We got us some fireworks a'comin' in about a year. The fate of the Republic is at stake; will we continue down the primrose path of Barack Obama, the Great Half-White Dope, who's enlightened policies of Communism with a Pepsi Logo at home, and Assuming the Position Abroad, are bringing the American Experiment this-close to an end, or will we Americans finally wise up, admit we've made a mistake, and put the adults back in charge before we become Zimbabwe --only with baseball?
We can pretty much tell who will run for the office of the Presidency on the democratic side; Barack Obambi is the incumbent, and his biggest threat to a repeat for the nomination is a woman so vile that her picture is next to the words 'vomit', 'douche-chill' and 'queef' in the dictionary: Hillary Clinton. Which one of them gets to pretend that they have any core principles and simply recycle the same libtard boilerplate pablum they've been puking up for the last 60 years is, at the moment, irrelevant; one is bad, and the other is only (arguably) infinitesimally-marginally better.
The choice on the Left is between a man with a resume so thin that you wouldn't hire him as night shift manager at your local Taco Bell, but who was elected anyway because of the sheer panic of the American electorate, or a woman who has a horndog of a husband who would fuck a catcher's mitt -- if it held still long enough -- and who's relationship with honesty is as strained and distant as Charlie Sheen's is with reality. Both are self-promoting charlatans, so one is not so terribly different from the other.
The folks to watch, however, are the on the other side of the aisle. The Republican Party has an opportunity to put someone in the White House who has infinitely more qualifications and intelligence than what's there now. They have the ability to nominate someone who is at least marginally more competent.
As a public service -- because that's the sort of civic-minded douche I am -- I will break down the presumptive Republican candidates for President in 2012, and give you my opinions on who can win, who should win, and why they should/shouldn't.
First, a word about the Second-Tier candidates, and the 'Hell Must Have Frozen Over' longshots;
While I'm certain that Michelle Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, and Hayley Barbour are (mostly) fine people, none of them stands much of a chance to garner the nomination. The reasons for this are varied: Bachmann is smart and attractive, but has that thousand-yard stare we usually associate with someone on recreational pharmaceuticals. Santorum is sooooo 1990's GOP Establishment that you can practically smell the pork. Daniels reminds me of a buttoned-down dentist -- one who probably goes home to his leather-clad wife who greets him with a ball-gag, a jar of Vapo-Rub, and a cat-o-nine tails. Pence's only claim to fame is that Ann Coulter once said he was the bestest conservative, EVAH!, in a GOP-controlled Congress that spent money like drunken sailors on shore leave. I beat Paul Ryan up for his milk money, and gave him a Wedgie, a Swirlie and Double Wet Willie, just last week. Christie already has a tough job to do -- and we haven't seen if he can actually do it, yet -- and a vote for Hayley Barber is about as effective and useful as a vote for Boss Hogg was in stoppin' them Duke Boys.
Don't get me started on Ron Paul. The Pot-Smoking wing of the GOP (i.e. Libertarians) might be able to rig a CPAC straw poll, but there's not enough of them to win a national election. Pawlenty reminds me of a box of No-Frills Brand Corn Flakes; there ain't enough sugar and blueberries to hide the blandness.
There are some in many (small 'c' intentional) conservative circles who consider these folks to be prime Presidential timber, but no, they ain't. Primarily because none of them can win, or even get enough support to make a decent showing. In most cases, these folks represent a single issue, maybe two, that appeals to a particular subset of GOP voters who, no matter how stupid or irrelevant the point at hand may be, still want to feel as if their view was advanced and that at least someone heard them out.
However, elections are not won by who plays the 'I-Support-the-Flame-Throwers-and-Hand-Grenades-for-Everyone' game, or who makes the required pilgrimages to Bob Jones University, or who kisses the grave of Jerry Falwell with the most reverence, nor are they won by someone who stands upon the podium, fist shaking in the air, condemning the buttfuckers to the eternal torments of Hell. Neither are they won by the candidate who pledges the most support for Israel, because without Israel there can be no Rapture, as we all know. They are won by people who put forward the best vision for the future of the country, consistent with the American values of fair play, respect for the governed and their institutions, and our common, Constitutional beliefs. Someone who can appeal to our better natures; someone who can sell us a plan for our future that seems the most reasonable, and most achievable.
We don't need another lockstep ideologue -- we already have one, and note how well that's working out -- nor do we need a Super-Duper-Fire-and-Brimstone-Conservative; at this moment we only need someone who's conservative enough, and even at that, conservative enough where it really, really counts.
So, here are your probable choices, and some carefully-thought out opinions on each. Discuss and enjoy;
1. Mitt Romney:
Poor Mitt Romney. He's a pretty decent guy, I think, but he has two major handicaps. First, he presided over a disaterous version of socialized medicine (the Ur-Obamacare) as governor of Massachusetts. Considering that one of the biggest complaints of Americans these days, and the Tea Party in particular, is the unconstitutional and enormously-expensive monstrosity that is ObamaCare, this is a self-inflicted wound from which Romney will possibly never recover if he has national aspirations.
