Hillary, Bill: Barack's Worst Nightmare

Let's make a major effort to support Republican congressional candidate Dana Walsh. I am going to put up on every blog (and I have a bunch) an appeal to send a contribution to Ms. Walsh. She's pro-military and running against Cindy Sheehan and Nancy Pelosi, "the witches of the West." I hope a whole lot of people online will feature Dana Walsh at: http://danawalshforcongress.com. Her web site is terrific. It has pics of Sheehan and Pelosi playing huggy-bear with dictators (Chavez and Assad). Please contribute whatever you can to this courageous woman.


I put up late Tuesday columns on: (1) the Pennsylvania blog about a new, unified, national effort to elect Republican candidates; (2) the Hillary Supporters for McCain blog about the Obama campaign and its surrogates "sliming" (Bill Clinton's word) Mrs. Clinton. If you're a "mom," you'll want to take a look at Jean Avery's blog: http://moms4mccain.blogspot.com/. (On the Hillary Supporters site, I have a picture of Bill's supposed girlfriend (Gina Gershon), as well as a quote from a friend in Ambridge, who said, "As Bill gets older, the girlfriends get better looking." Can't quarrel with that.

The pundits last night didn't really "interpret" Mrs. Clinton's "concession speech" (more properly, her "non-concession speech"). Instead, they mainly had a befuddled look on their faces. Some wondered if she was not perhaps launching the first shot in her 2012 campaign for the presidency.

(I suggested that the next presidential election -- the one after this year's -- might end up pitting Senator Clinton on the Democratic side against Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for the Republicans. (In this scenario, President John McCain would have -- as we said in business -- "elected to take early retirement.")

Of course, the major question the Senator left is whether she wants (expects?) the vice presidential nod. CNN"s David Gergen suggested that Mrs. Clinton seemed to be indicating that she wanted Senator Obama to agree to some sort of "coalition" government -- or perhaps a co-presidency. On that point, what about a "troika," that would have three equal parts: Barack, Hillary, and -- of course -- Bill?

The problem with Hillary as a vice-presidential nominee is this: she has supplied the Republicans with all sorts of ammunition. Famously, she once said, "I have a lifetime of experience; Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience; Senator Obama has a speech [against the Iraq War] that he delivered in 2002." When Obama runs against McCain, he will hear those words used in ads -- again and again and again.

Mrs. Clinton's slogan in her campaign was "Ready on Day 1." She has implied that John McCain would also be ready to serve as President on Day 1. Of course, her words mean that Obama would NOT be ready. If she thought the Illinois Senator had the appropriate seasoning (and as Prince Hamlet said, "The readiness is all"), then her slogan would have made no sense.

Bill Clinton said on June 2 that the Obama campaign was "sliming" his wife. Again, if Hillary Clinton accepts (the proper word may be "seizes") the vice-presidential nod, Bill Clinton's words just might ring throughout the fall campaign. The former President indicated that Obama is relying on "surrogates" to hurl mud at his wife.

Are Hillary and Bill Clinton really ready to mend fence with Obama? Are they willing to say, in essence, "all is forgiven, Barack. We really didn't mean all those nasty things we said about you."

Is this to be a ticket that contains a undertone of the following: "It's true that I said Barack wouldn't be ready on day 1; however, since he will have me with him (in the White House? perhaps the Lincoln Bedroom?), he won't have to worry about not being quite ready for prime time."

And what would the presence of Mrs. Clinton on the ticket do to Obama's seminal message of change? In fact, the "Billary" triplex would be a continuing reminder of the ghosts of American politics past. Barack would learn that it's impossible to fire a vice-president (or a former President).

For Senator McCain, campaigning against an Obama-Clinton team might not be the daunting task it appeared to be yesterday. The Republican message -- one of them -- is going to highlight Obama's unsuitability for the highest office. And the main "spokesperson" for that position might not be John McCain, but rather Hillary Clinton -- with occasional assists from her husband.

Let the games begin!

Sarah Palin: First Female President?

Note: I sent the following message to several Republican congressional candidates I'm working with this year. Please pass it on to congressional candidates in your area. Thanks.

Bulletin for Republican congressional candidates and supporters: In KY exit polls are showing that two-thirds of Clinton voters are saying they will not vote for Obama in the General Election. Forty-one percent are saying they will vote for McCain.That's why I'm asking candidates and supporters to say, "A vote for my opponent is a vote for Barack Obama." That is not the conventional wisdom, but the conventional wisdom is wrong in this case. Tie yourself and your campaign to John McCain. (Please be kind enough to go Congressional Quarterly -- link below -- and vote for Gov. Sarah Palin (scroll down).

Will this woman, Alaska Gov. Sarah Heath be America's first female President? And will this man, Todd Palin, holding their new baby, Trig, be America's "First Dude?" There is a good chance John McCain will name her as his vice-presidential running mate. Please vote for her in the Congressional Quarterly "V-P Madness" poll (see below)

Palin Fans:

Gov. Palin is now just one victory away from WINNING CQ Politics' "VP Madness"! She beat out Rob Portman in the Final Four by a vote of 56%-43%, advancing to a final confrontation with Mike Huckabee. I'm very confident in the chances of a Palin victory, but the presidential primaries proved that underestimating Mike Huckabee is a huge mistake. So, let's make sure that we give our favorite governor as much help as we possibly can.

PLEASE let as many people as you can know about this poll. Post it on your blog, email your friends, write a note on your Facebook profile, anything to help push Gov. Palin over the top. Win or lose, VP Madness has been a major victory for our movement, but a win here could permanently catapult Sarah Palin into the top tier of the top tier of the veepstakes (at least as far as the media is concerned).

LET'S WIN THIS!!!!!--

Adam Brickley

Founder, "Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President"

palinforvp.blogspot.com

Note from Steve: Adam Brickley, a 21-year-old college student (who's graduating this week in Colorado Springs) is the finest young political operative in the country. Please cast your ballot for Sarah, a pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-military, pro-integrity woman who just might be "Mt. Rushmore material."

Sarah Palin on a Roll

I said I wouldn't do anything for Tuesday, but it was a fib. Here's a story that appeared in Monday's Anchorage Daily News, which you can't have delivered to your home in th e lower-48.

