... From the very occasional blogger


There are a couple of problems with Huckabee. First and foremost, Romney has too much money and is buying votes.  Second, he let the media create a two man race and took too long to call them on it. Had he jumped on them the day they started pushing a two man race, he could have gotten enough traction and knocked Romney down to 3rd.

At this point, his best shot is that Romney's wife takes the checkbook away from him and he has to pull out.  I don't hold much hope out for that.

I cast my vote for Huckabee yesterday, not because I have decided he should be the next President, I've got to see the entire ticket before I can make that call with one exception. McCain can not be at the helm. It has nothing to do with the talking heads and everything to do with my 7 years as an Arizona resident. I saw first hand how he is an ugly political machine that will say and do anything he needs to get what he wants, regardless of what he was elected to do.

There are two things I like about McCain... he is a pork watchdog and he is no longer my Senator.

Romney may have been a successful business man but I don't like him. He has no regard for people and is stepping on everybody by going negative fast and hard.

all that being said, I think my quandry is typical for the GOP these days. We don't have one person that we can get behind. If I could take McCain's passion against pork, Romney's business sense and Huckabee's passion and roll them into one person we would have a slam dunk. This election is really going to depend on the ticket, the Veep is going to have to be able to sway a lot of people.

My crystal ball tells me a few things:

Romney can't beat Hillary or Obama. I don't have a beat on who or what type of person he would pick as a Veep.
McCain could beat Obama, it will be close against Hillary. He would have to pick a Veep that can pull the party together, because he can not do it.
Huckabee... If he picked a moderate Veep and McCain and Romney got behind him with sincerity, I think he could win. Of course, the money would have to start rolling in.

Let me know what you think, telling me I'm wrong is fine but the second you become insulting or rude your comment will dissapear into the ether.

I'm not overly excited about any individual candidate but I've begun whittling my list down. After listening to tonight's debate on XM, I have knocked Romney off my list. He was never high up there to begin with so it didn't take much. I just didn't like his tactics and some of his answers.

The rest of the field is still in play for me (the legit field, meaning not Ron Paul). I don't see myself getting really excited about any individual so for me it is going to come down to the ticket and who I feel can beat Obama. IMHO, The Democrats would be crazy not to nominate Obama. Clinton could make a good run but I think she would bring out the anti-Clinton (Which I am proud to be part of) crowd.

I do like Thompson but I don't think he is going to make it. I feel like he is pushing for the Veep slot, which would be ok. I love the flat tax idea and it is something I see as fair and workable. My best scenario would be for anything under $100k per family to be tax and SS free.

Huckabee could be good but as the saying goes, "once a Baptist, always a Baptist." The fairtax idea is novel but has a complicated feel to it and the potential to hurt families in the sub $80k income range.

I used to live in Arizona and McCain with his amnesty program has really hurt his chances with me. I think he would make a great Veep but I don't think he would accept the offer.

Giuliani has strong potential but I just can't seem to get fired up over him.

If we had a situation where we could pick the ticket I could handle a combination of any of them other than Romney. Yes, I'm leaving out Paul and Hunter. Paul was viable for me until I started listening to him. Hunter is too far down on the fringe to really be considered.

So there they are, my thoughts for the moment. Maybe reviving this blog will help me get excited about  one individual. The one thing I do know is that we will have to fight hard if/when Obama gets the nomination.  An Obama-Clinton ticket would probably kill us but the only chance of seeing that would be if Clinton got the nom, she would never accept a Veep position.

UAW threatens to strike.

Big fat hairy deal. The threat is thin and not likely to happen. GM needs to stand up and say, fine go ahead and strike, we'll just replace the workers.

There are some instances where unions do a good job, but they are few and far between these days. The cost of an American car is outrageous and there are  less than five reasons for this:

1. The unions have fought and won expensive salaries for factory workers.  I'm not demeaning the job or the workers but, come on, the wages these guys make for the job they do is insane.

2. Options. How many versions of each car does GM have? Too many. Chevy, GMC, etc, they all have the same cars with different names. These guys need to pair it down. One small truck, large truck, minivan, compact, small suv, large suv, etc. They can add on options galore such as club cabs, third row seating and all of that, but they need to cut the number of models back. They spend money making these cars, lose money because they have too many and salaries are to high and then they want a bail-out. Forget it.

3. Executive salaries and the golden parachutes. Retirement, termination (will-full or not) packages need to be based on performance and length of time with the company. I understand these guys have paid their dues and worked the way up the ladder. They deserve compensation for what they do, just not outrageous compensation.

3 reasons, 2 less than 5. Who can come up with 2 other reasons? IMHO foreign competition is not a reason. These guys know how to build and sell cars for a profit, the American guys need to take lessons.

I've gone back and forth about reviving this blog but just haven't been motivated. I've found motivation in a few local events so I'm going to get back at it.

