A Clinton – McCain Race?

Rebelflagbikini20copy Looks like it might be.  The results in Nevada and South Carolina point in that direction.  Romney’s victory in the Nevada outcome is indicative of nothing more than the participation of his co-religionists.  The Clinton campaign continues to demonstrate its mastery of the process. 

Huckabee is out.  Too bad.  He was a legitimate representative of his people.  Thompson may yet be McCain’s VP.  Not challenging but reassuring to the people who did not vote for Huckabee  in South Carolina in sufficient numbers to have their views truly represented.  They are not my views but I respect them and their views.

The MSM continue to be the whores for East and West Coast  elites that they have shown themselves to be lately.  The egregious Matthews still seems to be, what?  A fool obsessed with the sixties?

Hillary Clinton will be president.  I look forward to adult leadership in this country.

The Confederate Flag as an issue? Give me a break.  We all know who won.  Who could miss it?  pl

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to A Clinton – McCain Race?

  1. Babak Makkinejad says:

    That’s why they have Mutta’h in Shia Islam.

  2. Robert says:

    Hope you are right, Pat.

  3. Richard Armstrong says:

    I wish I was in the land of cotton…

  4. C’mon, Pat, enough with the female-debasing photos already. What’s that about “adult leadership”?

  5. Clifford Kiracofe says:

    An early 2006 report on McCain’s advisors from the Arizona Republic:
    “WASHINGTON — As Sen. John McCain eyes another run for the presidency in 2008, he seeks advice on political strategy and policy issues from new and old sources, aides and friends say.
    The independent-minded Arizona Republican does not have a regular “kitchen cabinet” of intimate advisers, they say.
    Instead, the list of political confidants, policy experts, fund-raisers and even opinionated journalists to whom McCain turns is constantly growing and evolving, and it includes those who may support other candidates in 2008, they say.”
    In the summer of 2006, I spoke with McCain’s strategist Lance Tarrance. Lance, a real professional in campaigns, indicated McCain-Hillary as the most likely scenario.
    Center for Public Integrity page on McCain
    So what about the Christian Right bloc? Republican candidates have assiduously cultivated the religious vote since Billy Graham coached Nixon in beginning about 1956 for the 1960 election. [Graham’s anti-Roman Catholic bias kept the Kennedy Admin at arms length although Lyndon Johnson cozied up seeing possibilities-votes.] While Reagan appealed to it, it was in fact George H. W. Bush (after Lee Atwater recalculated) who locked the bloc in for 1988. W, who himself had gone born again in 1984 (or adopted the pose along with the fake Texas accent), went with the flow and locked the bloc in in 2000 and 2004. McCain is not himself identified with the Christian Right as a true believer so Huckabee for VP on the McCain ticket? Or?

  6. jonst says:

    Perspective is a funny thing. For while I agree with you when you write: “The MSM continue to be the whores for East and West Coast elites that they have shown themselves to be lately.” I have a different perspective on it. I feel these elite are forever shoving down my throat the ‘nobility of the folks in the ‘flyover states’. Or the ‘downhominess and passionate intensity of the ‘born again types’…and these folks, I am told, embody “family values”, as, opposed, to the rest of us…who evidently do not.
    That the elites do so, in such an arrogant, ignorant, and patronizing manner..would tick me off to no end if I were one of the types being portrayed. But I am, so my perception goes, being the one lectured to. By people I don’t respect. And, further more, I feel a double loser in that I am not getting invited to any white wine swilling parties on Martha’s Vineyard. So am in for the crash but not for the landing.
    As to McCain’s alleged inevitability….it will be interesting, and fascinating, if it really turns out that a man condemned, in one of his patented campaigns, by Rush…and denounced as the “man who did the most to hurt the GOP”, or words that effect, by DeLay, can get the nomination. I have my doubts.