"Palin name keeps popping up on the national political landscape. There it was again, in The New York Times Sunday, suggesting Gov. Sarah Palin might be the woman who becomes president when Hillary Clinton does not."Sarah Palin, the Republican governor of Alaska, is on many lists - she's known as a reformer as well as for riding a motorcycle and referring to her husband as the ‘first dude.'"

"She's already made it into the final round on Congressional Quarterly's VP Madness poll. It's Palin vs. former White House budget director Rob Portman, and Mike Huckabee vs. Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty. See how she does by the end of today; if she makes it to the final round, voting ends Thursday. The ADN Alaska Politics blog is already taking comments on both snapshots."

AMERICAN POLITICS: WHOLE WORLD WATCHING

Note: On my new -- and, amazingly, popular -- blog: (http://hillarysuportersformccain.blogspot.com, I have a piece today by a superb political analyst, Jean Avery. It's called "The Agonies of Hillary Clinton." Yesterday's piece on the same blog is titled "Hatchets Hacking Away at Hillary." I hope you'll read both and comment if you wish. On my Pennsylvania blog, I have a piece about two congressional candidates whom I'm urging to link themselves closely to John McCain's presidential bid. It's a strategy I believe is applicable to most Republican congressional candidates across the nation. If you agree, please forward it to your own favorite congressional candidate. Thanks.

In recent months, The (London) Economist has written about the fascination many people in Great Britain have with this year's American politics. In Britain, hundreds of thousands (millions?) of Englishmen and Englishwomen find them awake at 5 a.m. (their time) hanging on the latest results from Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. Some of these people may not know exactly where Indiana or Pennsylvania are, but they're fixated on the Obama-Clinton battles in those states.

The Economist mentions that a lot of people in Britain have a form of "primary envy." They wonder why their own country, one with a parliamentary system, can't have primaries of their own! Obviously, the primaries are great theater. Also, there are clear winners and losers, a situation that's always certain to draw public interest.

The obsession with American politics isn't just something you'll find in Britain. For example, I received the following e-mail from an overseas man, Jim Fryar, an Aussie who's a regular reader of my blogs.

He tells me, " I have been over to HSFM [Hillary Supporters for McCain] a few times, and I regard it as a potential winner for our cause [i.e., the conservative and libertarian one].

"My main concern at present is that Hilary will make it. I realize it's unlikely or highly improbable, but I never underestimate the Clintons, [because] they are as cunning as outhouse rats. . . . It's not over until Obama has the nomination, and even then I think its likely that Hilary would have 2012 in mind and have similar sentiments [regarding] the people we are reaching out to.

"[Alaska Govenor] Sarah Palin would be a great asset to this effort if she were the VP nominee. The "girl" thing is a side issue to this. She is honest, competent, has executive experience, and appears to have the toughs where she needs them. I would not recommend her otherwise. The last thing we need in the future would be a useless VP who we 'owe' for getting us over the line.

"Sarah's main competition would be Mitt Romney, who is also a good choice. Mitt would bring back some of those who backed him but still won't come across to McCain. He would cost us some ultra-conservative support, but I am not sure that this would be a real bad thing if he can bring in greater numbers of other groups. I think that a great many ultra-conservatives would still support the ticket [McCain-Romney] rather than accept the alternative. If Mike Huckabee and/or Fred Thompson were to support such a ticket, it would go a long way to help.


"That group [ultra-conservatives] worry me as they seem to be pulling us away from the more moderate electorate to the point where I feel some of them actually despise moderates and possibly want them out. I still believe we need the [ultra's] support so we have to be nice to them, but to some extent I think they are costing us, especially among the young [voters that] Romney could appeal to.


"I notice in the NYT an article which suggests that the Latino vote could be crucial and Eric [Dondero of BlogTalkRadio/Libertarian] has been pushing this line for the last year, or at least that we do not do enough to get that vote. He also seems to feel that quite a few Latinos don't really like the Democrats as they tend to stand over them. He presented a good case for Bonnie Garcia as a possible VP a couple of months ago. If she were at least to get a prominent place in the campaign, she could be a great asset.

Is Condi [Rice] really 'tainted' [by assocation with the Bush Administration] as some seem to claim? I feel she has handled a bloody difficult role with total credit, and I have great respect and admiration for her. From over here, I don't get the street feel you would have, but on her record I would love to see her on the ticket.

In another e-mail Jim said talked about the need in his country and ours for highly skilled immigrants -- in the face of growing anti-immigrant feelings.

"All of us are bound to disagree on some things. I kind of half heard a tv show in the background the other night on our ABC which was interviewing someone with similar views to Marina Kats's. I have been looking for the transcript on their website but it has not come up yet. The interviewee was saying that both of our countries [U.S. and Australia] could lose out badly and the tendency for industry to move offshore could increase if we do not get in more skilled people [immigrants] in a hurry."


He adds, "It is almost impossible [in Australia] to get an electrician [in most non-minerals] industries now because of the mining boom."


Jim's knowledge of American politics is quite amazing when you consider that he's in Queensland, Australia. I love the way he talks about "us," referring to American conservatives. Jim sees himself -- and frankly, is -- one of "us." He's very familiar with what's going on in the New York Times and on ABC.

You can find Jim's remarkable blog at: http://jimunro.blogspot.com/. He describes its nature as:
"Real World Libertarian: The Politics of Liberty and the Defense Thereof." Occupationally, he is a "former farmer, [and] surface and underground driller now moving into [mining] training and consultancy."

I told Jim that "Americans and Aussies" are brothers and sisters under the skin. And as he demonstrates, we are. May it be ever thus.

Gov. Sarah Palin: America's Hope

Trig Paxson Van Palin
Born 6:30 AM, April 18th, 2008
6 pounds, 2 ounces

Trig was not slated to arrive until May 18th, which makes him exactly one month early. Gov. Palin actually went into labor while in Texas for yesterdays Governors Forum, where she delivered the Keynote Address, but flew back to Alaska to give birth at the Mat-Su Valley Regional Medical Center. The Palin family issued the following statement:

"Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed"

NOTE: A friend and fellow Palin supporter from Alaska informs me that among the “special challenges” is the fact that Trig Palin has Downs Syndrome.

