At Least it Wasn't Guliani

You'll never guess what I came across while I was cleaning out my internets.

The following list was from a stillborn L&E post that never made it back in JUNE of 2007.
That was when the Presidential Primary candidates from both parties were beginning to shake out, and I decided to rank them (from best to worst) as I evaluated their leadership potential.

I never finished it because I was still working in politics back at this point (and doing consulting for several candidates on this list), and didn't want to burn any bridges.
I just ranked every potential candidate on my assessment of their character, their level of experience, and my personal relationships with them and/or their offices. The list is shockingly (in retrospect) non-partisan.

Our Dear and Benevolent Leader (elect) finished 20th out of 21.

The following is my presidential "power rankings" list from June 15th, 2007:

1. Mitt Romney (R)
2. Bill Richardson (D)
3. Ron Paul (R)
4. Mike Gravel (D)
5. Fred Thompson (R)
6. John McCain (R)
7. Hillary Clinton (D)

Top 1/3 = 4 Republican - 3 Democrat

8. Tommy Thompson (R)
9. Duncan Hunter (R)
10. Jim Gilmore (R)
11. Ralph Nader (I)*
12. John Edwards (D)
13. Dennis Kucinich (D)
14. Joe Biden (D)

Middle 1/3 = 3 Republican - 4 Democrat*

15. Sam Brownback (R)
16. Mike Huckabee (R)
17. Chris Dodd (D)
18. Tom Tancredo (R)
19. Michael Bloomberg (I)*
20. Barack Obama (D)
21. Rudy Guliani (R)

Bottom 1/3 = 5 Republican* - 2 Democrat
---
*Including Nader as Democrat & Bloomberg as Republican in tallies.

Ain't that a kick in the nuts.

Before I Shut the Fuck Up

First I'd like to definitively answer the Old Dog's query, and categorically state that the reason that I've stopped blogging is that I haven't dug myself into any alcohol-induced holes as of late (ladies). Well, until now.

I'm sorry if I've riled some of you up with my blunt assessment of Our Dear and Benevolent Leader (elect). There's a superb conversation thread in the comment field of the post below (if you haven't checked it out yet).

I just want to reiterate that:
A) I'm just getting it out there now, so I can gloat later if I happen to be correct in my assessment.
B) I hope that I'm wrong-as-hell in my aforementioned assessment.
C) I wish nothing but the best for Our Dear and Benevolent Leader (elect) and his minions.

All I know is that I've watched enough History Channel to know that when there's a charismatic cult-of-personality figure standing before countless masses that are chanting in unison and making obscure hand gestures, that the guy behind the podium is both lying out of his ass and up to no good.

Plus, It's never a good sign when our (already depleted) financial markets break through the floor in the days following an election.
I just can't picture the world's financial mavens saying: "Huzzah! Our guy won. This is the end of the tumultuous period that has plagued us mercilessly and stripped our houses bare. A new day is dawning, and we are now at the precipice of a great new era of bounty and prosperity".
--slight pause--
"SELL! SELL! SELL!"

Okay, I lapsed back into "sarcastic prick" mode there for a second, but I'm getting it all out now, because I promise to play nice and not say anything mean about Our Dear and Benevolent Leader (elect) unless he starts to pull some shit like he did back in his state Senate days (on July 2nd, 1998 - to be precise) when he advocated banning the sale or transfer of ALL forms of semi-automatic weapons.
For those not in the know, almost every single gun manufactured in the world today falls under the "semi-automatic" classification. Shotguns are semi-auto, Pistols are semi-auto, revolvers are semi-auto, most rifles are semi-auto. If this ban were to pass, the only guns that wouldn't fall under this classification would be antiquated break-action single-shot guns, breech loaders, muzzle loaders, bolt-action guns, and fully automatic weapons (which are already way-illegal).

You wouldn't give a wet shit, you say?

Well here's a thought experiment:
Let's suppose the the Bush Administration somehow finagled legislation through Congress that mandated that the right of free-speech guaranteed to us by the first amendment didn't apply to any form of communication that was invented subsequent to 1885 (the year the semi-automatic process was patented).
I wouldn't put it past 'em.
That means the first amendment wouldn't apply to anything produced with and/or utilizing the following technologies: Linotype typesetting, any Recorded Media (subsequent to rotating cylinder), personal Telephone, Offset press, Screen-printing, Film, Photocopier, Television, Telex, Computer, Cellular technology, the Internet, or (essentially) anything that uses any form of electricity in it's use and/or production process.

Would that be okay with you?

Let me tell you; I'd be unholy pissed. That would be a great time to have a stockpile of modern firearms, because it's damn near impossible to overthrow a totalitarian government with rubber hippie daisies and clever slogans.

Apples and oranges, you say?

Those are the 1st and 2nd rights bestowed upon us by the founding fathers.

The second amendment is misinterpreted, you say?

Talk to the Supreme Court - Their number is: (202) 479-3011.
Good luck with that. If you could, like, change their mind, you totally would, like, be on television or something.

All I'm saying is that once you start fucking around with the Constitution, you set a precedent for every single nut-job to strip away any right that they don't deem necessary.

That's not a good thing.

Okay, got carried away there again for a second.
I'm back on the nice now. I promise not to say anything more on the subject, unless Our Dear and Benevolent Leader (elect) does something that gets me going, or one of you unwashed heathens keeps me riled-up on this....

... although, I do have some personal thoughts and experiences I'd like to share with you on his appointed Chief of Staff....

...Wait for it.

Change Comes from Within

Eight years ago I told everyone that would listen that George W. Bush was a no-good son-of-a-bitch pseudo-politician, and that his election would be the bane of the Republican party for decades.

Chalk one up for the Liar.

I'd like to take this opportunity to publicly state that Barrack Obama is a no-good son-of-a-bitch pseudo-politician, and that his administration will be a huge embarrassment for the Democratic party.

It is my sincerest hope that sometime in my lifetime we can elect one single United States President based on merit rather than manufactured populist appeal.

I can dream, can't I?