The 2016 Presidential Race Begins: Iowa caucuses are today

The first step of the 2016 election starts today.

Video:

The Story via Fox News:

As Iowans prepare to cast the first votes in the presidential nominating process Monday, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders hoped to defy the polls and pull off upset victories in Monday night’s caucuses.

After months of campaigning and more than $150 million spent on advertising, the race for supremacy in Iowa is close in both parties.

Among Republicans, the latest polls show real estate billionaire Donald Trump holding a slim edge over Cruz. Cruz, who became the first major candidate from either party to enter the presidential race 315 days ago, has pinned his hopes to a sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation. Cruz has also modeled his campaign after past Iowa winners, visiting all of the state’s 99 counties and courting influential evangelical and conservative leaders.

“If you had told me 10 months ago that the day before the Iowa caucuses we’d be in a statistcal tie for first place I would have been thrilled and exhilarated,” Cruz told Fox News late Sunday.

The Republican caucus is also the first test of whether Trump can turn the legion of fans drawn to his plainspoken populism into voters. The scope of the billionaire’s organization in Iowa is a mystery, though Trump himself has intensified his campaign schedule during the final sprint, including a pair of rallies Monday.

I predict that Trump will come in first, with Cruz second and Rubio third on the Republican side. On the Democrat side, I think that one could be a surprise. Sanders has a good deal of support, while Hillary has the name and the money. So, that one is a toss. It will be interesting to see to say the least.

Ted Cruz shows how not to win over caucuses

This is not very bright.

As Iowans prepare to head to the caucuses on Monday for the nation’s first votes in the presidential primaries, the campaigns are pulling out all the stops. The mailer sent out by one Republican campaign, however, might end up backfiring.Tom Hinkeldey, a resident of Alta, Iowa, tweeted a photo (which was later deleted because it included his personal address) on Friday evening of a mailer Sen. Ted Cruz’s campaign sent addressed to his wife, Steffany. The mailer was a large card printed to look like a manila envelope on one side and was labeled in all capital letters, “ELECTION ALERT,” “VOTER VIOLATION,” “PUBLIC RECORD,” and “FURTHER ACTION NEEDED.” — Source: He Said He Was An Undecided Iowan Until He Received This Controversial Mailer From Ted Cruz

Here is a picture of the said mailer:

Either way, it is not a good way to endure yourself to conservatives; who are pretty much against the Government knowing their business. I have to be honest, I highly doubt Trump would even do anything like that.

Others: The Last Refuge, BuzzFeed, CNN, The Libertarian Republic, Washington Monthly, BizPac Review, RedState, American Power, Althouse and Politico

Audio: Obama talks about Iowa, Hillary, Sanders and 2016

The full audio:

The Story via Politico:

Barack Obama, that prematurely gray elder statesman, is laboring mightily to remain neutral during Hillary Clinton’s battle with Bernie Sanders in Iowa, the state that cemented his political legend and secured his path to the presidency.

But in a candid 40-minute interview for POLITICO’s Off Message podcast as the first flakes of the blizzard fell outside the Oval Office, he couldn’t hide his obvious affection for Clinton or his implicit feeling that she, not Sanders, best understands the unpalatable pragmatic demands of a presidency he likens to the world’s most challenging walk-and-chew-gum exercise.

“[The] one thing everybody understands is that this job right here, you don’t have the luxury of just focusing on one thing,” a relaxed and reflective Obama told me in his most expansive discussion of the 2016 race to date.

Iowa isn’t just a state on the map for Obama. It’s the birthplace of his hope-and-change phenomenon, “the most satisfying political period in my career,” he says — “what politics should be” — and a bittersweet reminder of how far from the garden he’s gotten after seven bruising years in the White House.

The caucuses have a fierce-urgency-of-now quality as Obama reckons with the end of his presidency — the kickoff of a process of choosing a Democratic successor he hopes can secure his as-yet unsecured legacy, to keep Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or somebody else from undoing much of what he has done. And he was convinced Clinton was that candidate, prior to the emergence of Sanders, friends and associates have told me over the past 18 months.

“Bernie came in with the luxury of being a complete long shot and just letting loose,” he said. “I think Hillary came in with the both privilege — and burden — of being perceived as the front-runner. … You’re always looking at the bright, shiny object that people haven’t seen before — that’s a disadvantage to her.”

