Posted on 01/28/2004 5:28:41 PM PST by alwaysconservative
THE SMART MONEY IS ON A KERRY-EDWARDS TICKET
Pictures from New Hampshire The galleries are now up from Monday and Tuesday's live broadcast from New Hampshire. The New Hampshire primary is now history. Life in Manchester will now return to its frigid winter normality until 2008 .. the next time the voters will really matter on a national scale.
After Kerry's New Hampshire win, and the strong showing from John Edwards, the smart money is betting on a Kerry / Edwards Democratic ticket in November. That's wonderful. Here's two candidates who (a) can't wait to raise taxes and spend money; and (b) have never pledged to pursue or win the war on terror if they're actually elected.
I heard a sound bite from John Kerry this morning where he was slamming George Bush on the size of the federal deficit. You do realize, don't you, that even though John Kerry is proposing massive tax increases on the rich, he also has spending proposals on the table that would exceed any revenue increases that might come from his tax increases. In other words, his calls for tax increases are designed for one thing; to appeal to the envy and desire for revenge that festers in the hearts of so many Americans. These Americans could care less about budget deficits. They only want those who have more than they to be punished for their success. Democrats are willing to carry that banner with their calls for confiscatory tax rates.
Pollsters ... and Howard Dean, by the way ... are telling us that the two most important issues in New Hampshire were health care and jobs. Excuse me, but isn't New Hampshire the "Live free or die" state? They drive around with that motto on their license plates while worrying about how they can get the government to satisfy their health care and jobs needs? What about freedom? What about economic liberty? What about being safe from the murderous designs of Islamic Jihadists? These things aren't at the top of the list in the "Live free or die" state?
Sadly, the voters of New Hampshire probably aren't all that much different than the voters in most other states. They're just colder. Years of political pandering have taught these people to look not to their own resources, but to the government to satisfy their basic needs. Freedom? Oh sure. We want to be free to decide where we can live, and we want to be free to chose what we're going to have for dinner tonight. We want to be free to decide where to go on vacation, and which type of car we drive (as long as it's not an SUV). But do we want to be free to fend for ourselves in the jobs market? For many of us, the answer is no. The government owes us jobs. The government should make sure we have jobs. No matter how much we squander our educational opportunities, the government should make sure we have jobs, and the government should see to it that we're paid more than we're worth to insure we can raise a family with no job skills and a limited work ethic.
And health care? Nope, that's not our responsibility either. We should be free to eat what we want, and to exercise or not, but we don't want the freedom to provide for our own health care. Our employer is supposed to do that. Everybody knows that employers are supposed to do so much more than pay us for our work. They're supposed to take care of all our health needs also; and if they don't do it, then the government should. No .. we don't want the freedom to take care of our own health care needs. After all, we might make some wrong decisions? It' OK if we mess up on a choice for a vacation site, or where to live. After all, we're free to move if we want to. But if we screw up on a health care issue the consequences can be severe ... so we'll pass that responsibility off to someone else.
Make no mistake. There are a significant number of Americans who are only willing to pay lip service to the idea of freedom. When the chips are down, and when the consequences of a bad decision are severe, these people plead for the federal government to remove the burden of freedom and replace it with the cloak of government-provided security. What a shame. Evidently there are quite a few people who fit that description in the "Live free or die" state. Maybe they ought to give some thought to a new license plate slogan: "Security, not Freedom."
-snip-
EVERYBODY WINS IN THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
John Kerry won last night with 39% of the ballots cast, following his upset win in Iowa and seemingly putting him on the road to the Democratic nomination.
But who lost in the primary yesterday? No one if you ask the candidates themselves. Talk about fuzzy math. Howard Dean, once the front-runner, finished second with 26% which was a full 13 points behind Kerry. But during his concession speech, Dean said "The people of New Hampshire have allowed our campaign to regain its momentum. Some momentum. New Hampshire was your best shot ... right next door to Vermont ... and you came up way short.
Then, in third place came Weasley Clark. Apparently not convinced that his candidacy is now a total bust, he told supporters last night "I leave New Hampshire a smarter, better, stronger, and even more determined candidate." As they say in the military, this is a "miscalculation." Weasley leaves New Hampshire a loser, with an almost non-existent chance of winning the nomination. Time to get back into your spaceship and go home to Arkansas, General. By the way, just why were you fired from your NATO command?
Tied for third with Weasley is North Carolina Senator John "Have you been injured in an accident" Edwards. Unless he can win his birth state of South Carolina next week, he's done. Nice hair, though. I'm obviously jealous.
And then there's Lieberman. Despite all of his good intentions, there is not a single known scenario where Joe Lieberman has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Democratic nomination. We have a better chance of landing Elvis on Mars to fix the Spirit rover than we do of holding a Joe Lieberman inaugural ball next January. It's sad. If I had to vote for a Democrat, Lieberman would be my choice. He's clearly the most moderate, and he is the only candidate who has indicated a willingness to continue the fight against terrorism. Nice guy, too.
As for Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton....I guess it keeps them off the streets.
VOTERS NOT INTERESTED IN ANTI-BUSH IRAQ NONSENSE
On Nightline last night, Howard Dean actually admitted that the voters aren't really all that concerned with Iraq and, according to him, are more interested in jobs and health care. This is a huge development.
Dean has made it the basis of his entire candidacy that President Bush misled the public, went it alone and failed in Iraq. He has also preached that Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the United States. Could it be that he is finally getting it through his thick skull that nobody cares? The fact of the matter is the war in Iraq was a great success, and America is safer because of it.
Of course, this is also the same guy that said Osama Bin Laden deserved a jury trial, and he found "interesting" the idea that George Bush might have known about the 9/11 attacks beforehand. However, if Dean does shift gears, he could still make a dent if Kerry keeps pursuing the losing issue of Iraq and the missing WMD.
It ain't over til it's over, folks. This is going to be one great year.
ON TO SOUTH CAROLINA, LET THE POLITICAL PANDERING BEGIN
Missing in action all this time in New Hampshire has been the good Reverend and self avowed race warlord Al Sharpton. He's been going from church to church preaching and singing in an attempt to drum up support for his candidacy. You see, unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, South Carolina has a large black population. Here we go.
Black Americans should be completely offended at the sight of these bozos coming around every four years pandering for votes. They should understand that liberal Democrats have only a single agenda: to promise more government programs in exchange for votes. That's all there is to it and nothing more.
And it's too bad, because all things like more welfare spending and more government housing do is keep people enslaved in a cycle of poverty and hopelessness. Of course, those on the left only care about more government dependency designed to keep them in office.
That said, it will be entertaining to see John Kerry singing in a black church, so all is not lost.
Is that the same smart money that was on Dean two weeks ago?
az
Next?
Pretty typical at this stage of the game. If Edwards said he would take the VP at this point he would lose the South Carolina vote in a heart beat.
The VP will not be selected until the convention. That is a long time.
My view is that Kerry could not stand to have Edwards as his running mate. If you look at Kerry's campaign and Senate staffs, they are not very good. That tells me kerry like Clinton can't have someone better than him on his staff or as his running mate.
Look at hte posibilities Clinton had in 1992. Yet he chose the stilted under performing Al Gore. Kerry if the gets the nomination will chose a lesser campaigner than himself. Edwards is a better speaker, better looking and a better campaigner than Kerry. Kerry could not allow the comparisons that would ensue.
I think Edwards would take the VP nomination.. I think Kerry would not take Edwards as VP.
Edwards doesn't want VEEP.
Think the boring and botoxed Kerry will be no match for Bush.
But the really smart money is on a Bush-Cheney ticket.
az
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.