Comments to the Internets - The Freedom Party

taken from facebook...
it's funny bc when she came on to the national scene in '08 I thought of her as a TR figure in the GOP...now understand I love TR and do not compare him to her intellectually in any way. If TR were plucked from 1913 and brought to our present, he'd still be smarter than Sarah Palin in 2013. I compare them as young aspiring politician, and that's cool to see a female at a relatively young age shoot for the national scene, like a young TR did. So her "bolting" from the GOP and starting a third party, reminds me of the 1912 election, who's 100 year anniversary we just had and I'd hope for a repeat of party bolting, but with this info it sounds like Palin's Freedom Party would do just what the Progressive Party did to the 1912 election and divide the GOP vote, as well as the progressive vote (Wilson was running as a progressive just as TR was), but gave the election to the Democrats. I don't think, however that the Freedom Party would come in second place as TR's Progressive Party did...the only 3rd Party to come in second place both in the popular vote and the Electoral College. Other Third Parties have won States (and thus Electoral College Votes) since TR's Third Party and 1968's General Election was the last time a third party won any States and 1972 for an electoral college vote because of a "faithless elector". If the Freedom Party happens...maybe it'd win States, but like 1968's it'll be the States formerly known as the Confederate States of America.

The Presidential Pictures - "HBO's John Adams"

the following is from HBO's John Adams mini-series based on the David McCullough book.

The Presidential Pictures - "The First President"

The clip is a scene from the HBO mini-series, showing Vice President John Adams (Paul Giamatti) addressing the Congress before George Washington's (David Morse) swearing-in.

the following is from HBO's John Adams (2008) mini-series based on the David McCullough book (2001).

Pointless Presidential Pfacts #16 - "Back-to-Back 50 Percenters (D)"

Barack Obama is one of only 3 Democratic presidents to be reelected back-to-back with over 50% of the popular vote. Franklin Roosevelt received over 50% of the popular vote in all four of his elections (1932, 1936, 1940, 1944). Before FDR, you have to go back to the first Democrat elected president, Andrew Jackson won both his elections (1828, 1836) with over 50%. In 2008, Obama was the first Democrat since Jimmy Carter's 1976 election to receive 50% of the popular vote.

Pointless Presidential Pfacts #12 - "The Popular Candidates"

In 2008, Barack Obama received the most popular votes in a single election with 69.5 million votes. The second most number of votes in a single election went to George W. Bush in 2004 with 62 million. The person with the next most after Bush 43 went to John McCain in 2008 with 60 million, followed next by John Kerry in 2004 with 59 million. Ronald Reagan is next in 1984 with 54.5 million, a number that made him the person with the most popular votes in a single election until Bush 43's reelection. Before 2004, the closest any presidential candidate came to Reagan's 54.5 million was Al Gore in 2000 with 51 million votes. All numbers rounded.

2012 Prediction

My first time voting was in 1996, and after I cast my vote I felt I was voting for the winner of the election. In the end, I was right...it was William Jefferson Clinton. I didn't predict his election, but somehow knew he'd be reelected. I was a registered Republican for a couple of months before switching to the Democratic Party just before the election. I turned 18 in July of '96 and, of course, the election was in November.

In 2000, I voted for the incumbent vice president, and somehow believed and thought he would win. I voted the day of the election and of course had no idea that the outcome would not be revealed until December 13, 2000. I don't know why I thought he'd win, even though the popular vote would support my notion that Al Gore was more popular among the electorate than the actual winner, Governor George Bush of Texas. I should've known better since only 4 incumbent vice presidents have won a presidential election. At that point in 2000, Vice President George Bush was the first incumbent vice president to win since Martin Van Buren in 1936. Notice I used the Bush's titles to differentiate them rather than their middle initials. Of course, had Gore used more of President Bill Clinton and simply won his own home state he'd have won the election.

Historically, with the exception of Samuel Tilden, the person that won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote, returned 4 years later and defeated the president elected simply by the Electoral College. Andrew Jackson had the most votes in 1824, but John Quincy Adams was eventually elected president by the House of Representatives because neither candidate had a majority in the Electoral college. President Grover Cleveland won the popular vote in 1888, but Benjamin Harrison won the Electoral College. Four years later, former president Cleveland defeated President Harrison in a rematch. In 2004, Gore joined Tilden by not running again against the man that lost the popular vote but won the presidency. Most likely, Gore didn't run in '04 because Bush was a wartime president and no Democrat was going to beat him. If you asked me on September 10, 2001, if Gore were to run in '04, I'd say he would win. But if you asked me on September 12, 2001, in a post-9/11 America, I'd tell you that Bush would win reelection. I predicted it on that tragic day and proof that Bush was unbeatable is that Gore didn't run and the other most popular Democrat, Hillary Clinton, didn't run. Sure she was a first term U.S. Senator from New York, but in 2002 she was considered a front-runner for the presidential nomination on the Democratic side. But she knew, like Gore did, that she'd lose to a popular wartime president. Called it!

