Okay- here is a great example of BamBam's logic (or lack of logic):

If people who choose not to get healthcare get sick and end up with bills they can't pay Obama has a solution: make them pay back premiums and then the insurance company will pay.

Blitzer could have asked a necessary follow up: Why would anyone pay for health insurance up front if the only consequence that person faced was paying for the insurance later?

Everyone in such a system should take their chances and NOT pay for insurance until becoming ill. How do people take him seriously?

I can't believe it- liberal Republicans are supporting McCain.

The MSM is now focusing on "major" endorsements by Giuliani and Schwarzenegger and is working to spin these endorsements as evidence that McCain has the support of conservatives.

No actual conservative would say that either Giuliani or Schwarzenegger represent the core of the Republican Party. Hopefully, conservatives planning on attending a Super Tuesday primary or caucus will be listening to the actual candidates and looking at actual records rather than relying on pundits and other politicians.

The Wednesday night debate on CNN should have demonstrated to voters the problems with McCain- After all of his years in the Senate he can cling to two lines:

• He demonstrated leadership 35 years ago when he was in the military and when he was held as a prisoner of war.
• He was a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution.

That's pretty much it. Those are his claims to fame. Those two things alone make him more qualified to serve than either of the Democratic candidates however in the Republican field that is not enough to put him on top.

People should be thankful to McCain for his service to our country. That service does not qualify him to be President of the United States. His continual efforts to belittle those people who have not served are insulting to those people who have contributed to building a strong America in countless other ways.

In the debate last night McCain actually said that his service in Vietnam made him uniquely qualified and basically asserted that the other candidates were not qualified because they had not been in the military.

His logic, applied to other skills necessary to serve as the President of the United States, precludes him from the position because he has never run anything remotely resembling a business. He has not had the opportunity to supervise or run the equivalent of even the smallest branch of government. And as a Senator his work has not been to further a traditionally conservative platform.

Huckabee made one of the best points of the evening. Both he and Romney have run a state-which is like running the federal government on a smaller level. They know how the departments work together and how states and the federal government work and don't work together. Serving as a governor is perhaps the best training a candidate could have. The senate's claim to fame is its ability to obstruct legislation and limit the power of the executive branch. A senator does not have the opportunity to lead in the same way that a governor does.

McCain claims to have reached across the aisle to show his reasonableness. But his efforts did not serve to educate the left or bring those on the left towards conservative principles. His reaching across pulled him to the democratic positions. Amnesty remains a pathetic example of his positions that would hurt the United States.

When pressed as to whether he would support his own immigration bill if it were brought to a vote again he would NOT answer. His response: it won't be brought to the floor but the American people have spoken and border security must be addressed. He simply won't acknowledge the sad fact that he still believes he is right and the American people are wrong. His defensive and evasive response to the question should raise flags for conservatives.

And by the way, McCain's charge that others should be penalized for changing positions rings insincere because he too has changed his positions: He was against the tax cuts before he was for them and he was for amnesty before he was against it...

A good leader leads but also changes course when he is on the wrong path. For example, Romney has openly discussed reasons his prolife position has evolved. Conservatives should embrace candidates and voters who seek information and change their views in response to experience and maturity.

Most of us have political positions that have evolved over our lifetimes. Learning from life experience should be encouraged and McCain and his minions should stop criticizing those people who have come into the party because they have learned important lessons. These people often embrace the conservative principles upon which this country was founded in a purer manner than longtime conservatives who have drifted to the center for political expediency or to court the main stream media...

An unbelievable (but sadly totally believable) story in the New York Times today. It seems the Clintons have both benefitted financially from a questionable relationship with a foreign investor- shocking! (click here for article)

Here is the timeline the NY Times presents:

• 9/6/2005: BClinton flew with Frank Giustra (A very wealthy Canadian looking to make some money) to Kazakhstan on a private jet. Kazakhstan is rich in Uranium, which can be used in nuclear reactors.
• 9/7/2005: BClinton and Giustra met with president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. The president has reportedly taken extreme measures to prevent political dissenters from being heard. Ironically, Clinton came out in support of Nursultan being appointed to lead an international election monitoring organization following this meeting.
• 9/9/2005: Giustra's company entered into agreements with Kazakhstan's state-owned Uranium agency, Kazatomprom, allowing Giustra and his company to buy into uranium projects- thus turning Giustra's company, a company with no experience dealing with Uranium, into one of the largest uranium prodeucers n the world. The deal would make Giustra tens of millions of dollars.
• Early 2006: Giustra donated over $30 million to BClinton's charitable foundation
• 9/2006: Giustra co-produced Clinton's 60th birthday
• 2/2007: Giustra's company, UrAsia, was purchased for over $3 billion . According to the NY Times the company's shares traded at $.10 per share in 2005 and then at $7.05 at the time of the deal. Giustra was a major shareholder of UrAsia. He is an unbelievably rich giy!
• Giustra has now donated $100 million to BClinton's foundation.

