I would like to direct your attention to this reddit post (WARNING: naughty language) and this YouTube video. These are first-hand accounts of the Occupy Oakland protests on January 28, 2012. The post and the video paint a picture of grim reality – peaceful protest in the United States of America is becoming criminal.

The situation most large protests find themselves in is that they need to get a permit to protest. They could be denied the permit outright, which happens quite often. On the occasions where the protesters gain the required permit(s), the protest begins – marching, sign waving, etc. and, eventually, the cops show up. The goal is always the same – disperse the protest.

There are several things I could say about the ridiculousness of needing to gain permission from the state in order to protest the state, but I’ll leave that one alone for now.

What I’d really like to talk about is the disgusting trend in this country that has seen police units actively militarized and used, not for keeping the peace, but inciting violence and causing chaos. As a country, we’ve accepted this and even celebrated it in the form of cop-drama T.V. shows and movies. We’re contributing to the problem because we turn a blind eye to it.

We have “free speech zones” where people are caged and told that these are the only places they can exercise their First Amendment right of peaceful protest. I’m just curious – what’s the point in calling it free speech if you aren’t actually free to voice your grievances to the people they are directed at?

Hey, you guys can yell at the Democrats and Republicans who are eagerly bending over for the banking and corporate interests which want nothing more than to bleed the American people for every dollar they can possibly get out of them, just to enlarge the plutocracy that we’re living in, and meanwhile we’re going to stand like Stormtroopers, with guns pointed in your faces while you do it. Oh, and you’ve gotta be way over here where no one can hear you. – The Cops

Call me dramatic all you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that this is the reality we are living in. I’ve posted this quote before, but I feel it is once again appropriate.

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
– John F. Kennedy

Dwell on that for a moment, if you will, and remember that we have a Congress with the lowest approval rating in Gallup history.

This Government (that we elected, mind you), doesn’t care about improving the economy. It sees no value in improving American schools so that our children don’t grow up to be mouth-breathing imbeciles. It doesn’t care that we rank ever lower in testing for science and math, year after year. The Government sees no point in establishing clear civil rights for all Americans.

Instead, this Congress would rather pass censorship laws that limit freedom of speech. Our Government would rather spend its time making it more of a crime to pirate Michael Jackson’s music than it was to kill him with medical negligence. These people see no problem in maintaining the prohibition of marijuana, even though the majority of the American people want it legalized.

Oh, but let’s build a moon base, shall we?

I know I’ve been tough on old Dr. Paul at times.  I may have used words like “crazy,” “fringe,” and “bug-eyed old coot”on occasion.  But as the Republican primary race drags on into what feels like its fifth year, Paul is starting to look… acceptable.  If you break it down, 90% of what Paul preaches is right on target for a conservative audience.  Yes, we’re overextended around the world militarily.  Yes, we’re spending way too much.  Yes, the Federal government has usurped the authority of the states in many areas.  Yes, yes, yes.  Preach on, Brother Paul.

It’s just that other 10%.  The freaky, over-reacting, drug-legalizing, isolationist absolutism is really scary.  Does the 90% outweigh the 10%?  Until recently, I’d have said “no”.  Now, with less than a week before the primary in my state, I’m saying… “maybe.”

Nothing else has worked.  Ronald Reagan borrowed and spent like crazy in order to bankrupt the Soviet Union.  I get that.  That was good.  But what was President Bush’s excuse?  We had eight years of supposedly conservative rule and the government overspending only got worse.  Republican or Democrat, it isn’t getting any better.  Could it be that Paul would stand his ground and restore fiscal responsibility to the federal government?  Could he really return the power to the states, where it belongs?  If he could, would it be worth the risk of his less acceptable (to me) philosophies?

I guess the biggest question is “Could he win a general election?”  Four more years of what we’re getting now just isn’t going to cut it.  Could he win?  Should he win?  Somebody drop me a note in the comments below to either help me get comfortable with this idea or talk me back from the ledge.

Well, thanks for letting me share.  Since I spent most of my allotted word count on my personal Ron Paul dilemma and nobody really stood out as a Winner this week, we’ll just jump ahead to the Losers, where there is never a dearth of deserving candidates.

