Iowa winners are... | Thinking Right

Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2008 > January > 03 > Entry

Iowa winners are…

By Jim Wooten | Thursday, January 3, 2008, 08:15 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

After a year of campaigning, the Iowa caucuses are upon us. Today, then, is opportunity for all of us to see how much we’ve learned in the past year from each other in the Thinking Right discussion group. You be the pundit.

The AJC asked a number of Atlanta-area notables to pick the winners of tonight’s caucuses. Neal Boortz thinks it’ll be Hillary and Mike Huckabee. Former State GOP chairman Chuck Clay of Marietta thinks John Edwards and Mitt Romney. TBS baseball announcer Chip Caray says Edwards and Huckabee.

The correct answer is Romney and Clinton. Iowa’s about organization and Romney and Clinton are most effectively organized there to turn out their supporters.

In the spirit of fair play, however, other opinions are invited. Everybody’s an expert today.

Permalink | Comments (74) |

Comments

Commenting is now closed for this entry.

By jbmlaw

January 3, 2008 8:53 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. The winners in Iowa are not necessarily the people who finish first �since the days of Jimmy Carter it has all been about spin. Jimmy won in 1976 by finishing second; so did Pat Robertson (who remembers that Bob Dole won the 1988 Iowa republican caucus, and that Bush pere finished third?) In 1992 Bill Clinton finished fourth, behind Tom Harkin (favorite son), �uncommitted,� and Paul Tsongas. (There we have it, the Massachusettsite beats the Arkansoid.) I perceive that Iowans have a penchant for the self-righteous, having previously anointed Carter, Robertson, and Tsongas, so I�ll forecast Edwards and Huckabee as winners in Iowa, for all the good it will do them. If Hillary beats Obama for second place in Iowa, it is over for Obama. Similarly, if McCain beats Thompson for third place, that might make it tough for Fred in SC. And given the penchant for self-righteous types, I think Hillary and McCain are likely to be the big winners who will not finish first.

By Anonymous

January 3, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

Why try to predict the caucus behavior of a slim fraction of Iowa farmers?

More importantly, why act as though such results matter in any way?

By Curious Observer

January 3, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this

I find it difficult to take the Iowa caucuses seriously, especially on the Democratic side. Never mind that some 10 percent of Iowa voters, at most, are involved. The entire system runs counter to the notion of the secret ballot, and it permits open pressuring of voters. Worse still, it does not even result in the immediate selection of convention delegates.

When will we get over this obsession with allowing Iowa and then New Hampshire to determine which candidates get a leg up at the start of the race? Neither state is representative of the US as a whole. Yet, the psychological impact of those two states can cause good candidates to drop out even before a more representative sampling of voter sentiment occurs. Many voters seem to be too stupid to see that a bad finish in those two states is not at all indicative of a candidate’s national support.

And so I come to my view of the winners: Who cares? If anything, the entire country is the loser in this silly exercise. I’ll be more impressed on February 5, when a real cross-section of the country votes and a substantial portion of convention delegates is selected.

By Craig also

January 3, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this

Gosh I hate agreeing with you, Counselor, but Edwards and Huckabee are my picks also.

Obama and McCain, though, will be the eventual nominees.

By jbmlaw

January 3, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

One additional note, on Jim�s line, �Iowa�s about organization…� That is 65% of the calculus, but the other 35% is �enthusiasm� and right now Huckabee�s drones have it, enough to beat the conventional wisdom.

By Another taxpayer

January 3, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

“In the spirit of Fair play, however, other opinions are invited. Everybody�s an expert today.”

Why Mr. Wooten, Surely you would not have us believe that politics is about Fair play! Why, only those most gifted —monetarily, that is — are to be endowed with expert opinions. The rest of us are mere pawns of the expertly opinionated.

As for myself, I’m waiting to see which candidate offers up the greater sacrifice. An appropriate lamb might be an offering of a 50% tax on all campaign contributions, all campaign ads, all campaign services, all campaign literature, all campaign-related travel and hotel accommodations…..Now, that’s a Fair [Tax] play.

By RealRep

January 3, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

Mike believes Iowa will see Mitt Romney for the flip-flopper he is. The last thing our party needs is another imposter.