He also spoke of Bernie Sanders:

Obama didn’t utter an unkind word about Sanders, who has been respectfully critical of his administration’s reluctance to prosecute Wall Street executives and his decision to abandon a single-payer health care system as politically impractical. But he was kinder to Clinton. When I asked Obama whether he thought Sanders needed to expand his horizons, if the Vermont senator was too much a one-issue candidate too narrowly focused on income inequality, the presidente didn’t dispute the assertion.

Gesturing toward the Resolute Desk, with its spread-winged eagle seal, first brought into the Oval Office by John F. Kennedy, Obama said of Sanders: “Well, I don’t want to play political consultant, because obviously what he’s doing is working. I will say that the longer you go in the process, the more you’re going to have to pass a series of hurdles that the voters are going to put in front of you.”

Then he added: “As you’ll recall, I was sitting at my desk there just a little over a week ago … writing my State of the Union speech, and somebody walks in and says, ‘A couple of our sailors wandered into Iranian waters’” — and here he stopped to chuckle in disbelief — “that’s maybe a dramatic example, but not an unusual example of the job.”

As much as I hate to say it; President Obama is correct about that one. The office of the President of the United States is a very difficult job and it requires someone who can handle the job. While Bernie Sanders might be a respectable person and all; if I were voting in a Democratic Primary, there is no way that I would vote for Bernie Sanders, I would most likely vote for Hillary Clinton. Because she has already been there and she seems, for a Democrat, a bit more reasonable, than Bernie Sanders.

Needless to say, being an ideologue is great; if you are an activist or even maybe a Senator. However, when you are the commander and chief, that is a whole other ballgame and there is a certain amount of pragmatism is required in that office, if you actually want to succeed at the job. You have to remember, when you are President; you are President of the people of the United States of America, not just the President of the people who voted for you. You have to take into account everyone, not just those who voted for you. This is why I am not too keen on Ted Cruz; he is an extreme ideologue on the right, where Bernie Sander is an extreme ideologue on the left.

This is where I think Donald Trump might just be the more pragmatic candidate, who might just be able to get things done in DC and put aside some of this partisan rancor that has become so terrible under Bush and Obama. Now, if we could just work on his humility and get him to stop retweeting stuff like this here.

Other Bloggers: Vox, The Daily Beast, USA Today, Yahoo Politics, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, Hot Air, The Daily Caller, Washington Post, ABC News, Shakesville, Slantpoint and The Week – Via Memeorandum

Donald Trump just secured the soccer mom vote

He also just secured the female evangelical female vote too.

AMES, Iowa — Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor and 2008 vice-presidential nominee who became a Tea Party sensation and a favorite of grass-roots conservatives, endorsed Donald J. Trump in Iowa on Tuesday, providing him with a potentially significant boost just 13 days before the state’s caucuses.“Are you ready for the leader to make America great again?” Mrs. Palin said with Mr. Trump by her side at a rally at Iowa State University. “Are you ready to stump for Trump? I’m here to support the next president of the United States — Donald Trump.”Her support is the highest-profile backing for a Republican so far. It came the same day that Iowa’s Republican governor, Terry Branstad, said he hoped that Senator Ted Cruz would be defeated in Iowa. The Feb. 1 caucuses are a must-win for the Texas senator, who is running neck-and-neck with Mr. Trump in state polls.The endorsement came as Mr. Trump was bearing down in the state, holding multiple campaign events and raising expectations about his performance in the nation’s first nominating contest.As Mrs. Palin announced her backing, Mr. Trump stood wearing a satisfied smile as she scolded mainstream Republicans as sellouts and praised how Mr. Trump had shaken up the party. “He’s been going rogue left and right,” Mrs. Palin said of Mr. Trump, using one of her signature phrases. “That’s why he’s doing so well. He’s been able to tear the veil off this idea of the system.” – Source: Sarah Palin Endorses Donald Trump, Which Could Bolster Him in Iowa – The New York Times

The video:

https://youtu.be/Tif6xm4_ysA?t=58m51s

The question that many are asking is, why did she pick Trump over Cruz? Actually, there are two reasons; one is that Cruz might have seriously pissed off Palin by basically insulting her. The other reason basically is because Ted Cruz’s wife works for or did work for one of the biggest banks, that was involved with the huge meltdown in 2008 and got a bailout from it. She also is or was, depending on whom you believe; a member of the council on foreign relations, which is huge minus among the Conservative base —- especially the Ted Party base.