Like so many other people who believe Sarah Palin has the potential to be a great vice-president – and ultimately a great President – I continue to urge John McCain to select her as his running mate.

Trig Palin is very lucky to have two such superb people as Todd and Sarah Palin as his parents. All the best to the entire Palin family.

Patrick Ruffini on Sarah Palin

NOTE: THE FIRST SATURDAY COLUMN BELOW IS PATRICK RUFFINI'S EXCELLENT "TOWNHALL" PIECE ON GOV. SARAH PALIN. THE OTHER SATURDAY COLUMN REFLECTS MY COMMENTS ON THE PALIN ARTICLE AND MY ASSESSMENT THAT "EXPERIENCE" IS NOT REALLY AN ISSUE WITH THIS REMARKABLE WOMAN. Please feel free to make comments.


Patrick Ruffini, "The GOP'S North Star," Townhall, September 29, 2007

When Larry Craig brought disrepute onto the Republican house, conservatives did not circle the wagons. They immediately demanded his ouster. Even the party's leadership, normally slow to respond, did the right thing by setting aside Senatorial collegiality and demanding an explanation and eventually his resignation. With the case now a month removed from the headlines, Craig has snuck back in under the wire by delaying his resignation (that's right, after he initially retracted the initial trial balloon earlier this month).

Regardless of its ultimate outcome, the Craig case demonstrates that there is a growing grassroots movement within the Republican Party to clean house before a hostile media and an impatient electorate do it for us. To date, the movement's impact is mostly theoretical. Only 16 House Republicans consistently reject the backscratching earmark gravy train, scoring 100% on the Club for Growth's RePORK Card. And Republicans may be powerless to stop Larry Craig's embarassing flip-flop-flip on resignation.

Sarah Palin, right, is congratulate by former Alaska Gov. Tony Knowles at the election center in Anchorage, Alaska, Tuesday, Aug. 22, 2006, as Palin leads in the Republican gubernatorial primary and Knowles leads in the Democratic primary. The former Wasilla mayor faced former state legislator John Binkley of Fairbanks and incumbent Gov. Frank Murkowski in the race. Former Alaska governor Tony Knowles is expected to beat two lesser-known primary opponents in the Democrat primary.

But there is at least one Republican for whom ethical governance is more than just a theory. Meet Sarah Palin, Alaska's rockstar governor.


The rise of Sarah Palin has been improbable and meteoric. A losing primary candidate for Lieutenant Governor in 2002, Palin was eagerly sought out by then Gov. Frank Murkowski for a number of jobs in his new administration.

After rejecting every job offer up to that point, she eventually settled on the chairmanship of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.

Months later, she resigned after blowing the whistle on ethical improprieties within the Commission. Then she took on the Governor's attorney general/campaign manager and forced him to resign. In 2006, the 43-year old mother of four and mayor of Wasilla challenged Frank Murkowski in the Republican primary.

In a three way race, Palin emerged victorious with a majority of the primary vote while Murkowski took less than 20% in his race for renomination. In the general election, she defeated popular former Governor Tony Knowles by 8 points.

Most candidates stop playing the part of ethical crusader once they win the election. Not Sarah Palin. She immediately rescinded many of Murkowski's midnight appointments, and pushed some of the largest budget cuts in the state's history. As she put it to Fred Barnes in the Weekly Standard , Alaska should be self-sufficient and not subsist off "federal dollars."

That's why Sarah Palin's crusade for clean, efficient government doesn't stop in Alaska. This week, it was Palin who singlehandedly killed the leading symbol of Republican spending excess in Washington: the Bridge to Nowhere.

The Bridge to Nowhere was actually a state project, to be built with funds earmarked by the state's powerful Congressman Don Young. Last week, Palin killed the $398 million bridge to Gravina Island (pop. 50), directing that the money be spent on more "fiscally responsible" projects.

In a small state that generally votes Republican, the divide between Alaska's Republican elected officials could not be more clear. Palin was elected as a whistleblower, and routinely rails against the state's transactional Republican establishment.

Don Young has screamed "It's my money!" when conservative lawmakers challenge his pet projects and blamed the Republican loss of Congress on conservatives who want to cut spending. And Senator Ted Stevens' record as a porker is rivaled only by the patron saint of the West Virginia highway system.

With Palin now in office for the better part of a year, we have some data points to evaluate whose brand of politics works better. A poll out last month put Palin's approval rating at 84%, and Fred Barnes has noted that she's probably America's most popular elected official in any party.

Not content with Palin's public approval numbers as vindication for clean, fiscally responsible government, the Club for Growth decided to do some polling of its own. The Club found that Palin would handily beat Stevens, a 40-year Senate veterans, by 56 to 32 percent in a Republican primary, a number certainly helped along the by ongoing FBI bribery investigation that has implicated Stevens and his son.

When asked about the Bridge to Nowhere, only 25% of Alaska Republicans approved while 66% disapproved. And when Young's own constituents were asked to evaluate his claim that Republicans can only win by bringing home the bacon, they disagreed by wide margins. 71% said it was more important to cut spending, while just 17% endorsed Congress lavishing billions on home state projects.

The idea that more government spending is in the "interest" of the voters back home is being upended by the voters themselves. Republicans need to ride this wave, not fight it as the majority of them do by voting for earmarks on the House and Senate floor. Sarah Palin could be just the leader we need to convince Republicans to return to their roots.

Palin's devoted fans in the blogosphere aren't waiting for the Governor to be anointed by the powers that be. Barely a year into her term, blogs like Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President and Palintology track the Governor's every move, hoping that the GOP nominee will pluck Alaska's rising reformer for a spot on the ticket.

Palin's boosters aren't wrong, just a bit early. Let Palin get a term or two under her belt as governor. And then: watch out Washington.


Patrick Ruffini is an online strategist dedicated to helping Republicans and conservatives achieve dominance in a networked era. He has seen American politics from every vantagepoint — as a campaign staffer, activist, and analyst.

