Main Premise: Well, there’s a lot of good doctors that keep telling me: “Brandon, you better be slowin’ it down.”
Minor Premise: But there’s more old drunks than there are old doctors.
Conclusion: So I guess we better have another round.
I don’t like syllogisms.
Courtesy of “I Gotta Get Drunk” by Willie Nelson and George Jones
Today thousands of Iraqi citizens participated in a free and democratic election. Women voted as well as men. Sunnis voted as well as Shi’ites and Kurds. This would not have been possible without our nation’s 43rd President. And although many have the right to criticize him and celebrate the coming of our 44th, I would assert that few mitigate the perceived failures of Bush’s presidency with some of his great successes.
He’ll never admit it, but I’m sure George W. Bush is smiling today.
Mike Pence (R – IN 6th) was elected Republican Conference Chairman for the 111th Congress by his peers. He has swiftly become one of the most credible and oft-cited Republicans on the Hill. I am proud to say he’s my Congressman, and equally proud to say I’ve met the man.
The ability of the Republican leadership to make a principled stand (177-0 on the proposed Economic Revitalization Act) makes them a force to reckoned with. Just 40 blue dogs will allow Republicans to pass their own legislation. Eleven blue dogs defected from Pelosi’s ranks to join the Republican opposition to big government and wasteful spending.
The Senate version will be interesting. More cooperation is expected in the Senate than there was in the House. More tax cuts are expected to come out of the negotiations in the Senate. Sen. John McCain (R – AZ) has stated that he will oppose the Revitalization Act as it stands. If bipartisan support is what President Obama wants, getting Senator McCain on board will be critical.
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated that he expects when the two versions are combined and the House votes again, that there will be bipartisan support. His metaphor is that we’re counting the score in the third inning of the baseball game. It’s not a bad one. But for those of us wondering how much power the minority will have in Congress, this has been a statement that they will be more powerful than expected if they can maintain a unified voice.
You just knew it had to happen:
The Mayor returns from a much needed vacation, and The Star Press – a newspaper that recently admitted it could not “look the Mayor in the eye” due to constant libelous responses in its StoryChat features – is soliciting anger to be directed at the Mayor of Muncie. Its latest leading headline – drafted (or at least encouraged), by the notorious Rick Yencer – is “Mayor Satisfied with Snow Removal upon Return from Hawaii.”
Leading headlines are as much the problem as an uninformed, uneducated horde of bureaucrats on The Star Press’s StoryChat daily. Should it matter that the Mayor has spent her well earned vacation in the comfort of the Hawaiian islands instead of New York City? Its aim is not well disguised – it’s another misguided and editorial attempt to coax the general public into a negative, angry reaction. A negative and angry reaction creates the type of libelous StoryChat comments that The Star Press has so recently rebuked.
It’s time to end StoryChat. It’s time to end leading headlines. It’s time to stop editorializing the front page. It’s time to stop using a journalism monopoly to further divide a struggling community.
http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090128/NEWS06/90128039/1002/NEWS01
http://www.thestarpress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009901250315
Last night on Hardball, Chris Matthews discussed the possibility that Barack Obama may choose Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts as his running mate. According to Matthews, Kerry is on Obama’s notably long shortlist. Undoubtedly there is somebody in the Obama campaign that is smart enough to know that selecting Kerry would be a huge mistake. The uneasyness that working class voters and independents have about Barack Obama will only be amplified if Obama chooses a running mate that is more liberal than he is. Given the choice of 2004 over again, I am convinced that many independents would again choose Bush over Kerry.
Although I have been a longtime supporter of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, I do not think that he is the right choice for John McCain to choose as his running mate. To compete with the dynamic Barack Obama, John McCain needs to choose someone with charisma that will appeal to working class. He will also need a running mate that can shore up his support in the South and Midwest. Choosing Huckabee instead of Romney will probably eliminate the chances that Obama has in states like Georgia and Virginia. The guitar-playing, populist former minister from Hope, Arkansas has the charisma that McCain needs to showcase. He also appears young and sincere.
Huckabee was a surprise in the primaries, never given much of a shot. Indeed, he was rarely given questions to answer at early debates when McCain, Guiliani and Romney were in the spotlight. Huckabee was given about as much as time as Senator Brownback, Representative Paul and Representative Tancredo. When Fred Thompson entered the race, the media believed that Thompson would cut off a lot of the appeal that Huckabee had early on. The media has often been proved dreadfully wrong in this election. Huckabee performed well in Iowa and in the South. It is my belief that he will do well campaigning out West also, where people share his values. The only pitfall to choosing Huckabee over Romney, Jindal and others seems to be that Huckabee is not the strongest in Michigan. It is my belief, however, that Republicans must do all they can to first shore up support in red states before attempting to take away blue states. The map in the past few elections has favored Republicans.
So, John McCain, my advice to you is to select someone that can hold the base. If you can maintain the Bush ‘04 states you will win. McCain and Huckabee are both great Americans. Indeed, they are both admirable leaders. They are friends and there are few soundbites in the primary where they have argued like McCain and Romney have. Huckabee is young enough to put Americans at ease about McCain’s age. He is also capable enough to be President of the United States.
I am going to give high marks to Pixar’s latest venture, a movie about a small, lovable robot named Wall-E. Although there are plenty of political points that could have been made and pushed by the plot, Pixar used them only to advance the story. Although I doubt that it will go on to win Flick of the Year, it certainly is the best I have seen yet this year. I imagine the next movie I will be going to see will be Swing Vote. Wall-E was a charming movie that was capable of making an adult consider what is really important about our existence here on Earth.
