Predictions for the nominees

Jack Layton talking to Stéphane Dion on his initiative about Afghanistan is sort of like the pinkie talking to the hand.
It is ridiculous to talk about how alcohol and firearms are legal and tobacco is legal and regulated and they cause lots of damage so that is why we should not allow drugs to become legal and regulated. They’ll still cause a lot of damage and problems for addiction. But you don’t see any cigarette or booze gangs running around running those things. Only someone who doesn’t have to live in the neighbourhoods that deal with these ruthless, murderous gangs would say something like that. Isn’t it easier to deal with the problem if the person doesn’t have to hide all the time whenever he wants to use whatever he is addicted to? Aside from that, I don’t remember anyone running a gang for cigarettes, unless they were taxed or tariffed too much.
There are many people who vote for the NDP in the average poll or election would trade their Canadian ballot for an American ballot in an election. That says it all.
I wish to further memorialize the February 6, 2008, that McCain and Clinton will be the nominees of their parties. They have won in California and I don’t see how they can be stopped mathematically. Probably, the Democrat race will continue on as a sort of curiosity, especially if Obama can somehow win a couple of the remaining big states. In the likelihood that he doesn’t, Clinton will probably win the nomination.
McCain will almost certainly win it now. He seems to have more delegates that Romney and Huckabee put together. Clinton only has about a 10% lead on Obama. On the Republican side, it looks more inexorable that he will take the nomination.

McCain's Strategy

Sometimes this campaign looks like a Hollywood screenwriter wrote it. It’s like something out of West Wing. I expect at any moment Martin Sheen to come in with a cigarette and say: "Okay boys, let’s make a president!"
There are some real scenarios to chew on, though. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch endorsed John McCain. I think it was the writer Mike Sullivan from Fox who suggested that he would feel better about voting for McCain if he knew who his running mate was. What an interesting point. What if McCain announced who his running mate was? What if that person was young, attractive, fit, perhaps even a person from a visible minority? What sort of a stunning gesture would that be, not only showing confidence, as opposed to arrogance, about being the nominee but at the same time reassuring people, like those who read the Post-Dispatch need to be reassured, about McCain’s fitness, health and soundness. It’s not too late to do it. If McCain did it in the next couple of days before Super Tuesday, I think it could be a real devastating shot against Romney. So far, Romney doesn’t have anyone nominated for that and is in a much less obvious position to do that.
McCain is looking more and more like George C. Scott as Patton. All he is missing is a gigantic American flag behind him, the shiny helmet with the "A", britches, boots and a swagger stick up his ass. Apparently his record at Annapolis was as good as Custer’s at West Point. I want to know who is running mate is too.
The other thing that was brought up is what is Arnold Schwarzenegger listened to the Kennedy in his bed and jumped on the Obama bandwagon and actually supported Obama, a Democrat, for president? What a devastating gesture that would be. There’s not much time left to do it and Schwarzenegger would be fried forever as a Republican if he did it. But McCain got Lieberman to support him. Lieberman’s a Democrat Senator, albeit an independent one. Lieberman has far less to lose as a member of his party than Schwarzenegger stands to lose. Lately, though, he’s been acting more like a Democrat anyways. If he announced his support for Obama and also announced that he was joining the Democrats, it would create almost irresistible momentum for Obama.
Clinton said she found her voice. She didn’t point out that it was Bill’s.

The Presidential Race

Now we learn from the Today show that in fact Madame Clinton was in fact photographed with Mr. Rezko and President Clinton. This is in addition to the Soo situation, the Buddhist Temple, White Water…
Apparently, Madame Clinton and her family have invested millions of dollars in the Saudi part of the world. Doesn’t that put her in a conflict?
Not only is her hideous strategy having some effect on Obama’s support nationwide, but now she pulled out the Puss-in-Boots trick where she wells up and sends President Clinton to do her dog work. She could not wait to get out of South Carolina. She is the status quo ante candidate. It’s Middle Age Barbie in the White House package.
At the Obama acceptance rally in South Carolina, lighters were replaced by digital cameras, all held up looking like mini-lighters at rock concerts. He then attended on Sunday morning to do an interview with the odious, vile George Stephanopoulos. I would have pointed out that Stephanopoulos is a Clinton lickspittle who owes his career to them and it shows.
The Kennedy endorsement doesn’t hurt Obama, though. Senator Kennedy says Obama makes us appeal to the better angels of our nature, a Lincolnian phrase. I wonder if that means Barack, also from Illinois and more specifically Springfield, is the next Lincoln? Who wouldn’t love to see him in a stovepipe hat and some mutton chop sideburns?
Romney now has the support of the Jeb Bush organization in Florida and it was confirmed that the New York Times endorsement may have been a strategy to ruin McCain because they know that he is the easiest candidate to defeat. I think Romney is looking better and better right now. Looks young too.
The Canadian Front: John Manley stated he thought of Afghanistan as 1600 era England.
Superbowl: Junior Seau says there are three categories in life: good, great and EVER!

Eight is Enough!

I think it's time for people to start asking Mr. Clinton just what role he is going to play in Hillary's Clinton administration. I also think she should be asked far more because she is the candidate.

In light of his role in the campaign, it's a fair question. What will he be doing. What implications are there for the fact that he was already president for eight years. Will be in fact be getting a co-presidency? I think those questions should be asked and Mrs. Clinton should be forthright in answering them.

If she hedges or complains or whines that she's being asked unfair questions, people should not back off until she gives the answer that people should expect.

What she needs to give is a written undertaking that she will not use Mr. Clinton in an official capacity. She needs to provide a protocol as to how her husband will behave during the presidency and that that will be enforced.