(Note From Steve: Patrick Ruffini is very, very good. In the essay, he provides, even without it being his primary purpose, simple, clear, compelling arguments Republicans can use in electoral and philsophical combat with liberals. Basically, they're variations on things Republicans should say -- but often don't -- such as, "Do you want to reduce taxes or do you want to have your tax money spent on 'The Bridge to Nowhere?'"

AN APPEAL TO GOV. SARAH PALIN: GO FOR IT!

I received the following from Adam Brickley, founder of the Draft Palin Effort:

"Conservative web guru Patrick Ruffini (webmaster for the Bush-Cheney Campaign in 2004) has just posted a glowing column about Gov. Palin on Townhall.com. He even mentions our movement, agreeing with us in principle but saying we're "a bit early". Other than that one quip, his column is spot-on in my opinion. Click here to read the column.Adam BrickleyFounder, palinforvp.blogpsot.com."


Here's the link to Patrick's essay on Sarah ("The GOP's North Star"): http:/townhall.com/columnists/Column.aspxUrlTitle=the_gops_north_star&ns=PatrickRuffini&dt=09/29/2007&page=full&comments=true&submitted=true0188d8c6-5b38-4a6c-a329-b3e76c3cfbcb


Here's My Response to Adam:

Adam, I saw the Patrick Ruffini column saluting Sarah and agree that it's a very good one. A "bit early" doesn't strike me as too extreme in his comment about Sarah and the nation's highest offices.

Soon, perhaps, say by the election in 2008, it won't be "a bit early" for her to be on the national ticket.

Consider: when I was your age (previous century, but not telling exactly which century) freshmen in college were't allowed to play on the varsity football and basketball teams. The idea was that they (and even sophomores) were't "ready." Of course, we found out that was not true -- and, in some cases, it was absolutely absurd.

Today, in Charlottesville, Virginia, the University of Pittsburgh football team will start a freshman at QB and another one at running back. three years ago, West Virginia University started two freshmen in the backfrield and both got some mention for All-American teams. I guess they were a lot more "ready" than people might have imagined.

I even disagree with my friend Malia in Hawaii some on the question of Sarah's readiness to assume the presidency if necessary. I think she is in fact ready now (if it became necessary) to lead this country -- mainly because leadership is a question of character, willingness to listen and learn, and a desire to serve the "governed."

More and more people look at Sarah and soon begin to wonder: "Is there any space left on Mr. Rushmore?" One recent blog noted Sarah's ridiculously low 4% disapproval rating (and nearly 90% approval) and proclaimed: "She's More Popular Than Kittens." She has touched the hearts of her constituents in a way we've not seen with any other elected official.

People used to pester us with questions about Sarah's "stand" on the War on Terror. When her son Track, age 18, enlisted in the Army on 9/11-2007, I think we learned all we need to about the Palin family's views on that subject.

Sarah Palin has a connection with key issues (including the WOT) that is more direct and personal -- than any other candidate under consideration for President or V-P. She has more knowledge on critical issues -- especially energy and the environment. She rejects the view that top elected official has to be some sort of egomanic. Instead, she sees herself a "a willing servant."

This is a remarkable woman, and we don't even have the right to ask her to be more remarkable.

Adam, I'd compare Sarah in some ways to the founder of the Draft Palin movement -- which happens to be you. You're 20 years old. You're much "too young" (in the minds of some) to have accomplished what you have -- turning this effort into the largest such grass-roots undertaking now underway. I guess the fact that it's "a bit early" to achieve such things means you should have devoted your time to "normal" college activities, such as kegging, painting your face with the school colors, chasing girls, etc.

Right now, you're the same age Bill Gates was when he dropped out of Harvard to form the company that became Microsoft.

I've osaid that if Sarah were a Democrat, she'd be right up on the stage with Hillary, Obama, and the others. Even with her short tenure as Governor, she has more executive experience than Mrs. Clinton and Obama combined.

We Republicans tend to place a lot of value on "experience," which usually means that we end up running candidates who are eligible for Medicare and Social Security. Dick Cheney is a fine man, but he's too ill, too old, and too widely disliked to be an asset to George W. Bush. As for Dan Quayle, I don't know about his "experience," but he didn't have the intellect , dynamism, or candor of a person like Sarah Palin.

Someone (John Ehrlichman I think) once asked Richard Nixon why he chose Spiro Agnew as his running mate. Nixon said, "Because no one in his right mind would think of assassinating me."

As a political Party, we can do better, much better. Adam, the success of your "Sarah Project" derives from your initial perception that we as Republicans can't continue running a bunch of aging, exhausted Caucasian males. Frankly, we don't want to be a Party mainly appealing to "angry, old white guys." There's no future in that approach.

Like anyone in high office, Sarah would need good people around her. (Adam, you should be one of those people -- and Patrick Ruffini and Fred Barnes should be others. So should some of the people that received my e-mail today on this subject.)

In all candor, the kind of "experience" Sarah lacks is the type that seems to produce mainly Beltway Cynicism and the politicization of every aspect of an indvidual's being. Adam, at some point in our lifetime, we want someone on the ticket -- as V-P nominee first and later as presidential nominee -- who has the potential to be a Washington, a Lincoln, a Truman, or a Reagan.

If not Sarah, who? If not now, when?

Steve Maloney
"All Sarah (Almost) All the Time"

Note: I'll put up Patrick's entire article later today (Saturday)

WHY SARAH PALIN FOR THE NATION'S HIGHEST OFFICES?

NOTE: I HAVE SOME REGULAR VISITORS THAT I KNOW A LOT ABOUT AND SOME ABOUT WHOM I KNOW NOTHING. DON'T BE AFRAID TO LEAVE YOUR NAME AND THOUGHTS. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH WHAT I SAY, YOU MAY JUST BE IN THE MAJORITY. ANYWAY, THANKS FOR STOPPING BY. -- STEVE


But why Gov. Sarah Palin for the nation's highest offices? She's scrupulously honest, which puts her at odds with the state's pervasively corrupt Republican office holders.

She's able to win elections against both powerful Republicans (Frank Murkowski) and Democrats (Tony Knowles). She's completely uninterested in using political office to enrich herself and her family. She's BOTH a female professional AND a working mother. She's not only FOR the "workingman," she's married to one (commercial fisherman and oil field production worker).