If you follow President Bush's ratings from 9/11, you'll see he has the highest approval rating since his father after the Gulf War. But if you follow those numbers they go down, and a chart would show that if the election of 2004 were in December the president would probably lose. And his poll numbers just kept going down from there. So by 2008, there was no way a Republican could win the presidency. The presidential election of 2008 was pretty much determined during the 2008 Democratic primary/caucus elections between then-senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Once Obama won the nomination it was clear that he'd be winner in November.

As I write this and explain my justifications for the '04 an '08 election predictions, the evidence for reelection was so clear. Since Obama's election in 2008, I've predicted his reelection. As Election Day approaches, it looks like 2012 will be another 2004, 1976, or a 1968 to name a few close elections. But I've always thought that he was unbeatable, maybe it's like my vote for Clinton in '96 and Gore in '00, but the evidence for his reelection is there. The Republicans in 2012 nominated Mitt Romney out of a field that included fringe candidates and the lone logical candidate in Jon Huntsman, and he got no love whereas all those others scared Romney at least once by out polling him. In 2012, the Republicans had to choose a candidate out of the B-team (I don't think B-team is right, maybe Z-team), the no-love-candidate Jon Huntsman, and Etch A Sketch Mitt Romney. The A-Team of the Republican Party didn't show up, Haley Barbour, Mitch Daniels, and Jeb Bush, to name a few. Jeb Bush at least had his last name as a reason not run.

My prediction of Obama's '12 victory was confirmed by the A-Team GOPers skipping the race because they knew they couldn't defeat a popular president like Obama, just like Gore and Hillary skipping '04. Now if I am wrong, I'll admit it and those A-Team GOPers will be upset that they didn't step up. If I am wrong, I'll still predict that a President Romney will win reelection in 2016, because the economy will be better in the 2013-2017 presidential term and that president will get the credit. Meaning a President Romney will win reelection or President Obama will be able anoint his successor whether that's Vice President Joe Biden, probably-by-then former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or some other popular Democrat in four years, just like President Theodore Roosevelt did with William Howard Taft in 1908 or Ronald Reagan with Vice President Bush in 1988. Had Gore relied more on the popular Clinton, he too would have received the love of a popular outgoing incumbent. But Gore felt the Lewinsky scandal should not touch him, even though Clinton was popular post-impeachment and more so as an outgoing POTUS.

I don't see my 2012 prediction being wrong, although in the days leading up to election night I'm reminded of the days before 2000. I'm probably questioning myself because of all the articles I read that say how close the election is, or how friends or comments-online-people declaring a Romney landslide victory. I just wonder where are they getting their info since they bash any poll that says Obama will win. Obama's reelection will not just be the first for someone of African ancestry, but also the first time that 3 presidents have been reelected back-to-back since James Monroe succeeded James Madison in 1816 and Madison succeeded Thomas Jefferson in 1808. I'm sure the 57th U.S. Presidential Election will result in the reelection of the 44th President of the United States and 47th Vice President. Why is it the 57th election and 44th POTUS and 47 VPOTUS? That sounds like that can be a pointless presidential pfact, which is probably better than this pointless presidential 'pinion.

Why Mitt

President Barack Obama has a tough one-hundred-forty-seven days ahead of him. The 2012 Presidential Election is turning into a 50-50 race like 2004 and 2000, among many others. Obama or Governor Mitt Romney will be lucky to break 50% in the popular vote. Squeaking by with 270 or just a few more Electoral Votes will confirm the closeness of this race. The Republican Party probably speaks with confidence now that victory seems more and more likely. Mitt's the one!

Mitt became the one not because he is a political genius, well maybe he was to be the 2012 Republican Party Presidential Nominee. I'm sure that's it's official name. But Mitt isn't the party's A-game. Mitt took the next-in-line concept and was...next-in-line. Just like John McCain was in 2008, George W. Bush in 2000, Bob Dole in 1996, and the list goes on. But he sort of got it by default. He was almost an understudy for the actual next-in-liner.

The time it takes a presidential candidate to seriously run for the nomination, he or she must begin as soon as Election Day is over. By the end of the mid-term elections, the candidate must be in-it-to-win-it. When the 2008 election ended, Obama the victory and the GOP on the losing side, the nomination for the 2012 election didn't have a next-in-liner like previous elections which had candidates waiting like a ride at Disneyland. The 2008 election cycle produced possible contenders; Romney the second place finisher in the primaries and Governor Sarah Palin, the second place finisher in the Electoral College for the vice presidency.

