Again this year we are being put to sleep by bowl games before, on, and after New Years Day because they are meaningless. There is only one game that counts. That comes on Monday night, January 7 when Ohio State meets LSU to decide the national championship, which is still as mythical as it was thirty years ago. There is a simple solution to this, but not simple enough for the dunderheads of the NCAA.

            Here is how it would have worked this year. The top eight teams are selected much as the selection process works now. Sure there would be controversy and complaining. Good grief, you have that when the top 65 are selected for the NCAA basketball tournament. But nothing like the idiocy that arbitrarily surrounds picking the top two in football. You pair these off, 1-8, 2-7, etc. and play those four games on and around New Years Day accommodating some of those traditional Bowl games. The ratings would SKYROCKET. Four teams are going to live for another day.

            This year the other day(s) would be January 13, prime time, after the last NFL playoff game of the weekend, and that Monday night, the 14^th.  Now we’re down to the two best teams based on head to head playoffs. What a novel idea! The championship game is scheduled for, no, not a Monday night, when kids have to go to bed at halftime. This year the game would be played either on January 26 or 27, the DEAD weekend in between the NFL conference championships and the Super Bowl. It’s a marketing bonanza all the way, actually adding three games of revenue for the NCAA.

            I want the Buckeyes to win the championship game. I just want some credibility to that championship every year. I covered the solution in the two preceding paragraphs. It extends the season and compromises the school schedule of only four universities in the country. Yet, I believe it’s still too complicated for the NCAA to adopt.         

            During World War II German generals feared being assigned to the Russian or eastern front. This was always a joke in the old “Hogan’s Heroes” comedy. No joke this week for David Petraeus who had to face the “western front” in the war on terror. The enemy on the western front he faces is the democrats in Congress who have done everything within their power to lose the war in Iraq except cutting off funding.

For the democrats, what will it be? Over the summer their presidential candidates were all over the map. John Edwards said the war on terror was a bumpa sticka. B. Obama said let’s o’bomba Pakistan. Hillary will end the war in January 2009. But wait! She will leave 70,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq! Dennis the Menace has a plan to end the war. He went to Syria, sure that they can help.

But their current plans won’t just end the war, they’ll lose the war. Even with the surge showing promising results the democrats choose to lose.  They are bent on hanging an Iraq defeat on George W. Bush. In 2002 there was a strong bi-partisan vote for the war resolution. That will teach us all to count on any Democrat to follow up their vote with support for our military. Within a few months after the overthrow of Sadam, Ted Kennedy was calling Iraq George Bush’s Vietnam.

The truth is democrats have willed for this war to turn out like Vietnam. Their accomplices in the corrupt mainstream media have kept a steady drumbeat of criticism against American actions. While jihadists were cutting off heads and committing acts of terrorism, our troops and leaders were trashed for keeping terrorists alive in prisons. John Kerry came through with criticizing the troops, just like when he returned from Vietnam. Hey, it’s déjà vu, all over again. The continuous whining, opposition to funding, and calls for retreat have emboldened the enemy. To borrow a title from an old book “None Dare Call It Treason”.

So I think the least we can do is reward democrats by calling them the “Party of Vietnam”. When the administration began to draw comparisons with Vietnam last month, the response from the democrats was fast and furious. “No comparison”! I think someone touched a nerve. We abandoned South Vietnam in 1975 when a democrat Congress would not fund aid to defend against an (illegal war?) attack by North Vietnam in violation of the peace treaty. Ted Kennedy led the way. America was disrespected around the world for its broken promises. We turned to Jimmy Carter, one of the most hapless presidents in history. Communism advanced around the world. Carter encouraged the fall of the Shah of Iran, and Iran went to war against us. That’s the kind of future we’re inviting if we put a democrat back in the White House in 2008.

General Patraeus returns to Iraq after being subjected to the enemy in Washington with their insults and pompous bloviations. Can we win this battle against two fronts? It’s been said America does not lose wars on foreign battlefields, but at home in Washington. The democrats will never say it but their actions say “We will let nothing stand in the way of defeat”.