A vote for Giuliani is a vote for Hillary.

Huckabee ‘08

By ron

January 3, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Good morning Jim,Huckabee and Clinton are my guesses.Only guesses mind you,sort of a s.w.a.g.,absolutely nothing to base it on.

By jbmlaw

January 3, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Dear Craig @ 9:03, I hope you are right about Obama � I much prefer seeing positive, decent people as nominees of the parties. Character goes far with me (although, as President Carter proved, that alone is not enough to ensure a successful presidency.)

By getalife

January 3, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

I predict Gomer Pyle and Edwards win Iowa and lazy fred drops out.

By Jeff

January 3, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

Well, when it comes to grass roots organization, look to the man who raised 6 MILLION dollars in a SINGLE DAY - after raking in more than 4 MILLION in a single day barely more than a month before.

That man, and the man who will occupy the White House on Jan 20, 2009, is Dr. Ron Paul.

By Disgusted

January 3, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

That man, and the man who will occupy the White House on Jan 20, 2009, is Dr. Ron Paul.

Sure, and I expect to be named Secretary of State shortly thereafter.

By Another taxpayer

January 3, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Secretary of State is Disgusted.

By Eric

January 3, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

The Iowa Caucuses use a very sensible way of voting that the rest of the country should adopt.

For this, you rank your candidates, from the one you prefer the most the the least desirable candidate. If your most highly preferred candidate fails to receive a significant vote, your next choice is then counted instead until you have a vote that qualifies.

In this way, voters are able to vote for a qualified, yet unpopular candidate without “throwing away” their vote.

Of course, the current establishment would never allow such a thing in a general election, as this opens the door for independant candidates actually being elected — however it is the best way to represent the will of the people.

What will it take for us to get this in Georgia?

By Another taxpayer

January 3, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

Hand me another beer Jimmy.

Sure, Billy.

How did you ever get elected any way, Jimmy?

Well, for one thing, my constituency didn’t know about your desire to market beer. What made you want to market beer anyway?

Well, Jimmy, a man gets mighty thirsty and sore after a hard days work. A cold beer helps relieve them both. I just figured there was a good market for something that could do that.

There is Billy. It’s called Ice Cold Lipton Tea.

What about the soreness?

BC powder Billy. Now hand me another glass.

Sure thing, Jimmy. One powder or two? Do you want lemon in that?

By Glenn

January 3, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

Reckon you’re right, Jim. I’ll qualify the concurrence just with a nod to Obama’s immediately current momentum. Going forward, he can hold that momentum awhile if he continues both to out-retail Hillary and to show that he’s a little less transparent than his two rivals. Perhaps because he is so green there’s still a little part of him that wants to be president for some as-yet unspecified higher reason than self-aggrandizement. Democrats, as usual, seek a candidate who, at least in part, genuinely wants to use government to better the commonweal, and he just might today seem to them the only such candidate.

Also, that’s a right good, counterintuitive point jbm makes, the tortoise vs. the Hareslayer of the Hooch. That’s happened a lot, in fact, when Iowa or New Hampshire get eccentric or uppity and get it in their heads to “send a message”. They sometimes enjoy a young person’s luxury of deferred seriousness; they get to toy around because they come so early that they don’t have to sweat the hard choices between evils.

The old Democratic Party bosses sent Iowa into the game first because they saw it as a kind of Nielsen State. It may be so still for the Democrats (dunno), but it certainly isn’t for the GOP, as Iowa Republicans are so markedly unrepresentative of that party as a whole that few of them seem to feel a duty to commend to their party the most viable candidate for General Election. The other party therefore may have the advantage in continuing to humor Iowa, which periodically repositions itself, with the support of the DNC, to remain first. The GOP acquiesces. From a perch within the RNC, the Iowa Caucus must look like an elaborate prank.

B.P.O.E., with regard to your mock apology of yesterday for your perceived insult of my religion, I saw no insult in the little brushfire you started among those interested in ribbing the admittedly somewhat ridiculous Great Defenders of Christmas. On the contrary, I just thought one of you might get a kick out of taking on the subject from the perspective of a religious scholar, one who studies religious phenomena dispassionately and scientifically. (Lots of material in that for further satire.)

