Hillary Gets Endorsement

In an LA times article it stated that La Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has officially endorsed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Villaraigosa will also now serve as one of the four national chairs of the campaign. He supported Clinton's new path with Iraq and possibly new outlooks on the administration.

I would also like to add that Villaraigosa role as a Mexican American leader of a major city can easily pull votes for Clinton. He is expected to be run for Governor and what better than to support a presidential candidate which has a high chance of winning. It is clear that Hillary is definitely a force to be reckoned with, we have to see what other Democratic candidates can do to suppress her popularity.

In poll currently, Hillary has continually held the lead with nearly 30 percent. The only other candidate which comes close is Obama with around 20-25 percent. Following third is Edwards tied with Gore (who isn’t even running) and below them are the underdogs which can only muster less than 1 percent.

Another Reagan in office?

With nearly 10 Republican members running for President, how will the American make a decision on who to choose. One candidate, Fred Thompson hopes his acting career on the hit TV series Law and Order will come into play in his race for the oval office.

Republicans are actually looking for a candidate with conservative backgrounds. The other candidates lack republican credibility. Fred Thompson believes there is a "disconnection between the Washington D.C and he people of the United States".

So there is at least one candidate, which has not fully agreed with the policies of the current administration. Currently with so many people against the administration in power, it nice to see a candidate against it, especially a Republican. Although I don't think his acting ability will be much help with his campaign, he's a candidate that will be interesting to see.

-Arthur

Romney's Charity, Obama's Health Care

Apparently Romney's has decided, if elected as president, he would donate all and more of his presidential salary to charity. I don't know about most people, but that doesn't buy my vote. Why does it matter whether or not he donates to charity. Personally I feel if a person is running the most powerful nation in the world, he/she deserves that 400k salary. The president is making important decisions which will shapes the lives of millions throughout the world, either good or bad.

Now, on the Democrat side, Obama has continued to discuss his goal for health care. In a speech he made Tuesday, Senator Obama offered a plan to provide health care to millions of Americans. Although this is a heavy task for possible president, its very feasible.

I think our nation needs universal health care, we have the resources and the ability to make it happen. We just have to see how it plays out.

-Arthur

"The Last Temptation of Al Gore"

Its no surprise I am a Gore fan, many people are. Although I want Gore to run for president, it's a given fact he will not. He has found a new bliss and new meaning in life, he says he has "fallen out of love with politics". On presidential polls, he holds nearly 14 percent, and he isnt even registered candidate, that only shows that many people believe he is experienced and ready for the job. In an article in Time Magazine, titled The Last Temptation of Al Gore, there was an extensive interview between Al Gore and Eric Pooley.

Al Gore has done quite enough for one lifetime, gathering support for climate change, vice-president of the United States, being high position member of both Apple and Google.com. And now even an Academy Award Winner for his documentary, Inconvient Truth. Its hard to say what he plans to do, he has clearly stated there is no shawdow campaign group or a secret committee. He may have done more good losing than winning.

Follow Suit?

With election year coming up there seems to be some particular shift in the dates of voting for presidential primaries. Following FLorida's move, Alaska and Georgia have moved up thier presidential primaries to February. 15 states have now moved thier dates as well. Pushing it from the original date of March 4-5 to February 4-5.

Why the sudden shift in primary voting? I believe its because people want to give the primary candidates more time to prepare thier campaigns. Secondly, it may also because there are too many candidates taht the people just want 1 to support and back up. It may also be a political tactics used by either side.

Still, its nearly 6-7 months away, its hard to tell what will happen within that time, policies may change as well as opinoins.

Florida Bill to Move up Presidential Primary

A move by Florida Governor Charlie Crist has set a new precedence for the upcoming elections of 2008. A new bill passed by him has moved Florida Primaries to Janaury instead of its usual March date. Florida has the largest population compared to any early voting states. What this means is that if candidate cannot compete in early Florida, they really cant compete for president. Most candidates will need to spend quite a bit of money into the campaign in Florida

How will this affect the election, it shouldn't have too big of an outcome. Most of the candidates are all well funded and should be able to pull Florida primaries without a problem. The big thing I will be watching for is which candidate comes out on top. Florida primaries can be an early warning sign to seriously see who may be out next president.

-Arthur

Monica Goodling

Although this does not apply to presidential primaries, this topic deserves a post. After weeks and weeks of congressional deliberations and scandal, the long awaited testimony of Monica Goodling took place this past Wednesdays.

And what was concluded after her testimony, nothing. It was established that the attorney firing were still performance related, but somewhat political. Her testimony also stated that Deputy AG Paul McNaulty was not "fully candid" on his testimony to Congress weeks before about the issues to the firings of federal attorneys.

Was offering Monica Goodling immunity for her testimony worth it? She plead the 5th after accusations of wrong doing in the justice department. Nothing resulted from her testimony, as Republicans stated, there was no indication of illegality from her testimony. Gonzales will continue to fight for his position and to justify what he did was legal. Even when its obvious there was.

New War Spending Bill

Seems like Republicans will continue the war. A new war spending bill passed on Wedesday with an estinmated 120 billion to help fund the war until September 1, with an additional 20 billion for domestic issues. This acts as a major blow to the Democrats, even with the added gains, there seems to be no end to the war. There is no timetable for the return of troops.