           When George W. Bush nominated Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court and received the appropriate blowback from conservatives, the corrupt mainstream media (CMM) said it was the beginning of a conservative crackup. The CMM’s ideal scenario is always Republicans fighting Republicans. They wanted to sit back and watch the GOP duke it out over Bush’s pick. If talk radio attacked the president, so much the better. But Rush Limbaugh correctly labeled the debate the “conservative crackdown”. And because conservatives stuck to their principles, we got Sam Alito, one of the most qualified nominees ever for the high court.

            What happened over the last month with the ill-fated amnesty immigration bill was Conservative Crackdown II. There is merit to the argument that with only 22% of the public in support of this bill it was more than conservatives that stopped it. But realistically, without due diligence from talk radio, greatly assisted by groups like National Review, the Heritage Foundation, and the bloggers, this bill would have been rammed through the Senate. Powerful forces were behind this bill, including almost all business lobbies, immigrant groups, and the democrat party seeking a new voting block.

            The latter factor prompted fear and intimidation among establishment Republicans. Even conservative columnists like Bob Novak lamented this as being a “bad issue” for the GOP. This was it, another conservative crackup. In the aftermath of the cloture defeat on Thursday the political calculations go forward. I’m dismayed when I see conservative commentators lamenting that 2008 is over for Republicans because of this vote. It’s time to set the record straight and dispel the myths that ran rampant over the last month.

“We have to do something now!”

Comprehensive immigration reform had to be done in 2007, or else. Actually, the first statement was true. The “something” is enforcing the law. Over and over American said they want the government to show they can enforce the border and other laws long on the books. This bill fell apart because people no longer trust the government’s promises. The actions to rush over a thousand pages of legislation through without committee hearings, and virtually no debate were shameless. The substance of the bill was never debated. Many details were better discussed on talk radio than the Senate floor. The truth behind the statement was we have to legalize these people now because their illegal status makes us look bad and our big business friends need cheap labor. The most accurate revision of the statement is “We have to do something first” (prove we can enforce the law).

“Hatred and bigotry are motivating the opponents of immigration reform”

We always expect the liberals to play the race card and they did not disappoint. But a Republican president? Again helpful (?) conservatives like Bob Novak jumped in and made statements such as “I don’t understand where the hostility is coming from.” The hostility was coming from millions of informed Americans, but not, for the most part, aimed at illegal immigrants, but at the government. I used this analogy. When I hear of a drunk driver who had 10 previous convictions, just killed two people in an accident, I feel anger. But my anger is not so much at the drunk driver, but at a system that allowed him to be on the road and did not protect two of my fellow citizens. I am comparing the logic, not two very different crimes.

“Maybe the motivation of our government is to help fund social security”

We can only wish these senators were so shrewd and had fiscally sound motives. The truth is the government never did any cost/benefit analysis in any area of this bill. We don’t need to be “smarter by half” to figure out the motivations. Democrats are attempting to import a voting block and alienate Latinos from Republicans. Republicans are getting big-time pressure from all business interests to legalize cheap labor. One of the most revealing statements was made by Arlen Spector who said senators are not swayed by public opinion. Usually that’s true. Senators are swayed by special interests and contributions – UNTIL their phone system gets shutdown.

“It’s a bad issue for Republicans”

This is a bad issue for everyone who supported this bill. Only 22% of the public supported this bill. The telling point of this was the deafening silence coming from the presidential candidates from the senate over the last two week. This was a McCain/Kennedy bill. Anyone remember John McCain’s last statement on this bill. I think it may have been that “F” word confrontation with John Cornyn about three weeks ago, accompanied by McCain’s plummet in the polls. Anyone heard Hillary and Obama speak out strongly on this bill in the last two weeks. They just hope nobody notices their votes. This is why senators do not become president. I think it will be true again.

So what comes next? Just like social security which is in bad need of a fix, nothing will happen. It would be nice if the Senate would live up to its historic reputation, slow down, have hearings, and craft sound legislation to address the millions of illegal aliens who are here. However our politicians are cowards who would rather play the politics against both ends. Thankfully, there are some exceptions. Some stars in this fight were Jeff Sessions and Jim Demint. Put a presidential ticket together with these two true conservatives and I would wager them going all the way on the issues they champion.