Wow- everybody won! Playing connect the dots with the Clinton's and money is a game we should be playing now. This is an important subject that will likely be swept under some hand-woven rug.

When reporters initially questioned BClinton about the trip and meetings with Giustra his memory failed him (yes, I know we have heard that before.) He now remembers meeting with Giustra but has probably forgotten everything else. It's much easier to answer questions when you can claim to not have any answers.

This is an interesting story that may not be reported on again. Click on the link while you can...

Tragically sad story out of Afghanistan: According to an AP report (click here for CNN link to article) a reporter who printed off and passed out a report from the internet that challenged the practice of polygamy endorsed by Islam has been sentenced to death by a three judge panel in the city of Mazar-i-Sharif. DEATH!!

The AP reports that following the death sentence, Afghanistan's upper house of parliament not only approved of the death sentence but condemned the world community for attempting to interfere in the death sentence.

The reporter has challenged the sentence and is now waiting to learn whether or not the appeals court will stand up against fundamentalist Islam to protect the natural right of people to speak out against immorality and injustice.

No one should expect any court in Afghanistan to support freedom. Ultimately the issue may end up in the hands of Hamid Karzai, the President of Afghanistan. Karzai should be expecting international pressure to build if he can not convince the appeals court to alter the sentence. If Karzai is forced to address this issue, it will be very difficult for him to challenge the fundamentalist Islamic power structure that really controls Afghanistan. If he pardons this man against the wishes of the clerics do not be surprised if the followers of fundamentalist Islam murder him in the streets to ensure he is "properly punished" anyways.

How can average Americans or people around the world even begin to comprehend the way these fundamentalist Muslim leaders think or behave? How do we find common ground with a group of people who would kill someone for saying a religious practice is wrong?

The chasm between the culture of Christianity and the culture of fundamentalist Islam is so vast as to seem, in cases like this, to be insurmountable.

The chasm between secular political cultures and political cultures driven by fundamentalist Islam also seems too vast to bridge in situations like this.

People around the world must begin to actively challenge these sorts of fundamentalist practices. How can any rational person think that death is the appropriate sentence in this case? There is no reason here- there is only a warning of about the dangers of Sharia law. (click here for info from the Council on Foreign Relations on Sharia law)

Wake up America- this is a serious threat...

With the Florida showdown over we now head into Super Tuesday with a two person race on both sides of the equation.

On the Democratic side Clinton and Obama will continue to duke it out- or BClinton and Obama will keep sparring or BClinton will keep throwing punches at Obama while he and many other Democrats stand by shaking their heads at the sad figure he can appear to be.

HRod claimed victory in Florida but there is a long way to go to the nomination. The dream of the coronation has now faded and she should be looking forward to a tough campaign in state after state. Gathering endorsements from the likes of Maxine Waters may or may not be helpful as she battles for big wins next week.

Obama needs to develop some depth to his speeches and throw some meat out for people to chew on. He needs to begin to convince people that he has some real plans for the country and the ability to lead the country towards solutions. He might inspire people like the Kennedys but inspiration alone won't win the game.

And don't forget Edwards- who has no shot at the finals but may be able to jump on a team and secure a good job out of the deal. If the rumors are true- he will be coming out on support of Obama soon and hoping for the Attorney General ring. Look out corporate America- he'll be gunning for you!

On the Republican side the race will be between the new media favorite and not conservative John McCain- and fiscal conservative Romney. Huckabee may still get some attention but he should face facts and decide how best to serve the party and the country going forward. Giuliani will be out and will throw his support towards McCain. His support should serve as another
indicator that McCain is not the conservative candidate he wants people to think he is.

The pundits are now telling us that McCain is the guy to beat. If he manages to become the Republican nominee, conservatives should support him in lieu of the alternative but let us all hope that the voters in the Super Tuesday states wake up and pay attention. McCain has been a long-time Republican but he is not the candidate of conservatism.