The A-game of the GOP like Mitch Daniels and Haley Barbour stayed out of the 2012 election because they didn't want to face a popular incumbent like Obama. Even with the economic troubles he faces Obama has a chance of winning reelection...even at 50-50. Obama's misfortune is Romney's gain, so the A-game might be rethinking their decision. Other A-gamers like Chris Christie didn't enter the race even at the halfway point of Obama's first term.

So not facing Obama in the general was one factor, and another factor in the A-game vying for the GOP nomination would be to face the Republican Party star Sarah Palin. After losing in the 2008 General Election, Palin became the party's frontrunner for the nomination. She had political capital after her national introduction at the Republican Party Convention in Saint Paul. She's a good politician. I don't mean she's one that writes legislation and works across party lines, but as a politician that can rally people for a cause. But she's not a traditional politician that plays by established customs. It didn't look like she was a serious contender for the 2012 nomination. All the other wanna-be-nominees waited for Palin's decision while still massing their armies for the primary-caucus battles. In the end she chose not to run for the nomination, disappointing her following and allowing the other candidates to try and win her over...as well as her following.

With Palin out of the way and the A-gamers not wanting to challenge a popular incumbent no matter the problems, the next-in-line would be Mitt Romney. As he would mention in the (2011-)2012 primary-caucus debates/forums, he wasn't a politician. But that was by the voters decision. He lost the 1994 Senate race against Ted Kennedy and used that failed election, as well as his business background, as a campaign for Massachusetts Governor...WHICH he won. But instead of allowing the voters to decide if he should continue being governor, Romney chose not to run for a second term. Instead he went after the 2008 Republican nomination and came in second to McCain. Instead of being rewarded with the second spot on the ticket, that went to Palin, he went to being considered as a fronter-runner for 2012.

While others with more experience, knowledge, education sat out because of fear of challenging two popular political figures allowed a non-"politician" out politician the politicians and Sarah Palin. Wait I don't think she's a practicing politician anymore. She's simply a political commentator...or agitator. But yeah...GO MITT! You did it. You got the party's nomination and if by some chance you connect with those few individuals that decide this election I hope you don't run for reelection. But once again...I don't think we'll have a referendum on a Romney Administration.

The Non-Cleveland Qualifications to be President

There are only 3 qualifications to be President of the United States, being a natural born citizen, 14 years residency, and 35 years old.

As long as these qualifications are met, then there should be no reason why one individual couldn't run for the highest office in the land. In the 2008 Democratic primary race, then-Senator Hillary Clinton of New York touted her experience (which is real, genuine, and legit), verse then-Senator Barack Obama of Illinois' lack of experience (which was just at the federal level of politics...or just ageism). Experience was the theme of the Hillary Clinton campaign in the first half of the primary before evolving to an experienced politician for the working class American.

Senator Clinton's experience then in 2008, qualified her to be president. Her resume included a college graduate, law school graduate, First Lady of Arkansas, First Lady of the United States and senator from New York, and now she can include Secretary of State, an old stepping stone to the presidency. Let's just say, she's gone up in value since '08.

In that primary race her argument that then-Senator Obama wasn't experienced enough never stuck and the reason is because he met the qualifications to hold the office just as men before him with a small policial resume, like Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy.

While experience is not a qualifier to be POTUS, then-Senator Clinton's resume probably came the closest to having the chops for the job without having been president. She was married to the president so she has some first hand experience seeing what the office holder must go through. There has only been one person ready for the job of the presidency before winning on election day and that's Grover Cleveland...only because he had been elected president 8 years before resuming the office.

In 1992, then-Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas just had five terms as governor under his electoral belt before running. His main opponent, President George H. W. Bush had an even bigger resume plus as the commander-in-chief during a time of war. In 1996, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas had racked up years of political service in Congress and even as a vice-presidential candidate on a national ticket. In 2000, Vice President Al Gore's resume led him to the nomination as the sitting v-p, just like Bush, while his opponent, Bush's son George W. Bush, got the electoral weight from one full term as governor of a large state, Texas, and an election to a second term. John Kerry used his military service in Vietnam and political service in the senate as building blocks to his candidacy and then-President Bush 43 used his first term on top of all his experience for reelection. So really there is no clear cut mold for a person to fit to become a nominee. Obama used his brief federal experience, and State-level experience, and everything that made him unique to help him win the nomination, just as his opponent Senator John McCain used to prove to the electorate that he too was qualified to be president. In 2012, Obama is using his first term and Mitt Romney (assuming he is the nominee) will use his one term as governor and business career (he'd be using his political career had he won the senator race against Ted Kennedy in 1994) to be president. So why in 2008, didn't Sarah Palin's unique resume make her qualified for the bottom of the ticket?