The Republican obituaries are being written by the CMM. Republicans are dead in 2008. I’m so glad I can look back and see how often they have been wrong. Democrats will continue to exploit this issue for politics and power. They’ll blame Republicans for “failure” and Bush will not be exempt. Republicans better be on the offense promoting enforcement of the law, and strengthening that area, the clear message from the people of this country. You can always hold your head up and sleep at night if you’ve done the right thing, but you have to make your case to the public – over and over again.

            They threw the bums out in Ohio last year. Discontent with Republican performance in office was warranted. Bob Taft earned his distinction as the governor with the lowest popularity in the country. Mike Dewine earned the scorn of conservatives by aligning with John McCain on one too many issues (the gang of 14). So Ohio voters decided democrats were the default answer. As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for.

            Early in March new Governor Ted Strickland announced he was proposing a moratorium on charter schools and an end to school vouchers. Big surprise. Liberals hate choice in education. It tends to unsettle those teachers unions that are so important when union dues are forwarded to the DNC. One problem with the proposal is that many democrat voters are using those vouchers. It is unclear if the most popular program in Cleveland is on the chopping block. What is clear is that Cleveland is not a Republican stronghold.

            Strickland is moving under the guise of fiscal stress in the Ohio budget, but the school voucher elimination is a dubious strategy for solving funding problems in education. Less dubious is the fact that people like to have that choice and have exercised it to a great extent in Ohio. If we are going to have equal opportunity for citizens, it will only be possible if we start with our youngest citizens, at the grade school level.

            But Strickland did not stop with that to put his mark on Ohio education. He wants to eliminate the abstinence education programs. The governor says he sees no evidence these programs have “made a difference”. I wonder what parents he has consulted. Again, liberals do not like abstinence programs. Why? Because abortion is one of the sacraments of liberal religion, along with the idea of sexual “freedom”. Practicing abstinence certainly cuts into the traffic at those Planned Parenthood facilities. I often am surprised at people who do not know Planned Parenthood performs abortions. Factually, they are the leading abortion provider in America. They also, by the way, contribute to Democrats.

            Succinctly put, Ted Strickland wants less choice in education for Ohio parents, but more choice in sex for their kids. I don’t have a lot of faith in the Republican (still) majority Ohio legislature, but it seems a strong majority of Ohioans are opposed to these policies. Republican leaders should call these proposals dead on arrival because in a world full of choices, these are the wrong ones.

    In the last few days one prominent poll showed Rudy Giuliani leading John McCain by 40% to 18%. With McCain’s strategy this week there appears to be a good chance he will soon catch Mitt Romney in the polls.

    McCain’s first outburst was to take aim at Don Rumsfeld. He called him perhaps the worst Secretary of Defense, ever. I know McCain is older than any of the other candidates so I would expect him to remember the people who filled that position in the Carter and Johnson administrations. Of course, he had to bemoan all the mistakes that have been made in Iraq. A review of statistics showed that over 4,000 military deaths occurred in Bill Clinton’s first term, compared to the in excess of 3,200 in the almost four years of war in Iraq. And by the way, I do not recall the liberation of 50 million people in the first Clinton term. Yes, we’ve really screwed up.

    McCain took a day to catch his breath before attacking the Bush administration on its global warming record. The senator certainly knows the popularity of a bandwagon as he is jumping on. Unfortunately for John McCain, this is a liberal bandwagon.

    As we approach the end of this week, new Senate legislation on immigration, written by Ted Kennedy, is being introduced. McCain is a co-sponsor. Yes, he is teaming up with Senator Kennedy, another favorite of Republicans. We know the “flavor” of this legislation, speeding “the path to citizenship” for illegal immigrants who have broken our laws. In fairness to McCain, George Bush is basically favoring this approach. But the case can be made that part of the blame for 2006 Republican losses was conservative anger on this issue.

     This week’s events have convinced me that John McCain is deadly serious about the presidency. He is positioning himself to capture the Democrat nomination. I anticipate him changing parties at any moment. Nothing else can explain any of this.

