Iowa Straw Men

Ames, Iowa

"Change begins in Iowa and change begins today!," exclaimed Republican presidential candidate and the presumed winner of Saturday's Iowa GOP Straw Poll, Mitt Romney (though we're still awaiting the official results as there's apparently a voting machine glitch!). The only other catch is that neither Romney nor any of the other major candidates participating in today's beauty contest could list any single substantive policy they would actually change.

Unless, that is, you count all eight participating candidates having endorsed some version or another of an even more regressive tax policy than that of George W. Bush. Maverick and semi-crank candidate Ron Paul wants a withdrawal from Iraq. But otherwise the entire pack of candidates agreed they are pro-life, anti-Roe V. Wade, pro-gun, pro-privatization of some portion or another of social security, in favor of building a wall across the Mexican border, and had nothing very different to say about Iraq than would any current sitting White House official.

Indeed, Romney, who spent some $2 million to sew up today's poll, stood out at the most "continuist" of all the candidates. He lauded President Bush for "keeping us safe for the last six years" and celebrated the administration's controversial interrogation methods of terror suspects. OK, l et's give Romney credit for one fresh idea: "I want to clean up the moral pollution on TV and the Internet," he thundered to the crowd at the Hilton Coliseum in Ames. "I want to enforce our obscenity laws… One strike and you're ours."

I guess I should also include on of the change-prescriptions dished out by Ron Paul. If the government hadn't have had the monopoly on aviation security, he asserted, 9/11 would have been averted by allowing guns on airplanes! why hadn't we thought of that before?

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, in an interview this morning, conceded that the current political environment was "very tough" for Republicans and agreed that "the cloud of Iraq" was fogging up the election. "Hopefully General Petraeus will ride us into victory," he said, conceding that if there's no measurable change in the status of the war, Republican hopes are dim.

The most logical way to divvy up the Republican field that appeared in today's poll, is light and optimistic in one bunch and dark and angry in the other. On the lighter side (you might say Bush Lite) we would count Romney, a Lauren-dressed mix of Ronald Reagan and Max Headroom; a buoyant preacher-like Mike Huckabee trying to inherit the compassionate conservative mantel; the pathetic and soon-to-be ex-candidate Tommy Thompson; the evangelical Sam Brownback; and the irrepressible "constitutionalist" Ron Paul whose sporadic whispers of common sense are often gusted away by the downdraft of black helicopters.

Xenophobe Tom Tancredo and cult militarist Duncan Hunter, meanwhile, are in stiff competition for the title of Prince of Darkness. Hunter comes off as a sort of constipated drill sergeant, claiming he will extend the current border wall from 59 miles long to nearly 900 within six months of taking the office he stands no real chance of winning. Tancredo, meanwhile, brought along his so-called "Tom's Army Against Amnesty" and spent his time at the podium railing against illegal immigrants and warning, finally, "This is our culture!" Tancredo also chided the Bush administration for allegedly being too soft on the war in terror, denouncing what he called the "multi-cultural rules of engagement" set by the Pentagon. "In a Tancredo administration," he exclaimed," there will be only one rule of engagement: We win – You lose!" Wild applause.

It cost $35 a head to cast a vote, eat the "free" BBQ pulled pork offered up by the campaigns and listen to the various rock and country bands that spread across the Iowa State University campus. A lot, if not a majority of the attendees, had their tickets purchased by one or another of the campaigns. Once on site they were ferried from the parking lot and to the "voting" booths by rented golf carts.

Kudos to Mike Huckabee for being the only candidate who offered some real change, at least in the menu. The ice-cold chunks of fresh watermelon he served up was the only relief from the otherwise monotonous fare--both gastronomical and rhetorical.

Comments (17)

1. Giuliani, Thompson, Romney, Huckabee, or nutty ol' Sam Brownback....doesn't matter who gets the GOP nomination.

   The ONLY deciding factor will be...can the Dems shoot a gift horse in the mouth and screw up a pretty sure thing in 2008.

   Petraeus' report may grant a reprieve (in the form of "Blue Dog" Dems signing off for full-funding of the occupation until AFTER Bush is out of office), but the sentence is going to be carried out....the Dem candidate is going to win in 2008.

   What the hell could the Repubs run on? "More of the same"? While the Dems run on the ol' Reagan line against Carter..."Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago...and do you feel safer?"