  7. Clifford Kiracofe says:

    To follow up on the religious/values voter issue re Hillary-McCain.
    Here is an article on Hillary’s Methodist roots.
    “Clinton traces her Methodist roots back several generations, perhaps even to John Wesley himself, the founder of the Methodist Church in the 18th century. In her memoirs, “Living History,” she writes that her father’s parents claimed they became Methodists because their great-grandparents were converted by Wesley in the coal-mining villages around Newcastle in northern England and in South Wales….”
    While I have never met Senator Clinton, we are about the same age and I would not underestimate the depth and sincerity of her faith.
    Born in Chicago, Senator Clinton grew up in Park Ridge, Illinois. I know something of that area as my mother’s family was from the town next door, Des Plaines, and mother’s uncle was the pioneer doctor in Park Ridge in the late 19th and early 20th century and owned the local pharmacy.
    I recall the “social gospel” environment of the early 1960s and the impact of the Civil Rights movement on white Chicago suburbs. My parents invited our minister to dinner to learn more when he would return from various civil rights activities/marches etc. in Alabama and elsewhere.
    Mrs. Clinton’s experiences in her church community as she relates them, and the ministry of her pastor, were not uncommon in the 60s in the Chicago area as I recall those days. On theology, I well recall references to Tillich and Bonhoeffer back then.
    SST readers might want to take a look at the 19th century US historical context in which arose the religious-political conflict between the social gospel-moderates versus the Fundamentalists. While the drama climaxed with Scopes in 1925…”they’re back” since the 1970s with the Christian Right in the role of the Fundamentalists. Not all evangelicals are Fundamentalists or Armageddonist-End Timers by any means. Part of my current book project examines this historical background.
    For perspective on the Christian Right, Chris Hedges, “American Fascists. The Christian Right and the War on America” (New York: Fress Press, 2006). He makes some good points. His discussion of the American Christian Right’s parallels with the German “State Church” of the 1930s is of particular interest. Note the Holocaust Museum’s page:
    It is going to be an interesting election year, and while the Fundamentalists and Neocons may have taken over the Republican Party, those in opposition can play hard ball just as well.

  8. Leigh says:

    To win, all the Hillbilly’s campaign people will have to do is reproduce that picture of McCain embracing Bush. Oh, and add McCain’s quote that we’ll be in Iraq for 100 years. McCain’s then toast.
    Twenty-four years of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton is a generation too long.

  9. lina says:

    If McCain gets the nomination, and tacks to the center on domestic issues, he could beat Hillary. He’ll get all the Republicans and most of the Independents. However, if the economy continues to tank (and it’s looking very grim) Hillary has a chance to get some of those Independents back from McCain. Everyone will be hoping Bill’s third term will reverse the economic downturn. He did it before. They might be right.

  10. jonst says:

    “female-debasing”? How?

  11. JohnS says:

    Current national polls have McCain and Clinton within a point or two of each other in a general election. While I have little-to-no insight into the minds of independants (are they still buying into the Straight Talk Express nonsense big media generates), I know the GOP base loathes McCain. That’ll be a huge hurdle for him. But then again, they loathe Ms. Clinton even more, so that could help him clear it. After all, does anyone really think angry anti-McCain GOPers will stay home on election day with Hillary Clinton’s name on the ballot?
    Ahhh yi yi — all this means is that I wish I were as certain about a Clinton victory over McCain as Col. Lang.

  12. Out of it. What is MSM? Still way to early to predict but after Super-Tuesday may start to have a feeling of eventual victors. Still think events are in the saddle for 2008 election not personalities. Could be a really weird result before it is all over. By weird I mean Huckabee, Obama, or Clinton?
    This trio is an odd representation of the talent in the US that may be leading to the country as any threesome in American history.

  13. TSWittig says:

    Colonel: What are your thoughts about the potential Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton situation? I don’t believe you have ever directly addressed the issue.
    For me it is the defining problem with Hillary. Are we to suspend logic and believe that the Clintons will not behave as another dynasty, even if benevolent? Is this not potentially at least as anti-democratic as an emotion and ‘vision’ driven Obama administration?
    I think these are serious questions.