What happened? Why did democrats give up so easily? Owning both Houses of Congress, democrats should have pushed for another bill even with the threat of a veto. They should have kept pushing for more bills. They essentially accepted defeat from the Republicans, again.

So, the war is still a major issue of the presidential race. The end of any type of conflict in Iraq has no end in sight. I hope congress will be not be afraid to be called unpatriotic for fighting for what is right.

Senate Defeats Withdraw Measures

Today, Senate defeated a measure which would bring U.S troops back from combat operations in Iraq by April of next year. Although it was a defeat for the democrats, the 29 Senators who did vote for plan showed that there is change progressing in Congress. The overall approval rating of the White House and the War drops everyday with the public growing tiresome of a lost war.

How does this effect presidential primaries? It will be very likely that the War in Iraq will not conclude until sometime next year or even later. By then, there will be a new president in office, most likely a Democrat. What significant changes or even "radical" changes will occur when the democrats control both the White House as well as Congress? We shall see.

Thompson vs. Moore

In in interesting word battle between two media stars, Presidential hopeful Fred Thompson came under fire from Michael Moore. In a letter, Micheal challenged Fred Thompson to a debate on health care, responding to the criticism he received from Thompson when Michael argued that Cuba's healthy care system is superior to the United States.

Michael Moore shot back saying how that Fred Thompson has a box of Cuban cigars which supported the Castro Wealth. In a video by Fred, he said that a filmmaker which Castro did not like was tortured and put into mental institution. Fred said a hinted that a institution is what Micheal should consider.

Personally I feel this argument is somewhat childish and handled poorly by Fred Thompson. Whether he has time or not, he could have handled this problem more maturely. Simply attack Michael for what he said is not someone I would want to be my president.

Watch the video here

-Arthur

Republican Debate

10 GOP members met at Ronald Reagan Presidential Library for 90 minutes of intense debate on issues of abortion, the War in Iraq, taxes, and other issues. However it seemed the big issue for this debate was the 1978 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling. Candidates, specifically Giuliani, who said it would be OK if the Supreme Court upholds a 1973 landmark abortion right ruling. "it would be OK to repeal it."

9 of the GOP members said they would be happy if the landmark case was overturned, however they would support whatever decision the Supreme Court would decide. Giuliani, McCain and Romney were the three heavy hitters in this debate, they have the most support in polls and also the most resources.

Candidates also mentioned the War in Iraq, there was no disagreement among all the candidates about what the policy on Iraq should be. They agreed that the government must stay the course and not "run away from terrorism". I'm not sure if the public would agree with this course. However I'm looking forward to more debates to come with the Republicans as well as the Democrats.

Campaign Funding from Celebs

Its always been that Democrats received more campaign funding from celebrities than Republicans. How big is the difference between them? In Fox New article, it showed that 7 out of 10 dollars historically went to Democrats. A former Reagan White House aide Kenneth Khachigian says only half-jokingly that you can count the Republicans in Hollywood on your fingers.

Democrats on the other hand receives donations from a plethora of actors/actresses and producer/directors. Its almost like an Oscar fund raiser for them. It not different in this election, donations are still moving more towards the Democrats, and one reason is the Bush administration. There is an obvious dislike by the public on how the current administration is handling issues in the world, specifically Iraq. Still all candidates do receive a significant amount of donations to fund their campaigns.

I would think that producers would support the Republicans more because of Republican stance on big busiesses, and the movies are big businesses. Still, many of these candidates are already very wealthy and can easily fund themselves without donations.

-Arthur

Bush Vetoes War Funding Bill

Without hesitation, President Vetoed the war spending bill today. He argued you cannot set a timetable for the terrorist. Then all they have to do is to just mark their calendars and wait for the United States to leave. As much as I am against the War, Bush makes perfect sense. However I do believe the goal of the bill was to prove a point, that congress was no longer going to sit around and allow the White House administration take command.

Has Senate Majority leader put it "Now he(Bush) has an obligation to explain his plan to responsibly end this war", that the ball was in his court. Bush has invited members of Congress to come and begin talks to compromise on a bill. However, I don't believe Bush will be swayed to put any type of timetable on any bills.

This is lardmark day for the Senate. Finally a new direction toward the issues in Iraq. Hopefully there will be some form of resolution in which we continue to support the troops but also to start bringing them home.

-Arthur

Edwards Urges to Stand Firm on Timetable

Edwards clamored to Congress today demanded that Congress stand firm to a timetable to bring troops back from Iraq. Even under Bush's threat of a veto, Congress must continue to stand and demand a timetable. He stated "If he vetoes it and if we don't have enough votes to override the veto, then we need to submit another bill to him with a timetable for withdrawal and continue to do that until he's forced to start withdrawing troops from Iraq".

Reading this article, I couldn't agree with him more, there needs to be time when we will send our soldiers back. There is an obvious dislike for the war, support has decreased ever year since it started and will continue to decrease until we are out. Even under the threat of a veto, still stand firm. Either that or there must be a compromise between the Democrats and Republicans. It is clear where Edwards stands on the funding bill and the troops, its hard to tell how the other candidates will approach this matter.

-Arthur