   Can Hillary screw that up?...maybe. But she'll have to try HARD!

   Posted by Mask at 08/11/2007 @ 9:52pm

2. plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

   i hate to be cynical, but................................

   Posted by frosty zoom at 08/11/2007 @ 11:37pm

3. a pretty sure thing in 2008.

   Posted by MASK 08/11/2007 @ 9:52pm

   Such Hubris! Tsk, tsk, tsk......

   You would be amazed how human behavior is exactly the same when it comes to "sure things"....be it can't-lose purchase of houses, dot.com stocks, Ned Lamont,....until the bubbles pop!

   What I do in the stock market is essentially taking the other side of many, many bets on "sure things"....wonder what kind of wager you would put down for your "sure thing" of a Dem win = POTUS?????

   Posted by Happy at 08/11/2007 @ 11:52pm

4. After spending 12 million dollars there, it only cost him $2,600 per vote he got. That'd get a little expensive even for Romney. But I guess he has the looks and the money, so what the hell. If he gives me $2,600 maybe I'd vote for him.

   But more likely I'd do what Musharraf does to Bush, take the money and laugh at him all the way to the bank.

   "In politics stupidity is not a handicap." Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

   if you have tons of money.

   icf itmfa

   Posted by COProgressive at 08/12/2007 @ 01:31am

5. I am a new Republican. I was recently spurred to take political action after years of watching my country and my constitutional rights quickly being eroded before my eyes.

   From my research, and my own opinion of course, I think Republican would have to be "nuts" not to choose Candidate Ron Paul to be their man for the white house.

   With recent polls showing that some 70+ percent of Americans want out of this war, how can we expect to have a chance at winning the white house by supporting a Candidate who is just picking up where Bush left off?

   Reality check people. The president and congress have the lowest approval ratings in Gallup Poll history!

   Do you understand what that means? It means people are looking for change. Isn't that why the Democrats won the house?

   Anyone who doesn't take Ron Paul seriously needs to take a good look at where our party stands in the spotlight of public opinion.

   I think one of the greatest things the GOP needs are an influx of passionate supporters in order to breath this dying beast back into life. And one thing that people can't overlook is that Ron Paul's message speaks to people. He wouldn't have such a massive widespread grassroots following if that weren't true.

   Sincerely,

   Nathan

   Posted by Bob Dylan at 08/12/2007 @ 02:06am

6. Posted by HAPPY 08/11/2007 @ 11:52pm

   What do the Repubs run on, HAPPY?

   Posted by Mask at 08/12/2007 @ 08:34am

7. Who is going to run on Chimpies legacy in the general election?

   29%.

   What do the Repubs run on, HAPPY?

   Posted by MASK 08/12/2007 @ 08:34am

   Fear and hatred of The Other. What else?

   Posted by crabwalk at 08/12/2007 @ 09:02am

8. Happy, do you play on the stock mkt? I never would have guessed.

   Posted by crabwalk at 08/12/2007 @ 09:03am

9. Posted by BOB DYLAN 08/12/2007 @ 02:06am

   One, using the title of Dylan and calling yourself a repub is waaaayyy out there. Missing Bobs points, maybe.

   Two, what makes you a "new republican" . What is it about the new neo-conservative/Christian bent of the republican party that appeals to you? Are you ready for The Rapture?

   Posted by crabwalk at 08/12/2007 @ 09:06am

10. Fear and hatred of The Other. What else?

    Posted by CRABWALK 08/12/2007 @ 09:02am

    Well, the problem CRAB is...that that "Other" may be Hillary. And there are a lot of the LEFT (here and elsewhere) that promote fear and hatred of her. And the Repubs may use it.

    Posted by Mask at 08/12/2007 @ 09:16am

11. What do the Repubs run on, HAPPY?

    Posted by MASK 08/12/2007 @ 08:34am

    By NOT answering my Q on how much you'd wager on your "sure thing", I take it you are standing down?!

    I'll answer your Q! Iraq is unpredictable & I'll leave that out....

    The Repubs can put together enough "Much, much more taxes w/Dems" campaign `bullets' to make the race credible!

    Posted by Happy at 08/12/2007 @ 12:30pm

12. Fear and hatred of The Other. What else?

    Posted by CRABWALK 08/12/2007 @ 09:02am

    Isn't that the Dem's ONLY playbook forever?

