As an outsider watching the Republican race for the nomination, I can’t help but think that the Republicans don’t want to win the presidency this term. After all, the country is still in an economic quagmire (not the funny Family Guy kind of Quagmire) and why would they want to inherit that mess? It’s too soon to be able to blame it all on Obama. People still remember that it was George W. Bush that handed Obama the economic train wreck in the first place, after being given the biggest economic surplus in the history of the country by Clinton. Historically it seems that the Republicans like to run the country into the ground, then the Democrats patch it up as best they can for a term or two, then pass it back to the Republicans to break again. This chart shows that the Democrats outperform the Republicans when it comes to the economy. http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm
The Republicans in this race seem to be doing an ‘I don’t want the nomination’ dance. From the very beginning when there were ten people vying for the title. It seemed to me that every time a new candidate became the front runner they would say or do something so outlandish that they would fall by the wayside within a week. Now it’s down to four, possibly five, if you believe that Sarah Palin has a secret plot afoot http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-dunn/sarah-palin-2012_b_1351763.html
Arguably, none of the remaining four men have much of a chance at winning the presidency back from Obama if they keep inserting their feet firmly into their mouths as they have been. The Republicans, as a whole, are alienating their female supporters right out of the party with all of this backward talk of contraception and abortion. Issues that had been settled 39 years ago when Roe vs. Wade was decided. However, according to this video, at least, there are many Americans who are voting faith over issues that directly concern them like the economy. It’s shocking that in the poorest state of the union, people would rather starve than elect Obama again.
Rick Santorum recently stated that Obama was a snob for wanting people to attend college and he’s winning in the southern states.
Santorum came out against higher education and women and is still winning the support of entire states. The scary thing here is that he could actually beat Obama if the people who vote faith vote in higher numbers that the people who vote issues. Not to mention the flames of racism that still run rampant through the country that are being fanned by conservative pundits like Rush Limbaugh and the fine folks at FOX news. Illustrated by this bumper sticker.
The Republicans like to divide and conquer. This attitude has served them well, historically but it will be severely tested if Romney wins the nomination. Who will the Christian right vote for without a horse in the race, the Mormon or the ‘Muslim’? Romney has been so transparent in his pandering that he has very little chance of a presidential win, but stranger things have happened.
It’s hard to think that a win is the real goal this election with the crazy dog and pony show the Republicans have been putting on, but, they may just be crazy like the proverbial fox and incite their base into voting en mass. So I guess my real point is…
If you want to be taken seriously, vote issues, not faith and please vote for the one person that will least embarrass you on the world stage.
I quit smoking a little over 6 months ago. I was a pack a day smoker for 33 years. It was my choice to quit. No one else forced me to make that decision, try as they might over the years. I was just at a point where I was ready to stop, so I did. I still think that if people want to smoke, that it is their right to do so. I am a firm believer in my body, my choice. So when I read this article http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/02/14/cote-st-luc-smoking-bylaw_n_1276604.html?ref=canada it put the wind up my skirt (or, in this case, the smoke). I understand banning smoking in indoor public places, what with ventilation being an issue and all, but OUTDOORS? I could even get on board with no smoking in playgrounds, if only to keep parents quiet. This smoking ban surprised me most of all, because it was put in place in a Montreal adjacent municipality. Yes, French Canadians are banning cigarette smoking outside. The last time I went to France (admittedly, it’s been a while), I got off the plane in Paris, went to the service desk, cigarette in hand, asked for a light and was immediately obliged. Smoking is practically mandatory in France. Have French Canadians been so watered down by Canadian political correctness that they are okay with banning smoking OUTSIDE? I expect this kind of erosion of personal freedoms in laces like California, where you are not allowed to smoke on the beach anymore… yes, the beach, nature’s ashtray. But Montreal? Really?
Then, on the very same day, from the other side of the very same country comes this story. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/02/14/former-bc-attorneys-general-pot-prohibition_n_1277040.html While I think this is potentially a good thing, what I would like to know is, if we can’t smoke cigarettes indoors or outdoors, just where will we be allowed to smoke pot? While one hand gives us freedom to do what we want to/with our body, the other hand takes it away by telling us we can do it, but only in designated areas, which are getting fewer by the minute. So for those of you who are excited by the prospect of legalized marijuana, don’t think you’ll be seeing this sign anytime soon.