Captain's Quarters -

At least Richardson got this part right on immigration:

(He's a little free and easy on the rest.)

from: http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/issues_immigration/

We also need a national system to reliably and instantaneously verify the legal status of every job applicant and worker. We cannot stop illegal immigration if we continue to look the other way on illegal employment. We need a national, non-duplicable electronic worker identification document to be used exclusively for employment purposes. Such a system must come with legal protections against it being used to discriminate in hiring practices, as well as privacy safeguards. After the institution of such an ID system, employers will have no excuses: those who knowingly hire undocumented workers must face serious and certain penalties. Those who hire illegal immigrants are law-breakers too, and like illegal immigrants themselves, they must be held to account for breaking the law.

Uh, wait until you hear him on Iraq. He wants all US troops out now, even those fighting al-Qaeda in Anbar and Diyala. I'm posting a new article on that in the next few minutes ...

I think a Richardson vs Giuliani campaign would make for an interesting choice for the country. Probably one of the better available.

Different parties! And, Bill Richardson's opportunities depends on Hillary's strengths. And, weaknesses.

Plus, from some of the tea-leaf readers "predictions" I've read; Richardson is running for VEEP.

While the GOP has to deal with its own base.

Yes. The base served up the slop that came with both Bushes. Not so much Reagan. Because back in 1980, the "conservatives" were the John Birchers. And, they ran on their own money! (Many people don't know it; because they consider California to be full of nuts and flakes. But the right wing is ENTRENCHED. The "old money?" Knott's Berry Farm. And, Walt. When he ran Walt Disney. It was very quiet. Well dressed men. And, within Orange County, to San Diego, they carried clout.

What has this got to do with 2008? The John Birchers moved out of San Marino years ago. Decades, perhaps. And, the conservative "base" within the GOP is now a socially conservative group.

When Lincoln took hold of the Republican Party; it should be remembered that the old WHIGS, were the conservatives in their day. And, he eschewed the label "abolitionist" ... because it was a deadly one to carry. He was emphatic that he was not an abolitionist!

Not only that, but during the 4+ years of the Civil War, Lincoln held onto his "border states." Each one had slavery within its borders. But they didn't leave the union. (Was it easy for Lincoln to keep interests that so divided the border states? Who were closer to the southern rebels than say, NY State? NO. IT WAS NOT!)

But successful politicians don't pander.

To escape from the charges that he was 'gonna free the slaves," ... during 1860 ... Lincoln did not campaign. OTHERS DID. But it was an assignment carried by a few other men. Not just one. While Douglas, running as the dem's candidate; was the first human being in American history to make campaign stops EVERYWHERE. Down south? They heckled him like crazy. And, by then? The southerners were far gone into their insanity.

Whatever the social conservatives want to get in the next presidential cycle? Hard to say. Since this is a right winger's niche, here. And, yet, for the most part, sanity prevails.

And, sanity includes a desire to win.

And, what Tom DeLay, in his wonderful book, analyzes: Politics is about compromise.

I have no idea if Guiliani's lead is going to hold, or not? Nobody knows what life has in store for anyone, ahead. But if it holds, he's definitely a product of a big city that drifts left.

And, the other example? Bill Clinton, after he got hit on the head in 1994, drifted RIGHT. So he could reach the center. And, hold that ground.

Dunno what candidate will be the most appealing to the most people. But if France is any indication; we've left the "too bored to vote" with politics, behind us now.

Heck, the French elected the Jew! And, with a turnout that burnt up about 40 years worth of slower, lower voters. Is the world ready to come back together again? Has the muzzies actually caused "backlash" yet, that will be felt in 2008?

Again, the GOP is at least trotting out their 8. Though I know what Fred said. He wasn't ready to be the tallest midget. While, he may not have what it takes to do the long race? Such a thing includes lots-a money. And, a mainstream following.

Something that McCain has managed to damage. Did McCain-Feingold do him in? Something sure has come along to stain his luster. Even the press doesn't laud him, anymore. (I guess McCain-Feingold, to the press, is a loss of funds?) So they're not friendly.

Used to be, a long time ago, and far away; some indians befriended white settlers. Didn't take long, though, for opinions to form against them. That really did encompass the majority of the People.

And, the People VOTE.

Can't herd cats, either.

I have to confess, I listened to the radio interview/cheering section and I’m not impressed. Running to the Left during the Dem Primary is easy, but he’s not running for the Presidency of the Democrat States of America, eventually he will be faced with questions such as “If we retreat from Iraq as you propose, how badly do you expect the country to explode in violence and how many lives do you expect will be lost?”, “How will you promote democracy around the world if you will not support democracy in Iraq?”, and “How will you act to protect democracy worldwide in the conflict with violent jihadists?” (because we know he can not say “Global War on Terror”)

"faced with questions such as"

From whom, exactly?

You have some good questions there, but there is not the slightest chance a Democrat will be asked to answer them.

Democrats are never posed hard questions. They are tossed softball after softball by their media lickspittles.

Democrats boycott Fox News because they are too cowardly and stupid to answer the hard questions.

Republicans debated on the appalling MSNBC. They took questions from loyal Democrat staffer, clown Chris Matthews. The "analyst" for this fiasco was raging lunatic left jackass Keith Olberman.

Questions posed to Democrats never rise above the level of, "If you were a flower, what kind of flower would you be?"