Veep Sweeps

I don't remember this much attention ever being given to a potential Vice President, but since John McCain chose Sarah Palin I guess I understand why.

Usually chosen to counter balance a weakness in the Presidential candidate, the only thing Palin did for McCain's ticket was to be a female.

I haven't the worry I had with McCain.  Romney doesn't appear senile nor tempting the grim reaper.  Well, McCain is still with us so that was a worry I needn't have had.  For all my other thoughts about him, however, I have no apologies.

Now it's time to look at the choices being floated for Romney.  Have you noticed how many seem to share his lack of personality?  Maybe the theory is sleeping through his administration might be the preferable way to survive it.  Forget that many have already said they aren't interested, let's have a look.  If you follow politics you will know some of the names, but probably not all of them.  If you don't, you aren't likely to know any.  McDowell? Portman?  Martinez? Haley?  Not a lot of name recognition there.  Going into their weaknesses isn't necessary at this point.  The name or lack thereof is enough.

Who might you know?  Marco Rubio?  He says no, but never say never.  I will suggest he hasn't yet enough experience.  Condoleezza Rice?  Once a part of the inner circle was probably enough to last her a life time.  I could think of worse things than being a dean at Stanford.  Being Vice President is one of them.

Paul Ryan?  Too controversial.  Chris Christie?  Too abrasive and his weight/health might be cause for concern.  Jeb Bush said he'd 'consider' it if asked.  That's big of him.  He wouldn't run for President when asked.  And he's still a Bush and Obama might have too much fun with that.

So who's left?  I conjured up the spirit of ole Bacchus of Dogwalk fame and he sniffed out the answer in no time.  Mike Huckabee.  Perfect.  He's chunky, but not quite like Christy.  His personality runs rings around most of the others.  He has experience governing.  He's not Mormon. Wait for it.  He's an evangelical!  Talk about balancing the ticket!  Rick Santorum, eat your heart out!  You too Newt.  This guy is the real thing.  A true Christian conservative.

So there you have it.  Another Dogwalk solution front and center.

Obama may think he's the rock star, but Huckabee beats him hands down.  He can actually pick that bass.  He's pretty good, too!

One Man's Delusional Love Fest

If there was ever a reason to not vote for Newt Gingrich it's because he's truly delusional!  Yes. He's still in the race, such as it is, for the Republican nomination.

He's been spending all his time of late in Delaware, according to Politico . Even with seventeen delegates at stake in the winner take all primary, taking place today, what good will it do?  Unfortunately it will boost his confidence that he can yet become the nominee even though he needs five more wins to even get on the ballot in Tampa.

If this isn't delusional than I am.  Which could be.  Remember, though,  Delaware gave us Christine O'Donnell!  That paragon of conservatism yet even she has endorsed Romney!

One thing that is worrisome in all states is the need to be wooed by candidates.  Even though logistically it isn't always possible a certain element of voter will hold out for that personal attention whether or not the candidate is actually worthy.  This is rumored to hold true in Delaware too, though I can hope not.

Why the Republicans weren't able to field a better selection of candidates puzzles me.  There isn't one of them I feel comfortable with but at least they've winnowed it down to perhaps the least offensive.  Heck, how can someone who can't articulate an idea be offensive?

Those remaining are just as puzzling.  Ron Paul, I suppose, just wants a platform for his ideals hoping at least some of them might catch on.  Recently departed Santorum wandered too far to the right and left the comfort zone of the average voter.  Then there's our Newt. The man is the poster child of self love from his opinion of his own intellect to the sound of his own voice.

Hopefully Delaware will have learned it's lesson with Ms. O'Donnell and will not give Newt the victory he craves.  Perhaps then our attention will no longer be divided with thoughts of 'what next?'

As imperfect as the choices are, at least we'll be down to two.  My apologies to Americans Elect. Of their top five declared candidates I've heard of one and he's one in which I have no interest.  One more time it looks like our choice will be for the least offensive of two who shouldn't be there in the first place.

Blood Money

The more I know the less I understand. It doesn't keep me from gettin mad though. Why are we going to pay Afghanistan (read Karzai) billions of dollars for a minimum of ten years after our withdrawal for the privilege of continuing to defend it?  Figure somewhere between four and six billion dollars per year. What am I missing here?

For one thing, it means more U.S. military casualties.  That's a given.  It means propping up a leader as corrupt as the day is long who we put in place not only once, but twice.  It means taking his abuse every time we look cross eyed and suffering his scoldings every time we sneeze. We're being made to look weak and subjective!

It means taking orders from him! It means continuing to train his security forces, the ones who with some regularity kill the very men training them.  Our men.  It means getting their permission for everything we do.  No more night raids.  No more launching drone attacks into Pakistan or any place else.

We're expected to support their economic development.  What?  Poppy production?  Education.  Women too? Not likely.  Health care and social initiatives?  What, pray tell!  Defend human rights and free speech?  Human rights?  This is Afghanistan we're talking about here.  The country the Taliban wants back.  Karzai is little more than the mayor of Kabul, by the grace of the Taliban at that.  The remainder of the country is still under the thumb of various war lords who side with us only if the money is right.