Romney's speech tonight was a great step towards offering voters simple and clear information about issues McCain and his senate colleagues have failed to address in an appropriate and successful manner. The next debate will be critical to getting his message and plans out to voters. Romney should call McCain on the misinformation put out by him and his campaign and challenge him to stick to real facts. More importantly, Romney must connect with voters personally- he needs to show them how his ideas and his experience will improve the lives of average Americans and strengthen the United States at home and abroad.

The campaigns will break down the numbers and shake out new strategies to win over the primary and caucus goers. The pundits will refine their positions and language to try to influence our voting behavior. Voters will each make a decision that seems unimportant in the grand scale of things but actually may be the most important cumulative decision Americans have made in decades.

Lets hope the voters are on their best game next week...

The partial Kennedy Clan endorsement of Obama shouldn't have surprised anyone- the Kennedy's have always been about show rather than substance. Obama fits their bill exactly.

Americans should all question why so many people talk about supporting Obama because he gives them "hope" when they seem completely unable to explain WHY he gives them hope. In Caroline Kennedy's endorsement of Obama she referred to him as the most inspirational leader since her father. Why does he inspire her? What has he done to earn such accolades? She didn't offer any specifics- but she is not alone in her inability to pronounce reasons behind her emotional connection to Obama.

Caroline did explain that it was her children who showed her the path to the Obamarama. Her kids are 19, 17 and 15 years old. If she needs to get her political advice from them, is her endorsement credible or merely incredible?

No question about it- Obama can deliver a speech some speechwriter puts in front of him. He has the ministerial intonation down better than just about everyone else in politics. But what has he achieved? What legislation has he authored and successfully pushed through Congress or even through the Illinois Senate? What is his greatest accomplishment in the private sector?

Ted Kennedy chimed in with his position that the JFK torch has been passed to Obama. Do we really remember what the JFK torch is or was? Has the Democratic party moved Kennedy to the left to fit their own agenda? Does the average person in America- Democrat or Republican- ask themselves what can they do for their country? Or is the average person trying to figure out what someone else should do for their country?

We are headed for tougher times and we need to start holding our elected officials accountable. We need to demand they provide us with clear positions so we can make an educated decision about which of them we can support. I am hoping to learn what Obama's positions are today. I am listening but I am not hearing anything...

Wait- he is for change...

It is always interesting to listen to Democrats (or supposedly non-biased members of the mainstream media) discuss and criticize Republican spending as though if it weren't for Democrats...

No question that many Republicans have failed in their efforts to control spending. No question that many Republicans have been sucked into the race to provide pork to their home districts. But there is also no question that had Democrats been allowed to pass legislation containing all of their earmarks and all of their spending programs the deficit would be much bigger, taxes would be higher and all of the resulting economic indicators would be worse.

Bush has compromised conservative principles in an effort to extend the olive branch to those on the other side of the aisle and he has been shown what little regard they and their minions have for his efforts. These efforts were made with the best of intentions and may serve only to prove the point that the road to h*** is paved with good intentions.

After the past eight years people should recognize it is seemingly pointless to give on principle in the hope that meeting at a less principled place will help pull the opposition to the middle. The Democratic perspective is not that they have compromised it is that the Republicans have compromised. Like toddlers throwing tantrums until parents succumb, Democrats have been emboldened.

Politics, particularly at the federal level, have become so vitriolic that the two ends are in a continual war over the undecided middle. In this unbelievably important game of tug of war, everyone seems to end up muddy.

McCain tried to articulate the above point- I wish he would have done so more clearly and that the others would have echoed the sentiment more vehemently.

Romney showed his strength in the MSNBC debate, in spite of the efforts of the questioners to bring him down.

Romney's zinger about Bill Clinton was priceless- Like Romney, I can not imagine the American people purposely putting a bored Bill Clinton back in the White House... He clearly pointed out that there are tremendous differences between the Democrats and Republicans: There is a choice and if that choice is between Billary and Romney, Romney is right to be confident.

When questioned about his personal financial contributions to the campaign he might have reminded voters more clearly that the current campaign finance law has created a debacle: McCain is largely responsible for the dramatic increase in spending by special interests while minimizing the ability of average people to contribute.

2004 saw a dramatic increase in spending on campaigns. (Click here for summary of 2004 spending) 2008 will leave it in the dust. (Click here for data from Open Secrets on 2008 Spending)

We should all be grateful that a person with the character and conviction of Romney is willing and able to contribute his own wealth to defeat the Democratic candidate for President.

The recent Democratic debate offered some of the best TV available in quite some time and sadly many people saw none of it. (Click here to view debate)

HRod and BamBam engaged in some very entertaining tit for tat that has been minimized to only a couple of sound bytes that fail to show the degree of confrontation that actually occurred. (Admittedly, the animosity may have been all for show...)