She's a devoted Christian whose religious beliefs have NOT curdled into sanctimony and self-congratulation.She not only "supports" our troops, but also has a beloved son -- Track -- who's one of them.

She's an expert on energy and the environment, two of the great issues of our time. She's a lifetime advocate of the sanctity of life and gun rights, but does a minimum of pandering on either.

That's why I support Sarah Palin for vice-president and, in God's own good time, for President. Those with eyes to see detect signs there of another Washington, Lincoln, or Reagan. She's a person whose communication skills and character have earned her the nation's highest approval ratings.

She's a breath of fresh air in a political atmosphere -- Republican and Democrat -- that's generally stultifying. For a nation in need of strong leadership, Sarah is the best our nation has.

Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA

RUDY & SARAH: VICTORY in 2008

Sarah Palin and husband Todd in Dillingham, Alaska, with Alaska Teacher of the Year Ina Boucher

Diana Lynn Irey, Washington County (PA) Commissioner who gained a national following in her heroic campaign against John Murtha, is endorsing Rudy Giuliani for President. In 2006, Giuliani campaigned tirelessly for two conservative Pennsylvania Republicans: Senatorial candidate Rick Santorum and gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swann. Thanks Rudy. In the words of Sarah Palin (spoken about her son), "We have your back."

John Hawkins August 10, 2007 column (J.C.'s Corner) in "The Forgotten Street" gives a salute to Sarah Palin and the grass roots effort (led by Adam Brickley at http://palinforvp.blogspot.com).

He also mentions as possible females for higher office Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutcheson and Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. I am opposed to either Kay (whom I like a lot) or Marsha (who is a fine congresswoman) getting consideration for higher office.

It makes no sense -- check out the Cheney fiasco -- to nominate people for Vice-President who have no chance, either because of age, health problems, or lack of energy -- to have a opportunity to run for President. That eliminates Kay Hutcheson.

What about Marsha Blackburn? She's only 55 years of age and she has a good record as a Tennessee state Senator and as a congresswoman, where she's been cited as one of the best "new" representatives. She's pretty, blonde, and relentlessly Republican.

However, Rep. Blackburn won her congressional seat in one of the most Republican districts in America -- an area stretching from the suburbs of Nashville to the suburbs of Memphis. In other words, she represents the classic GOP base: people who are white, generally affluent, and almost reflexively Republican.

Early in the presidential campaign,Blackburn was a staunch backer of Mitt Romney. Later, she switched her allegiance to her home-state candidate Fred Thompson.

To win elections -- and to avoid repeating the disaster of 2006 -- Republicans don't need to solidify the (Southern or Southwestern, white,well-off, significantly evangelical) base. Frankly, attractive as she is personally and politically, Mrs. Blackburn doesn't really add strength to the Republican ticket.

Exactly who is she going to attract that we don't have already?

In the coming election, a Republican who wants to win must contest effectively in states like Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and -- yes -- in Hillary's New York. The Republican Party in Ohio, usually a must-win state, is in disrepair, and Hillary will carry that state. She may also carrry Florida and Colorado, both with big Hispanic bases mainly ticked off at the Republican Party's stance on immigration.

Since 2004, the number of people who identify themselves as Republicans has declined by about 10%. The number who identify themselves as Democrats has risen by about 10%. Also, the number of Independents who lean Democratic has increased substantially.

In New Hampshire, three-fourths of the Independents say they will vote in the Democratic primary. Let me beat the networks by about 14 months and "declare" the Sununu Senate seat in New Hampshire lost. The Virginia Senate Seat vacated by Republican Warner? Also a sure loss against an extremely popular Democrat.

Republicans have problems with the following voting segments: Blacks, Hispanics, young people (voters under 35), women professionals (teachers, journalists, doctors, lawyers), gays (about 5% of the electorate in most states), and younger evangelicals. (In 2006, Democrats got 27% of the evangelical vote, up from 21% in 2004).

A person like Mrs. Blackburn might help some with female professionals, but I see her as a net negative with the other key groups.

Traditionally, the Republican Party has nominated aging male Caucasians. All too often, as I've said before, the vice-presidential choice has been an individual who's one or more of the following: aged, or corrupt, or unelectable. When asked why he put Agnew on the ticket in 1972, Nixon replied, "Because no one in his right mind would want to assassinate me." Maybe that comment gives some insight into Bush, Sr.'s curious allegiance to the intellectually challenged Dan Quayle.

Recently, the web site race42008 had a discussion about the GOP's presidential nominee's "need" to have a Black running-male (there being no Black females imaginable) on the ticket. The participants came up with every conceivable Black other than O. J. Simpson and Michael Vick. It was a sad display of tokenism and political naivete.

But why Sarah Palin? She's scrupulously honest, which puts her at odds with the state's pervasively corrupt Republican office holders. She's able to win elections against both powerful Republicans (Frank Murkowski) and Democrats (Tony Knowles). She's completely uninterested in using political office to enrich herself and her family.

She's BOTH a female professional AND a working mother. She's not only FOR the "workingman," she's married to one (commercial fisherman and oil field production worker). She's a devoted Christian whose religious beliefs have NOT curdled into sanctimony and self-congratulation.

She not only "supports" our troops, but also has a beloved son -- Track -- who's one of them. She's an expert on energy and the environment, two of the great issues of our time. She's a lifetime advocate of the sanctity of life and gun rights, but does a minimum of pandering on either.

That's why I support Sarah Palin for vice-president and, in God's own good time, for President. Those with eyes to see detect signs there of another Washington, Lincoln, or Reagan. She's a person whose communication skills and character have earned her the nation's highest approval ratings.

She's a breath of fresh air in a political atmosphere -- Republican and Democrat -- that's generally stultifying.

The new national polls are coming out today. The Democratic version shows Hillary Clinton increasing her lead over Obama and Edwards, in keeping with her Gallup Poll ranking as the most popular woman in America -- Oprah is second.

The Republican Poll is as follows:

Rudy Giuliani 30%
Fred Thompson 22%
John McCain 16%
Mitt Romney 09%
Mike Huckabee 04%

One notable point in the poll is that Thompson is taking support from Huckabee. I'm hoping that Mike, a wonderful man, will read the handwriting on the wall and throw his support to Rudy Giuliani. When the time comes, I believe John McCain, a true American hero, will do the same.