He could, it's true, simply step up to a microphone somewhere and say "Hey, I know I've fucked up, and it hasn't worked. In fact, it's failed spectacularly. It didn't lower costs, it didn't make insurance easier to get, it resulted in increased taxes, regulation, and limited the consumer's freedom of choice. But, and here's the important part; I know why it didn't work, and why it can never work, and so not only will I defeat Obama Care, I'll make certain our health care system is reformed by the free market, and not by Congress by an unconstitutional maneuver in the dead of night."
He could do that, but then guess what happens to him? The Perpetually Pantybunched Wing of the GOP (the so-called 'Real' Conservatives) would call him...wait for it...a flip-flopper, and if there's anything they hate more than a happily-married homosexual, it's a hypocrite. Especially when you've already flip-flopped, twice, on their other pet peeve, Abortion.
Even assuming that Romney could survive those hits, by getting enough moderates and independents to drown out the bring-back-the-Victorian-Age bunch, he has one other fatal flaw: He's a Mormon. In this day and age that shouldn't matter one bit, but in many places in the Andy-Griffith-Show south, being Mormon is the next best thing to being an admitted child molester, which is, incidentally, what a lot of folks in those parts happen to think Catholics are, too.
Spare me the defensive e-mails extolling Southern Open-mindedness and intellectual sophistication, Goober: I've lived in the South, I know. For every Southerner who can speak German, recite Shakespeare by heart, or who once read Flaubert, there's 20 others who don't piss without permission or guidance from Pastor Bob. Besides, everyone knows you can't win South Carolina without bowing at Bob Jones U, and they'd burn the joint down before they let a polygamist apostate defile the place by walking upon that Sacred Ground.
Conclusion: Mitt Romney can't shake the flip-flopper and Mormon tags, and he violated core Republican values by advocating for and then installing a socialized medicine scheme. These cannot be overborne by his obvious business acumen and male-model good looks. He can't carry enough primaries in the Southern states to get the nomination, and if you put him on the ticket as VP, he's a liability with the Guns-God-and-Gays Wing of the GOP who remember when he was Pro-Choice...two positions ago.
2. Sarah Palin:
Ah, Lovely Sarah...what I would do to that woman! Let me put it to you this way; I would gladly bump uglies with Sarah America, but I wouldn't vote for her if you paid me to. I base this opinion on the fact that I'm just sick-and-tired of Sarah Palin. She's not wrong on too many issues, mind you, it's just that I have seen...and heard...far too much of her. In this regard, Palin is on the same plane as Obama; I see..and unfortunately, hear...both every freakin' day, and the prospect of seeing/hearing them again every day for the next four years just doesn't appeal. I'd rather take up High Calonic as a hobby. Besides, after that initial Pitbull/lipstick joke which launched her to a weird form of superstardom, there's been precious little to recommend her for higher office.
Oh, sure, there's that Tea Party thing, but here's the catch; Sarah Palin isn't so much a leader of the Tea Party, as much as she's a parasite upon it.
If Palin threw her panties into the ring she'd spend all of her time defending herself (and her children) against all sorts of liberal libel (even worse than what she's unjustly endured to this point!). My impression of Sarah Palin, in recent days, is that she has lost much of what made her attractive as a candidate in 2008, which was her authenticity. The libtard media attacks, the Katie Couric fiasco, the repeated questioning of her fitness for office, her quitting half-way through her term as Governor in order to suck up cash from books and appearances have turned Sarah Palin into that which we are supposed to despise these days; the Polished, Professional Politician. She seems canned, nowadays, too well prepared, programmed and trained to blindly 'stay on message' and 'get the talking points out' which is a far cry from the Old Sarah that I used to know and love.
The knocks on Palin; media hates her (then again, they hate everybody who doesn't kiss their ass and play their game), she's seen in some quarters as a quitter, even Obama would have more experience as a head-of-state than she would come 2012, and she represents a right-wing social agenda that, thanks to a lackluster economy, is taking a back seat to economic issues even amongst rock-ribbed social issue republicans. Besides, the possibility of a Palin win brings with it dire consequences. These are:
a. Tiny Fey's fifteen minutes would be unreasonably and unbearably extended.
b. The horrifying prospect of 4 more years of Andrew Sullivan/Maureen Dowd ruminations upon her vagina.
I just don't think Palin is up to the task.
Conclusion: Sarah Palin, even with Tea Party help, can't overcome whichever dingbat the Left throws up for election. She would make some GOP moderate a very good VP -- she's a visible sign to old-line curmudgeons that the GOP hasn't totally abandoned social issues, and her Tea Party legions will back a hard-core fiscal conservative to the death -- but that's about it.
Oh, and she's welcome to call me at any time of day or night for a little heavy breathing.
3. Mike Huckabee:
Reverend Huckabee gave aging hunk of rapidly-decaying dogshit, John McCain, a run for his money there towards the end of the last GOP primaries, but that's nothing to brag about; after all, it was John McCain, and if a camel is a horse designed by committee, then John McCain was a candidate crafted by a bunch of drunken monkeys with Down's Syndrome. McCain only got the nod because there was no one else, and Ol' Huck managed to stick around solely because the Bible Thumpers had no place else to go. Some of them just wouldn't hold their nose and vote for McCain, even if that meant Barack Obama won.