The cut I have seen the most shows the audience booing HRod as she raises questions about BamBam's "present" votes. While she may have overstated the concern about these "present" votes, these votes do make him appear at least a little non committal.

BamBam's concern about trying to figure out who he is running against- Bill or Hillary was hilarious. Hill's slam about BamBam working on behalf of a slumlord irked the Man and his comments about her helping the evil Walmart raised her hackles. Really humorous stuff...

Then we had Edwards doing his darndest to get a word in edgewise. The man with the best hair tried to talk policy- actual policy- and he made some great points, when Blitzer let him talk. I don't agree with his notions about universal health care but he did a much better job of pointing out differences between his plan and the plans of Hill and Obama than either of the front runners did.

And by the way, the Wolfman consistently demonstrators the lack of judgement by the powers that be at CNN- he had no control over the debate- Edwards was politely apologetic for trying to interject himself while the two other candidates ran on and on.

The jabbing in this debate was better than any boxing match I've seen. I hope the rematch is even better.

While attending a service in remembrance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. last weekend, Clinton sat in a position of honor on the alter behind Martin Luther King III- the son of MLK. As MLK III gave a very emotional speech, Mr. Clinton nodded off over and over again. (Click here for video)

The video of him falling asleep is sad for so many reasons- the saddest being the failure of the media to cover the story. What if any Republican had dozed off in a similar situation?

No honest person could say a sleeping Republican would be ignored. The video would open every news program, would be played again and again and again. If the dozer was campaigning for a Republican, the candidate would be asked to denounce the insensitivity of the sleep deprived person.

I understand that Bill Clinton is very tired- he is putting in long hours and working hard to fight for his wife's political future. (Although his behavior on so many fronts might beg questions as to whether he really does want his wife to win the race.)

Perhaps, in the future, he should either make sure he is not in the line of a camera lens when sitting on stage, get more sleep or slam some highly caffeinated beverages.

Following a week of controversy between the Obama and Clinton campaigns in regards to the contributions of MLK to the Civil Rights movement, one would think Clinton would have been on his best behavior. Or maybe this does exemplify his best behavior...

How much money are the pundits paid to be wrong? What have we heard or the last week other than McCain is the man to beat…Romney is washed up…If Romney makes a decent showing in Michigan it’s only because of his dad…The race in Michigan is going to be really close…Huckabee is gaining…

Romney kicked some serious behind today and that is the story they should be reporting. He did not win because his father was Governor- he won because conservatives voted for him. It was not even close. Independents did not show up in huge numbers to vote for McCain- which they could have done because there wasn’t a meaningful Democrat primary and people don’t have to be registered Republicans to vote in Michigan… Romney won despite the constant minimizing of his chances by the mainstream press.

Now that Romney won in Michigan what do they say? A couple of highlights:

Politico: Romney’s win throws Republican race into chaos.
Is Jonathon Martin checked in at all. There is no chaos- in fact this win should help to begin the shakeout of the other candidates. Giuliani didn’t break 5%- this is hugely problematic for him. Rudy is no Duncan Hunter: Everyone knows his name and what he stands for. No one voted for him. Ron Paul got more votes than he did. Same deal with Fred Thompson. And by the way, I have yet to hear anyone say the three guys who are at less than 10% should get out.

CNN: 41% of Michigan voters said Romney’s Michigan ties were important. That means that 59% of his voters didn’t think his ties to Michigan mattered. CNN reports that Giuliani is happy with how things are going…

MSNBC: “No Republican anchor in sight” with the opening paragraph asserting the Republicans are wildly uncommitted…

These talking heads merely attempt to influence the debate, not report on it. The fervor with which they “report” on the polls drives the polls. The polls seem increasingly often to be wrong. Things change so quickly that polls shift in hours. Are things shifting because of the reported polls?

And how sad that HRod barely cracked 50% of the vote when she was the only Dem on the ballot. I hope she gets the nod for the top spot…

South Carolina looms on the horizon. I suppose that in spite of his crushing win in Michigan, there will be the news heads who will assert that if Romney loses he will be washed up while the fourth and fifth place holders will be seen as important future contenders looking for an opening to get onto the main stage.

Things may be up in the air for the Republicans but that is not the result of a weak field. The current situation of multiple candidates has occurred because the Republican Party is in a time of strength and growth. The Republican candidates are offering the American people real choices.

The same cannot be said on the democratic side- where voters like Obama because- well they just do and if they like HRod it's because, well she is married to the guy they really like. What does either one stand for? Do Democrats even care?