George W. Bush, who knows something about winning elections, has said that the national polls are very important this time around because the primary itself will be "a national one." He's referring to the fact that 60%-plus of the nation will vote from the Florida primary (January 29) through Super Tuesday on Feb. 5.

In Pennsylvania, which will hold a "late" primary, Giuliani seems to have an insurmountable lead.

I strongly urge people interested in voting in the general election for someone other than Mrs. Clinton to back Rudy Giuliani. He's already focusing on the Democrats and has completely refrained from attacking Republicans.

I also urge Republicans to ask (beg?) Rudy to choose as his running mate Sarah Heath Palin.

Anyone who has seen Sarah in action will recognize that she will never be "Rudy's token." With her, Rudy will have his hands full, which is as it should be. I don't expect her to discard any of her core beliefs.

Together, they can supply dynamic leadership in a time when the country desperately needs it.

Stephen R. Maloney
Ambridge, PA

From today's Anchorage Daily News (http://adn.com): Following in the footsteps of North Dakota. Gov. Sarah Palin has been picked to serve as chair of Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission in 2007-08, according to a state-issued press release. Palin succeeds North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven as head of the group, which promotes the conservation and efficient recovery of the nation’s oil and natural gas resources.

NOTE: MUCH OF MY EFFORT BETWEEN NOW AND SUPER TUESDAY (FEB. 5, 2008) WILL BE ON BEHALF OF RUDY GIULIANI'S CANDIDACY FOR THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION. AT THE SAME TIME, I'LL DEVOTE AS MUCH TIME AS I CAN TO THE OTHER CANDIDATES I SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY GOV. SARAH HEATH PALIN OF ALASKA AND DIANA LYNN IREY OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Evangelical Extremism is Destroying Mike Huckabee's campaign:

On Mike Huckabee's main blog today (Tuesday), he reprints a letter from Dr. L. White, a Lutheran pastor in Houston. I urge you to read it -- and also read some of White's anti-American tirades. Here's my response to the White letter and his other writings, especially "God and Caesar," which is available at: http://mtio.com/articles/bissar55.htm

I've posted a comment on Gov. Huckabee's blog about Dr. Laurence White. I don't know whether it will get printed. I've probably written enough about Dr. White, a thoroughly evil egomaniac.

In his essay "God and Caesar," White compares America to Nazi Germany, saying the following: "America finds itself today in the midst of a moral catastrophe. We have cast aside the most basic standards of human decency. We have broken marriages and fractured families. Our youth are losing their way and often their lives in a maze of alcohol and drugs. We live in the midst of a culture that mistakes lust for love and tolerates the vilest perversions as acceptable alternate lifestyles while pestilence stalks the land. Our public schools have become facilitators for fornication and procurers for the abortionists knife. America has sown the wind of immorality and we are reaping the whirlwind of destruction and death. We have degenerated into a nation rolling in luxury, reveling in excess, rollicking in pleasure, revolting in morals, and rotting in sin. Personal responsibility, duty and honor have been abandoned in our mindless pursuit of instant gratification for our every desire."

Frankly, people who agree with Dr. White should not spend time blogging for Mike. Rather, if things were anywhere near as bad as he says, the proper response would be to engage in violent revolution. Dr. White's extremist comments are the kind that influence "pro-life-killers" like Eric Rudolph and Paul Hill.

Why is an attractive and articulate candidate like Mike Huckabee getting only a dismal 4% in the latest national polls? I fear it's because many Americans somehow associate Mike and his cause with the Dr. Whites of the world.

The Huckabee campaign made a major mistake in posting White's vicious screed against America. The country is not about to elect anyone who has a deep loathing for this country.

The Huckabee campaign disavowed the anti-Catholic statements of one its supporters (Dr. Ride in Iowa). It should do the same with White's comments.

TWO VIEWS OF MIKE HUCKABEE: MATT & STEVE

Note: As the week goes on, I'll talk about a few of the many columns I've written on Gov. Sarah Heath Palin and why I think she would be a dynamic -- and successful -- candidate for the nation's highest offices. On my blogroll you'll find dozens of bloggers who support Sarah for the nation's highest offices. If you'd like to "sign-up" as a Sarah supporter, please contact Adam Brickley at his site (http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/)

Before that, however, I'll talk about correspondence I've received from Matt in Washington state (http://senseinpolitics.blogspot.com/) and John Hawkins in Florida (http://theforgottenstreet.com/)

In response to my recent column indicating that I believe the Mike Huckabee's effort to get the Republican nomination cannot not succeed, Matt in Washington state sent me the following e-mail:

Stephen, I saw your posting in which you say you withdraw Mike Huckabee from consideration. I understand your reasons why, and let me add some [about] why I support Huckabee. It is because he has articulated so eloquently things I have been thinking of for quite some time. Things I would expound on if I were running for political office. Positions I would collectively call " Practical Conservatism." He seems to be trying to lead the conservative movement away from vitriol and rhetoric to more practical solutions to problems. That is where you and I are.

As for his winning, well, he could just be another Goldwater. He'll blaze the trail for another person who will come along and say the same things to a more receptive audience. I think that some of his ideas are light years ahead of what is currently being preached as policy, particularly in the realm of health care. Because he thinks outside the box, and because he holds to his principles while still being likable, he is the one I am truly fired up about. Some had the same feeling for Bobby Kennedy.

But I am realistic, I will be satisfied if Giuliani or McCain get in (hopefully with Gov. Palin). Giuliani being president won't mean that we'll have more abortions in this country, and I doubt that the current status would change even if Huckabee got in. Giuliani comes across as urbane and sophisticated; heck, he's from New York! Sure he's had issues in his personal life that make me have a few questions. But we've had a divorced man as Commander in Chief -- Reagan, who also was Republican -- so that should be put to rest. Giuliani has crossover appeal, and could actually put my state (Washington) in play.

I want to run for office someday, and I think that a variation of Huckabee's platform would appeal to the large number of Independents we have here. I'd have to be looked at as a moderate if I wanted any chance of winning statewide office as a Republican.