The good thing about Huckabee is that he's a reasonable man, and if there's one thing American politics lacks these days it's reasonable people. If you doubt this, turn on your television and watch the Parade of Retards that show up on the nightly newscasts; Obama, Pelosi, Reid, McCain, Schumer, Weiner, Frank, McConnell, Jackson-Lee, Rangel, Kerry, et. al. We could use a level-headed guy, but unfortunately, level-headed guys don't get to be President in America. I would hazard to say that the last reasonable man we had in the White House was John Quincy Adams, or maybe even Jefferson. People want passion and personality in their leaders, whether it's the uncontrollable lusts and lovable roguishness of William J. Clintoon, the Precocious Irish-Setter-like-Dumbass-ness of Joe Biden, the Born-Again Assurance of George W. Bushtard, the Teleprompter-and-Hint-of-Black-Preacher Routine of Ba-Hack Obama.
Huckabee, as smart and reasonable as he is, is about as interesting as burnt toast. He's also a little too free and easy with the use of subliminal religious symbolism for my tastes. He could be my Confessor, but I wouldn't expect him to be the guy to eliminate the Welfare State. If there's anyone in the field who could be the poster child for GWB's Compassionate Conservatism, that would be Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee's greatest detriment, however, is that he has a Willie Horton situation hanging over his head. As Governor of Arkansas (which is sort of like being elected the Smartest Retard in the Class), Huck pardoned a very nasty criminal who later killed someone. While the Left squealed like stuck pigs when Mike Dukakis was handcuffed to the 'racist', 'unfair', 'dirty politics' vision of Willie Horton, they'd absolutely line up with unrestrained, pee-in-your-pants glee for a chance to to hammer Huck over the head with a similar bunch of charges.
Conclusion; Huck is someone's VP. He brings in the Mindless Godbot vote, and he softens the image of the GOP as a bunch of rich guys who want your grandmother to subsist on Alpo and rainwater so that Wall Street can better afford gold-plated-and-diamond-encrusted, remote-controlled toilet seats. If you can keep him from mentioning God every five minutes, and he gets the chance to explain his positions and viewpoints, he's a very likable man. He just can't win because he doesn't generate any buzz.
4. Newt Gingrich:
Now this is the guy the GOP should have tapped in 2008. The reason being that Newt Gingrich's style of forceful, crystal-clear logic was the perfect foil to Obama's inflated Hopenchangey bullshit. Unfortunately, in 2007, Newt Gingrich couldn't get elected Dog Catcher in East Buttfuck, Podunk, U.S.A. The reason why? The 'Weren't Hoopskirts and Chastity Belts the Best Things Ever?' wing of the GOP would rather drink Drano with a Battery Acid chaser than nominate a man who ran through more wives than Henry the Eighth, even if he was a fiscally-conservative, law-and-order, America-is-the-best-goddamn-country-on-Earth, kill-the-terrorists, No-Gay-Marriage, No-Abortion, No-Welfare, Free-markets-forever Warrior.
However, this time around social conservatism is taking a backseat to economic recovery, and the string of wives and mistresses is not as much of an issue as it would have been in the past. I think a large number of social conservatives are coming around to the idea that neither Jesus nor Reagan is coming back to save America, and that instead of concentrating on getting the most pristine representative of conservatism we can get, they'd be better served by settling for the best standard-bearer, instead. Nowadays -- after two years of Obama -- the main issue is effectiveness.
And Gingrich is quite possibly the most effective of the presumptive front-runners. He's a former Speaker of the House, which means he knows how Congress operates, and would have the advantage of being able to figure out how to best get his agenda through. Ginigrich is a historian, which means he has a depth of knowledge about democracy, it's traditions, and the ability to learn from the lessons of the past so as to not make (too many of) the same mistakes our more recent bad excuses for Presidents have made. If there's a knock on Gingrich from my point of view, it's this: all this will-he-or-won't-he-I'm-forming-a-committee-I'm-travelling-to-Iowa-but-I'm-not-certain-I'm-running bullshit is getting old. Shit or get off the pot, already, Newt. There's playing it close to the vest, and then there's being a fucking tease.
The best part about a Gingrich candidacy? Newt Gingrich is a lightbulb, while Barack the First and The Hildebeest are mere shadows. He would clean the streets with either in a debate, and for the first time in a very long time in American politics, the differences in ideals, agendas, and level of relative competence would be so stark as to leave the vast majority wondering just what the fuck it was they ever saw in Liberalism.
Conclusion: Newt Gingrich is the best GOP candidate out there. His former bad behavior is no longer relevant, considering the national emergency and mood, and compared to Bill Clinton -- who got two terms -- Newt is a fucking Boy Scout, so any mention of his past indiscretions can be mostly neutralized by the "you didn't say that about Clinton, and you all think he was the greatest thing ever" card. If he would just stop this contrived 'indecision' nonsense, and get in the game, he'd probably win in 2012 by a 20-point margin.