The Republican Party should be proud to assert itself as the party of debate and dialogue, the party of thinkers AND doers. Having five candidates in this race is a sign of strength...

BET Founder Robert Johnson's slam of Obama demonstrates the negative campaign approach many have decried in recent weeks. (click here for article)

While I am certainly no supporter of either Clinton or Obama, I must take exception to his comments. When Johnson suggested that Obama was out doing drugs while the Clintons were fighting for civil rights I wonder how old Obama was when he began his drug experimentation. And did I miss the massive expansion of civil rights in Arkansas in the 1980s or in the United States in the 1990s?

I don't know what major accomplishments the Clintons can claim in regards to civil rights legislation- or how deeply involved they have been in "black issues"- and Mr. Johnson certainly spent no time offering details. I know Bill Clinton has liked to claim, compliments of Toni Morrison, that he was the the country's first Black President. (click here for article)

Additionally, his attempt at an analogy between Obama and Sidney Poitier in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" lacks any logical premise. Is he saying that a Black man who speaks clearly and dresses well and pursues post-secondary education doesn't fit into Mr. Johnson's conception of "real life"? What did he mean and will any of the main stream press question him about his exact point?

People of every race, across all socioeconomic lines should be able to recognize a flagrant attempt to use race as a wedge and should reject the message and the messenger.

I wonder what Dr. King would think about the lunacy of the Clinton and Obama campaigns chastising each other for whatever they seem to think the other said or didn't say.

Perhaps it was the work of Dr. King that led to the ability of President Johnson to successfully get the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964. or perhaps there were legions of people who all were vital to the evolution of the Civil Rights Movement.

Dr. King surely would be saddened at the current state of affairs in the United States. While children of color continue to struggle in disproportionate numbers, our politicians have failed to discuss and address root causes of the exacerbation of the plight of many of the children living in poverty, regardless of the color of their skin.

No one can honestly say that the expansion of government-run social service programs had an overall positive impact on the lives of people in our inner cities or rural areas. Our communities have become increasingly disjointed, individuals more and more isolated, intact families less likely and children more vulnerable.

Perhaps the "I Have A Dream" speech should be required reading for all...

(Click here to read MLK Jr.'s Dream speech)

Ron Paul demonstrated a dangerous lack of insight into the risk of small boats vs. big military ships. In the Fox debate he suggested that it was ridiculous to believe these little boats were a threat.

Was he on vacation in October, 2000 when the USS Cole was attacked by suicide bombers in a small boat?

17 soldiers were killed because a little boat was allowed to get too close to a big ship. (Click here)

Iran, and any other country thinking about playing chicken with US military, needs to believe that the United States will not tolerate threatening behavior. This time, the Iranians were lucky that the officers in charge chose not to attack the boats that engaged in threatening behavior.

They should understand that the next time, they may not be so lucky...

Politico reports that McCain included his fundraising list on a list of assets as collateral for a loan to keep his campaign alive. (Click here)

A poor decision for a campaign that promised not to sell info. DON'T do it again...

Who could be a McCain VP choice? Pawlenty from MN remains an option. The two have been connected for a couple of years and the PAW is spearheading his campaign in MN.

Despite a rocky couple of years, Pawlenty seems to have rediscovered his conservative groove following a brush with political death in his 2006 governor race. He has wisely wielded the veto pen- preventing MN Democrats from increasing taxes on everything from cemetery plots to gas to licenses. He has held the legislature's feet to the fire repeatedly. And he has finally come out with some tough positions on immigration- he recognizes this is a major problem in Minnesota and the country. Pawlenty seems to be a clean candidate with a wonderful family. And Pawlenty looks great loving the Great Outdoors, even when holding a fish. (Click here)

If Pawlenty can stay on a strong conservative course he has a shot at being a contender himself in the future. He is only 47 years old so has years to move into the big leagues. The real question: Why would or should he give up his current position to join a campaign with a questionable chance of succeeding?

Pawlenty should learn from his past mistakes and now stay on the conservative course. And eventually, if he does this, he will someday be campaigning for himself in New Hampshire.

On a non-political note there was an interesting article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune that demonstrates the inability of many smart young people to think.

More than 100 students have been disciplined, with more to follow, because students posted photos on Facebook that showed them drinking, partying and basically engaging in behavior that is illegal and against MN State High School League rules. (Click here for article)

The students are generally upset. Some student quotes:

Danny O'Leary, shown in a variety of pictures, one of which captured him holding a 40 ounce container of beer: "I wasn't drinking that night." On a more accurate note: "A lot of kids lives are going to be ruined as far as scholarships and sports are concerned."
Natalie Friedman didn't acknowledge drinking but did assert that no one can prove there was alcohol in the glasses. She should consider going to law school.