My sub-gambit, then, had nothing to do with actual conviction. Frankly I doubt whether you could insult my religion as much as I’ve savaged it myself, and I’m down in the mudwaller with tftt on that one. On the other hand, if you’ve got any creative ideas, I’d be the first to enjoy them, I think!

(Sometimes I and others here do leap reactively to the defense of our King, but even this is pointless of course, as he demonstrated rather memorably that he needs no defending and moreover he assured us that those who blaspheme him shall be forgiven—-which is to say simply that he can take it, thank you.)

As for your coinage of the phrase “religious correctness”, it’s as funny as the feminist original, “political correctness”, and to my twisted mind well worth playing with, provided that you do the honors as rightful author.

By Captain Freedom

January 3, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

THE Captain agrees with Eric that the Iowa causus is an exemplary method for choosing our Presidential candidates. For one thing, what could be more appropriate than canvassing an electorate that is over 90% White. Why, that is almost (but not quite) perfection!! THE Captain is greatly pleased, and believes the 10% non-whiteness will not be enough for Obama’s 50% non-whiteness.

Further, the calculus is strentgthened by the fact that the Upright Iowans are primarily rural dwelling hyper-Christians. This alone should be enough to derail the Mormontologist flip-flopper and catapult the Godly Salt-of-the-Earth Rev. Huckabee to Primacy. (Though by ‘primacy’, THE Captain does not imply any Episco-Catholic status upon the Godly Mike. Let’s leave that devil’s stain to Don Vito Giuliani!)

The open ballot forum is another innovation that should be adopted nationwide. This would certainly go a long way to wives pledging to vote Right, only to be seduced by the siren song of Bill “Mighty Fallus” Clinton or Barack Obamandingo. Women need to be protected from their base animal natures, and this is a salutary method for applying proper guidance.

Yes, what could be more fitting than that we turn to a state of White Christianist scat-shovellers to designate the front-runners in the Presidential campaign? The New Hampshirites can no longer be trusted to be first in the Nation on this question, as the flood of migrating Islamassachulesbians has polluted their once Godly political bloodline.

Perhaps we could get Montana, Idaho, and North Dakota front-loaded into the schedule, too? This would further Our Nation’s continued commitment to Rightness.

As to your question, Jim (and THE Captain thanks you for recognizing His expertise)— Edwards and Hucklebee. THE Captain will enjoy watching the talking heads explode in disgust.

Further…Frederick of Hollywood withdraws by Monday. My friends at The Corner will be crestfallen, but it is alas not to be.

By Profit

January 3, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

The real loser in Iowa is america. The One True Issue has not been discussed and debated by the cowards. You know what that issue is as well as I do. You are just too cowardly to risk your cozy comfy lifestyle by speaking the truth. Cowards

By Glenn

January 3, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

That particular salt of the earth is Mrs. Dash.

By Mel

January 3, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this

These are people who have lived on their land for generations,

they have unchanging values,

the salt of the earth people,

you know….

MORONS!

By Anonymous

January 3, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

Eric: The METHOD they use in the Iowa caucus is a good one; it’s very similar to instant-runoff voting (IRV), which would be the more intelligent way to handle our electoral process. And which, of course, both major parties would be dead-set against and would fight to the death rather than allow to happen.

But the Captain’s point is also valid: caucusing a slice of Iowans, no matter how sophisticated the method, tells us NOTHING about America’s preferences.

By Glenn

January 3, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this

“Well it is a kind of lunch counter art, I admit, but then ‘art’ is so vague, and lunch is so real.”

—Will Rogers

Good points @ 9:03, C.O. And Craig, thanks for yours of yesterday. And stop poaching; agreeing with jbm is MY job.

By getalife

January 3, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

And down the stretch they come.

It is Clinton, Obama, Edwards, running neck to neck.

There are at the wire.

Oh my, too close to call.

It is a photo finish.

America wins!

By Eric

January 3, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this

Mr. Captain —

I don’t quite understand how you misconstrued my point, it was only referring to the way in which they vote. I certainly do not think that Iowa is a cross section of “average” America (if there were such a thing!)

