Huckabee wins Iowa

Way to go Huck! Big win tonight in Iowa! The conventional wisdom has now become that he is a one trick pony, and now that he's moving on to less evangelical territory, his victories will be few and far between. I hope these "analysts" are mis-reading things. I'd like to think that a deep thinking person that relates to average people has stronger legs than just among the Baptists of the country.

That said, congrats to evangelicals in Iowa, and thanks for showing up. When Christians show up at the polls, we can make a big difference. Imagine how different our nation may look today if Christians would have gone to the polls in 2006.

Tomorrow's Iowa Caucus

I've been thinking about tomorrow's first caucus and how having a few states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina select the nominees for the rest of the country...or at least weed out candidates before they get to our state...seems a bit unfair. We are supposed to have equal say in who picks our leaders, and we do in the general election (for the most part), but absolutely not in the candidate selection process.

While Iowans are being hammered by phone calls, ads and personal appearances, Kansans will likely never see a single presidential candidate wooing us for our votes. Perhaps a midnight appearance at the Wichita or Kansas City airports.

I think it would be good to break it up into regional primaries, which would have the benefit of keeping candidates working states in a specific area for awhile, reducing their travel expenses and enabling locals throughout the region to see and hear from the candidates, and then the caravans move to the next region. There would be enough delegates in each region to enable someone who does poorly in the Midwest region to recover in the Northeast. The current scattershot approach of Iowa one week, New Hampshire the next, then South Carolina and then a bunch of states on one day means the vast majority of Americans will (a) not have much, if any, say in who their party's nominee is and (b) won't be exposed to them during the selection process other than the soundbites they pick up on the news.

The funny thing is that we seem to look for the next Reagan, which isn't out there, but if someone with his exact same personal and political background (that had seen its share of flopping on social issues) came along now, we would not call him Reaganesque because of the mythology and mystique we've created around Reagan. I don't know who I'd vote for yet, but I guess I don't have to decide. Iowans will pick for me!

And I still like to delude myself with the notion that Hillary is not electable. Aren't Americans tired of the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton thing? Do they want that cackle and scandals for the next 4-8 years? Tell me it isn't so! I'm sure she's beatable. Probably the most beatable Democrat out there. I don't think she would wear well during the long duration of the national campaign. She can be as tempered and non-shrill as her advisers convince her to be, but then again someone told her she needed to burst out in spontaneous laughter during interviews. Regardless of how she behaves herself, Republicans will be sure to roll out commercials loaded with cackles and shrill political speeches she's given to remind people what they're really getting.

The Balloonist

A woman in a hot air balloon realizes she is lost. She lowers her altitude and spots a man fishing from a boat below.

She shouts to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consults his portable GPS and replies, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.

She rolls her eyes and says, "You must be a Republican!"

"I am," replies the man. "How did you know?"

"Well," answers the balloonist, "everything you tell me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you're not much help to me."

The man smiles and responds, "You must be a Democrat."

"I am," replies the balloonist. "How did you know?"

"Well," says the man, "You don't know where you are or where you're going. You've risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and now you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met , but, somehow, now it's my fault."

Dr. Roy Says Election a Defeat for Religionist Right

Dr. Bill Roy has spoken up again. He says, in his latest editorial, that the last election was the electorate voting against Christian candidates...choosing to shore up the wall between church and state by casting out those who govern by their Christian principles.

On a side note, my mother was a nurse and I grew up hearing about Dr. Bill Roy. My mother didn't think much of him. Never had a kind word for him. In fact, she said he was the rudest, most arrogant doctor in Topeka and treated nurses with contempt. But that's beside the point.

The point Dr. Roy forgets is that Republicans of all stripes lost in this past election. If they had an R after their name, they were in for trouble. I was disappointed that more evangelicals didn't turn up at the polls, but they'll be back.

Christian candidates believe that Biblical principles make good government. It was good enough when the founders used those principles to develop our form of government, so why shouldn't they stick to those principles when they run for office and govern after they are elected?

What's so offensive with using Biblical principles to govern? Why is it more agreeable for those whose morals are based on the religions of liberalism, secularism, atheism, etc.?

Ugly, UGLY election

Well, we can put to rest once and for all that Kansas is a "conservative" state. The good candidates are all losing here.

What's the matter with you people???

It's always sad when people, confronted with the truth, are more comfortable with the lie. Nancy Boyda (dist. 2) and Paul Morrison (AG), both heavily funded by the abortion industry and both based on rampant deception in their advertising, are WINNING??? Who believes the garbage they've been dishing out? It's been proven that they're lying to you and yet they're winning. I don't get it.