Her lack of intellectual curiosity was made clear in her interview with Katie Couric and then later with Charlie Gibson and it was nobody's fault but her own...and probably the McCain camp's vetting team. Palin's resume is a political dream come true and only if she had intelligence to back up her short political resume, she would be a political super-star just like Obama, Reagan, Bush 43 (pre-2006), and both Clintons. She can muster a following, but if there was only substance to back it up would her following become more powerful in putting her into a position of power.

There are only 3 qualifications to be POTUS and they are clearly stated in the Constitution. Individuals like Obama and Palin have vied for it and have had to prove themselves beyond the qualifiers mentioned in one of our founding documents. You don't have to be a life long politician to be president but you have to show some knowledge of current events...just like students in a social studies class. Or if you're lucky, you can run for a non-consecutive term like Cleveland...but that's difficult in this 22nd Amendent era we live in.

Madame Vice President

In 1984, Geraldine Ferraro of New York was the first female on a national ticket. 64 years after gaining the right to vote, a female was on the ticket for the vice presidency. She lost. That presidential ticket lost, to quote a vice president...big time.

There wouldn't be a female on the ticket again until 2008. The Democrats never opined the idea again after 1984, with the exception of the brief flirtation with a female at the top of ticket during the heated 2008 Democratic Party Primary when it was clear Senator Hillary Clinton, of New York by the way, was not going to be the presidential nominee. It took the Grand Old Party 152 years, but they broke the white-males-only ticket streak, with the selection, by Senator John McCain of Arizona, of Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Once again the ticket with the female on it did not win. Women voters voted for the ticket without the female on it both in 1984 and 2008. If McCain had his way he'd have former-Democratic-but-still-siding-with-said-party-now-Independent Joe Lieberman. But in 2008 that would not happen. Clinton's major defeat during the primaries, which came with "18 million" or 48% of the primary vote a few hundred thousand more than the man that won the nomination. Her near victory was a great way to attract voters (i.e. woman voters) that were hoping for a female on the ticket. So selecting the young (opposite of McCain), attractive (same as before), and executive branch experienced (about as much "experience" as then-Senator Barack Obama). Choosing Palin, McCain went with the way to get votes and not the person that would work best with him to governor if he won. No offense to the other female politicians or non-politicians in the GOP circa 2008. Remember Alaska doesn't bring the Electoral votes. It's already in the GOP column.

The third time can happen in 2012...and with the GOP too. Recently the GOP has had difficulties with women, just like a Star Trek fan at any age. The GOP can save themselves with the women vote by putting a female on the ticket. They of course have to go with the opposite of Palin. The woman does not have to be old, unattractive, that would be an insult to the would be candidate. But the party can find a vp candidate in the governor mansions, Congress, in the judiciary, and the non-political world. They just need to be opposite of Mitt Romney ideologically...whatever that is or the election he's running in. So the general election by the time it's important.

Now while the GOP have the opportunity to put a female on the ticket and a political reason, the Democrats have probably until the end of August/start of September to nominate their candidates. If the GOP put a female on the ticket and the benefit, there's nothing stopping the Democrats from doing the same. Vice President Joe Biden will be 73 in 2016, the same age President Ronald Reagan was when he ran for reelection in 1984...the election Ferraro lost as vp. Biden will be 74 a few weeks after the election in 2016. Not really presidential age. The loyal and foreign-policy-minded Biden could be persuaded to step down from the ticket with a new post at the head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton's current job. The dream ticket of 2008, thought of during the heat of the primary battle, can be a reality in 2012. If it happens, 2012 and the third time a female is on the ticket (2nd time for both parties) could be the charm.

december 13...today in history

in 2003 the headline was "WE GOT HIM!"

"Ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was captured by U.S. forces while hiding in a hole under a farmhouse in Adwar, near his hometown of Tikrit."



in 2000 the 36 day post-2000 election came to an end.

"Republican George W. Bush claimed the presidency 36 days after Election Day."

and al gore gave one of the greatest speeches in presidential history [according to me:)]



it's interesting...a historical what if...would the 2003 event have occurred had the 2000 event gone the way it should have which is gore becoming the 43rd potus?

i remember after gore gave his speech crowds were cheering "gore in 4!" as he left the old executive office building (where he gave the speech). but gore chose not to run...i'm sure had there been no 9/11 (even though it more than likely would've occurred no matter the potus) and iraq war gore could've won just as jackson and cleveland (popular vote winners who returned four years later...tilden did not try again) had done. but once bush became a war time potus it just seemed for sure he'd be a two termer.

another historical what if would be that obama most likely wouldn't have run in 2008 and 2008 would've probably had either an incumbent vp (assuming gore/lieberman made it to the white house in '01 and were reelected in '04) or an incumbent potus (assuming president gore lost reelection...in this scenario i guess obama could've run in '08 as a democrat)...i know a lot of over thinking, but that's how what if's work :)

The First African-American

John McCain's hero, the 26th president of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt invited the first African-American to the Executive Mansion, aka the White House, for dinner in 1901.

