Pandering for no good reason

Saw a blurb on Romney this morning. For some reason, he felt the need to hold himself out as a long-time hunter when the quick response in the news media (24 hour scruitny hits again!) that he'd been hunting once as a kid and once recently in Georgia, has never held a hunting license and owns no rifles. I'm sure this will be the first of many "panders" across all candidates and parties so I guess I shouldn't be amazed.

Kerry redux?

One of the funniest things during the last Presidential election was the "I voted for the war before I voted against it". Will we see such waffling this go around? I'm starting to see we might on the Dems side of things with Hillary but I suppose time will tell.

That brings to mind another idea....like Bush or hate Bush (may be more of the later), I have to admire the guy for not waffling. He may have made bad decisions on bad assumptions or beliefs, but at least the guy is consistent. That being said, I'd like to see someone in the office who is consistent on GOOD decisions based on GOOD assumptions. Is that possible in today's 24-hour information microscope that is today's political system? I doubt it. However, when I believe what someone says and their actions back up their statements, I certainly have much more confidence in him/her.

Common Sense

I don't know how long this blog will last but I hope to stimulate some conversation over the next 18 months.

I'm amazed at the lack of common sense often shown by both Republicans and Democrats. As an example, Rudy doesn't show most of the typical views that Republicans look for in a candidate. He's done a fantastic job of leveraging "American's Mayor" status to keep the focus off of everything else he's said in the past. Likewise, Democrats seem to take a face value what many of their candidats are saying at a specific point in time and ignore the history of their actions. Amazing no?