“The Iowa Caucuses USE A VERY SENSIBLE WAY OF VOTING that the rest of the country should adopt.”

As “Anonymous” points out — I am referring to the METHOD of voting.

To the Captain’s point though — I don’t quite know how Iowa was bestowed with the honor of being the first state (and somehow the most important?!?!) — it must be my lack of history knowledge in this area.

My general thought is that our election system is in place to keep the country a two party system — and I believe many people do not feel that the current two parties accurately represent their political outlook, however much of America must “settle” for the most popular person who offends their political values the least in order to have confidence that their vote will make an impact.

If the country were to adopt the “instant-runoff voting” as mentioned above, the will of the American people would be much better represented at the voting booth.

By Redneck Convert

January 3, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

Well, I reckon somebody�s got to win in Iowa. But I don�t know why. All they got is churches and bars and cornfields there. Besides, anybody that�s idiot enough to show up in the dark at somebody�s house when its 0 degrees outside is liable to vote for anybody just to stay warm. Long as Rev. Huckabee wins I�m OK with it. Course, if he does win he won�t stay on top long. I give the godless libruls just a day till they show pictures of him in bed with a sheep and two or three kids with a big bottle of booze in his hand. They just can�t keep away from trying to smear a godly conservative white Christian.

Just look what they done to the godly Sen. Vitter. It wasn�t enough they had to publish all his visits to Women of Easy Virtue in moments of weakness and Moral Failing. No, they had to describe the kind of diaper he wore and all that stuff. They done the same kind of thing to the godly Sen. Craig. You can spend your life doing good things but move your foot just a little in the bathroom and you are finished for life.

Anyway, when the heathens do dig up the dirt on Rev. Huckabee it will be better than watching the hoochy-coochy show at the fair. I just hope he don�t stand in front of the TV camera and bawl and pray the way that other preacher done a few years ago.

Have a good day everybody. Ain�t it nice that TFTT is gone for treatment and people can be kind of polite on this blog?

By @@

January 3, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

I wouldn’t even attempt a guess the outcome of the Iowa caucus Jim. I’ll leave that to the polling fundpits.

It was interesting to watch that Luntz fella polling the dems last night on Fox. They’d all changed their minds so often I couldn’t tell which end they had up. They all agreed on one thing….they wanted a candidate that could win in November—to heck with their qualifications or lack thereof.

Their opinions seemed to follow those of the media. When a dem candidate is up they’re in favor of him/her. When the dem candidate was down, they were down on that dem.

The possibility that John Edwards may come in first is an interesting one. With everyone in America looking to unite, Edwards who talks about “Two Americas” could win??? I just don’t get it.

Joe Biden, who I see as the only qualified candidate, had this to say about Jackpot Johnny.

Going postal �John doesn’t have a record in the Senate. John’s only passed four bills. They’re all about post offices. I mean, literally.�

Joe Biden on John Edwards’s senatorial career. Washingtonpost.com, December 31st

Jackpot Johnny’s message? Down with corporate America. I can’t wait to see how Wall Street would react with an Edwards nomination. That’s certain to make retirement funds— including those owned by labor unions and working families—happy, right?

I’m still hanging with Giuliani as the nominee. His campaign ads inspire. He gives Americans more credit than their due in my opinion. Rudy believes that when we’re united there’s no nation that can compare to our greatness—no nation that can offer such hope.

Love his message.

By Captain Freedom

January 3, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

Eric,

It does not matter how you arrived at your support of the Iowa caucus. It matters only that you end in agreement with THE Captain.

THE Captain agrees as well that the instant runoff is a fine idea. As Mrs Freedom will attest, THE Captain prefers his gratification quickly, and the idea of having to wait through several primaries to know who wins is just about more suspense than HE can bear.

But to take it a step further…THE Captain is appalled by the large number of choices placed before the electorate. In old times (which are not forgotten in these parts), the candidate was chosen by the Wise Men of each party. This unimprovable approach was the safeguard against common rabble such as the Arkansas rapist (not to be confused with the guy who Pardons Arkansas Rapists) and the Brave Georgian Rabbit Fighter from getting too close to power. If we would only allow Our Betters (of whom THE Captain and Wooten are members, naturally), we could have annointed the Godly Frederick of Hollywood months ago and saved him the embarassement of actually having to campaign amongst the cornfield rubes of Iowa. My heart goes out to this good man and his comely trophy lass with the major league yabos. But THE Captain digresses….

