Maybe the World is Flat

Okay, so the Republican race for nomination as candidate for the presidency has become the singular issue of  how far to the right each can move.

First, we had Rep. Michele Bachmann and the awe shucks governor of Texas, Rick Perry, who apparently proved that the world is indeed flat, moved so far beyond even the reaches of the Tea Party that they dropped off the earth.  Both were at one time front-runners in the GOP that has seen more twists and turns than auto racing's grand prix.

Former Congressman Newt Gingrich made a strong run to the front of the crowd, but something slowed him abruptly, moving him to the back of the pack despite the tens of millions of dollars that flowed his way from Las Vegas.  He showed there are limits to how much baggage we're allowed, and that just because you think you're the smartest person in the room doesn't mean you should serve as the leader of the free world.

Then, along came former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum and his seemingly endless wardrobe of sweater vests, who has demonstrated his ability to test the outer extremes of conservatism.  There are no limits to which he'll go, perhaps knowing deep down that he'll eventually drop off the edge.  Hell, his own state turned him aside in his re-election bid to the Senate.  Which makes me wonder what it would have been like to have Santorum and his vests going up against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her pantsuits.  Just sayin'...

Of course, we have the so-called establishment candidate, Willard Mitt Romney, former Mr. Lots of Things, with a boatload of personal wealth.  Unfortunately, he's tacking perilously close to the edge of the abyss, risking whatever support he has just to be able to stand up and say: Hey, look at me!  I'm the true Mr. Conservative.
Perhaps the brightest bulb in the lot, Congressman Ron Paul, who has made few protestations of ultra conservatism, comes across as more of a libertarian, with no shot at winning the support of either the far right or left (or even the middle, for that matter).  He seems content to play the role of the little puppy dog, constantly nipping at the heals of his fellow Republicans.  To them, I'm sure, he's little more than an annoyance.  To anyone taking the time to listen, he's definitely the you-can-take-me-or-leave-me, this-is-what-I-am, no-window-dressing candidate.  It's kind of refreshing, really, even though he has no real shot at the nomination.

One thing is certain.  At the end of all the conservative one-upsmanship, there's still a strong possibility of a yet-to-be-named candidate who'll out-conservative them all, maybe even former Alaska Gov. Sarah I-can-see-Russia-from-my-house Palin.  This would prove beyond a shadow of doubt that despite the adventures of Christopher Columbus the world is indeed flat.

Huntsman's Chances

Every four years pundits from throughout the country and around the globe focus as lasers on the voters in New Hampshire.  A few weeks in most believe they have a solid grasp  of what makes the Granite State's electorate tick.  Reporters and talking heads pontificate at length as to why one candidate is sure to emerge as the winner of this quadrennial event called the presidential preference primary.  Sometimes they are right, often they are wrong.

The proliferation of poll results are reflective of a revolving door.  They are supposedly conducted by questioning potential primary voters, yet their reliability has proven questionable.  There are certainties in this season's Republican race, not all of which are reflected in polls.

• There will be a winner and more than one loser.
• The winner will not necessarily be the party's eventual nominee.
• Despite what the candidates say about competing in all 50 states, it won't happen...never has, never will.
• Once again, New Hampshire will prove to be the great winnower of the field, narrowing it to no more than three viable contestants.
• The second place finisher will go on and prove that it isn't necessary to finish first in the drive to  carry the party's banner toward the 2012 election in November.

As it stands today, former Massachusetts Gov. Willard Mitt Romney will be the number one choice of New Hampshire Republicans.  Of the two spots remaining of the viable three, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will likely fill one of the spots, and don't be surprised if one of the national media's least covered, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, sneaks into the number two spot.

One thing my years of covering politics in New Hampshire taught me is that the Granite Staters are cagey, seldom showing their hand before entering the voting booth.  Remember Jimmy who?  When the little known governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, was campaigning he was given little shot at winning the state's primary and going on to capture the White House.  Like it or not, he emerged atop the Democratic Party's pile in 1976 and survived a challenge within his own party four years later.  Winning the GOP nod in New Hampshire but failing to gain their party's nomination were such notables as Pat Buchanan in 1996 and John McCain in 2000.  Bill Clinton failed to win over the state's Democrats in 1992, finishing second, and neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama got the state's endorsement.  Both Bush and Obama proved that finishing second wasn't a bad thing.

So, what about Huntsman?  He seems to be running a stealth campaign, flying just far enough below the radar that the only attention he gathers is that of the people who really matter, the GOP voters.  He has said on more than one occasion that he will be quite happy finishing second, and I for one will not be surprised if he meets that goal.  As for the darling of the state's largest newspaper, Gingrich, the harder Gingrich campaigns and the longer it drags on the better for everyone else in the contest.  As for the remainder of the crowded field, forget about it; maybe in another four years.