When we left Little Mexico (Arizona) for Georgia we had settled on living in either Cherokee or Forsyth counties. We ended up in Forsyth for various reasons and have had no regrets until this week. It has nothing to do with the politics of Forsyth which seem to be a lot of he said, she said attacks that I haven't dived into.

Cherokee County made a bold move this week in the war on illegal immigration. A moved that will end up being fought in the courts. A move that will more than likely fail or have to be watered down because it contains LOGIC. They have had enough of the illegal immigration problem and have decided to hold legal citizens that act as accomplices accountable.

Beginning on January 1, 2007 if you rent to illegal citizens you will be breaking the law and will be prosecuted. It makes sense and should hold up in the court system but I'm sure some activist Judge will get involved and ruin it.

Why should it be enforced? Because being an accomplice to a crime is punishable in just about every other aspect of law. If you give someone a gun to kill someone you are also guilty. If you sit in a car while someone goes into a bank to rob it and drive them away, you are also guilty. If you give someone a place ti live while they are here legally you should be guilty as well.

Landlords are upset and are crying that this will hurt them and cost them money because they will not be able to rent out the dumps they own to 5 families per house or 4 per apartment and let them live in squalor. Instead of going for the easy buck and renting out a barely liveable house to a bunch of illegals, they need to invest some money into the properties they own to clean them up. This will allow them to rent them out at a higher rate or sell them for a larger profit. They need to be thanking Cherokee County for forcing them to do the right thing. Both in terms of helping better the community and earning more money in the long run.

Coming from Maricopa County in Arizona, I have first hand knowledge in the effects of illegal immigration. Nothing good comes from it. Is your produce a little cheaper? Is it cheap to have your lawn taken care of because you can't or are too lazy to do it yourself? Yes on both accounts and many others that people see as cost savings from having an illegal workforce. All of these savings (and plenty more) are offset by free healthcare for the illegals, welfare for those that come illegally and have children, ESOL classes, the cost of locking up, prosecuting and occasionally deporting the illegals that continue on to commit violent crimes and savings to our auto insurance because of licensed (or non-licensed) illegal immigrants that cause accidents and don't have insurance to pay for the damage.

I can only hope that when this new law goes to court it is upheld. After that, hopefully other counties will follow suit and then we can start going after business owners that employ the illegals. We still need to work on the border to stop the flow. But I'm glad things are happening locally to make it more difficult for the illegals to live here.

I started this log knowing that I would be leaving Arizona and would have to take some time getting into the local Georgia politics. It's been tough to get myself going. I do think I'm on the verge of it though so I'll try.

Before I do though, let me say that I fear my thoughts about Arizona are coming true. The Gov election is going to be against Munsil and Veto Janet. The conservative base is much better at getting out the vote so there is hope that a Republican will hold that office soon, but not much hope. Munsil seems to be a pretty good guy but he has been too far right to win and do much good. Arizona is a fairly conservative state but Munsil in office stands a chance at ruining the possibility of another Republican Gov for quite sometime.

Unless he comes closer to the middle of the road. I don't want to see a Centrist but the far right has a tendency to take things to... far.

But what do I care, I'm outta there and never going back! I do feel for friends still living there though. Get out while you can or at least get Veto Janet out and hold Munsil on a short leash. I still do believe that anyone is better than Veto Janet but Goldwater could have taken the spot, fixed her problems and paved the way for future Republican Govs to actually make something of the state.

The moving truck just can't get here fast enough! By this time next week we'll be packing up our belongings and moving to North Georgia. Why? The primary reason is to be closer to family. I didn't get much sleep last night, going through the list of things to do in my head before moving. When I don't sleep well I get cranky. I'll try to get all of my crankiness out on this blog but who knows.

I have to admit though, leaving this state behind is going to be fun. I still plan to blog and comment on the failures of Veto Janet. She has run rough shod over this state. Allowing illegal immigrants to take over and actually gain political control is only one of her idiotic moves. I'm so fed up with her telling us she is going to do something about it and then claiming the feds need to take care of it.

CPS is another problem she has managed to make worse. She should be charged with murder. She tried to "reform" the organization and ended up making things worse and killing innocent children.

Remember the prison hostage situation? Did we ever really find out how it happened? No. Why? Because she shut down any investigation other than her own and her cronies at The Arizona Republic would never point out that she put the people responsible in charge.

Veto Queen... she has vetoed more bills than any other Governor in the state, and she is only in her first (hopefully last) term.

School funding. All day Kindergarten? Come on, show me a valid study that says it actually helps. School choice? Vouchers? Bueller.... Bueller.... Bueller?

Spending tax payer dollars to teach ungrateful illegal aliens and their offspring to read English? An immigrant used to learn the language and assimilate out of respect for the country and not because the government paid for it.

As long as she is in charge, unions and the newspaper will continue to run this state. If she wins another term it will only be because the legal residents are asleep at the wheel and the illegal aliens learned enough English to read a ballot.