That African-American was Booker T. Washington.

That dinner caused such a stir TR, the real maverick, caved to the criticism and never invited Washington or any other African-American back to the White House again. The criticism came from those that couldn't accept African-Americans as equals. But we in the 21st century must put ourselves in the shoes of our little than over a hundred years ago counterparts and understand that the Civil War had just ended 36 years prior to that historic dinner. Also the Supreme Court had just ruled five years earlier from that dinner on Plessy v. Ferguson, which established racial segregation or "separate but equal" as law of the land.

It would be almost more than half a century later when Plessy v. Ferguson would be over turned via the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education. And then a decade after that African-Americans would finally be considered equal with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and secure their right to vote with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

How far we have come from the days of slavery, abolitionism, segregation, and civil rights, to see that an African-American male has a true shot at the highest office in the land which once oppressed him. Barack Obama fought for the nomination of one of the two major political parties against a female and won. That scenario is unimaginable in our nation's history, but it occurred just eight years into the 21st century, where one hundred years prior dining with the president was considered blasphemy.

How far we have come from the day when Booker T. Washington dined with President Theodore Roosevelt. We have come a long way. While it would have been amazing to see President Roosevelt stand up to the bigotry of the times, he would be proud to see that an African-American would be seen as an equal in the eyes of his opponent. The equality between the two major political party candidates is seen simply in their candidacy. We have a lot more to over come, but with Obama's candidacy we have shown that we are taking a step forward.

How far we have come is certainly shown not only in Obama's nomination by a national party but by his certain victory as the 44th president of the United States. One hundred and eight years ago a president of the United States invited an African-American to dine in the White House. One hundred and eight years later we see the possibly...no the certainty...that an African-American will sit at the head of the table in the White House.

How far we have come since the days of Theodore Roosevelt.

Missing Bush

The year I turned 18 was the first time I voted for president of the United States. The year was 1996.

My love of presidential history started years early. I was born when a peanut farmer lived in the White House. As a child of the 1980s, I only knew of Ronald Reagan as the president and thought it natural that the man that was his vice president would go on to become president.

William Jefferson Clinton came into my life as a high school student and I thought he should remain president through my college years.

The 2000 election was the first election that I truly paid close attention to and I cast my vote for the incumbent vice president. And like most Americans I thought he should be the commander-in-chief. The governor of Texas showed he wasn't anything special other than a son of a president. In the end, Vice President Al Gore gave an amazing concession speech on December 13, 2000 ending the race and the post-election race. I remember Bush's acceptance speech, or more specifically where it was delivered and nothing more. But Gore's I remember so much more: "While we yet hold and do not yield our opposing beliefs, there is a higher duty than the one we owe to political party. This is America and we put country before party. We will stand together behind our new president." Why didn't this Gore win? The Gore the country would really come to love was just beginning I guess.

And so our country moved forward. We had a new president. For the second time in our history a son of a president became president. And for the first few months of his presidency I believed history would repeat itself and George W. Bush would be just like that other son of a president, John Quincy Adams, a one term president. Then came September 11, 2001.

By September 12, 2001, I knew that George W. Bush would break history and become a two term president. By breaking history I mean the only one of the father-son combo of presidents and minority presidents, that is to win the Electoral College and lose the popular vote, to go on and win a second term. A national tragedy had occurred and as Gore had told his supporters ten months prior, we had to rally behind our new president. And I did.

Bush amazed me with his address in the National Cathedral on September 14 and then before a joint session of Congress on September 20. He was going after those that attacked us and they would be punished.

Then at the start of 2002, the drum beats of war began and the unified country returned to its election 2000 divisiveness. The war of choice was on and his reelection was still certain. While his poll numbers plummeted from the highs of September 11, 2001 straight down toward the election of 2004, I still knew no one would be able to defeat him.

Bush survived to serve another term. He received 51% of the popular vote, the only president since his father in 1988 to break the 50% barrier. The president had the audacity to claim a mandate. But his second term proved he had no such thing and like other second term presidents his was nothing to brag about. From a failed attempt at revamping social security to mishandling the response to Hurricane Katrina, Bush's second term was not something Americans should be proud of.

