Rare

2008 will end up pitting two senators against each other. It may not be the first time, but I'm hard pressed to recall another instance where that was the case. Should add another bizarre element to an already very bizarre election season.

Two Things I Don't Like

The recent primary results from Super Tuesday give me two major causes for concern.

1) Hillary Clinton is winning the race for the Democratic nomination, but not because of the elections. She's simply gathering more 'super-delegates' than Obama. This is completely unfair. The people should choose who their candidate is, not a few 'special' Congressmen and governors.

2) John McCain is going to have to pick an awfully good running mate. Let's face it: McCain's old. His chances of dying in office are much greater than any other candidate still in the race. So his vice president has a better-than-average chance of becoming the next president. So please, McCain, please don't choose Huckabee to win over the hardline conservatives. That would be a really bad idea. Choose Condi instead - everyone likes her! Or, I do, at least.

Romney's Push

McCain's lead in Cali is beginning to shrink. Not too much, but a noticeable amount -- some 3%. Apparently, this is explainable by the fact that absentee ballots were counted early, and these were overwhelmingly in the senator's favor. There's no way Romney will win CA, but if he can close the lead (say, 40 / 30), he'll save a lot of face.

Huge Night For GOP

Can someone please explain to me the far right's love affair with Mitt Romney? I've been trolling RedState, Townhall and other bastions of conservatism, and I keep running into sentiments along these lines: "Ah, well, Mitt in 2012!" That slogan has even popped up at National Review, which is significant more cautious and sophisticated than RS and TH.

It's hard not to laugh at these delusional hacks (especially when you're a McCain man). When will they face the facts? Romney was shut-out in the south, repelled in the west, and embarrassed in much of the north. Self-identifying conservatives didn't rush his way, neither did Christian conservatives. There's also indications from exit polls that those concerned with the economy preferred McCain -- this after Mitt's people have begun shifting his image from Family Man to Business Man. Ah, the snarls of a poll-driven campaign.

How is a man who placed second in South Carolina and third in Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, and Missouri supposed to represent the Republican Party? Granted, he may have done better without Huckabee, but how much better? Would a Yankee ex-RINO Mormon millionaire really have played well, even without competition? My guess is Huckabee is drawing on Republicans who dislike the Party of Bush, and they likely see Romney as the president's nearest heir (and rightfully so). Given McCain's semi change of heart regarding immigration and his military heritage, could the governor done all that better in a Huck-free race?

Long story short: With some 450 delegates, McCain is close to cinching the GOP nod. Romney still has a chance, but with only ~150 delegates, it's not looking good, not at all. That's a lot of ground to make up, and Mac is sure to do well by riding big momentum. The best Mitt can hope for is a miracle at a brokered convention (which is a miracle unto itself!). A McCain presidency -- even a McCain candidacy -- will hopefully rejuvenate Republican moderates, perhaps even kicking some life into the party's shriveling appendages in the Northeast, Rustbelt, and Mountain West.

In Praise of Common Sense

Sir — A nation has a history, a culture, an identity. Britain is not France, Spain is not Germany, and none of these are Bangladesh or Morocco. Nor do their citizens want them to become so. People do not want to be overrun by foreigners of a strange religion, a different race, or exotic (and sometimes repulsive) customs, even if it means a 1% rise in economic growth. No amount of lecturing will change these attitudes.

This letter appeared in a recent issue of The Economist, in response to an article run by that publication advocating relaxed immigration policies. I join John Derbyshire in marveling at the undiluted candor and old fashioned simplicity of those sentiments. You rarely find such straight-forward commonsense in the mainstream media these days, despite the fact that many Americans are still sharp enough to realize that preserving national identity is part and parcel of preserving our republic as we know it.

If I have an objection to make, it's with the letter writer's decision to use the word "race" instead of ethnicity, though I supposed the ethnicity was implied in the customs bit.

It's remarkable -- also, remarkably scary -- that the notion of "particular community" is receding from American public discourse. In public, in polite company, it's increasingly difficult to articulate a desire for a "familiar" nation without immediately being labeled a bigot, xenophobe, racist, or know-nothing. Really a pity.

Give Me A Break

Clinton cries again.

And she's supposed to be an example of strong, empowered womanhood? Riiight. By my reckoning, Hillary has done everything she possibly can to prove legitimate the patronizing expression that females are the "weaker sex."

When she's on the ropes, she cries. When she can't go eye to eye with the big boys, she whines. When she wants dirty work to be done, she drafts her husband.

Keep Ms. Waterworks out of the Oval Office, please.

Expect the Unexpected

There's something to hate about that trite and illogical expression, but it's the one thing on my mind going into Super Tuesday. Especially after the heartbreak in Phoenix last night, it's hard to be confident about anything.

Unhinged

"I would vote for the Devil over John McCain." --Ann Coulter, craven lunatic.

Clinton more conservative than McCain? Why won't anybody call her on these inane assertions?

John's Party

If you go by the Florida returns, maybe this year positions aren't everything. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the one who suffered 5½ years in the Hanoi Hilton. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the one who has endured a lifetime in the rounds in Washington and survived as antispending, antiabortion and pro-military. Republicans on the ground think the conservative is the old fighter jock who'll keep the country safe in a rocky time ahead. And maybe Republicans on the ground are saying: He earned it. --Peggy Noonan

Borderline Treasonous

Look, the military isn't perfect. It has used questionable tactics during these wars, and engaged in some behavior that should be roundly condemned. That said, is there any other way to describe this besides borderline treasonous?

Hey-hey, ho-ho, the Marines in Berkeley have got to go.

That's the message from the Berkeley City Council, which voted 6-3 Tuesday night to tell the U.S. Marines that its Shattuck Avenue recruiting station "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

In addition, the council voted to explore enforcing its law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation against the Marines because of the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. And it officially encouraged the women's peace group Code Pink to impede the work of the Marines in the city by protesting in front of the station.

In a separate item, the council voted 8-1 to give Code Pink a designated parking space in front of the recruiting station once a week for six months and a free sound permit for protesting once a week from noon to 4 p.m.

. . .

"I believe in the Code Pink cause. The Marines don't belong here, they shouldn't have come here, and they should leave," said Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates after votes were cast.