  14. David W says:

    I’ll admit that I don’t get the photo–is it a meta comment on how the media is portraying the election race, or is this woman part of the new Republican ‘Southern strategy?’
    It must be a sign of how far down Giuliani has fallen that you don’t even mention him as being the biggest recipient of the pre-caucus media whoredom. Has there ever been a candidate so touted by the media who has fared so poorly. He’s so bad that he finished behind the guy who can’t even get on the debates!
    The biggest positive that I see from the Republican side is the firm rejection of the most rabid reactionary candidates, Tancredo and Hunter. We can now see how marginal these characters and their viewpoints are in the Republican party. Unfortunately, their troglodytic positions still get a disproportionate hearing within the party.

  15. Tom Milton says:

    Don’t rule out NYC Mayor Bloomberg just yet. McCain strikes many, including myself, as somewhat unstable. He has made some bad judgement calls in the past. He IS a cancer patient, so his choice of VP would be CRITICAL.
    Bloomberg would likely choose a low key VP candidate to return that office to a more ceremonial role after our Chaney disaster.
    With Hillary we get Bill for a third term. I wish it weren’t so. But, there is no way she can keep that megalomaniac off center stage. She’s proven she can’t/won’t control him. He will attend funerals. He will hog the talk shows. He will provide the rational in a revisit to the world of triangulation. He will emasculate, then replace her hapless VP. Just look at her campaign to date. She shown she can’t win with out him on stage and working inside the union caucuses.
    Bloomberg and Clinton are both ponies in the financial sector’s stable of approved candidates. McCain will do exactly what he’s told.
    Change?? Forgetaboutit.
    Paul, Edwards and Kucinich have been swept away by the tsunami of $$ and influence flooding from the financial community. The LAST thing they want is change.
    Middle class Americans will get a couple of sugar cookies and then the rape will continue.
    BTW, which Repug trophy wife is wearing the Confederate flag bikini? I couldn’t quite make out the face.

  16. avedis says:

    Wow. No wonder they say, “The South will rise again!”.

  17. Assuming MSM equals Maintstream Media? Actually little of the current media is mainstream from any quantifiable aspect! Cable news is a niche and is nightly news on major networks. No much in the way of actual news and hard coverage of tough issues. Newshour on PBS has very limited viewership as a % of population.

  18. Nicholas Weaver says:

    Out of the republican field, McCain is the most palitable, although I expected far more courage from him during the past 8 years than he delivered. Instead, he abdicated much of his responsibility.
    But if you are going to handicap the race, do it right:
    Romney still has a far bigger deligate lead among the republican candidates. Mitt Rommney got one less deligate out of Nevada that McCain got out of South Carolina.

  19. Andy Mink says:

    I saw Huckabee in Berlin, NH, in mid December, on his ‘Huck and Chuck’ tour. He comes across very well and taps into peoples’ concerns about the economy and the state of the country in general. Those voters up there want a pres who is strong on nat. sec. but also really cares about the plight of the American people. For all his Hucksterism, Huckabee would bring alot to a ticket McCain/Huckabee. So I’d agrre with Cliff Kiracofe’s first posting here. I think they could prevail against Clinton/Wesley Clarke (she’d need a guy with a good record on nat. sec., but dependent enough not to get into Bill’ hair). A interesting development are ‘red state’ prominent Dems coming out for Obama. They know that (for all those dubious and crazy reasons) too many voters just dislike Hillary on a gut level. A old Dem told me that there are ‘rock solid 40 percent of the electorate’ with those negative feelings towards her. I think that’s injust and tragic but it just seems to be a reality.
    On another note: At least McCain wants to work against global warming instead of lowering fuel consumption standards again.
    Andy Mink

  20. Richard Armstrong says:

    I have to apologize to all for my juvenile comment at the top of this thread.
    As an army brat I was raised on bases which were mostly located in the defeated south. The funny thing about that is that I didn’t figure out why there were so many bases in the south until I was in college. The south lost!
    As the Colonel said, it’s just a flag. I don’t know who is sillier. The folks who fight to have the confederate naval ensign removed from public view or the folks who fight to keep waiving it in the first groups faces.