What it did provide was fodder for late night comedians. Our troubles of living under another four years of the Bush administration provided many laughs and inspiration for comedy writers.

At the start of 2001 when the Clinton administration came to an end I remember hearing the late night hosts saddened by the loss of material as the Clinton administration left office. They knew they were getting something special in Bush, seeing him on the campaign trail the previous year. Little did they know that the next eight years would provide more material that would out match the eight years of Clinton.

The scare tactics, fear mongering, incompetence, and arrogance will not be missed.

The year I turned 30 was the fourth time I voted for president of the United States. The year was 2008.

We'll see how things turned out.

McCain/Another White Guy '08

It's McCain/Palin all the way in 2008!

The 2008 election was going to make history from the start. That's from the start of the Democratic contest for the nomination, not the Republican's contest. The Democrats had an African-American male, a Latino, and a woman who was just not any woman, but the former first lady of the United States. When the contest came down to just the African-American male and the woman, it was very clear that history was being made and there was possible more history making to come.

While the Democrats put up five white males alongside the other three, the Grand Old Party totaled ten white males all vying for the top of the ticket.

For the first time in twenty-four the Democratic Party was going to bring some diversity to their national ticket. Once the people had spoken and put Barack Obama, an African-American, at the top of the ticket, some wondered if an unprecedented ticket was to be formed. Instead going the more democratic approach of choosing the person to receive the second most highest number of votes cast, Obama selected a safe choice in a running mate. The ticketed did not need to be balanced ideologically or geographically, but it was balanced with Joe Biden someone that balance outs any of Obama's flaws.

The other national party didn't seem to have the possibility of making some history in this election. Those that ran for the nomination were all white males. McCain could've chosen Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, the next two highest vote getters. But he didn't. McCain secured his party's nomination via the primaries and caucuses earlier than Obama. That was February and it wouldn't be until the first week of September when McCain would officially be the Republican nominee. And yet he still waited until the week before to make his selection.

By this point Obama was history in the making and with Biden the Democrats chose to make history one step at a time. McCain's choices of running mates were Romney of Massachusetts, Governor Charlie Crist of Florida, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, Secretary and former governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, and Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. His choices were nothing extraordinary for the Republican, save maybe Lieberman. Senator Lieberman would be a historical choice for a number of reasons: the first Jewish vice presidential candidate for the Republican ticket (he was also the first Jewish vice presidential candidate for the Democrats in 2000, which would've made his simply the first Jewish vice presidential candidate in U.S. history), and he would've been a Democrat turned Independent Democrat to run as vice president on the Republican ticket. Not since the election of 1864 had there been such a bipartisan ticket.

But that was not to be. McCain couldn't settle on the white males he was debating over. The Democratic party was about to have for the second time in twenty-four years a ticket with just one white male on it. It looked like McCain's Republican ticket would be no different than GOP tickets of the past.

One name did keep appearing on McCain's short list. The name on that list would eventually be the name added to the ticket and break the Republican party's one hundred fifty-two year streak of an all white male ticket.

Sarah Palin was the choice. She's a governor of a state, just like the other men McCain was considering, once again, except Lieberman. But her resume is somewhat shorter than the others on the short list. There are other qualified and more recognizable Republican woman: Senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas and Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, a former candidate for the Republican nomination back in 2000 and wife of the GOP's 1996 nominee; former governor Christine Todd Whitman; business woman Carly Fiorina; and second lady Lynne Cheney. If a first lady can gain experience watch a president, I'm sure the same can be said of the second lady watch her vice president husband execute the duties of his office.

Sarah Palin was the choice. She was the choice because it went with McCain's maverick or outsider approach to politics. Sure the second lady would be an out there choice, but that would be like selecting another GOP woman rumored to be considered by McCain: secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. Rice would've been an historic nomination, but enough of an outsider or change to compete with McCain's opponent idea of change.

Sarah Palin was the choice. Her selection fits with McCain and the options he faced. With Sarah Palin, McCain added much heat and interest into a campaign that without Palin would've been no different the first GOP ticket of John C. Fremont and William L. Dayton.

Electing the Vice President

Since the passage of the 12th Amendment in 1804 the vice presidency has become the least sought after office. Prior to 1804 the person who received the second most electoral votes became the vice president. That meant that someone who went after the presidency was really worth the office, just look at the only two men who were elected to the office pre-12th Amendment: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. (Aaron Burr was elected on a backfired attempt at the first ever president/vice president ticket which is a story unto itself). Up until the 1950s the 12th Amendment made the vice presidency a balancing act to a presidential election, rather than a qualified office holder for the higher office. There were some exceptions between 1804 to the 1950s of great men in the vice presidency, but truly with Richard Nixon the vice presidency became an office to be reckoned with. As the 20th Century came to an end the importance of the vice presidency became ever apparent especially with the passage of the 25th Amendment which finally stated in the Constitution that "the Vice President shall become President" upon death, resignation, or removal from office.