This could be the last straw for the “Star Spangled Banner”. Over the years countless people have complained that our national anthem cannot be sung, and/or the words glorified war, or some such stuff. Now it has been exposed that our future first woman president cannot sing the anthem. Hillary’s valiant attempt at an Iowa rally was a bit embarrassing. Even the corrupt mainstream media allowed replays of this regrettable episode. Not to worry. There will be much apologizing done for the senator. There will be renewed calls for changing the anthem to “America the Beautiful”, “God Bless America”, or the latest patriotic rap song. Up until now, it was thought only men with average voices were victims of the anthem. Most of us thought a woman could sing it. Nevertheless, Hillary can still claim she is better at singing it than Pat Buchanan.

What Hillary needs to improve are her political tunes. The media may be replaying Hillary’s anthem debut to distract from other embarrassing things that came out of her mouth in Iowa. The bloggers are relentless, and Hillary’s claims about being betrayed by President Bush on the Iraq war do not stand the test of things on the record (with her voice attached) from 2002 and 2003. Hillary asks what in her background helps her in dealing with evil or bad men. This gets laughs from supporters. Later on she says it’s a joke. Later on she says it’s not a joke and that no one thought she was talking about Bill or George. She used Osama Bin Laden as an example of an evil man. This is the stuff of college kids. Note to Hillary – When it comes to evil men in 2009, Osama will be low on the priority list.  Are people really this simplistic? Yes, I suppose.

Still, this all wears thin. “Been there, done that” is not going to be a good theme for Hillary. The dodging and weaving, the parsing of words. Nobody does it better --- than Bill. Obama and Edwards could not have hoped for a better start.

    A creative listener to the Laura Ingraham Show came up with an appropriate term for the new Republicans we are seeing emerge in 2007 –RATS. RATS stands for Republicans Agreeing To Surrender. This came about as certain Republicans voiced displeasure with the President’s Iraq “surge” policy last week. They are convinced the democrats took control of congress because of Iraq. But the acronym is brilliant because it is becoming apparent the GOP is caving on numerous fronts.

    We can debate the effect of Iraq on the 2006 results. But while I was sending a blistering e-mail to my representative, Steve Latourette, regarding his criticism of the President on Iraq, he was busy casting three unrelated important votes last week with Dennis Kucinich. Rather than voting for Latourette in 2008, maybe I’ll move twenty miles west and vote against Kucinich. Again, what difference will it make?

    On the same note, my irate call to Voinovich’s office this week will probably count for as much. Voinovich joined with about six other Republicans in the senate to dis the President. I told his staffer that Voinovich’s statement sounded like a democrat. He’d “pass that along” to the senator. Well, pass some kleenex, too, in case it offends him to the point of tears. We have seven Republicans in a race to get the Lincoln Chaffee memorial award. Sam Brownback, usually a staunch conservative, lost any slim chance he may have had to make noise in the GOP presidential field by becoming a member of the RATS. The others are the usual suspects that made the Republican senate in these last years an ineffective majority.

    Sources this week said the young buck GOP members in the House want to mix it up with the democrats. Unfortunately, that’s only about one third of the GOP. The rest want to let the democrats have their day, whatever that means. Maybe it means 100 hours. Maybe it means 100 days. If I were betting, I’d tag it closer to the roughly100 weeks this Congress will meet. That’s because I see no one going after the enemy. No, not Al-quada, the democrats.

    The GOP is clueless as to why they lost in 2006. Their base was frustrated with their feckless direction and lack of conviction concerning just about anything. Can anyone recall since 2003 any Republican senator attacking the democrats for attacking Bush? They should have put the democrats back on their heels, implying they were unpatriotic and treasonous for undermining our war effort. Criticism from the press? Let them have it, too. Make sure there’s an investigation into all treasonous leaks to the press. Don’t let up until there is. But Republicans wimped out at every turn, acting like the minority party. And now they are.

    Here’s a thought. Now act like the party that used to be in the minority. I want to see obstructionism in the finest Dashle/Reid tradition. Let the democrats propose, we oppose. No exceptions. Give us some reason to vote for you again. And Mitch McConnell, if you don’t get control of this caucus in the senate, Republicans around the country will not donate. Election 2006 will seem like fun compared to 2008. And it won’t matter what happens in Iraq. We have brave troops and “scared” Republicans.