Mark my words…this method of allowing common people to choose candidates can only result in nominees who represent the needs and wants of common riffraff like the Redneck, and that can only lead to unreasonable demands for inclusion, participation, and equality. Reserving the selection process for White People only is intelligence at work. Allowing the lower of Our Race to participate is lunacy. The Foundation of Our Nation cannot withstand such rampant democracy. We are a Republic, dammit, and that is why Republicans are better than Democrats, ipso facto cogito ergo unum. Nuff said.

Well, almost. While THE Captain supports the Christianist inclinations of the Rev Hucklebee, he is alarmed at the almost WalMartian populism that his candidacy seems to inspire. The upshot is the voice of ragamuffin morons like Dusty and Redneck thinking that their opinions may actually mean something. This can only lead to an epidemic of stretch-polyester pants on Our Sainted Women and to importunate public scratching of private parts by Our Men.

America can withstand many things, including Islamosodomassachten terrorists. We cannot, however, survive and prosper if the kinds of behaviors and fashions practiced by Dusty and Redneck become widespread. The very idea makes THE Captain throw up in His mouth just a little bit.

By Captain Freedom

January 3, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

Please, do not get confused. All the talk about “coming together” and “bipartisanship” is just a ruse to fool the Dumbocrats. We all know that one of their Islamoliberal pansies will become President. The mainstream media’s relentless persecution of Our Leader and His Cheney have all but guaranteed it.

(Even Fox News is in on the fix. how else to explain their fixation on the unelectable Papist Giuliani as the GOP standard bearer?)

So, the bipartisanship ruse is designed to lull the Dems into a false notion that We of True Belief intend to work cooperatively with them, when nothing could be farther from the truth. This diversion will make it all the easier for Our Shock Troops to bend the liberals over the negotiating table and deliver them the proper rump rogering they so richly deserve. They’ll never know what hit them when we empty Our Firehose of Righteousness into their bewildered loins.

So be careful, @@, at the way you throw that notion around. If the Dems ever realize they need to grow a pair of brass onions and fight Us Real Americans like crazed beasts, the gig will be up. I mean, come on…take a look at guys like Gary Bauer and Ralph Reed and Lindsay Graham. These closeted pu$$ie$ would fold like a paper napkin if the Dems ever showed any spine. Thank God they continue to believe We are Reasonable People.

By ron

January 3, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

The throw up in the mouth bit is so over used that it has to be relegated to Perez Hilton et al.Been sneaking over there Captain,when Mrs.Freedom wasn’t around?

By Dusty

January 3, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

Well, having just come in from the frigid outdoors, I can see that the Captain has thrown up quite a bit (as usual).

All those words just to say nothing. But that’s OUR Captain, our albatross of an ancient mariner, our pontificator of pap, our legendary lapdog of possible politicians. Oh well, he’s one step above RedNeck.

At times, though,Cap’n & RedNeck seem one and the same in some obtuse undercover latent libbyloos sort of way. RedNeck is the basic boor of twisted Southern art work while Captain is the Castle keeper of a Mulrovian Count (Dracula, that is).

But what’s a day without the crazier coots of Wooten’s blog? Not sunny, I tell you. But back to basics.

Edwards and Thompson!! I’d love the debates. The ambulance chaser versus the TV star. War of the Wanton Warriors!

By @@

January 3, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

Captain:

You really should avoid discussing your sexual fantasies on a public forum don’tcha think?

They�ll never know what hit them when we empty Our Firehose of Righteousness into their bewildered loins.

If THE Fox is promoting one hound over the other, I missed it.

By Craig

January 3, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this

Glenn @ 12:41 - sorry - I’ll try to do better…

By @@

January 3, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

Dusty:

I would love to see Thompson get the nomination. He’s right about so many things, the latest of which was that people would tire of campaigning that started so early. Unfortunately proving his point by entering late has offered the media a field day with their accusations that he’s not driven enough.