Wait four years?  Most likely.  See, Mr. Ego, Donald Trump, is so bent on ousting President Obama that he has made it perfectly clear that if Republicans don't nominate someone of his liking, he will strongly consider running as an independent.  If he choses to do so, the only beneficiary of his candidacy will be Obama.  So the President's team must be looking forward to The Donald's entry into the fray.  It would be Christmas in November.

Trump This!

I suppose it would be easy, maybe even sensible to ignore the proposed December 27 Republican presidential debate in Iowa being promoted and moderated by the ultimate huckster of our time, Donald Trump.  I mean, really?  Trump, who hasn't totally ruled himself out as a potential candidate for the presidency moderating a sideshow that as of this writing has only two announced candidates agreeing to be part of this vaudevillian exercise - Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum - taking part?

Now I can totally understand former House Speaker Gingrich leaping at the opportunity to pontificate on why he's the smartest person in the room, if not the planet.  Though he's leading in some polls at this point, he is in desperate need of campaign cash.  And if he's able to impress the equally egotistical Trump, perhaps the cash register will ring up sufficient coin to carry him through the primary season.

As for Santorum, he has nothing to lose.  His candidacy is about as insignificant as The Donald himself.  Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have wisely said no thanks to participating, and Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are said to be mulling over their course of action.  The latter two are also fast becoming irrelevant in the crowded field of GOP contenders, as is Rep. Paul.  Former Massachusetts Gov. Willard Mitt Romney says he's unable to fit the show into his schedule, that he will be busy campaigning for votes in the Iowa caucus.

So it appears that the debate will be between Gingrich and Santorum.  The egotist versus the wannabe, questioned and moderated by the carnival barker.  Will it be interesting and informative?  Probably not.  The only thing that could save the show (let's face it, that's what it is) is if at the conclusion one of the two candidates (or maybe even both) simultaneously points directly at Trump and utters the words "You're Fired".

Now that, in the words of Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry, would make my day.

My Doomed Ship

You know how many of us go through life hanging onto the old saw "waiting for my ship to come in"?  Well, no longer, for me.  I am now convinced such thinking is an utter waste of time.  Such a thought will no longer, after today, occupy any portion of my already over-loaded brain.

I mean, we have limited storage capacity, don't we?  How much can we be expected to retain as we go through life, year after year, accumulating, sorting, analyzing and rarely editing down items and information that is either useless or irrelevant to our lives.

So that's it.  My ship isn't coming in, I'm convinced beyond reasonable doubt.  No more waiting around for that big windfall that was believed to be afloat on the high seas, just waiting for a proper berth in a friendly, welcoming port.

There would be no safe harbor for my ship.  No need to stand watch, gazing out across the foamy Atlantic in search of some mystical vessel swelled with riches bearing my name on the address label.

See, 71 years ago today, the day I was born, there were no fewer than 18 ships sunk in the Atlantic Ocean. One belonged to the Royal Navy, so my intended riches certainly were not aboard the HMS Forfar, that was torpedoed by the German submarine U-99.  Only 21 of the crew of 194 were saved.  Another doomed ship was the Klaus Schoke, a German cargo ship that was attacked, attempts to scuttle her were initially unsuccessful and she later sank on December 5.  I know nothing on board her was headed my way.

As for the remaining 16, well we shall never know for certain, but I'm reasonably sure my ship's not coming in anytime soon, if ever.  It was either lost, sunk or never sailed.

Hey, at least I know, right?

Say Goodnight, Mr. Cain

On Tuesday, Herman Cain reportedly told some staffers that he is reassessing the viability of his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.  This, in the wake of an allegation from a woman who claims she had a long affair with Cain.

Memo to Cain:

Your campaign was never, I repeat, never viable, no matter who was telling you otherwise and throwing money your way.  Oh it looked somewhat promising (at least to you, I’m sure) when you emerged victorious in a straw poll in Florida.  But did you really believe that was a reasonable sampling of the folks from the Sunshine State?

You were only a little interesting because the national media fell for the novelty of your quest.  And once that happened, the newsroom pools were formed and wagers placed on just when you’d trip yourself up, or otherwise implode.

And as the campaign progressed, did you actually believe that you could get away with only 9-9-9 as a platform or that it alone would lead anyone to consider you qualified to hold the highest office in the land?

You dodged a few bullets when first one woman than another accused you of inappropriate behavior at some point in your life.  But with this latest revelation…well, there was just a little too much smoke to believe there was no fire, know what I mean, Herman?  Oh, you protested, of course, as you have more than once.  Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry certainly helped your cause for a while, by his ability to stumble seemingly at will.  I'm thinking you owe him something for taking some of the heat off you, if only for a day or so.