This e-mail has run longer than I originally wanted, but I wanted to say check out my newest posting today on "Gun Control for Criminals" and let me know what you think.

Thanks for listening . . .

Matt (E-mail at: corpsole2@olypen.com)


Steve's Response: Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of the man. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (Admittedly, in the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.)

What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states). Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.

Can Mike Huckabee possibly have a dramatic surge among primary voters? In that regard, one candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9% in late November, 2003 and was at 52% in February, 2004. (Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.)

In the race for 2008, the only real movement in the polls over the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.

By the way, one national poll showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who say they aren't going to vote for Rudy in the primary still have a favorable view of him.

I've read that nearly six-out-of-ten Americans haven't seen so much as ONE debate. The current campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.

Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be gravitating toward Rudy. Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of passing.

Also, he's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.

Overall, Mike Huckabee should have a bright political future. With Fred Thompson, I believe his political career is behind him.

If I had to go way out on a limb, I'd guess the Democratic ticket will be: Clinton-Richardson. The Republican ticket may well be Giuliani-Palin.

Steve (e-mail at: TalkTop65@aol.com)

FRED THOMPSON & THE "DEAD CAT BOUNCE": "NO PASSION . . . NO ZEAL"

Picture of Fred Thompson, second wife, and youngest children

Note: I'll continue my "scum of the earth" series on Democratic Senators (Robert Byrd, Jay Rockefeller, Edward M. Kennedy, and others) next week.

NOTE: NEXT WEEK I'LL ENDORSE A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT. OBVIOUSLY, IT WON'T BE FRED THOMPSON! IT ALSO WON'T BE MIKE HUCKABEE, WHO IS IN SOME WAYS THE MOST ATTRACTIVE CANDIDATE. MIKE MAY IN FACT HAVE A BRIGHT FUTURE, BUT IT WON'T INCLUDE WINNING EITHER THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION OR THE GENERAL ELECTION.

Fred Thompson!!!!

Fred Thompson????

Former Senator Thompson's presidential campaign has experienced what stock traders call a "dead cat bounce." That refers to a stock whose price drops precipitously and then rises slightly, only to continue its downward trend. The concept behind the phrase is that, if it's dropped from a high enough point, even a "dead cat" will bounce.

Many evangelical Christians urged Thompson to enter the presidential race. However, he didn't exactly take off like a rocket. Evangelical Christian and Focus on the Family guru James Dobson expressed his disappointment with Thompson by saying the candidate had "no passion . . . no zeal."

Dobson got it right. Thompson is in his 66th year -- note: I'm 67 -- and he looks it and acts it. He's eligible for both Social Security and Medicare. Saddled with non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, Thompson is a chronic (mild) belcher and throat-clearer. He usually looks like a man who needs a good nap.

Let's face it: Fred Thompson is a boring guy. He's charisma-challenged. In many ways, he's a living embodiment of Arthur Branch, his character on "Law & Order," a man who never met a risk he wouldn't prefer to avoid.

Prior to announcing his candidacy on "The Jay Leno Show," Thompson ran for the presidency in a manner reminiscent of Warren Gamaliel Harding's Ohio-centric "Front Porch Campaign.".

In Thompson's case, the campaign consisted mainly of regular columns on Townhall.com, a web-site known for the almost total predictability of every comment that appears there. He also gave occasional speeches to the kind of conservative groups that still revere the sacred memory of William Howard Taft.

One observer described Thompson's speaking style as consisting of "conservative cliches . . . punctuated by long pauses." His style with essays isn't much better.

An excellent blogger on townhall, GenXDad, analyzed the many essays Thompson's staff produced for Townhall. He found the pieces only one-step up from the ancient Zen question that asks: "What is the sound of one hand clapping." The answer of course is: silence. GenXDad found nothing insightful or exciting in the Thompson essays. He describes reading them as an eerie experience. http://genxdad.townhall.com/

How can a man produce so many essays and have so little to say? It's like Robert Frost at his lamest: "Good fences make good neighbors . . . something there is that doesn't love a wall."

Actuarial charts suggest that Thompson many not live long enough to see those beautiful children above graduate from elementary school. From the looks of him, his chances of making it to Election Day appear to be about 50-50.

He's announced that even with his now-dormant cancer, his life expectancy will be "normal." In fact, by Inauguration Day in 2009, Thompson will already have exceeded the life expectancy for someone born in 1942.

He's a man with an uneasy relationship with the future. As a Senator after 9/11, he announced that "Now is not the time to leave [his position]." Shortly thereafter, he left.

He should have stayed -- even though of course he could make A LOT more money on TV. .

In reading about Thompson's life, one keeps wondering: what on earth was the man thinking? I realize that a fair number (not enough) people like Fred Thompson, although I can't understand why. He's a guy who chucks social conservatives uner the chin -- but provides no coherent explanation of how he would lead this country.

For example, what was he thinking when he divorced Sharon Elizabeth Lindsey (Thompson), his wife of 26 years? Also, in his lucrative lobbying career, what was he thinking when one of his "pro bono" clients was the dictator of Haiti? And what was he thinking when his TV work on "Law and Order" consisted of laboring for Richard Wolf, a Moveon.org-type who can't figure out which he hates worse: Christians (usually portrayed as lunatics or perverts), Dick Cheney, or the Iraq War?

Was it all about the money? I'll rely on Jerry Maguire to answer that one.

Thompson isn't seeking the presidency with anything resembling enthusiasm. He says he wants the office because there are "things" he could only accomplish in that office. One is almost afraid to ask what those "things" might be.

For some months, I've been fearful of being too candid about some of the presidential candidates. I didn't want to do anything that would detract from the candidacy of Gov. Sarah Palin for vice-president (and, eventually, for President). But Sarah's character and accomplishments can stand on their own. I hope no one defects from Sarah because of something I say, but if they do, so be it. Fearful is not my style.

Thompson is not the man for the presidency. I don't see a single state he could carry in a general election that Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, and Romney also couldn't win. Do you?

I expect his campaign -- lacking in passion, substance, and probably money -- to fizzle out. There's no evidence he can raise enough money -- or build a strong organization -- to compete effectively in the Super Tuesday states on Feb. 5, 2008.

