As we draw ever closer to the 2008 clustermuck that we call the United States Presidential Election, let's figure out for a moment where everyone stands. I know that there are a significant number of people here over the age of 18 (and if you haven't registered you suck ass) but as the office is a four-year position that means that the next batch of people who vote are at stake as well, so if you're over 14 but can't vote yet you should be pestering the hell out of the people that can. But for just a moment let's take a look at the election and it's people.

Big surprise here (yawn). Just about all of the states that were Democratic (or “Blue”) states last time around are the same this time around. Which means that the predicted “Red” or Republican states haven't changed, either. Snoozeville. Who cares. No wonder voter apathy decides elections more than the elderly do.

But the hot topic is the candidates. Who says nicer things? Who has better hair? Who's smile do you believe, the old guy or the black guy? Once again...why this is even an issue is insane. Anyone who believes that they can judge someone from a commercial, a speech, or a public image should take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut.

If you really want to know who to vote for, then you have to examine the actual issues and the records of the politicians. First of all, there are certain topics that are non-issues. Smoke screens blown out to confuse and mislead. Anyone who spends a lot of time on topics like “Jobs”, and “The Economy” is wasting breath. Think about it. Who in their right mind would aim to make the economy worse? Who would deliberately aim to force Americans out of jobs? It's ridiculous and you know it. Anyone that wastes time discussing the obvious is a twit who deserves to fail.

Since we're done Hillary Bashing for this election, let's move on to the Other Democrat, Barak Obama. What does he stand for? Well...according to his record, not much. He has managed to move up the political ladder by playing it safe. Which means if elected he will be spending more of his time making sure he doesn't offend anyone instead of actively seeking solutions. There are huge numbers of black voters (and quite a few whites) that are convinced that if Obama gets into office then African Americans will finally get their fair shake...and maybe even reparations. Really? Last time I checked the office of the President was not in the legislative branch. He can't make legislative policy, and even if he could what kind of reparations could be personally distributed? Does anyone honestly believe that overnight white shareholders and CEOs will become poor while all blacks become millionaires? Even if they make good on the “40 acres and a mule” decision, that will be less like reparations and more like reservations. As in being given crappy land to move on to. He claims that he will fight for health care for all Americans, but the health care industry is privatized and he can't force them to give up their money. He's never been a hard-core businessman, so the best he will do is offer up a few new public health center and maybe a drug discount program (which will be wiped out when the companies just raise their prices to compensate for it.) Lastly, he claims that he supports ending the war in Iraq and withdrawing troops as quickly as the situation allows us to do. Well, since there have been some generals that feel the final withdrawal won't be tactically possible until 2024 then that “promise” is just plain hollow.

My main prediction for Barak Obama. If elected, he will be a weak and ineffective president that will spend most of his time dodging political bullets. At the end, everyone will blame him for everything and will elect the next Republican that smiles.

On the other side of that coin is John McCain. And coin is appropriate as that man has flipped just about any time politics required him to do so. Here was a man who was a tortured POW, yet when necessary fully supported Bush's prisoner torture programs, but now that he's running for office claims that he is against that idea once again in order to distance himself from the unpopular incumbent. McCain (as too many Republicans do) suggests that the Democrat's weak point is taxes. So tell me then...how is a man who is claiming he will maintain the status quo also claiming he will lower taxes. He states that there will be no decreases in military or domestic spending, but somehow taxes will go down. At the very least, this implies “creative accounting”. More likely it's an outright fib. McCain has also flip-flopped on the issues of ecology and the environment. Just a few years ago he was one of the people declaring Gore to be a crackpot. Now that there is an energy crisis and warming trends have become an issue people talk about, McCain is suggesting that he always supported ecological issues.

Final prediction for John McCain: In a presidential position he will take whatever course of action keeps him from being impeached while using his power to further his own goals. Four more years of Bush Backslide!

But let's not forget Ralph Nader. The “alternative” choice for those who think that Barak Obama won't carry the issues far enough. There's an old saying, though. “What's the difference between a liberal and a conservative? 30 years.” In other words Ralph Nader has been saying the same “liberal” doctrines for so long they are no longer liberal. They are the same problems facing all the candidates and he's not that different any more. The policies he suggests are not new, not revolutionary, and not likely to be any more inventive once he gets into office. He even agrees with setting up a potentially permanent force in Iraq for “peace keeping” purposes.

If elected as President, Ralph Nader will propose two kinds of policies. First, ones that are generally accepted anyway. Secondly, ones that have slight policy differences, but those he won't be able to get to pass. Congress will own him.

But hold on...what about the “Other Black Candidate?” Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party. No news items. No campaign budget. Massive underdog. And that's a shame. She is a progressive woman with keen business sense and a strong sense of ideals (and if you think I'm just playing shill, take a look at http://www.2008electionprocon.org/candidates/cynthiamckinney.htm ) and she also believes that we can have a better quality of life while allowing for our environment. She has actual political experience as a former congressional delegate so she's not some inexperienced noob without ties in the political arena. She's a successful lawyer and has background in international affairs. So what's wrong with her? Well...

If Cynthia McKinney is elected...well...okay...She won't be. Flat out no. She may be perfect for the job but she just doesn't have the money to run against the big two.

But damn, would that woman kick ass and take names!