You better not be succeeding over there!

As I think of the wide open upcoming election, the first wide one since LBJ refused another term in ’68, I wander what tropes will be pulled out. One that I know I will be hearing, one that I’ve heard all my life, is that of the lamenting over the Widening Income Gap. You know, the rich getting richer and the poor getting poor, the tired old influence of Marxist class warfare into American politics. But what does it mean?

If I race a Ferrari the gap between it and Heidi (1986 Saab Turbo) will be “widening” but not as a result of me slowing down.

Let me make a relevant example. Say you make $1,000,000 as a CEO and I make $45,000 as an assistant designer, then 3 years later you are making $1,250,000 and I, after promotions, am making $90,000. My income has doubled, cause for celebration perhaps but not to the class warmongers who are busy pointing out that while your income only increased 25% to my 100% the “gap” still widened.

So what is all this gap talk. We hear it, on TV shows, during speeches, at the local watering hold but does it really mean anything? And further, just what it the point of the gap talk? Is it to get angry at rich folks? How is that supposed to help anything?

But expect to hear it.

Expect to hear how utterly horrible the economy is and how thanks to Bush Americans just can’t afford the costs of living anymore. And expect to see people who lived beyond their means and are now paying the price paraded out for the cameras as proof of the collapse of our nation. And expect the solution to be more government.

USS Giuliani

President Giuliani? It’s not only not farfetched but while it is very early – 18 months before the primaries – I’m inclined to say it’s likely. Here’s what I’m thinking in a reverse chronology.

The General Election.

Who in the world could the Democrats put up against Rudy that could over take him? Hilary is a known and divisive quantity – who will have her own issues beating back the Dems leftist base in the primaries – who has a tendency to come across as a bit of a cold fish. Now whether this is the result of the feminist idea that in order to succeed women must be harder than their male counter parts or if it’s the natural evolution of living with a cheating husband I don’t know. But what I do believe is that her coldness will be a tough sell against Rudy’s warmth.

Kerry, who every bit looks like he wants to make another run, would get landslided by Rudy. I mean come on, Kerry barely eeked out a 2-1 record in the debates against Dubya! Bush43 has to be one of the worst speakers to ever hold any office in any country at anytime in history and Kerry needed a rubber game. How is Kerry going to do against the effervescent, charming, smooth tongue and quick witted Rudy? Add to that the fact that Kerry has spent the last two years waffling on issue after issue, not to mention calling for the US to surrender to the terrorists in Iraq and you can begin to envision Rudy as a doped up Bonds and Kerry as a T-ball.

Edwards is, from what I have read, also looking. Okay, he couldn’t deliver his own state in ’04 so no threat here.

There are many other unknowns out there who will be taking a crack at the Dem nomination but will be moving to the left of Hilary to fire up the lefties in the base, Kerry is doing the same, and moving left of Hilary pretty much means you won’t be able to get back to the middle. Of course if Hilary doesn’t run…

Republican Primaries.

So I don’t see Rudy losing a GE but can he get there? Partisans like to claim the other side isn’t unified like us and comprises a lose affiliation of disparate groups. They’re right, with the exception of the “unified like us” part. So the question really is can Rudy get enough of the conservative base on his side and I think he can. The only groups that would be strongly opposed to Rudy would be the McCainite RINO’s and the evangelical right. Combined they could be a threat but they aren’t going to be combined. The McCainintes will be voting for, well, McCain and the Fundies will be voting for Whocares. With them split a Rudy run should be fairly smooth with a middle social conservatism, strong foreign policy, iron clad fiscal history (turned a $2.5 billion NYC deficit into a surplus with tax and spending cuts) and his great statesman moment during the WTC attack and aftermath.

Rudy also has a hint of libertarianism in his rhetoric that is reminiscent of Regan’s speeches, and Regan ran away with things in an America less conservative than it is today. Can some Republican unknown beat back a Rudy charge? I don’t think so, but Rudy needs to run first.

Will Giuliani make a play.

Yes. I base this on one thing. His Solutions America is nothing if not a tool by which to get his faces in front of people all around the US and hone his national message. Just looking at the map of states where Rudy is supporting local candidates you see him leaning on swing states, early primary states and big Electoral Vote states(with the lone exception of CA). Small Electoral Vote states that are deeply red or blue are not getting his attention. Why? Cause they’ll either already be voting for him or aren’t worth the effort, but I except him to widen his influence as we draw closer.

President Giuliani? I’m almost ready to put a beer on this call, almost.

1400 year old Islamists war heats up.

I support Israel. Since the IDF pulled out of the “Occupied Territories”* the citizens of Israel have been under daily rocket attacks by Hezbolla and Hamas. Recently the IDF began to push back into Gaza, the launching point for the majority of the attacks, and the Islamists responded by kidnapping several IDF soldiers. Now Israel is fighting mad and as the Islamist hydra that is trying to push them into the sea is the same one that is trying to extinguish the light of freedom by conquering the entire globe. Go get’em guys.


Cox & Forkum

* Also known as the “Buffer Zone” to keep the Islamists rockets out of range.

Delenda est Islam

Screw CAIR

This afternoon I saw a TV report on a town in Florida where the local residents are trying to block the construction of a new mosque. The report started with the reported giving the background, then had words of a local leading the protest who spoke of concern over the mosque turning into a center of Islamic fanaticism and then finished with the words of a weasel mouthpiece of CAIR.

The CAIR representative stated that blaming the actions of, “a few bad apples” on a religion would be the same as blaming all Christians for the Crusades. Ah, the tired old tactic of CAIR and muslims in general, when you feel you are losing play the Crusades card and claim victimhood. I would though like to bring up a few points of contention to the Crusades card.

1) Most muslims DO blame all Christians for the Crusades
2) The Crusades were almost 1000 years ago and you won, get over it.
3) But if we are going to hold a grudge then what about the 400 years of constant attacks and invasions committed by the armies of Islam on Christendom that preceded the Crusades?

Delenda est Islam