Recently it has been said that Senator John McCain should reveal who is on his short list for vice president, since the search for his v.p. is going on behind closed doors. And why not? Go back eight years when then-Governor George W. Bush of Texas selected former Secretary of Defense Richard B. Cheney to head up his vice president selection committee. In the end, Secretary Cheney chose himself as the best candidate for vice president. After eight years of Cheney as vice president, who has become indisputably the most powerful vice president in United States history, the citizens of the United States should have more say as to who their vice president is.

Long ago the presidential nominating conventions lost the right to pick the vice presidential candidate for either party. The presidential candidates have been the ones to choose their respective running mates. Some were once bitter rivals during the primary campaign season and then became a presidential ticket, like Senator John F. Kennedy and Senator Lyndon Johnson in 1960, former Governor Ronald Reagan and former Director of the CIA George Herbert Walker Bush in 1980, and Senator John Kerry and Senator John Edwards in 2004. The time has come for the voters to decide the vice president.

A perfect example is the 2008 Democratic primary race for president. Neither Senator Barack Obama or Senator Hillary Clinton have enough votes to obtain the Democratic nomination. The party is almost split on the decision. It has come to the point where the two need to be on the same ticket to appease supporters of both candidates whether it is Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama. Also with the request of McCain to reveal his "short list" of v.p. candidates, it seems ever apparent that electing a vice president instead of having the presidential candidate making his or her first presidential decision pre-presidency is what the electorate wants. During the primary election each state should not only vote for their choice for president but their choice for vice president, on a separate ballot just like in the general election.

This separate ballot primary election will once again return the stature that was taken away by the 12th Amendment and return some electoral glory to the office as well as prevent the long drawn out primary or closed door selection as seen in the 2008 presidential/vice presidential selection.

jumping rooftops 11/05/07

On Friday for three hours, the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport was hit with a power outage. The power outage was due to an electrical fire, which caused flight delays, cancellations, and bathroom hookups.

Michael Mukasey, the new attorney general of the United States, vowed to be an independent advocate. When asked what he meant by independent? President Bush replied independent of the Constitution and the rule of law.

The Dallas Zoo is turning to alternative methods of powering some of their buildings and irrigation systems using animal droppings. This will be the first time the $#!t powers the fan.

States are targeting teacher sexual misconduct with students. Soon every school with have its own Chris Hanson and plate of cookies at the ready.

Stephen Colbert ended his presidential run this week. Now that his fake presidential campaign is over, we wait and see which fake presidential candidate will win.

In a Washington Post-ABC poll, 74% of Americans want a change in the direction of the agenda and priorities of President George W. Bush. The remaining 26% were survivors of Hurricane Katrina and unable to respond to the poll.

Representative Dennis Kucinich said he will force a vote of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney this week. News of the possible impeachment shocked the nation, since most did not know that Cheney had cheated on his wife.

Soccer superstar David Beckham told British style magazine Arena that friend Tom Cruise did not attempt to recruit him or his wife Victoria, saying “There’s been nothing shoved down our throats.” However he went on to say other things attempted to be shoved down his throat.

Bill Richardson appeared in the November issue of Playboy where he said the Democratic Party made a “tactical mistake” in 2000 by becoming the party of the poor instead of the middle class. The tactical mistake Richardson made, appearing nude in Playboy.

In 2004 former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani recommended his former police commissioner Bernard Kerik to President Bush to nominate to head the Department of Homeland Security. Seven days later Kerik withdrew his name as allegations of organized crime connections arose. Now Candidate Giuliani’s judgment of leadership is coming into question. In a related story, Giuliani defends Bush’s leadership in the Iraq War.

John McCain has shifted his position from the U.S. combining its efforts to secure the borders as well as allowing illegal immigrants a temporary worker program and a path to citizenship to emphasizing securing the borders first. The McCain campaign’s explanation for the adjustment of his stance on immigration was to avoid accusations of being a homosexual.

the measure of a man

The 2008 presidential election will give for the first time since 1952 no incumbent president or vice president running for the high office. The Republican side looks to be the same as it's been since their first ticket in 1856, two white males. The Democratic Party shows a possibility of breaking their 24 years of two white males on the ticket. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York and Senator Barack Obama of Illinois are these two examples that show a strong possibility of being somewhere on the ticket in 2008. This isn't to bash white males at all, because nowhere is anyone questioning these two senators for being a woman and an African-American. We have learned to look beyond such things, in some areas we have a ways to go. It is the experience of these senators that will come into question in this campaign.