So, go ahead, reassess all you want.  You’re being dropped like a hot potato by nearly everyone whose support you thought you could count on.  The mainstream GOP?  There never was the possibility of backing there.  The Tea Party?  Yeah, right.  Please.  Right now you are just background noise that is unwelcome.  And don't feel like a lone cast-off.  Gov. Perry will be joining you shortly, as will Rep. Michelle Bachmann.  Hey, one more and you'll have a foursome at golf.  You do play, don't you?

Maybe it was fun for you while it lasted, but I’m sure you’ll come quickly to the realization that there are other things you could be doing with your life.  Hint: maybe smooth things over at home?

Say goodnight, Mr. Cain.

Arrogance Versus the Uninterested

Sad, pathetic…those are just two words that could accurately describe the scene at a hearing before the House Natural Resources Committee, aimed at the issue of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  On stage, front and center, undeniably arrogant professor Douglas Brinkley, and a congressman, who by definition is someone with questionable esteem, Rep. Don Young, Republican of Alaska.  It was little more than a schoolyard joust, that did nothing more than waste time.

It started by Young referring to the Brinkley, a Rice University professor and so-called historian, as Mr. Rice.  Brinkley, apparently presuming he’s from the everyone-knows-your-name club, interrupted to set the record straight on who Young was addressing, and informing the congressman that Rice was a university.

Young reportedly told Brinkley to “be quiet”, and went on to say that members of his committee were the ones to ask questions and that Brinkley was merely there to respond.  To ignite the flames further, Young insinuated that the hearing was an exercise in futility.

He didn’t like the idea of Brinkley’s interruption and referred to the ever full-of-himself prof as an ivory tower elitist.  Young lost his composure entirely when he said, “Boy, I’m really pissed right now.”

Okay, enough said.  I mean, no one expects Alaska to elect Mensa caliber representatives, or even governors for that matter.  Consider that pseudo moose-hunter, former Gov. Sarah Palin.  On that I rest my case.

Why Brinkley, who we’re told and often reminded is quite bright, would fall into an obvious trap and appear before a committee that will ultimately do nothing to protect whatever is there in what Young called a “nothing” kind of place, is beyond me.

In the end, the actions of the two verbal jousters set a poor example for anyone watching.

I can just imagine the thoughts going through the minds of visitors to a House committee hearing for the first time, presuming (incorrectly, for the most part) that this is the way of Washington.

They just need to know that this wasn’t a typical exchange (at least I hope not), but rather an example of when a highly arrogant individual gets involved in a contest with someone whose interest in hearing an opposing side ranges between zero and none.

No one wins.

A Political Junkie Vents

Okay, let’s get one thing out in the open right away.  I am a bit of a political junkie.  But there are occasions during campaign seasons when I think perhaps we were wrong in adopting this democracy thing.

I guess I come to the political games genetically.  My grandfather was a two-term state representative, and we had many conversations about the fate of the nation when I visited him.  Of course, one conversation centered on my registering as a Democrat.   He was a staunch Baptist and about as Republican as one can get, even cringing at the thought of the late President John F. Kennedy, a Democrat and worse yet, a Catholic, becoming president.  But I don’t think he harbored ill feelings toward me because I happened to favor Kennedy.

Mother, too, was acutely aware of everything politic to the day she died, just shy of her 98^th birthday.  Strangely, even though her legislator father indoctrinated her into the Republican way, she did hold a certain fondness for the late great liberal lion of the U.S. Senate, Edward M. Kennedy, D-Massachusetts.  Go figure.

I guess my interest in politics became further heightened when I made a shift in my journalism career from sports editor to political reporter.  It wasn’t much of a transition, really.  As my mentor at the time, Rod Paul of the Concord (N.H.) Monitor, explained, the only difference between pols and athletes was the fact that politicians don’t wear numbers or their name on the back of their shirts.  He was right about that.  Yes, politics is a game, but one that can have more dire consequences than any contest played on a basketball court, ice rink, baseball diamond, football or soccer field.

So what’s the point of all of this prattle?  I was listening to some campaign commercials that have been airing of late and I realized that so-called attack ads are about 95 percent lies, or at best twisted truths, and the remaining five percent pointless.  Unfortunately, some potential voters will be swayed one way or another by them, and that strikes me as a shame.  It is evident that we’re going to run through a presidential preference primary season hearing nothing of substance and an increasing amount of vitriol.  And the run-up to the general election in November 2012 promises to be more of the same.

Just once I would love to hear candidates say what they will do if elected to whatever office they seek, and forget about whomever they are running against.  There is no point in demonizing an opponent or foes without explaining how you would do things differently if given the chance.  And please, can we do away with the phrase “sick and tired”?  If a candidate is indeed sick and/or tired, he or she doesn’t warrant my vote.  I don’t need someone representing me who might sleep during their time in office, missing a crucial debate and vote, or who is too ill to be involved at all.

Okay, not that I’ve flushed those thoughts from the area of my mind that’s labeled “gives-a-damn”, let the games go on.  Maybe there’ll be a good halftime show.