Rachel Kalaidis, a senior who has not yet been disciplined noted, "I think it's a huge invasion of privacy." I wonder what she considers the invasion of privacy: The fact that her classmates took pictures at parties? The fact that some classmates posted the pictures on Facebook? The fact that administrators reviewed the pictures?

People who think they retain privacy on Facebook really are naive.

These kids should be thankful the police aren't looking at the photos to determine who, if anyone, should be charged with providing alcohol to minors.

By the way, O'Leary has since deleted his Facebook page. He is probably not the only one...

Thank you, New Hampshire! Hillary has been resuscitated. I thought I was going to have to send her a campaign contribution and trust me, that would have been very difficult.

We are back to the pundits- they couldn't have had it more wrong on the Democratic side. What happened to Obama's double digit lead? Wow- he must be feeling a little dejected tonight. And did Edwards give the same speech tonight that he gave in Iowa? can he afford a speechwriter?

This just goes to show us: no one knows what is around the political corner. These races are going to keep everyone on their toes for the next month and then we might know who has won the race to be in the race.

Michigan, here they come...

If the Washington Times story is correct, Huckabee means business- he is hungry for it. He has officially gone out on a limb that only Ron Paul has even looked at.

While he has been no champion for people opposed to illegal aliens historically, he has now taken a stand that might just push some policy reform forward. If the other candidates don't take equally strong positions, the immigration issue could turn into a strength for Huckabee. (Click here for article)

If Huckabee campaigns on the position that he will push to amend the Constitution to prevent children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens from automatically becoming citizens he will cut into the support currently thrown behind other candidates.

Illegal immigration will continue to be a hot button issue for many of us who believe that illegal immigration is one of the greatest threats to U.S. national security and to U.S. sovereignty.

Additionally, Huckabee's stated intention to pardon border agents Ramos and Campean will score him points with many conservatives who believe that Bush has failed to do right by these agents.

He is absolutely on the money on this issue and the other candidates should start paying attention immediately.

The pundits are spinning like crazy tonight... What does it all mean? Does anybody really know?

Chris Wallace says if McCain wins he will have the momentum. Does he really think that a win in New Hampshire will erase years of positions that have annoyed and offended a large percentage of Republican voters?

Thompson has already walked away, conceding that at less than 2% he isn't even in the pack in New Hampshire. He has started his bus tour of South Carolina...

Giuliani has not yet broken 10% in New Hampshire. The interesting thing about Giuliani is that he has name recognition and a brand label that none of the other Republicans- barring perhaps McCain- can claim so his need to campaign is less important than the others. I would have expected a higher turnout for Giuliani. His less than 10% showing should raise concerns about his ability to sway the base in non-liberal states in his direction. In a process driven by a caucus or primary system relying on the base, this is problematic for him.

Huckabee at 10 - 13% is where he should expect to be. His popularity in many states will not break 15% unless he can quickly convince a lot of people he has more substance than we have seen to date.

And then we have Romney- second but nowhere near the third place finisher. He continues to show a consistent level of support that currently no other candidate can claim.

If Romney can finish first or second in the next several primaries, he will be in a great position going into Super Tuesday. no matter what the pundits try to spin...

Hillary is falling apart. She is tired. It is really difficult for her to get enough exercise and to eat right. She is living on pizza... And she teared up today talking about all of this. (Click here for Video)

Does Hillary seem to play the feminine card whenever things don't go her way? We should all note, HRod is not a women who cries easily.

What is interesting is how personal she says this election is for her. It is so personal she is emotionally stricken. She claims to see what's happening out there like she is more intuitive then the average politician. Her tears seem to flow from sheer emotional concern for the future of the country- as though she is the only person running who will put this country first or who can ensure the United States is on the right track.

Contrast this reaction to her non reaction to her really personal problems of years ago when her husband behaved in a way that would have brought the average wife not only to tears but to absolute hysterics. HRod apparently had no intuition then. She supposedly had no clue as to what was happening a couple of hundred yards from her living room. Or maybe she knew exactly what was happening but rather than be honest about her husband's behavior she chose to not put the country first but rather attempt to turn her personal problems into a political war.

That is her real track record: her personal needs or desires come first- no matter the cost to our country. Her tears, if real, are merely an indication of her desperation as she feels her dream of power slipping away.

