A Political Moment

Hello friends. Time for a political moment. There will be more.

I am responding to the Presidential Campaign. First, it looks like Rudy Giuliani gambled on Florida and lost. People will say he was stupid to do so, but I don't agree. It was a gamble--50/50, but I think he had to take it because west of the Hudson river, they just don't like New Yorkers. But there are lots of former New Yorkers in Florida. They needed to convince their friends and neighbors to vote for Rudy. It didn't work. So here is my republican forecast. John McCain for president, Rudy Giuliani for Vice President. My republican friends say Rudy's ego will not allow him to be Veep, but I disagree. First, he'd be the first Italian-American Vice President and I think that would be important to him. Second... McCain has health issues.

Now for my main point. I am a democrat after all. People are freaking out that Ted Kennedy endorsed Barack. GIVE ME A BREAK. That is the best thing that has happened to Hillary in the past week. Outside New York and Massachusetts and some parts of California, NOBODY likes or respects Ted Kennedy. NOBODY. When republicans want to raise moeny they send out letters telling people what Ted is up to. Most "independents" are former or potential democrats who think irresponsible liberals control the democratic party. The poster boy of irresponsible liberalism is Ted Kennedy. If you want an indedent to vote for you, get Ted Kennedy to endorse your opponent. Way to go Hillary! (or maybe Bill made a pass at one of Ted's girlfriends. Way to go Bill! Now I like Caroline Kennedy and respect her, but she is not a heavy hitter.

As for Barack Obama, he is a gifted man and he has a bright future. But he is not ready for president. 3 years ago I met a woman who worked for him and what she said was impressive. She said he would run for president one day and my response was "great, but he has to run for Governor of Illinois." She disagreed with me but I believe I'm right (its my blog, no?).

There is a bias against democrats that is not necessarilly unfair. A democratic candidate for president has to prove he or she has the ability to govern more than a republican candidate does. Its not unfair because democrats tend to run on a platform of change, or a grater role for government in our lives. Republicans, being conservative, would rather shrink government, or at least not implement new programs. The idea is that a person who wants to change government needs to prove that she knows how government works and usually that means she must first have been a successful governor. Now Hillary Clinton has made the case that her 8 years next to Bill in the chambers of power has given her that experience. I don't buy the argument, but I do believe she is capable of governing. I believe Barack has it in him too, but his case for bypassing the experience that most voters and I prefer is not as strong.

IF Hillary wins, Barack's best bet is to accept a VP nomination (if Hillary offers it, and I doubt she will) or run for governer of Illinois. If he's a good governor, no one will be able to bring up the experience issue again. He will still be young in 4 or 8 years.

In the meantime...GO GIANTS!