  21. Fran says:

    PL, why do you think HRC will prevail in a McCain-Clinton match-up?
    McCain has significant crossparty appeal. Independents really like him. People who are unhappy/angry about the Bush administration vote for him en masse over the other GOP options. All the election results so far confirm this: even when McCain is not doing well overall, he does well among Independents.
    HRC has ZERO cross party appeal. She has virtually no appeal to Independents, either. She even performs quite poorly among male Democrats. McCain’s big problem has always been the GOP base. If he can somehow get enough GOP votes in a fractured field, he’s in an extremely favorable position for the general election.
    I don’t see what is going to happen to change this, to make HRC more broadly appealing or to reduce McCain’s appeal. The media love McCain and hate Hillary. He gets wonderful coverage about his integrity and straight talk; she is generally seen by reporters as willing to say or do anything to win. This has been the dominant media narrative about the two of them for years. And nothing that has happened in the campaign does anything at all to undermine the favored narrative (just the opposite; campaign events have only reinforced these story lines). Consequently, McCain is perceived as trustworthy. Not even Democrats believe HRC is particularly trustworthy.
    How on earth is HRC going to do better than Kerry did? How does she win any state that he lost?
    One final thought: If it’s HRC vs McCain, I predict a gender gap of truly gigantic proportions. I’d be surprised if HRC can get 30% of male Independents. She will hemorrhage lots of Democratic voters, particularly men. She strikes me as one of the weakest possible general election candidates the Democratic party could have chosen.

  22. W. Patrick Lang says:

    Election choices have to be made among real candidates. One can vote for “fantasy” candidates to make a statement, but real decisions must be made between real people. What are the alternatives?
    Richard Armstrong
    People should leave each other alone to revere their traditions, and should not molest the dead. Douglas Wilder, when he was governor of Virginia was very careful not to molest the dead. That was appreciated.
    As for the number of Army posts in the South, I must disabuse you of the idea that they are a relic of the occupation of the South after the CW. There are a few like that but the great majority were opened during the First World War period when it was thought necessary to engage the warlike spirit of the South in the struggle in Europe. The response to the Spanish American War had been lukewarm in the South. Wade Hampton, then governor of South Carolina said at the time, “Let the North fight. The South knows the cost of war.” You notice that almost all of these posts are named for Confederate officers: Forts Lee, AP Hill, Hood, Benning, Campbell, Bragg, etc. pl

  23. W. Patrick Lang says:

    John McCain is a great man and a great citizen of our country.
    It pains me to say that I think he is also too old, too frail, too busy still fighting his war (and mine), too committed to alliance with the Jacobins in foreign policy and too unstable in the way that old combat men are often unstable.
    All of that will become more visible in the long grind before the election.
    We should honor him, but not make him president. pl

  24. ked says:

    I am surprised many find Huckabee benign. He’s a minister-turned-politician with close ties to extremist Evangelical-Dominionist sects. He appears to place his theology before our Constitution.
    From close observation (having lived in the Deep South for most of my life) I am suspicious of his ilk – they tend to justify means by faithful ends.
    Is he dissembling to his flock or the People?

  25. Cloned Poster says:

    Helena, Pat loves thongs.