Maybe what this also shows us is that politics are more personal to her than her actual personal life. How sad for her...

George Stephanopoulos sounded like a rocket scientist when talking to Diane Sawyer about the Gibson debate. George noted that none of the other candidates seem to like Romney.

Really- could it be that they don't seem to like him because they all realize that in fact he is the candidate to beat? Republicans need to be careful when listening to these pundits- who also recognize that Romney is the best candidate in the race.

Romney's challenge: Stay the course. Hold the other candidates accountable for their past positions. Romney needs to avoid getting defensive when candidates like McCain attempt to criticize Romney for his financial success. When McCain seems to suggest that Romney has a lot of gall for living the American dream Romney needs to have a strong one-liner comeback.

By the way, McCain should be careful criticizing Romney for wealth- last I checked he wasn't living in a trailer home...

By the way, the Charlie Gibson debate brought out some great infighting on the immigration issue.

Watching McCain try and argue that he was not for amnesty was absolutely ridiculous. No one could have read about the "Z" visas and not thought "amnesty" was in play. McCain is the one distorting his past positions on immigration and Romney is not wrong, ,or negative, to point this out.

Giuliani did a great job at acknowledging that illegal immigration is a very complicated issue and that each candidate's record is imperfect.

It should be of concern that the candidates seem quick to want to deport criminals. I would suggest that we should NOT deport violent criminals. We should enhance their sentences because they are illegally in this country. Deportation is not a solution for these people because they have every reason to reenter the U.S.- they did it before and they will do it again. Perhaps jail for criminals who are also illegal aliens is a price the United States will need to pay.

(By the way, would it be possible to outsource prisons for illegal aliens? Perhaps we could contract with countries like China and India to run prisons for illegal aliens convicted of committing violent crimes in the United States. We know illegal aliens have no right to be in the United States and we also know that it would be cheaper to run prisons overseas.)

One other note on McCain's rhetoric on this issue: it seemed desperate to throw out the hypothetical he wouldn't want to let a service person in Iraq learn that his mother got deported because she was in this country illegally.

Would McCain's position be that any illegal alien who can convince a family member to serve in the military should receive amnesty? I am fairly confident that our military is not dependent on the service of illegal aliens or their family members...

Michael Steele, chairperson of GOPAC, provided some accurate commentary after the debate tonight. Romney was a bit defensive about the taxation issue and whether a fee was the same as a tax. Romney should just concede that fees are taxes and then move on and describe the financial turnaround he led in Massachusetts.

Steele is wrong about Romney's need to win in Hew Hampshire. A strong 2nd keeps Romney in the game. He is right that Thompson is on the way out if he doesn't ratchet things up a little.

Steele also acknowledged that Republicans are struggling because those in office have often failed to follow through on the conservative ideals upon which many of them ran. Voters need to be convinced that Republican candidates will again become the voice of reason and the guardians of government accountability.

Let us hope that he is using whatever influence he may have to encourage those in office and / or running this year to stand up for those principles that have made the United States the greatest country in the world.

Let us also hope that the elected officials and the candidates are listening.

Huckabee and Romney got into a sparring match over which one cut taxes or raised taxes or raised fees... (click here for bloomberg.com commentary)

Huckabee seemed evasive about how he handled taxes while Governor of Arkansas. Romney went after him in a direct manner and Huckabee didn't answer his questions about how much he raised taxes.

Huckabee seems to want to paint any questions or concerns about his record as negative attacks. He needs to be better prepared going forward to answer questions directly. Continued refusal to respond quickly with actual number answers will turn people off.

Huckabee's tax proposal, the Fair Tax, intrigues many people. The abolition of all withholding taxes sounds great. The question becomes how simple would a national sales tax really be and how would the "prebates" really work? His estimate of the tax seems low based on estimates by many economists. (click here for Washington Post editorial)

Would the American people readily adjust, psychologically, to paying a tax on their Friday night babysitter? What about on health care? How about groceries? Even if his plan made sense, which I am not conceding at this point, it is so drastic that it seems impossible to implement.

My verdict: Romney beat Huckabee on the tax issue.

The Republican debate offered a lot of information for voters who tuned in.

Huckabee's early comments on illegal immigration demonstrated his lack of preparedness on that issue. He said he wants to seal the border but then suggested families leave their kids here when the parents are deported. WHAT!! Send them all back to their home country and let them apply for entry like all those people who have been waiting their turn.

Romney was strong on the issue-No amnesty, real or perceived.