Thompson's bowing out of the race, which may happen this calendar year, would be good for America and, frankly, good for him. "Run, Fred, run?" Only if he's running away from his bad decision to announce as a candidate for the nation's highest office.

Now is not the time, and he is not the man.

Stephen R. Maloney

Ambridge, PA

One lady formerly from Pittsburgh and now living in Tennessee responded to my post by saying that "Thompson was a great Senator, and he will make a great President!"

In fact, no one, including Thompson claims he was a great Senator. When he was asked what he had accomplished in his terms there, he responded (in paraphrase, but close), "Well, sometimes it the things you DON'T do that matter most." He did excel at not doing things. One thing he didn't do, because he left after saying he wouldn't, was to play any kind of positive role in the War on Terror (although he's recently said he's for it).

Instead, he worked for a TV producer -- Richard Wolf -- who has made the "Law and Order" series the television equivalent of Moveon.org. As Lucy's Ricky Ricardo put it, "He has a heap of 'splaining to do."

Tomorrow, I'll post comments by my friend John Hawkins (of "The Forgotten Street") who hopes Thompson is a conservative. In my case, I've not seen anything that suggests he is electable. He's just another low-energy, aging white guy who will get chopped to ribbons in the general election. He's Bob Dole, circa 1996.

According to Gallup, the most popular male politician in America is Bill Clinton. Also according to Gallup, the most popular female -- politician or otherwise -- in the U.S. is Hillary Clinton (with Oprah second).

You figure it out.

Palin, Hart, Irey, Jindal, Wilson, Pippy: They Deserve Your Support

NOTE: ON OCTOBER 3, 2007, I'M GOING TO ENDORSE A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT. I'VE SAID FAVORABLE THINGS ABOUT SEVERAL OF THOSE WHO ARE IN CONTENTION, BUT I'LL PICK THE ONE MOST LIKELY TO CHOOSE SARAH PALIN AS HIS RUNNING MATE. "BUSINESS-AS-USUAL" IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE FOR REPUBLICANS. WE NEED A DYNAMIC AND DIVERSE TICKET, ONE WHERE THE CANDIDATES MAY EVEN DISAGREE (IMAGINE THAT!) ON A FEW SIGNIFICANT ISSUES.

Also on October 3, 2007, Diana Lynn Irey, a Washington County (PA) Commissioner will hold a fundraiser/reception south of Pittsburgh, PA. Attendees who will participate in a political roundtable include: former Senator Rick Santorum, former congresswoman (and candidate to regain her seat) Melissa Hart, and State Senator and Iraq War veteran James Pippy. This will be a meeting of Republican political heavyweights, and I'll report on what they have to say.

If you're interested in attending, please let me know, and I've give you further details.

At the get-together, I intend to promote the candidacy of Sarah Palin for the vice-presidential slot and for the presidency in either 2012 or 2016, or both (depending on the circumstances). I'm hoping that Sarah might just show up as a mystery guest. People like Sarah, Diana, James, and Melissa (formerly my congresswoman) are the best our Party has to offer. They're individuals who adhere to the highest ethical standards and commit themselves totally to representing their constituents.

As I've indicated previously, I'm going to devote this blog primarily to promoting the candidacies of people like Diana, Rick, Melissa, and James. I hope to raise some money for them, but my main goal is to build a base of activists who solicit votes for the candidates.

Two other individuals are very much on my online radar: Heather A. Wilson, congresswoman from the Albuquerque area, and "Bobby" Jindal, a Lousiana congressman who's running for the gubernatorial seat now held by Kathleeen Blanco.

It's essential that Republican activists focus on supporting people who can build the Party. Such people don't even give off a whiff of scandal. They recognize the need to broaden the base of the Party. They have participated in tough elections -- and won them. Specifically, they know how to attract not only Republicans, but also Independents and Democrats.

My highlighted candidates will be mainly (but not exclusively) women. Why? Because the Republican Party desperately needs more females in all elective offices.

Right now, there are three Republican women governors -- and five Democrats. In the U.S. Senate, there are five Republican females -- and 11 Democrats. In the House, there are 21 Republican women -- and 50 Democrats. We need more Republicans of the female "persuasion" running for such offfices, and winning them.

We need candidates of both sexes with whom voters can identify. Take Sarah Palin of Alasksa. She's a wife and a mother (of four children). She not only "supports our troops," but is the mother of one. She's married to an authentic working man, Todd. She's an expert on energy and the environment. She's a true reformer, committed to cleansing her Party of corrupt individuals. She knows how to run against entrenched opponents, Republican and Democrat, and defeat them at the polls.

Currently, she's the most popular elected official in the country -- and for good reasons. For Alaskans, she's not just THE governor. She's THEIR governor. She "has their backs."

The other candidates I'm strongly recommending have similar qualities. They're fine people, and they deserve your backing.

Stephen R. Maloney

P.S. I'm asking readers to recommend perhaps two more candidates who are exemplary people. Please leave the name(s) in either a comment or an e-mail to me: TalkTop65@aol.com.

My wife and I visited our family doctor, Kathleen Osten of Ambridge Area Healthcare, today. Kathleen is an Air Force veteran (who served at the base in Wichita Falls, TX). Her partners are Donna Craig, also an Air Force veteran, and Michael Karp, an Army veteran who's made several humanitarian visits to Africa. I've encountered many physicians over the years, but these three "vets" are the absolute best.

Kathleen has three young children, and she works two-three days a week. I asked her today when she got time off, and she said, "When I sleep."

Once when my wife Pat (who's disabled) and I went in, I mentioned that my spouse needed a pap smear. Kathleen looked over at Pat and said, "Lucky her." Imagine that: a doctor with a sense of humor!

She's a great reader of body language and tone of voice. I come from the generation that generally fibs to doctors, and she invariably catches me.

How do medical doctors become veterans? In most cases, the military is paying for their medical school training -- in return for several years of service. In short, these are "ordinary people" who are bright enough to get into med school, but generally lack the $200,000-plus needed to pay for it.

I asked Kathleen what she thought of her time in Wichita Falls. She said, "I loved it." I have a hunch she loves most of the things -- and people -- in her life. I have news for Kathleen: her patients also love her.