Sunday, January 13, 2008

Updates XIII.

There's snow flakes falling on Lansing, by tomorrrow I'm hoping there'll be snow again! As for today, more studying, worked delts/tri's, had coffee w/ bagels, and I'm back at the Cooley Library, but you're right...'who cares Duque?'

This morning I had a chance to hear Hillary Rodham (you just know she's going to ditch the Clinton-name when the race heats up) on Meet The Press. I loved how she went after the host with lines like "I can't let you get away with that," "that's out of context," "if you look at my record you'll see..." Clinton, like Bill, has a certain level of boldness that's lacking in Obama. This is a woman that went from being a First Lady for 20yrs (either for Ark. or America) to taking out one of the GOP's current favorites for the nod, she took him & beat him so badly he had to pull out of the NY Senate race; I'm talking of Rudy G. of course. She beat Rudy-poo and then years later, won re-election. Hillary is about as New Yorker as John Boyles is a member of a crazy cult... (say nothing James!)

And what about John Kerry endorsing Obama? I know this will sound lame, but first thing I thought of when I read that was, Kyle Jones' endorsement of Scott Kennelly over his runningmate Jamal Sowell in 2003. Regardless of their past disagreements, how can Kerry do Edwards like that? And in the scheme of things, how valuable is Kerry's endorsement? Comments please!!! Is Kerry's backing more important than say Howard Dean's; who will Al Gore back? Makes you kinda wonder...would Gore backstab the Clintons?, would Gore really screw things up by endorsing someone from the GOP (like his '00 runningmate did?), or would Gore bide his time and sit the sidelines? It's become rather apparent that Gore is somewhat of a one-issue man.

Also there's a key point brought up by some conservative talkshow hosts, namely Neil Boortz & that is that the Libertarian Party has yet to announce a candidate or a pool of candidates. I wonder...has a republican-hopeful ever received the endorsement of a third party prior to reaching the GOP convention? What implications would formal Libertarian support send, with Ron Paul receiving truckloads of campaign contributions and holding substantial pockets of diehard support in his homestate of Texas (where Paul has enjoyed 10-consecutive re-elections)? I think the parallels that can be drawn between H. Ross Perot & Ron Paul are many and I would be interested, very interested if Perot would endorse Ron Paul. There doesn't seem to be any kind of talk on this mattter, I wonder what will happen later in the year? I also wonder if Perot's hawkish-like condemnation of NAFTA/GATT will serve to garner similar support from Americans opposed to this much-rumored North American Union.

Still there's more to be said on the matter of a possible Ron Paul independent run. His supporters, according to MANY GOP pundits, are fanatical, other pundits assert that Paul's backers have an almost romantic-relationship with the Texas Congressman, and quite frankly, these folks will not support anyone short of 'Dr. Paul.' The urgency of a relevant 3rd party has never been felt stronger than now. Perot was left the task of forming his own (Reform Party) & Wallace (American Independent Party), but if Paul won official LP support (as he did in 1988), this piecemeal support, coupled with the almost endless coffers of campaign money and 'fanatical support-base' could be a formula for his success or a deathnote for the GOP.

It will also be interesting how some states (largely angered over the attention given to Iowa & NH), like California, are splitting their electoral votes. California will no longer give all its votes as a block to any one candidate, instead they will go district by district. Not since the Wallace & Byrd elections has a 3rd party candidate received electoral votes, could Ron Paul make something happen?

xxxMore Rantingxxx (sorry)

There are many non-traditional politicos out there. For example, few can deny that Bill Maher's liking of Ron Paul was anything but discreet. The TX Congressman also received favorable appeal from Stephen Colbert / Colbert Report. Will Paul ever get the Limbaughs, Boortz, Savages - or - the Hannity's, the Dobb's, or the O'Reilly's? Probably not. However, let's take a look at Jim Cramer. Anyone that saw the episode of Mad Money with Ron Paul knows that Cramer all but endorsed the guy. Limbaugh might make people angry, Savage might wear at people's sensibilities, but Cramer makes people money and if Cramer likes Ron Paul, believe you me, that will influence people.

This isn't merely about a 3rd party run or Ron Paul, but this election while 'promising to be one of the most exciting,' according to many a frontrunner, is also highly complex. I think guys like Karl Rove have done their careers wonders by staying out of this one... I think that everything that's been established from previous elections will not hold water.

