Dem Debate

I'm glad the debate tonight didn't turn into a pissing contest the way McCain and Romney's did.

I think Clinton's health care plan is superior to Obama's only in that (remembering how I was as a young man) I'm not sure I would have paid out of pocket for health care if I had the option not to. Obama says all the people he's talked to say they'd buy health insurance if they could afford it. But he hasn't talked to people who don't go to political rallies. Point to Clinton.

While I understand what Clinton is saying about her vote for the Iraq resolution and her thinking that Bush abused the intent of the resolution, Obama scores in having seen it to it's possible consequence. Point to Obama.

Best line of the evening to Clinton:
It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush and it'll take a Clinton to clean up after this one.

As to style and potential effectiveness as President domestically, I think Obama has the edge. The Clinton name carries too much baggage. Internationally--especially in dealing with the Arab world--I think Clinton's sex would be a handicap and Obama's sex, name, and color would be assets.

As to electability, I sort of think more people combined would not vote for a woman and a Clinton than would not vote for a black man.

Given the overriding importance of defeating the GOP, I have to favor Obama for the nomination. At least for the moment.

Fantasy Convention

After listening to the Dem candidates the past few days, I'm back where I was four years ago at this time. John Edwards is again my man, but with a twist.

I still think Barack Obama is the best face to meet the world and repair damage with, but I like Edwards' approach to the economy and his insistence on the importance of a healthy middle class. So here's how we get both...

Come the Nationl Convention, neither Obama nor Clinton has quite enough delegates for the nomination. The delegates Edwards has are enough to make either Clinton or Obama the presidential nominee.

So both of those worthies are doing their best to persuade the kingmaker to throw his support their way.

Obama: Give me your support, John, and I'll make you secretary of whatever you want, even vice-president if you want that.

Edwards: Why thank you, Barack. That is a tempting offer, but I have a better idea. We all know that I can make either you or Hillary the nominee. But it's also true that either one of you can make me the nominee. So here's the deal. You give me your delegates, I become the nominee, and you become the vice-presidential nominee.

Obama: Are you crazy? You're a distant third place in this!

Edwards: Not crazy, Senator. I can give my delegates to Hillary and you get nothing, or you can give yours to me and you get something. You get more than something. You get the experience that Hillary says, and that John McCain will say, you lack. After four years of your name and face being before the country and the world, any lingering fears of electing a black man to the Presidency will dwindle. You'll be all set for a run in 2012, or, well, let's say 2016, just to be safe. You think about that overnight and let me know. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm late for a meeting with the Clintons.

Dems and Second Amendment

I switched to the Nevada debate at the end of Comanche Moon last night just in time for Tim Russert's direct question to the three Dem candidates asking their thoughts on the Second Amendment.

At least Clinton and Obama realize that flogging gun control is a losing proposition and admitted as much. John Edwards still thinks the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has something to do with hunting.

Clinton would like to reinstate the "assault weapons ban", even though the guns in question are not assault weapons and the law was not a ban on the guns but a ban on further manufacture of them, and even though the US Government conceded that the ban had no measureable effect on crime and its sunsetting did not increase crime.

Illinois is one of only two states that does not allow concealed carry of handguns by civilians under any circumstances, so perhaps Obama can be given a pass on his ignorance. At least he is smart enough to know he doesn't know everything; there is hope he may eventually study the Second Amendment's context and intent and realize the error in his absence of thinking on the subject.

Governor Bill Richardson is the only prominent Democrat since Hubert Humphrey that I'm aware of who understands the what and the why of the Second Amendment. Too bad he dropped out.

That leaves the Republican candidates. Ugh.

Mike Huckabee is pro-gun rights, not because it's politically expedient but because he understands what it's about. And he's a hell of a nice guy. Too bad he's a religious fanatic who would like to reshape the Constitution to fit his own superstitions.

Rudy Guliani is little more than an opportunist, and--rare for a Republican--anti-gun rights. At least he doesn't appear to be a religious fanatic.

Mitt Romney... Well, hell. What can anyone say about Mitt the Twit? Whatever anyone says, if it's not accurate when said, it probably will be if you wait a few minutes.

That leaves John McCain, the Old Man of the entire bunch. In terms of understanding the nuts and bolts of government, he may be best qualified, if only because he's been around longer. (Put your swords back in their scabbards. I said may be.)

But, wait a minute! We don't want an experienced person this time! We want CHANGE!

So does every bum on the sidewalk.

The scary side of wanting a complete outsider is, we may get another Jimmy Carter, a good-hearted guy who tried to re-invent the wheel every day but Sunday.

What this country needs is a President with the force of will and the moral standing to change the direction of government while using the existing tools and mechanisms of government efficiently and with understanding of the day-to-day basics of how our government works.

Many of the organizations I belong to and support will be urging me to vote a straight pro-gun ticket, as usual. I can't do that. The country may not be able to afford that.

Now comes the rumored possibility that Michael Bloomberg will enter the race as a third-party candidate, inheriting the crown of thorns sported by Ralph Nader and perhaps having the same effect: siphoning enough votes from the Democratic candidate to ensure the election of another Republican incompetent. (Not that Republicans are, by definition, incompetent; it just seems to work out that way. And, this year, with the possible exception of John McCain, it is that way.)

We live in interesting times. I hope we, as a nation, can survive them.