  26. CJ says:

    Pat –
    I can see the election quite possibly swinging the way you predict, but I’m not so sanguine about a Clinton win. Though I could conceive of myself theoretically pulling the lever for Clinton, her high negatives present problems for me on both a practical and idealistic level. First, I can’t but imagine the bitter divisiveness she engenders presents a problem both for her election and for her governance. Second, isn’t her knowledge of the system as it stands part of the problem? She can pull the levers of power fast and furious – isn’t that what she did when essentially voting for the Iraq War? She’ll quibble about such things as “resolutions” and the “UN” and congressional authority, but we all knew pretty much what was in play at the time and, if she didn’t, particularly being a senator, well that doesn’t speak too well for her judgment. If it was a momentary lapse, what of Kyle-Lieberman? I don’t have objections basis of any attack dog propaganda nor am I under the delusion that we are electing or need to elect a Saint – this is power, after all, and if one subscribes to a religious view, the final destination of 99% of politicians is a clime much hotter than anything on the equator – of Mercury, that is.
    Clinton is an impressive piece of what has become a dysfunctional system – she’ll run that system substantially better than the previous administration without a doubt. Perhaps, if stories such as her joining the senate prayer group and rubbing elbows with all sorts of Republicans are true, she will even be able to bring some bipartisanship back to the Hill. Lord knows if the shit storm that appears to be coming our way on the economic front is as bad as some forecast, the congress may actually have to get something done, even if it goes against ideological/political cores.
    I think the country is really buying the change message because they are starting to feel the pain for horrendous governance directly. The evidence that the emperor has no clothes is getting hard to ignore, particularly as the price of everything inflates – though the government manipulates their numbers statistically (damned lies) or hides them entirely, as with money supply measures. Curiously, the only thing not inflating all that much is most people’s wages. People know they are served by our country as a whole, for what it is and has been, but they know that service for their section’s seating has been sucking pretty bad lately. And they know, in their core, Washington’s two parties are unable to solve the problems, but can bandaid their discontent by taking money out of their great great gand children’s pockets. Our media, our politicians, our corporations have failed us in some basic way when the only interview worth watching is on Stewart and Colbert’s brilliant “news” offerings – yes, they are corporately sponsored, but as Jon would say, it’s comedy central for god’s sake! All of this brings to mind Stewart’s recent piece on legislation to make lobbyists stand in line for seats at congressional hearings as opposed to paying “stand in citizenry.” The lobbyist interviewed stared at Samantha Bee with – I can only assume -willful ignorance at the irony that congress may require him to actually wait in line himself while he steps to the head of the governmental line on behalf of industry trade groups. Will Clinton have an effect? Sure, I’m guessing, but the parties are beholden and that is a limiting factor.
    This is the derivation of the little guys’ (Paul, Huckabee, Kucinich – ha!) guerilla campaigns’ popularity this time around and Dean’s last time. Perhaps it is why “change” seems the word in every speech come election time. It is the source of appeal for both McCain and Obama (Though when I saw McCain say that to repeal the Bush Tax Cuts is to raise taxes – ok, true in a sense, but really! -, saw him embrace Bush, saw him take a shopping stroll with scores of heavily armed friends in an Iraqi market, I nearly retched at what the necessities of political survival had done to him…). Is “change” a basis of government in a two hundred plus year old country? Probably not, but you can see it’s appeal this time around. As for specific campaigns, I see a certain relevance to Paul’s campaign, but what would libertarianism do? Doesn’t that mean less regulation? I’m surprised corporate America isn’t more behind his campaign….wait, never mind. On the other hand, I think Edward’s angry populism is possibly a workable message, but at the wrong time and perhaps with the wrong messenger. Give another four years and enough pain, that dog might just hunt.
    So what’s the point? Yes, I agree with you on Clinton. The adult in me, the part that knows the shudders of what we adults sometimes have to do to make our way through an imperfect world, would likely be able to vote for her. But there is a part of me – perhaps the childish, rational anarchist side of me – that hopes that the primaries bring forth Clinton and Romney and then, as both sides gear up the bitter machinery of modern politics, a viable and inspiring third party candidate steals the prize. Why does snatching the French fry from two squabbling sea gulls come to mind?
    You do have Jim Webb’s number, don’t you?
    Oh, and Pat, I recently passed your site along to a woman friend of my wife’s – I have to agree with Helena on the ..ah…provocative picture…
    Thanks as always…