    Posted by Happy at 08/12/2007 @ 12:32pm

13. Posted by HAPPY 08/12/2007 @ 12:32pm

    cite me some examples.

    Posted by crabwalk at 08/12/2007 @ 4:03pm

14. Hap, take a look around. Even though the yearly deficit has shrunk, we are still borrowing massively from foreign countries, including communists and Islamic dictatorships. Our infrastructure is in dire need of repair (a lot of it was built on tax rates that would make your head spin, yet those darn rich got along just fine in the 50's and 60's).

    and also, are your proud Eagle scouts signed up to go to Iraq yet?

    Posted by crabwalk at 08/12/2007 @ 4:07pm

15. ...are your proud Eagle scouts signed up to go to Iraq yet?

    Posted by CRABWALK 08/12/2007 @ 4:07pm

    HAPPY to repeat myself from the "Ready" thread....

    Do you know that the Scout Troop we've been a part of for ~11 years, had already sent 4~5 Eagle Scouts to the Academies?

    Have you checked to see how many of our nation's Astronauts are Eagle Scouts? Do you have any concept that Scouting is structured fun for kids while teaching them to LEAD? How many of your kids, or grandkids for that matter, will get several chances by the time they reach 17~18, to learn the rewards & frustrations of leading a bunch of kids ranging from 11 to 16/17?

    Is your obvious distaste for Scouts based on religion and its exclusion of (known) gays? Are you being a bit, Scout-phobic? Do you have a problem w/a buch of patriotic adults and kids pledging allegiance to the flag? have faith in God? believes in the Scout Law (very similar to the Ten commandments), etc.....? Do we really pose such a threat to you?

    Posted by HAPPY 08/12/2007 @ 4:48pm

    Posted by Happy at 08/12/2007 @ 4:52pm

16. cite me some examples.

    Posted by CRABWALK 08/12/2007 @ 4:03pm

    See your own post @ 4:07 pm!

    As a representative on the Right this fine afternoon with time to burn.....

    Unlike you and your party, I have no fear of foreigners holding a large amount of dollar debts......Ever heard of the `ol saying, when you owe the bank a lot of dough, you OWN them?

    IF all them unfriendly countries actually start `dumping' dollar assets, what do you suppose after the first couple of `sales', would happen to the value of their much-larger remaining dollar assets? Would you cut off your nose to spite your face?

    Now, let's suppose China was determined to sell its, say $500 billion in dollar assets and convert them to Euros (now 1 Euro = $1.40), do you think they will end up with 357 Billion Euros? They would be lucky to end up with 200 Billion Euros!

    Not only that, they will have created powerful enemies all over this earth (translation: all those with money globally) that our politicians could never convince otherwise!

    There are all sorts of `nuclear' options (not actual war) we (and our true allies) can deploy to destroy China! Yes, we will all be hurt, but I'll guarantee you we will come through the end of the very tough, oxygen-starved tunnel in better shape than China!

    Posted by Happy at 08/12/2007 @ 5:03pm

17. "neither Romney nor any of the other major candidates participating in today's beauty contest could list any single substantive policy they would actually change....and semi-crank candidate Ron Paul wants a withdrawal from Iraq"

    Marc, How typical, yet surprising. A man of your gifts writing such a shallow piece. Are you really so ignorant of Ron Paul's platform as to call him "semi-crank". What happened? Bad hangover or somethin? Or, are you simply telling us "move along, nothing to see here". I suspect the latter, given your worldly views-did anyone mention Chavez?

    Facts be told, Ron Paul is the only candidate with any substance to his platform and the differences between him and others are vast. They ain't callin it the "Ron Paul Revolution" for nothin. Just picture the majority of the brood, Damns and Repugnants, all goose stepping to the biddings of Israel while we sink further and further into the abyss.

    Here's an assignment for you. Write a fictional piece depicting rogue government elements of the greatest nation stealing an election and setting up a false flag operation that plunges them into an illegal war. Eventually the country shuts down all civil rights and becomes a police state. The economy spirals downward as corporations raid the treasury to finance the illegal war.

    Uh oh. The black helicopters are circling. Gotta go.......

    Posted by adamsapple at 08/12/2007 @ 10:33pm