This might be premature–by definition it is–but, the Democrats have squandered a chance handed to them on a silver platter to put themselves in the Oval Office. With the horrible decisions that the Bush administration has made in the last 7 years, who was going to vote for more Republican control? Comparing the candidates of the two parties during the primaries made it almost crystal clear that the Democrats had the strongest candidates and the strongest candidate: Hillary Clinton.

If I had to pick a candidate for the Democrats, I would have chosen Kucinich. If we are talking about candidates who the media actually allowed to have a chance, I’d pick Obama. I don’t like either party so this is an exercise in picking crap amongst crap. The world practically worships the ground Obama walks on. Thousands of people gather to hear him speak when he is in foreign nations! He isn’t running to rule the world–at least that’s not in his tag line.

The first error the Democrats made was to nominate Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton. From a purely political strategy point of view, Clinton was a much better candidate to handle the only Republican left in the race: John McCain. Clinton is a stronger  candidate and is just better at playing the game.

Obama’s message of “change” has completely deteriorated. No one knows what change he is talking about. There is no substance behind the message. It didn’t have much substance to begin with but, as the campaign wore on, Obama’s views became less and less different than the political status quo.

To add insult to injury, Obama selects Joe Biden to be his Vice President. What? Biden had a shot to be the Democratic presidential candidate 1988 but, dropped out of the race because of a citation confusion when he was a law student? That was the best dirt they could dig up on him and he cowered to it? Of course, Biden has since become a part of the political establishment in Washington. Why would the messiah of change choose Joe Biden as the VP if Obama was really the “change candidate”? Obama’s entire brand and image has fallen out the window.

On the flip-side, McCain has had a reputation–for years–for being a maverick. In reality, the man is not so radical. He is only radical in the sense that he is really more liberal than he is conservative. McCain isn’t going to drastically change anything either but, he has the image going for him. He is a terrible speaker and lost that Straight Talk Express bravado that the media gave him in 2000. Up until McCain picked Sarah Palin to be his Vice President, I was still convinced that the completely uncharismatic John McCain and this historically low approval rating Republican Presidency would give the Democrats the White House in November.

Sarah changed everything. I’m not just going by the media buzz about Sarah Palin. When I first read this completely unknown name in the headlines, I felt it. The Republicans just did something few people expected. They picked a young, unknown, female candidate for the Vice Presidency. I didn’t know who she was, where she was from, or anything and I also didn’t care.

The hardcore Democrats are going to give you a million reasons why Sarah is unqualified for the job. All those reasons are meaningless to the majority of the voters. You don’t need to have served public office your entire life to be qualified. The liberals are literally eroding their own image of change by attacking Sarah in this fashion. Because she is so young and apparently so unqualified, she is also the perfect person to actually enact change. She isn’t going to but, neither was Obama. It really is just a marketing game.

Sarah Palin has won the hearts and minds of millions of voting Americans this week. I don’t agree with a lot of what she said in her speech because it was towing party line but, she is a great speaker. She is easily likable. Her limited public office experience in the far away state of Alaska gives her the image of being the farthest thing from the political establishment in Washington.

I can’t help but like Sarah. I dislike both the Democrats and the Republicans because they are so similar but, it is hard to dislike Sarah right now. Marketing is a damn powerful tool. I won’t be voting for McCain/Palin this November but, I’m willing to bet enough people are that we’ll see them in the White House in 2009. With this one political move, the Republicans have literally turned the tables on the Democrats. The person with the most believable image of change amongst the four is Sarah Palin and she is why the Democrats lost in 2008.

I like having political debates and discussions. I live in New York so liberal thought dominates the political conversation in this town. From all the people who I’ve talked to about politics who consider themselves liberal or progressive, I have concluded that they mean well.

It is often that I will agree with them on certain issues but, it is what we feel the role of government should be that differs and leads to disagreements. I recently had a political discussion at work. We talked about a lot of things and the conversation veered off course several times as most political discussions tend to–at least in my experience they do.

One particular topic that we touched upon was child labor laws. I don’t believe that the federal government should be passing laws making it illegal for children to work. The ultimate authority should rest with the parents and the child. 

I would not send my child to work and would prefer that they were learning at school–preferably private or home school. However, I am against the existence of child labor laws. I am generally against legislation outside of those necessary to protect life, liberty, property, etc. Being against child labor laws does not mean I intend or want to send all our kids to work at places that are going to take advantage of them.

My main point throughout the discussion was that we don’t need more laws and that passing a law does not suddenly make things so.

The fault with most modern day Democrats and Republicans is not they intend to destroy our country and all the freedoms that we cherish but, they don’t understand liberty. Both parties talk about it and when you meet a conservative or a liberal they will talk about liberty and freedom but, will not hesitate to support a law that is designed to enforce their point of view on the rest of the country–that is not liberty.

I think homosexuals should be allowed to marry. I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage at all so passing a law that allows or disallows gay marriage is ridiculous. I would be against either legislation but, I think homosexuals have the right to marriage. I also feel that if a church doesn’t want to wed a homosexual couple, they have the right not to and if they do want to wed a homosexual couple, they the right to. The government should not be involved at all.

The only thing the government needs to do is enforce contracts–in this case it is the contract of marriage. Contracts are freely written for all kinds of things without government approval so why does marriage need to be approved? Anyone capable of writing a contract should be allowed to marry any two–or more–people as long as someone is willing to do it.

Liberty is being able to do whatever you choose without violating the liberty of others. The war of political ideology would be nonexistent if we could just understand liberty. The only ideology that matters is one where you live your life as you see fit so long as you respect other people’s right to live as they choose.

That is what liberty is all about.