As we come closer to deciding the nominees of the major parties I couldn't help but think back to that time almost two years ago when the presumptive Republican nominee for President was Senator George Allen of Virginia, the Golden Boy of Republican Conservatism: Southern (or, Southern Californian, if we're nitpicking); son and namesake of a successful football coach; not bad looking; anti-abortion; hunter; 2nd Amendment advocate; not too bright; wealthy; ambitious; easily-led; _______ (fill in the blank.)

More below the fold . . .

I have faithfully listened to all of the debates, both Democratic and Republican,  and I have pretty much picked out my candidate. For the record, I will vote for the Democratic candidate even if it is not my candidate. This diary is not meant to demean or denigrate any candidate or any campaign. However, I find all of the candidates and their campaigns lacking a certain something, a je ne saie quoi.  What is that question that all are avoiding?

I want to know why you are a Democrat.

Ralph Regula has announced that he will not seek another term in Congress according to the local Fox News outlet in Columbus.

http://www.foxnews.com/...

I don't diary or comment often - mostly just lurk. However, I didn't see this one coming and just had to comment. Rep. Doolittle, the Member of Congress voted most likely to win the Duke Cunningham Corruption Crown, now wants us out of Iraq.

Apparently, he had a town meeting in Rocklin, CA and then repeated his new position to the Board of the Sacramento Bee.
go here:  http://www.editorandpublisher.com/...

In the years since Watergate I have come to believe that Gerald Ford was telling the truth about his blanket pardon of Richard Nixon. I believed that he weighed the pros and cons of a pardon and made the decision that he felt was in the nation's best interest and not as a favor to Nixon. I believed that there was no quid pro quo. I believed that Nixon picked Ford as VP because he was confirmable. I didn't agree with the decision at the time and have only grudgingly accepted it over time. However, I did believe that Ford thought long and hard about the decision and came to the decision with difficulty. Even though I voted for Jimmy Carter I always felt a little sad that Ford lost the Presidency because of a decision made with difficulty and honor.

Now it can be told: Nixon picked the man he considered his most loyal friend; the man he knew he didn't have to ask for a pardon; it was understood in that Tony-Soprano-Don-Corleone unspoken request/command way so prized by felons and their minions.

more below the fold. . .

There's been much ado about George Bush, Sr's emotional speech about his son, Jeb. The conventional wisdom seems to have settled on the meme that Jeb has no chance at the presidency now that W has poisoned the Bush family well with this disastrous adventure into Iraq. It would appear to most that Poppy is understandably upset at the family name being besmirched by the designated bad boy, thereby ruining it for the "smart one," Jeb, and his ability to take his rightful, inherited place in the Pantheon of Bush Presidents. Whatever will the Republican Party, not to mention America, do without a Bush heir apparent? It's enough to make their criminal blue blood run cold.

This past Sunday the Washington Post Magazine celebrated its 20th anniversary by publishing some of its past articles. One of particular interest was an interview by Walt Harrington with George H W Bush in the summer of 1986. It was almost spooky to read words written 20 years ago that so aptly explain and clarify the Bush family behavior today.

There is only one very brief reference to W - but a telling one.

...more below the fold

On election night all of the pundits, left, right, center, neutral, have their herald sign races that indicate to them whether there is a tsunami, wave or ripple.

For me that election is the Harold Ford election in the Senate and the Anne Northrup election in KY for the House. If Ford can pull this off as an African American in TN and if Anne Northrup loses after years of winning in a district that has treated her quite well then I think that we are in for a tsunami.

more below the fold

A couple of weeks ago I asked who among the Republicans would switch parties if the Democrats were to win. http://www.dailykos.com/...

The MSNBC Politics site has a National Journal article asking the same. It is especially interesting and I suggest you go to the complete article for some rather good insights into the political calculus involved in party switching. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...

...losing the House might be just the beginning of the House Republicans' troubles: The post-1994 political era has demonstrated that a congressional caucus newly relegated to minority status continues hemorrhaging long after Election Day.

more below the fold

In past large wave elections, e.g., 1994, there were significant numbers of party switchers. I specifically recall Ben Nighthorse Campbell switching when the Dems lost the Senate. As I recall it gave the Republicans an almost veto proof majority in the Senate.

It would seem that with the Hastert/Foley Sex Scandal destined to occupy the election coverage in the forseeable future we will more than likely have a large number of seats change hands in a month. If the stars align correctly or this scandal deepens perhaps the Senate will also change hands.

Who among our Republican loyalists will be the first to decamp the Republican Party? My husband says he has no clue but predicts that with amazing cluelessness Joe Lieberman will become a Republican.

more below the fold. . .

In looking ahead to a probable switch in the House and, hopefully, a switch in the Senate, I am wondering which House members and/or Senators would switch parties after the elections.

I remember that Ben Nighthorse Campbell became a Republican when the Republicans won the Senate in '94. What a jerk! I can almost understand the Southern Senators becoming Republican. They can't abide the changes that occurred in the Democratic Party they grew up in. But, I still don't understand Campbell.

more below the fold . . .

Today's NYTimes has a story on the Department of Education's list of acceptable majors for eligibility for federal grants. Suddenly and without explanation the major field of study in evolutionary biology has dropped of the list of acceptable majors.

These grants are for low income students in their 3rd or 4th year of study.

The program provides $4,000 grants to third- or fourth-year, low-income students majoring in physical, life or computer sciences; mathematics; technology; engineering; or foreign languages deemed "critical" to national security.

Go here:  http://www.nytimes.com/...

Even lapsed Irish Catholics feel the need to confess periodically. I confess. I indulged in a guilty pleasure. I have just finished reading the article about Duke Cunningham in the new online issue of TNR. Why the guilt? Why the pleasure?  Well, the article was written by, ahem. . . Kitty Kelley. But, it was so juicy! Oh, God! I'm on my way to hell even as I write.

Yes, it's sensational. And, yes, I take immense pleasure from the suffering of The Dukester and his missus (soon to be ex.)

Go here for the full story: http://www.tnr.com/...

We all knew this guy was a piece of work but the wife . . . what a whiny ass wimp.

More below the fold -

David Broder's column in the WaPo today is quite interesting. While I usually don't bother with his ramblings, the headline caught my eye:  For Republicans, A Heartland Plunge. It seems that even the most recalcitrant MSM punditocracy seems to be getting it . . . finally!!

Go here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

He says that Republicans feel that support for GOP candidates has nose-dived this summer because of the daily televised scenes of destruction on Iraq and Lebanon AND in part because of the dismal reputation built by the Republican Congress!!!!  They're afraid of a really bad blowout.

More below the fold. . .

The LATimes is reporting that U. S. Rep Gary Miller has avoided paying millions on real estate profits by lying to the IRS. Apparently, he sold 165 acres of land to the city of Monrovia and told the IRS that Monrovia  had forced him to sell the property under threat of eminent domain. This would allow him to shelter the profits from capital gains for more than two years before reinvesting the money.

There is just one small problem: Monrovia officials deny threatening to force the sale and say that he sold the land willingly! Uh-oh! Those IRS guys can be a nasty lot.

Here is the link:  http://www.latimes.com/...

Lots more below the fold:

This is my first diary so please be patient with a tired old nurse with creaky IT skills. There is a great article in GQ about Ralph Reed. It is rather long but well worth the read.

Go Here:

http://men.style.com/...

That smarmy SOB. My sister said it best: "He looks like he wears dirty underwear."