Reaction has been predictable among the left. The reaction among the right is varied; some are happy, some, not so much. Personally, I think that this endorsement will be just another feather in Donald Trump’s hat; I just hope that Trump does not squander this chance. For the drive-by crowd, I am neither a supporter or against Donald Trump; I view all politicians with a good dose of skepticism.

I would recommend Trump not to use her too much to stump for his campaign, because there are a good number of people, who see Palin as a blithering idiot and that would work against him. An endorsement is fine, a campaign attack dog would be a disaster. So, keep Palin at a distance. I just hope Trump does not pick her to his Vice President; that would be huge mistake. I mean, anything is better than Hillary. But, with Palin in the VP slot, Trump would not get elected in the general election at all. I might be wrong about that, but I really doubt it.

Either way, I will be following this a bit more closely, as this primary race just got a bit more interesting now.

Blogger roundup: The Huffington Post, Donald J Trump for President, Guardian, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, US News, Mediaite, Gawker, FiveThirtyEight, Bloomberg Business, Power Line, The Atlantic, Algemeiner.com, Business Insider, Hot Air, ThinkProgress, Right Wing Watch, Lawyers, Guns & Money, Vox, Shot in the Dark, Raw Story, The Right Scoop,National Review, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, RealClearPolitics, The Last Tradition, Washington Post, addictinginfo.org, Trail Blazers Blog, Talking Points Memo, American Spectator,Political Insider …, BuzzFeed, Outside the Beltway, The Slot, Weasel Zippers, Mother Jones, VICE, The Week, Vox Popoli, Daily Kos, The Last Refuge, Politico and Townhall.com, Mother Jones, ABC News, BizPac Review, New York Times, U.S. News, Washington Times, The Hill, National Review, RedState, Fox News Insider,Washington Monthly, The Daily Caller, The Gateway Pundit, Balloon Juice, American Spectator, The Right Scoop, The Week, Mediaite, Salon, Hot Air, Telegraph,PoliticusUSA, Bloomberg.com, Politico and Little Green Footballs

Um, @tedcruz? The smarter members of the body of Christ, don’t want you

This is actually kind of funny:

“If we awaken and energize the body of Christ– if Christians and people of faith come out and vote our values– we will win and we will turn the country around,” Cruz told volunteers on a conference call Tuesday.Cruz also said that he is organizing a coalition of pastors in early states including Iowa and South Carolina.“We’re working to have a lead pastor in each of the 99 counties in Iowa, 99 pastors are organizing other pastors,” Cruz said. “We’re doing the same thing in South Carolina, organizing pastors in 46 counties to motivate and organize other pastors.”Cruz warned that, as the election nears, the attacks on his campaign will become more vicious.“I want to tell everyone to get ready, strap on the full armor of God, get ready for the attacks that are coming,” he warned. “Come the month of January we ain’t seen nothing yet.”Cruz predicts that the nomination will come by the end of the March and said that his campaign is now in a “90-day sprint to win this nomination.”“There is a very good possibility that the Republican primary will be decided by the end of March,” he told them.

Source: Sen. Ted Cruz Tells Volunteers: We Can Win ‘If We Awaken And Energize The Body Of Christ” – Breitbart

The reason why I say this, is because Ted Cruz was not born in America; he was born in Canada. By that very definition, he is nothing more than an interloper; a foreign-born person, who has no business being in the White House.

Not to mention that Ted Cruz and his Father are both Christian Dominionists; which is basically the Christian version of Sharia Law. This ought to concern anyone, who does not want to see a Christian theocracy in America; which is pretty ironic, because that is what the founders of this Country were trying to get away from, when they sailed from Europe to Holland, and then to the new world.

So, to Mr. Cruz: There are some members of the body of Christ, who do not want you and your screwball apostate theology nowhere near the White House or any other public office for that matter. We tend to be a bit smarter, than you Cuban interlopers give us credit for.