  27. Clifford Kiracofe says:

    1. Per Hucksterbee (Southern Baptist) and Hagee, he preached some sermons at ultraFundamentalist-Armageddonist Hagee’s church in Texas this Christmas season. What does that indicate but that he is in the process of organizing Fundamentalist backing. As a VP he could easily help bring this bloc to McCain, or energize it and make sure it shows up at the polls on voting day.
    2. Per Hucksterbee and Christian Zionism:
    “Q: Should Israel give up the West Bank?
    A: [Huckabee] No, I don’t think so. I have been to Israel 9 times. I have been all throughout the Middle East. Anyone who goes to Israel, and just understands the unique geography and the unique tension that surrounds that area, it would be very problematic for Israel to give up the West Bank, from their own standpoint of security. The same thing with the Golan Heights–giving up the Golan Heights makes most of Galilee a sitting target. Now it’s their government. They’ll make that decision, not me. But I certainly could not encourage them to give up the West Bank.”
    3. McCain’s strategist Lance Tarrance has written (1998) to the effect that the country is polarized about 40 percent Republican, 40 percent Dem, leaving 20 percent ‘ticket splitters’ to be fought over. I do not work in this branch of political science (state and federal elections) but his book on election strategy is “Checked and Balanced. How Ticket-Splitters are Shaping the New Balance of Power in American Politics” (Grand Rapid: Erdmans, 1998).”
    3. McCain is guided by Neocons on foreign policy. The McCain I saw in the Senate of the United States during the 1980s was highly unstable so much so that a buddy of mine nicknamed him “The Manchurian Candidate.” Tantrums with his staff all the time, lot’s of horror stories. He used to get this glazed look in his eyes which I found a bit worrisome…Yugoslavia? he said bomb it and send in ground forces; Iraq? everybody knows that one…
    4. Seems to me — given the present Iraq War as a new variable/we were at peace under Bill Clinton, and an increasing economic disintegration another new variable/we had prosperity under Bill Clinton who left a surplus — liberal and a slice of moderate Republicans disgusted with the takeover of the party by Fundamentalists, Neocons, and McCainiac warmongers could very well bolt to a Clinton ticket particularly with the right VP.

  28. W. Patrick Lang says:

    I never claimed to be a prude, or PC. pl

  29. Buzz says:

    As an indepedent voter I can speak for my take on McCain.
    I used to respect him when he was telling the truth about defense spending corruption, campaign finance corruption, and the intolerant branch of Christianity. When he abandoned the truth and started pandering for votes he betrayed what made him different and appealing in the first place.
    I would guess that many other independent voters feel the same way.

  30. Cieran says:

    I imagined your choice of illustration was simply your way of choosing sides in the recent Hillary Clinton versus Anna Wintour debate.
    Wintour is rumored to be at least as caustic an opponent as McCain.

  31. fasteddiez says:

    John S:
    National polls at this stage of the game are pointless. Even when the final candidates (dems, repubs) are decided, and independents are factored in, they will pale in comparison to the state by state polling…of registered voters.
    A lot of possible scenarios could unfold: racial nastiness (Obama/HillBill); Stock market continued flat spin due to Bond Insurer Insolvency (due to take place without Uncle Sugar’s last minute intervention; McCain angry man Flame Out.
    Last but not least, Hizoner Mr. Bloomberg, the current mayor of New York, could enter the race as an Independent, as an affront to HillBill. Should be fun to watch; enjoy the horse race, for Götterdämmerung might follow.

  32. Mike Moscoe says:

    I’m not so sure about McCain getting the Repub nod. He’s got some tough sledding ahead in states where the Republicans don’t let the independents vote. When it’s just the Republicans voting, we may see Huck and Romney running the tables.
    As to the Bush/Clinton/Bush /Clinton issue. I note that we didn’t hear a lot about Shrub following Clinton after Bush. The meme was Son avenging Father. Now, with the Demo’s on the warpath, a Clinton shouldn’t follow Shrub!
    What was good for the son ought to be fine for the wife.
    Mike Moscoe aka Mike Shepherd

  33. rjj says:

    by way of observer bias, eye of the beholder, and thematic aperception: I took PL’s image to be ironic/sardonic; a celebration of the meretricious, consistent with the campaigns and their coverage.