Before looking at experience, it is interesting to note that these two candidates are not the first woman and African-American to seek the nomination. Elizabeth Dole ran for the 2000 Republican nomination, losing to Governor George W. Bush of Texas. Carol Moseley Braun ran for the Democratic nomination in 2004 and lost to Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. Hillary Clinton shows a better resume than these two woman combined and then some. In both 1984 and 1988, Reverend Jesse Jackson attempted to get the nomination, as did Reverend Al Sharpton in 2004 and possibly again in 2008. Barack Obama, shows a better resume however small it is than his predecessors in this race for the nomination.

By 2008, Barack Obama will have experience in the Illinois State Legislator and four years in the U.S. Senate. People say he's not ready to lead the country. He meets the qualifications specified in the Constitution; U.S. citizen (no matter what his full name is), over 35 years of age, and 14 years residence in the U.S. His age shouldn't be a concern.

Theodore Roosevelt was elected vice president in 1900. He was Assistant Secretary of the Navy and Governor of New York before being put on the vacant vice president spot on the ticket. He was put there to get him out of New York politics which was corrupt and Roosevelt was cleaning up shop. The vice presidency would put an end to his crusade. McKinley's campaign manager, his Karl Rove, Senator Mark Hanna didn't like the idea. What if something happened to McKinley?

McKinley was shot September 6, 1901 and died on the 14th. Roosevelt was sworn in as the youngest president at 42. He is younger than Obama. Yes, Roosevelt lived one hundred years ago and in a time of peace and prosperity. Roosevelt more than anything wanted to be president during a time of war, he unlike some of his successors had self control. This is the man that helped make peace between the Russians and the Japanese. This is also the man who three years before being the Commander-in-Chief, as a colonel charged up San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War. Compare that to the current Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush, who did not see combat in his generation's war and his view on peace is different than the rest of the world. Maybe Roosevelt isn't such a good comparison to Obama.

John F. Kennedy was elected to the House of Representatives in 1946 as a Democrat from Massachusetts and served six years. In 1952, he was elected to the Senate and stayed there four eight years. In 1956, he made an unsuccessful attempt for the second spot on the ticket. He became the youngest elected president at 43 years old. There was a big difference between the young Kennedy and the old Eisenhower at the inaugural in 1961. Kennedy served at the height of the Cold War and at one of the most serious moments in human history, the Cuban Missile Crisis. He seemed to do fine for his age.

If it's experience you're questioning, Obama will have two more years on Abraham Lincoln in regards to holding a federal representative office prior to being on a national ticket. Lincoln served in the House of Representatives from Obama's home state of Illinois for one term from 1847-1849. He was elected as a Whig and was against President Polk and the Mexican-US war. The war was very popular in Lincoln's district and his views certainly did not match the constituents. Today's Democrats can learn from the Whig Party of the past, that opposed the Mexican-War, on how to be a true opposition party to a war time administration.

Lincoln won the Republican nomination in 1860 from a list of well experienced men. Those men were then put into his Cabinet, very different than Bush. Could you imagine Bush, putting John McCain, Elizabeth Dole, Steve Forbes, and whoever else ran for the Republican nomination in 2000, in the most import positions in the Cabinet? Big difference in the Lincoln and Bush, as well as the Republicans of the 1860s and of the 2000s. That's for another time.

Yes, Lincoln lived in another, but of all the presidents he has faced the biggest crisis, the Civil War between the States. With only two years as a Representative of the House, he successfully led the country through one of it's darkest moment.

George W. Bush's experience pales in comparison to these predecessors mentioned. He served six years as governor of Texas. Prior to the election, he clearly showed to have no foreign policy experience beyond Mexico. Bush has had to deal with foreign affairs for the majority of his presidency, and his inexperience has taken the United States to one of it's lowest points militarily, economically, and diplomatically.

Other presidents have had plenty of experience prior to being president and still had a horrible presidency; John Adams, John Quincy Adams, James Buchanan, and Herbert Hoover come to mind.

Experience isn't everything as history has shown. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 altered the presidency of George W. Bush, foreign policy would come to dominate. Would he really be elected if we knew we would have to deal so much in foreign affairs?

Experience is in Senator Clinton's favor. Clinton served as First Lady of the United States for eight years before successfully winning two elections to the US Senate representing her adopted state of New York. It is her lack of charisma unlike her husband and Senator Obama who have it.

Experience or charisma, among other things, will be what voters, first Democratic voters in the primary, will look at rather than the ability of a woman or an African-American to be president.