Others: John Hawkins’ Right Wing News and The Last Refuge

A Good Read: Why Are the Bushies Attacking Ted Cruz?

As I wrote over at the link below: Anyone that goes against the mantra of fight wars on Israel’s behalf until hades freezes over, is a target in the Republican Party.

Check out this awesome article:

The Republican Party has played Marley’s Ghost for the past half-dozen years, dragging behind it the sins of the foreign-policy utopians who persuaded George W. Bush to bet the farm on nation-building in the Middle East. Bush’s 2004 Second Inaugural, written with the help of the Weekly Standard‘s Bill Kristol and the Washington Post‘s Charles Krauthammer, was the high-water mark of foreign-policy overreach and the cusp of Republican fortunes. By the 2006 congressional elections, the electorate had had enough, and the public’s disgust with the pointless sacrifice of blood and treasure helped propel the junior senator from Illinois into the White House. The Bushies who blundered so badly–occupying Iraq, pushing for the West Bank elections won by Hamas, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt against the Egyptian military–are still fighting for what is left of their reputations. And their greatest fear is that a Republican leader will come along untainted by their mistakes, and able to admit what we Republicans should have admitted years ago: the Bush administration made some big mistakes.

That leader is Sen. Ted Cruz

via Spengler @ PJMedia: Why Are the Bushies Attacking Ted Cruz?.

Let me clear, I am not a huge ted Cruz fan; but this guy is spot on. I will be adding his blog to my list of them on here.

BudgetGate 2013

I apologize for a lack of output today. I just didn’t see anything worth wasting time over. I did post one thing; But nothing political.

Anyhow, Senate leaders hashed out a budget deal; and the Dems hate it, although some do like it; and not shockingly, the right is not to happy with it either. Which means, it might just be a decent deal. Believe it or not, Rep. John Boehner makes a valid point here: (H/T HotAir.com)

The point he makes at 1:30 in this video is legit; and we all know whom that little remark is aimed at! (Ted Cruz) Boehner has a point; Cruz took the House into the ditch and did not have a plan to come out of the ditch at all. Which is not good politics. I’ve written all about this before, so I am not going to repeat all that again! 🙄

Either way, the roundup on this huge story over at Memeoradum is huge and worth a read.

Noted Cuban/Canadian interloper displays a lack of self awareness

Someone get this idiot a mirror please.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said in a recent interview that the filibuster rule change made in the Senate on Thursday will hurt the chamber’s ability to pass legislation.

“It will poison the atmosphere of the Senate,” Cruz said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” a transcript of which was posted online Friday afternoon.

via Cruz: Filibuster Rule Change ‘Will Poison The Atmosphere Of The Senate’.

You mean like when he poisoned the atmosphere in the house, when he lead the house Republicans into a ditch, without any plan to get out? What an idiot! Here is hoping that this so-called “tea party” twirp gets primaried in 2014.

Cuban/Canadian interloper Ted Cruz takes a page from the Bush Administration playbook

This is so fitting considering that this idiot charlatan is supposedly some sort of a Conservative champion. Which on its face, is a huge, poorly timed joke:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) believes that when his critics attack, they’re not just going after him, but also taking on “the American people.” Following his lively conversation with Jay Leno last Friday, the senator attended an “exclusive, top secret” dinner in Los Angeles, where he shared those thoughts with the conservative website Politichicks.

Cruz said he was “encouraged” by the personal attacks he’s received from both Democrats and Republicans “because I think all across the country, I think people are getting energized, they’re getting engaged, they’re speaking up. And we shouldn’t be surprised. Changing the country isn’t easy. And the establishment is going to fight back. In both parties, they don’t want to change.”

“And so, the reason—the nastier the attacks get—I mean, they’re directed at all of us, they are directed at the American people,” Cruz continued. “Because a lot of the folks in Washington don’t want to be held accountable.”

via Ted Cruz: When You Attack Me, You’re Attacking the ‘American People’ | Mediaite.

Now where have I heard this one before? Oh, yes! That’s right! It was said by the Bush Administration in 2003, when the Bush Administration decided to invade a sovereign Country based on bad intelligence from Germany. “If you are against us, you hate America and want to see it invaded by terrorists.” This is the same thing, a neoconservative line.