How this is supposed to insure stability in Central and South Asia is beyond me.  I'm not convinced any other country has an interest in that waste land other than us.  Our NATO allies are leaving.  We'll be there alone protecting the people against aggression from who?  They think it's us!

To make matters worse, it's being structured so the President doesn't even have to get Congressional approval.  Our only hope is they refuse funding.

I've long been weary of Mr. Karzai's abuse.  This is the last straw.  Bin Laden is dead.  He was the target from the get go and wasn't even there for the past six years or so.  Let's end it.   Really end it.  Karzai can tap the funds he has already embezzled to fund his protection.  It's not our responsibility to fund his retirement.

As I said, there is much I don't understand.  I do understand it's un-American for our military to have to pay lip service to a 'hostile' ally. Isn't it about time we put Mr. Karzai in his place?  We have a lot better use for four to six billion dollars a year in this country!  I can think of a lot better use for our young men and women's lives too!

If This Isn't Who We Are, Who Are We?

Not long ago photos appeared on the web of our service men urinating on dead Afghans and the cry went out.  "This isn't who we are!" It has happened again, an older incident, but one just published.  The same cry has gone out.

It seems to me we're doing a whole lot of denying and very little defining these days.

We're insensitive to our enemies during a war that has been waging for far too long.  We're racist when a white feels it necessary to defend himself. We're not God fearing enough if we're pro choice or neutral on Gay relationships. We're against the poor and the elderly if we think Obamacare is bad legislation.  We're selfish if we're wealthy. This isn't who we are either.  At least I hope not.

On the other hand who are we?  Are we the public servants working for the GSA who mock we tax payers as they party hardy on our money?  Are we the military and Secret Service personnel who partook of the ladies of the night in Colombia?

We're either very confused or just not very nice people any more.  Self indulgent.  Defensive.  Entitled?

Of course there is good out there.  Tons of it.  Kind,  caring,  giving people who do enormous good daily.  They just don't make good enough copy to sell papers or get a discussion going on Facebook or Twitter.  They don't raise your blood pressure.   They don't generate your rage.

I'd like to think they are the silent majority.  Once I would have argued that point.  However, when I read about the continuing abuses by Americans against Americans, like the actions of the TSA for instance, I find it impossible. Maybe it's not us, maybe it's those who we've elected to lead us. If so then shame on us.  We do seem willing to follow their lead however.

The military takes a lot of the abuse but I can't help but wonder from whence it comes.  The Coast Guard, for example, uses live animals for 'live tissue' training. It has been revealed that they will anesthetize a goat and cut off it's legs for the purpose.  Sometimes with nothing more sophisticated than a tree trimmer.

Well, that raises my blood pressure and generates my rage.  I ask you, what kind of people would sanction such  actions?  I cannot imagine.  Does it start at the top?  Is this really who we are?

There's Nothing Wrong With An Old Fashioned Man

Like many women today, I was incensed by Hilary Rosen's put down of Ann Romney and her husband.

Any woman who raises five children knows what "work" is.  Especially while battling MS among other ills over the years.  And just because a woman hasn't held a job that draws a paycheck doesn't mean she isn't keenly aware of the economics of living.  Even if wealthy.

By the same token, when a man defers to his wife as his source of knowledge about what women want it's pretty normal.  Men are from Mars.  Remember?  They don't fully understand women any better than we fully understand them.  We think differently.  It also doesn't mean he doesn't think of women as equals.

I'm married to an old fashioned guy.  One who doesn't wear his hat in the house, will still open a door for me, says please and thank you on a regular basis and remembers my birthday and our anniversary.

I remember him telling me, before we were married, about his accomplishments and what he wanted in the future.  The main thing was to be able to take care of his family.  That family has turned out to be just me and a passel of dogs over the years.

I didn't have to work, but having done so for a long time before marrying, I found myself missing the challenges and interactions with those "out there".  He never denied me when I went back to my work on various occasions, but I knew his feelings were hurt.  You see, in his generation, it was something expected of men - to provide, and a source of great pride when they were successful.  Mitt Romney is only five years younger than we are and I would guess his upbringing was much the same.

All that being said, my husband was as non-chauvinistic a man as you could find.  Women didn't work for him, they worked with him.  If they had the ability to do the job and did it they were treated no differently than their male counterparts.  The same truth applied if they failed.

The President has allegedly said they didn't have the luxury of Michelle not working.  He had a law degree from Harvard but chose to be a community organizer.  Her $300,000+ salary far outweighed his, obviously.  His priorities were different from Hubs; he could bask in his wife's earnings.  But I'd hardly say they were denied the luxury.

Once again it's a generational difference.  We've always been a team but he carried the weight because he felt it was his responsibility.  We're equals but as he once told me our strengths are in diffrent areas.  Not one better than the other, just different.

Maybe that's the difference.  We're the last of the "we" generation. Ms. Rosen and the Obamas represent the "me" generation. I'm old fashioned, I admit.  I'm becoming less flexible in my thinking; I tend to brush off rationale unless it really makes sense.  I do know,  however,  I  don't blame Hub for my shortcomings and he doesn't blame me for his.  We're pretty, what's the word I'm looking for - equal?  The paycheck may be a measure but not the only one and not necessarily the most important.