II. Conspiracies Expounded

Ok... more ranting. What if the Religious Right is unwilling to accept defeat? What if McCain or Giuliani prevail? While Huckabee is the perennial Christian candidate, the LDS Romney could be argued is also a religious holy-roller; the Moral Majority might take a Romney consolation prize, but can you imagine going from victory in Iowa to being forced to shoulder the brunt of a Pro-Choice, non-homophobic, cross-dressing GOP nominee? (Oh the injustice!, lol) I honestly don't think you'll have too many Ralph Reeds or Benny Hinns doing aerobatics from the pulpit for Rudy Giuliani or John McCain, do you?

The Fiscal Conservatives and the Religious Right have both been systematically denied the reins of the GOP, it's inaccurate to say that either faction has really run the organization. The Republican Party, much to the chagrin of radio personalities and tv crackpots, (and much like the DNC), has been run by Party-Bureaucrats, call them what you wish (anything from neo-cons [a term preferred by Ron Paul advocates and Michael Moore groupies] or you can just call them pillagers of American society. You can't really trace the histories of some of these louses, they are only concerned with lining their pockets and running the nation towards failure, in the end, they control both parties and they will have their way. When's the last time we had a truly liberal president? A truly conservative president? Point is...this election could prove to be very differnt.

The mainstreamers are on the run (Romney & Rudy are in trouble). The feared GOP rogue and the preacher from Hope are both vying for control. Sadly, McCain isn't much of a fiscal conservative, but like '00, I suspect he'll put on a great fight, but will succumb to Huckabee. Huckabee has a lot more of Clinton than a small town in common, they are both musicians, they both have rapport with guys like Jay Leno, they both have Hollywood star-power behind them (when's the last time a Republican could look to the Silver Screen for backing?). Huckabee, like the Clinton's, also has that (pardon me for saying this) 'white trash appeal', kinda like Larry The Cable Guy. Anyone that's a real Larry fan knows that he's not really a redneck, it's an act, an act he perfected, an act that's made him A LOT of money and gotten him A LOT of fans. I mean why exactly would the Governor of a state want to live in a pre-fab home ( a trailer) ? It got him on got him noticed, "Git Er Done!"

Huckabee has this race won. Some old Access-clout is even behind the Arkansas governor (write in!). The GOP needs its Christian base and believe me, it won't piss them off. However, I'd also like to know how hard Joe Lieberman will back McCain with his endorsement. Will this be an Oprah-like-endorsement-for-Obama, will this be a Chuck Norris-like-endorsement-for-Huckabee? Let's go to the M.I.A. and let's focus on the Cuban American National Foundation, still the top dog Cuban-American flagship organization (almost exclusively Republican, with few exceptions).

One key exception for both the CANF/FNCA and other exile organizations (A'66, C-L, HAR) is 'ole Joe Lieberman, whom they love & respect -- yes love and respect. In a battle for credibility, the top brass of the exile community would go with Joe over Rudy, hands down. Question hard will the rogue Democrat from New England back his main man from Arizona???

I could go all night. I need to get back to my studies. Talk to you all later.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Your positively farcical political ineptitude notwithstanding, I'll merely correct you in that Hillary didn't beat Rudy - she beat Rick Lazio, who took Rudy's place after he was diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Keep up the good work.

Christian Duque said...

Prostrate Cancer, right... Listen there sport, if Peter Jennings was able to work practically till his dying day with LUNG CANCER, then ole Rudy could have stayed in the race.

Hillary had the guy beat on every exit poll up to his pull-out and she annihilated Lazio. Nice attempt, but you are no match for The Duque. :o)

Anonymous said...

Ben Dictor for student alliance! the indies are pathetic

Anonymous said...

Exit polls? Foot, meet mouth.

And although Peter Jennings could still work while going through chemo, most people can't. Not to mention that spending an hour a night in front of the camera is much different from spending eighteen hours a day on the campaign trail.

Christian Duque said...

An hour? You clearly have never taken a TV Production class. The finished product may take an hour, but the production takes an entire day, even & especially for, the Pro's like Jennings.

If Rudy can't muster a Senatorial race with prostate cancer, then he's really not cut for the presidency. Dick Cheney has been able to shake hands, kiss babies, and do all this meanwhile suffering from a heartattack. Rudy needs to man up!