  34. W. Patrick Lang says:

    Was this not Madame Wintour? pl

  35. W. Patrick Lang says:

    in re irony, too true, but such an appealing person. pl

  36. J.T.Davis says:

    Re: The Mormon vote. It might be too early to count Mitt out. He’s got the cash to go the distance.
    From TPM:
    A number of commentators are arguing that Mitt’s victory in Nevada yesterday can be discounted because of the heavy turnout of coreligionist Mormons who voted almost unanimously for Romney. But as our numbers maven Eric Kleefeld pointed out to me last night, even if you exclude all the Mormons who caucused in Nevada, Romney still would have had more than twice the support of the candidate who came in second, Ron Paul.

  37. rjj says:

    Recamier?. But this is a facile, indulgent, sentimental/romantic, not a neoclassical age. Perhaps more like Delacroix’s Liberty???

  38. taters says:

    Dear Col.lang,
    I beg your indulgence.
    Gov. Huckabee plays bass and speaking of bass..
    It was another sweltering day in South Africa, the night was a welcome relief.
    Capt. A.H. Soames-Mercier of the South African Light Horse, heard the incessant pounding of drums in the distance. It was unnerving, the Boer had put more than enough on his mind.
    His trusted guide, Joseph had a look of terror on his face – which he had never witnessed from the courageous fellow.
    “What is it, man?” asked the captain”
    “Bad sign, drums very bad sign,” said a visibly shaken Joseph.
    “Out with it Joseph!” snapped
    Quivering, the trusted guide managed to say, “Fff..irst drrums – na.. na..na..next – BASS SOLO!”

  39. rjj says:

    Preoccupied, I read Recamier for Wintour.
    Not sure why.

  40. Babak Makkinejad says:

    There are 3.5 million adjustable mortgage loans in US which will have their rates adjusted in 2008.
    If you assume that they will all go bad and that the value of each is about $ 300,000, the loss will be more than a trillion dollars.
    US GDP is estimated at 13.3 trillion per year and thus the worst case that I have outlined would be quite serious.
    In regards to “desire for change” I think that there are significant segments of US white population that feels that its concerns are not being heard. I think there is a danger here for US that fringe leaders and parties will emerge that could cause a lot of damage – both internally and externally to the United States. I think we already have had inklings of this in the candidacies of Lyndon La Rouche and David Duke – the latter taking a lot of effort to squash.
    There is a danger here, I should think.

  41. Curious says:

    Well, it really doesn’t matter who the president is by now (Obama vs. Hillary)
    Both of their proposal won’t be implementable because of crashing global economy.
    The war in Iraq/energy price/sub-prime problems are now crashing world stock market. This alone will take few months to calm, nevermind fixing it.
    US economy will enter major recession, if we are lucky. otherwise it’s total crash. (japan in the ’00 ) If we have war with Iran with oil hitting $200+, then we gonna crash argentina style.
    GDP will have to shrink some 10-20%.
    $15 McDonald dinner and $6/Gallon gas.

  42. “I’ll admit that I don’t get the photo…”
    It’s a bombshell blonde in a teeny-tiny bikini.
    What else is there for men to “get?”

  43. Steve says:

    “I have a different perspective on it. I feel these elite are forever shoving down my throat the ‘nobility of the folks in the ‘flyover states’. Or the ‘downhominess and passionate intensity of the ‘born again types’…and these folks, I am told, embody “family values”, as, opposed, to the rest of us…who evidently do not.”
    As someone living in Iowa, I appreciate your comments. The media’s ignorance stems from a lazy inclination to go with stereotypes of the coasts and the heartland. To go beyond those stereotypes would require some real digging and subtlty, attributes not much in evidence with the media.
    And what the heck is the heartland anyway–Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis, Cincy, Cleveland, Denver, Houston?
    Clifford Kiracofe:
    “I recall the “social gospel” environment of the early 1960s and the impact of the Civil Rights movement on white Chicago suburbs. My parents invited our minister to dinner to learn more when he would return from various civil rights activities/marches etc. in Alabama and elsewhere.”
    I have to chuckle a bit, comparing your experiences in Chicago during the sixties with mine. Unlike the Methodists in suburban Chicago, my Irish Catholic aunts, uncles, and cousins on Chicago’s southwest side most assuredly did not invite priests into their homes for Sunday dinner to relate the latest civil rights work in Alabama.

Comments are closed.