Ted Cruz? Tea Party? Don’t make me laugh; this idiot is nothing more than an Cuban interloper that is making a mockery of the Republican Party and Conservatism in general. Not to mention the fact, that Cruz just took a page from the biggest neoconservative Presidential administration in history.

Another good reason why I cannot stand Ted Cruz

I wrote about this yesterday. However, I believe it goes without saying that Ted Cruz and his Dad have no place in American politics at all.

In April, Rafael Cruz, the father of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), spoke to the tea party of Hood County, which is southwest of Fort Worth, and made a bold declaration: The United States is a “Christian nation.” The septuagenarian businessman turned evangelical pastor did not choose to use the more inclusive formulation “Judeo-Christian nation.” Insisting that the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution “were signed on the knees of the framers” and were a “divine revelation from God,” he went on to say, “yet our president has the gall to tell us that this is not a Christian nation…The United States of America was formed to honor the word of God.” Seven months earlier, Rafael Cruz, speaking to the North Texas Tea Party on behalf of his son, who was then running for Senate, called President Barack Obama an “outright Marxist” who “seeks to destroy all concept of God,” and he urged the crowd to send Obama “back to Kenya.”

via WATCH: Ted Cruz’s Dad Calls US a “Christian Nation,” Says Obama Should Go “Back to Kenya” | Mother Jones.

I do not want this man or his son anywhere near the White House at all. He does not speak for this paleoconservative at all. Do not misunderstand me here; I am all for the defense of Christian moral values and such. However, this guys beliefs are similar to those of the friends of Rick Perry, who happen to believe that apostate doctrine of “Kingdom Now” theology. Which is a very highly mistaken belief that somehow or another that Christians are on some sort of “God mandate” to occupy the Government until Christ comes back for his Church. It is the whole “God and Country” movement, taken to another level.

The reason for this is because historically, Christians did not believe in such things. Allow me to quote from a book called “The trail of blood” by James Milton Carroll:

24. Some serious questions have many times been asked concerning the Baptists: Would they, as a denomination, have accepted from any nation or state an offer of “establishment” if such nation or state had freely made them such an offer? And, would they, in case they had accepted such an offer, have become persecutors of others like Catholics or Episcopals, or Lutherans or Presbyterians, or Congregationalists? Probably a little consideration of such questions now would not be amiss. Have the Baptists, as a fact, ever had such an opportunity?

Is it not recorded in history, that on one occasion, the King of the Netherlands (the Netherlands at that time embracing Norway and Sweden, Belgium, Holland, and Denmark) had under serious consideration the question of having an established religion? Their kingdom at that period was surrounded on almost all sides by nations or governments with established religions–religions supported by the Civil Government.

It is stated that the King of Holland appointed a committee to examine into the claims of all existing churches or denominations to see which had the best claim to be the New Testament Church. The committee reported back that the Baptists were the best representatives of New Testament teachings. Then the King offered to make the Baptist “the established” church or denomination of his kingdom. The Baptists kindly thanked him but declined, stating that it was contrary to their fundamental convictions and principles.

But this was not the only opportunity they ever had of having their denomination the established religion of a people. They certainly had that opportunity when Rhode Island Colony was founded. And to have persecuted others–that would have been an impossibility if they were to continue being Baptists. They were the original advocates of “Religious Liberty.” That really is one of the fundamental articles of their religious faith. They believed in the absolute separation of church and state.

This is the proper way that true believers should be, to leave the business of politics of this fallen world to the people that want to run it. We believers should be about our Father’s business. We Christians have a right to vote; and we should vote our beliefs; what we should NOT do, is make disrespectful statements about the President and try occupy this Government. It all comes down to that thing, that many Christians seem to forget about; our Christian testimony.

This is why I had an issue with the whole “God and Country” movement of the 1980’s and this is why I have such an issue with the “Kingdom Now” types. This is because it is an unholy alliance between believers and non believers.

In closing, this is what the Bible says about all that:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18 KJV)

The round up of blogger reaction to this story is found here at Memeorandum.

Update: Fixed a rather bad typo and omission of words. Whoops. What I get for blogging before my mug of coffee is done. 😛