In this political season I have decided to rank all of the Presidents. Recently I ranked the top ten on Helium. If you are impatient and don’t want to wait the 43 days it will take to get there, here is the link to my top ten. This blog will feature more in-depth articles on these Presidents. Today, however, I am going to focus on the WORST PRESIDENT OF ALL TIME: Lyndon Baines Johnson.
I have chosen Johnson as the worst President ever because I think enough time has passed that we can understand his presidency. On most lists, Nixon would be #43 because of his spying on Democrats during the 1972 election. What historians have come to find out, however, is that this was a practice started by Johnson in 1968. This can be found in No Peace, No Honor by Larry Berman, a noted and credible author. Alongside Johnson’s spying on Republicans in ‘68, I believe his actual entire administration was inept.
Johnson created “The Great Society” in a time when Americans could not afford the entitlements it promised. Although admirable for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, little else has amounted to anything. Johnson was a President that spent a lot of money and expanded military operations in Vietnam. It was his administration that made Vietnam a conflict that American could not exit from with its honor intact. The spending of the Johnson administration plagued the nation later as the dollar’s value became inconsistent because of the heavy debts accumulated throughout the Vietnam war.
Johnson also was a man who could not take criticism and frankly was overwhelmed by the office of President. He was brash and angry. When he was challenged in the 1968 primaries by his own party, he ran away from the office out of fear of losing a Presidential election. Some claim that Johnson was doomed by the situation in Vietnam and that he would have been an excellent President. Johnson, however, had complete control of the conflict in Vietnam. He had the option to exit before combat troops were deployed.
These are the reasons why I believe Lyndon Baines Johnson is the WORST PRESIDENT EVER!
“Why Ole Miss?”
This question has been a constant in my life since I decided to attend the University of Mississippi School of Law. Upon the announcement of my decision to certain individuals I have seen varied responses. In the faces of my family and my friends I have seen joy, pride, sadness, disgust and confusion. Those who have been to Oxford recently seem to understand my decision. And so I turn the question to the Commission of Presidential Debates. Why have you chosen the University of Mississippi for the first and probably most important Presidential debate?
“Why Ole Miss?”
Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain will meet at the University of Mississippi on September 26th, 2008. During their stay in Oxford, they are likely to see the statue commemorating the desegregation of the university by James Meredith in 1962. They are likely to drive through the old Southern square, where the state flag of Mississippi is almost entirely overshadowed by the upper left hand corner of it, where the Confederate battle jack is prominently displayed. These two presidential candidates will do battle with words in a state that has often been called “reactionary” and “stubborn.” It is a state that is one of the least likely to be in play in this election cycle. In the universally acknowledged “change” election:
“Why Ole Miss?”
In part, the selection of the University of Mississippi for the first Presidential debate of 2008 is an acknowledgment of the progress the university has made in recent years. This quiet, uniquely Southern town of nearly 13,000 is likely to welcome the 3,000 journalists expected for the debate as readily as they accept the 15,000 Ole Miss students every semester. Oxford has become an extension of Ole Miss unlike any other college town. It is unique in that the town gives off a vibe of being all about Ole Miss. Undoubtedly, Oxford’s reputation as being an excellent college town and Ole Miss’s reputation as an excellent university weighed heavily on the minds of the Commission of Presidential Debates as they made this decision.
Although the venue was announced long before Barack Obama was even favored in the Democrat primary, it seems almost destiny that he appear here, in Oxford, the first African-American candidate for President. His arrival in Oxford will show a much different side of the town than many remember in 1962, when federal marshals went face to face with state law enforcement officials beneath the beautiful magnolias in the grove and atop the streets of Oxford.
So why Ole Miss? Because it’s not your grandmother’s Oxford. It is the New South, a place where a Yankee boy from Muncie, Indiana can be welcomed while getting an excellent legal education. It’s a place where the first African-American Presidential candidate can be welcomed as well. It is a hospitable town that has been entirely changed since 1962, but refuses to be ashamed of its past. America is finally giving Oxford its well-deserved second chance. I look forward to the coverage and analysis of my new hometown this September, and I will be providing coverage of my own to you.
A number of Muncie residents have recently complained to me about the lack of objectiveness in recent Star Press articles about the Mayor of Muncie, Sharon McShurley. While it is apparent that The Star Press (or, at least journalist Nick Werner) has taken a stand against the mayor recently, it is also obvious that they are covering her far too often. Several unnecessary articles even appeared while she was away in Japan, searching to bring jobs into the last notch in the Rust Belt: Muncie, Indiana. I have tried to remember how often the last mayor of Muncie received front page attention in the Star Press, and the answer is: rarely.
The coverage that the Star Press has given the Mayor has led to a political exhaustion of the citizens. Many of the residents are just tired of hearing about it. The Star Press has recently covered the troubles at Prairie Creek Reservoir extensively, as well as commenting on legal debt that resulted from a recount. Today, they published a good news / bad news article on Prairie Creek alongside the legal debt article. The good news article was about twenty words, the bad news … naturally, it got a ton of ink and space. It is time to have some responsible journalism, the different articles deserve equal space and equal ink.
This mayor has shaken up the city. She has worked extensively to clean the corruption that has existed for decades. She has made strong and bold statements that the City of Muncie is going to be a good steward of tax dollars. That is what a good city does. It spends the tax dollars on necessary public good. Prairie Creek reservoir is an inherited burden of corruption and deceit as Larry Riley pointed out in his recent editorial. It is time to privatize the reservoir. If it is Prairie Creek that sinks this administration, the fault lies in a gullible electorate. Prairie Creek is where progressive politics goes to die, and those that are willing to jump on the mayor on this one issue alone are the reason why Muncie is lagging behind the rest of the nation.