Not driven enough to be a politician?

Nothing wrong with that I say.

By Captain Freedom

January 3, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

That Sister Dusty cannot discern the content of THE Captain’s musings is more a comment on her atrophied reading comprehension than on THE Captain’s refined and coveted prose stylings. Perhaps if THE Captain could post in crayon, Sister D might not have such a tough time.

ron…Esophagal reflux is nothing to joke about, and should not be construed as a mere rhetorical gambit. And just who is this Perez Hilton that you speak of? (The name has a vaguely foreign taint, yet reeks of raw and youthful libido. THE Captain is conflicted by this combination of taint and, well,,,, taint.) THE Captain constrains His activity in the Internets to Mr Wooten’s favorite sights, as listed above. To wander beyond these confines is to invite a wonderland of horror into one’s life. Better to stick with those with whom one knows one to be in agreement. With.

By ron

January 3, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

My Captain,I mistook you to be a free roamer of cyberspace,gulping in knowledge from a variety of sites.My mistake.I stand corrected.

By Dusty

January 3, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this

Dear Captain,

We all know that you post with crayons and the catalytic converter switches it for you. It is nothing of which to be ashamed for those who have reached the finer years of life . But let us not sneer at your sensibilities and fantasy land jaunts, dear Cappy. You have shown us how joyful this state can be. Ah yes..joie de vivre!

@@..2:14

I’m afriad that I am taking political decisions a bit lightly at the moment. Not really serious about Thompson but not real excited about any of the others either. With a little more time, I hope decisions will be easier. Let’s hope that Nunn and Bloomberg don’t make a squeeze play by throwing in am independent of sorts at the last moment. There are too many people “running” now.

By jbmlaw

January 3, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

Dear Captain @ 2:16, your strained conclusion clumsily ends with a misplaced preposition. That is a problem up with which I will not put.

By Another taxpayer

January 3, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this

Too bad too many people running does not correlate with too many good choices.

By HIDT

January 3, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

The end is near. Dusty does have a sense of humor

“We all know that you post with crayons and the catalytic converter switches it for you.”

Funny stuff. My compliments.

By Captain Freedom

January 3, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Mr jbm,

Well played, sir. You are indeed Churchillian.

A Captain Kudo to you. Even a blind squirrel and all that, what what.

By getalife

January 3, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

And down the stetch they come.

Gomer Pyle leading……

Who cares?

The gop can’t govern.

Check out your last loser’s resume:

R�SUM�

GEORGE W. BUSH 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20520

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:

Law Enforcement: I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine, in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pleaded guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver�s license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been �lost� and is not available.

Military: I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.

College: I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.

PAST WORK EXPERIENCE: I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland,Texas in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn�t find any oil in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.

I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money.

With the help of my father and our friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected governor of Texas.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR OF TEXAS:

I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America.

I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money.

I set the record for the most executions by any governor in American history.

With the help of my brother, the governor of Florida , and my father�s appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President of the United States, after losing by over 500,000 votes.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT:

I am the first President in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record.

I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week.

I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury.

I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history.

I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.

I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.

I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. In my first year in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues.

I�m proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My �poorest millionaire,� Condoleezza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.

I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. President.

I am the all-time U.S. and world record -holder for receiving the most corporate campaign donations.

My largest lifetime campaign contributor, and one of my best friends, Kenneth Lay, presided over the largest corporate bankruptcy fraud in U.S. history, Enron.

My political party used Enron private jets and corporate attorneys to assure my success with the U.S. Supreme Court during my election decision.

I have protected my friends at Enron and Halliburton against investigation or prosecution. More time and money was spent investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair than has been spent investigating one of the biggest corporate rip-offs in history. I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed.

I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history.

I changed the U.S. policy to allow convict ed criminals to be awarded government contracts.

I appointed more convicted criminals to my administration than any President in U.S. history.

I created the Ministry of Homeland Security, the largest bureaucracy in the history of the United States Government.

I�ve broken more international treaties than any President in U.S. history.

I am the first President in U.S. history to have the United Nations remove the U.S. from the Human Rights Commission.