These are just a few of the things that make me glad to be leaving. Once I'm out and Janet can't send her cronies after me, I'll tell you what I really think about her.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=11321

According to the article, Sen McCain is taking money from the illegal immigrants and his office is helping them when they get into trouble.

I'm a little leary on the article but if anyone has anything else to support it, let me know.

H/T http://www.espressopundit.com/

Dr. Kevorkian was denied parole this week. Several states are looking at the issue of assisted suicide for terminal patients as well. As a christian, this is a touchy subject for me.

On one side you have the argument against people playing God, deciding when they should die. On the other side you have someone that is going to die quite possibly with pain and without dignity. How do you take both sides and come up with a valid position one way or the other?

Not all people are Christians, nor do all believe in a higher power that takes your life when the time comes. Do you take away the freedom of choice from those people?

Some people (christians included) would prefer to die with dignity once they come to the conclusion that the illness they have will take their life at some point anyway.  These same people and others, would simply love to end the pain and suffering for themselves and their family. I can't see where it would be enjoyable to watch a loved one die a slow painful death knowing that they would have wanted to end it earlier.

Let's go back to the argument about playing God for a minute. Terminal diseases are, for the most part, natural. Yes, cancer from smoking and a host of other diseases are not natural but where do you draw the line? One thing I know is, treatment is NOT natural. In a way, treatment is playing God.... a Doctor (following his oath) is altering the course of ones life. Do two wrongs make a right? Can you justify assisted suicide by saying that if the patient had not been treated, they would have died already?

If we try and remove the personal aspects of the issue, assisted suicide is a cost benefit for all involved. The health insurance companies have less to pay, the families medical bills are decreased greatly. If the health insurance companies had the power people claim they do, assisted suicide would not only be legal, it would be a health benefit.

So how does one decide on this issue? For me it comes down to quality of life. The playing God argument is out the window once treatment sets in. I'm not saying all or any treatment is bad. I'm saying people should have the choice. If I went to the Doctor and they told me I had a terminal disease, I would take any treatment they could give me that would allow me to live the longest quality of life. I would also want the choice to end treatment and end my life once the quality of life has diminished to the point that I become a burden to my family. I want to go out with dignity and I don't want to spend my children's college fund on treatments so I can lie in a bed and wait to die.

What about you, where do you stand?

I live in Arizona for the time being and we are at the front of the battle lines on the immigration issue. I've got to admit that it is pretty scary. It isn't scary because of the coyotes, the drug smugglers or even the illegal aliens themselves.

It is scary because people that have no clue what it is like in the real world are arguing over what to do. On one side, we have Veto Janet posturing and promising to take action in order to get enough Republican votes to win the next election. On the other side we have Kyl, McCain and Hayworth fighting over what we should do and when. When was the last time any of them had to repeat an order 3 times at a drive-thru or ask 4 different people in a grocery store where something was just to get what they were there for?

None of them are brave enough to stand up and say enough is enough. Not to the business world. Not to Mexico. Not to the hispanic community. But they will (and we will let them) make empty promises and make futile attempts to solve the problems created by illegal immigration.

The entire problem can be resolved fairly quickly and in a way that most citizens of this great country can accept.

First, we need to stop the flow. We need to enforce the borders and punish the border crossers in a way that sends a message to those on the other side of the border.

Second, We need to set up a way for those already here to either assimilate and pay back the debt to our society for coming here illegally or to go home. I'm not talking about amnesty or even fines, although a financial punishment would need to be included. Some things that would need to be part of the "assimilation" program would be:

So my rants, thoughts and beliefs tend to lean right of center. My children are named after two Republican Presidents that I respect, admire and occasionally disagree with.

To let the 4 or 5 readers that will find this know a little bit about me, I thought I'd jot down a few things.

1. I'm no fan of amnesty but I understand that you can't round up 12 million (and counting) illegals and send them back home. 
    I do believe you can incent these people to become "legal" and find a way to penalize them for coming in illegally. 
    I do believe that you can deport the rest as they are found. 
    I do believe that businesses that employ illegals need to be punished.
    I do believe the borders need to be secured first. When a pipe breaks under the sink, do you fix it before shutting the water off?

2. You can not overturn Roe v Wade. I understand the basic need to allow for them. Back alley and coat hanger abortions are a thing of the past in this country and we do not need to return to them. Making an abortion illegal will slow the rate down, but it also has the great potential to kill those who feel the need (for any reason) to have an abortion.

3. At the end of the day, if the government has money left over, I want my share back.

4. People fall on hard times and we need to help them. We need to help them get out of the situation at hand and make a better life. We don't need to allow them to use social welfare programs as a way of life. All programs need to have requirements for getting money and a hard end date.

5. The dems lost, get over it.

6. The Dems lost because all they had was hate and venom to spew. If they had offered anything close to a sensible resolution to the the issues they complained about, they probably would have won. Both sides complain about the other side, I get that, it's what you have to say outside of those complaints that gets you votes.

I'll stop now because if I say anything else, you'd have no reason to come back.