this world view. This is the worldview of a dying culture, one whose highest ambition is to be left alone, not an active participant in the progress of the world.

A few weeks ago, I read a poll on the Cape Wind project – who supported it an who didn’t. The projects a little dicey, because those who claim they are for the environment, are at odds with those wealthy Massachusetts folk who own shorefront property. Most of the politicians threw up their hands when forced to re-neg on their pro-environmental positions. Kennedy – against, Mitt – against it – … and then Kerry, what was Kerry?

Undecided.

Classic. And the bumper stickers aren’t going anywhere. Don’t those things get old after 3 years now? Where did you get those bumper stickers – are they still handing out “Iron Workers Support Kerry in 2004″ stickers?