Giuliani spoke clearly on the immigration issue. He admits to providing humane benefits and now believes his plan is the best:

• build a fence
• tamper proof ID
• Mandatory to read, write and speak English to get citizenship

Thompson: great point about the need to NOT encourage people living outside of the U.S. to come here illegally, which amnesty will do.

It doesn't really matter what McCain says about immigration now because his positions have been clear throughout his time in the senate: his positions lead to amnesty which is a non-starter for Republicans in general.

On immigration: Romney and Giuliani were most presidential.

Interestingly naive comments by political pundits suggest that Romney can't afford another 2nd place finish. They want to convince people that another second place finish would spell the end for Romney. Could these pundits simply be anti-Romney talking heads for other candidates?

While Romney should obviously hope for a win in NH, a second place finish in New Hampshire should embolden Romney to move full-speed ahead. This is especially true if McCain takes first.

If Romney comes in second to McCain then Huckabee could, at best, be third. Is he then out of the race as well? If McCain and Romney are 1 & 2 in New Hampshire then is a third place Giuliani or a third place Thompson out of it as well? It should go without question that the fourth and fifth place finishers should hang it up the morning after.

Ridiculous!!

Iowa represents mile one of a very long marathon. Better to be consistently in the top couple of the pack than to be first once and third or fourth or even fifth the rest of the race.

The Iowa caucus brought out a very large number of Evangelical voters and that is why Huckabee won the primary. Do the pundits think that a difference of 10,000 voters in Iowa really make that big of a difference? Evangelical voters are certainly influential in many states, but by no means do they make up a majority of the base across the country. Was Huckabee's victory a fluke? Do voters really know Huckabee's message or were they responding to his background as an Evangelical minister? It will be at least a month before anyone can shake out the truth behind Huckabee's win.

New Hampshire is a notoriously independent state with long ties to McCain. No one should be surprised if McCain manages to pull out a win there. Independent voters of New Hampshire do not represent the typical Republican caucus goer or primary voter across the country.

Giuliani has focused on Florida and should be expecting a win there. Romney should realize a second there keeps him in the game, as well.

Any talking head contentions about a Romney problem before Super Tuesday are premature and designed to discourage his supporters.

The bottom line- it is always better to be first, but second place in the early states does bring credibility and does build momentum going into Super Tuesday.

Finally, every Republican candidate has experience and skills that trump those of every Democrat running. That being said, Republican voters should honestly assess the potential of the five candidates, all of whom are very talented and experienced politicians, to fight the inevitable flood of money and media that will be used to attempt to hoodwink the American people in the 2008 election.

This will be an election to end all elections. We will see the negative influence of the McCain-Feingold Act and we will long for a time when money isn't the key. But that is not now. Money will be determinative and the candidates with the most access to money will ultimately have the best hope of winning.

All Americans need to pay attention to the many serious issues facing our
country and vote for the candidate who is most likely to help us wake up and find that it is again morning in America.

Is it at least remotely possible that the Dow was down today because investors who are paying attention got scared by the prospect of an Obama presidency?

An unemployment rate of 5% shouldn't spark a 2% loss in the market.

For an interesting graph of unemployment numbers since Bush inherited the Clinton recession click on the following link: unemployment data

The way the talking heads were playing up the "dramatic increase" in unemployment a person might have thought there was a serious problem.

Socialists complaining about the Bush economy should note that the unemployment rate in France: over 9%; Canada 5.9%; Germany over 8%.

While I hope that all people in the U.S. who are able to work do what they can to find success, perspective is always important. The economy is humming along and that fact should not be ignored by people whose job it is to educate and inform the American people about the many important issues facing our society.

Happy New Year!!

Happy New Year to all the Iowans who turned out for the inaugural caucus yesterday. My recap:

On Hillary: She's melting...melting...
On Obama: The audacity continues...
On Edwards: Do you know why? He thinks he does...
On Huckabee: Aw Shuckabee. He reminds me of a modern day Jim Nabors...
On Romney: 2nd keeps him in the game. Loosen up and put on some plaid, unless you've never worn plaid- in which case stick with the suits and play up your resume- since none of the Democrats running have one. (A first lady, a freshman senator who has spent most of term campaigning not governing and a trial lawyer who seems to claim his greatest success has been making out of the Mill...
On Thompson: Please, go back to your day job- I loved you on Law and Order...
On McCain: Is there anything to say besides McCain-Feingold...
On Giuliani: If he pulls off Florida, he may be the guy with the most street smarts ...

It's going to be a long month for people who don't like politics- and maybe longer for people who do.