Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
My state’s primary is tomorrow, so I suppose his words are for me.
I want to clarify something that I said in the last hour. I had a caller who was talking about the three legs of the conservative stool, and I said that one of the reasons why voters on our side are going to three or four different candidates is because not one candidate embodies all three legs of the stool. The more accurate way to have stated that was that at the outset of our campaign, there wasn’t one who had all three legs. Well, there was one. Fred Thompson did, but he was never really a factor, for reasons we can only guess about. But after that, Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Ron Paul; each one of these guys had a strength on one of those legs of the stool, and so our guys, our side, went off on their single-issue preferences.
I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. The social conservatives are the cultural people. The fiscal conservatives are the economic crowd: low taxes, smaller government, get out of the way.
Well, I’m probably not going to be doing as The Godfather expects tomorrow morning. And it’s not because I’ve managed to dig up anything horrible or sinister about Romney; it’s got to do with messages. I can only send one, and I have my priorities to consider.
For the first time in my life, the “Don’t Throw Away Your Vote!” priority will not be taking center stage. And I’m inclined to think this sidebarring is overdue. After all, I’m a red voter in a blue state. Which Republican I would like to see nominated…how in the world does it matter?
I’m much more concerned about communicating my displeasure with the primary process. Everybody we know damn good and well shouldn’t rightfully have any say in the matter whatsoever, gets to, essentially, all-but-determine the outcome. Look, who’s in the lead right now: Barack Obama — media construct; Hillary Clinton — another media construct if ever there was one; and John McCaine, media construct extraordinaire.
How did we get down to these three losers?
They were selected as finalists for their respective abilities to giggle like maniacs, to cry on cue, to obfuscate and change the subject. And to tell us what to think, how to think it, when to be depressed and when to be hopeful — everything we do not want a sitting President to do.
It’s crap, I say. I’m going to write in the name of a candidate who already dropped out — because he would have been perfect for the job. And the reason I’m writing in a candidate who doesn’t really have a shot, is because I know why he was eliminated from the running. And the reason he was eliminated from the running, is that…he would have been perfect for the job. He was emotionally stable, his competition was not, so we pitched him out and stuck by the lunatics.
It’s crap, I tells ya. Crap.
By the way — we had one of our associates fly in from halfway across the country. A big-time lefty libbie. Team team team, loves to talk about football, loves to debate politics…know what? This time out, I didn’t feel much like discussing it at all. Know what else? It wasn’t a problem at all. He didn’t feel like it either.
Both sides are highly, highly discouraged with the way the field has been whittled down. I say again…BOTH sides.
I think on a subconscious level, we’re afraid of commitment. We narrow the field down to the candidates who we know won’t really make us very happy as serious contenders. It’s a way of absolving ourselves of responsibility.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well, it wasn’t because of Rush — I don’t even know when he’s on around here, but I did waver and vote for Mitt.
I have to admit, it was very difficult. I was very close to pulling the lever for Fred, but I was afraid that would not be as easily interpreted as “not McCain” and it definitely would have no effect on the result.
Not trying to get you to pull the lever for anyone but Fred… as a matter of fact, I hope you do… for me. I really wanted to. So I want someone to.
Frankly, there’s only one thing that kept me from pulling the lever for Paul, but that one thing is really really big.
It should be an interesting convention this year.
- philmon | 02/05/2008 @ 10:23