LOSERS:
The Tired Old Stereotypes –
Mitt Romney gives more than four times as much to charity, as a percentage of his income, than Barack Obama does, according to tax records released this week.  Miserly Joe Biden gives a tiny fraction of a percent of his dough to charitable causes.  He gives away so little of his vast fortune that it is less in pure dollar terms than some poor freelance writers that you might know, even though his income is many times more.  I thought it was supposed to be the Democrats who are concerned about the less fortunate and the Republicans who couldn’t care less about the poor and weak.

The Republican Contenders –
34% of Republicans would like to see another candidate enter the race at this late date, according to a Rasmussen poll.  That means that 1 in 3 GOP voters are not so entranced by Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, or Mitt Romney.  After a year of campaigning and 18 debates, no candidate has managed to really wow the GOP as the clock ticks down toward the general election.

Nancy Pelosi  –
“I know something that could ruin Gingrich’s chances of being president, but I’m not going to say it” – what is she, twelve?  I’m a little surprised Pelosi didn’t add “neener neener neener” to the end of her little stunt.  That kind of childish and asinine behavior may be the norm inside the beltway, but real Americans just aren’t buying it.

But three years into his presidency, I think it is fair enough to come to the conclusion that while Obama may be a lot of things, a socialist is not one of them.

Socialism – what is it? These days people seem to call everything under the sun socialism, and things have veered a lot from what I learned in school – that socialism is government-run, often -owned, and -controlled industry.

The problem? While I know there are plenty of touters of Friedman economics who believe  that any type of government interference makes the possibility of a free market impossible, I think most practicing economists understand this to be a bit like the laws of physics – damn hard to apply to every day life due to gravity. What I mean is, if this is the defining characteristic of free market capitalism then all of our government consumer protection organizations are socialist.

This is a far cry from standard definitions of socialism and capitalism – this is extremism to the level of communism.

The problem is too many people confuse social services and social programs with socialism. Sure, if the government offers a service it can be difficult for private actors to compete. But that doesn’t mean they cannot.

I spent some time living in Sweden, often considered to be a bastion of socialism, and would you believe that five days a week I received two mail deliveries, one from the state run post office and one from the private run commercial post service. Private industry competes openly with government run business, is this socialism?

A government, voted by the people for the people, which sets laws and regulations to protect the people, is not socialist.

Passing a law that states every citizen must purchase health insurance or be fined, is not socialist. You can be fined. You can opt not to and pay the fine. You can opt to not pay your medical bills and have the taxpayers pay them instead. Sure, that is your right and your freedom.

Social Security is socialist because you cannot opt out, you pay into it automatically, and the government controls where your money goes. But let’s remember that Obama is not responsible for starting Social Security, and it has provided money for a lot of retirees over the years.

There have been no acts that Obama has passed in his three years in office that have changed the capitalist nature of the United States.

Even the buyouts of the banks, where the US took over part of the banks following the latest economic crisis, were not socialism. Just as according to plan, as soon as they had the funds, the banks bought themselves back. The purpose of the bank takeovers was to preserve capital so that the banks didn’t fail and people didn’t lose all their money, not so that the government could be active in the daily running of the banks. The purpose was purely capitalistic, not socialist.

Let’s also remember the initial TARP act, which lent money to the banks, was President Bush’s act, not Obamas.

Is Obama a socialist? No. Is America at risk to become a socialist country? No. Comparatively speaking the United States has fewer social programs than pretty much any other western nation in the world. Maternity leave, health care, standard practices in many democratic capitalist countries around the world are considered socialist by the people of the US and therefore do not pass through our system. Do you need any more proof?

(White House photo)

I’ll do more than that, here.  I’m not just going to endorse a ticket.  I will lay out who I want in an ideal administration—and give my reasons why.  So, without further ado…

The ticket: Of the Final Four, my favorite, as you probably know, is Rick Santorum.  Still, the practical guy in me understands the argument that Mitt and Newt have more momentum.  Of those two, I’d pick Mitt Romney.

Now, recall the classic ticket of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.  The Gipper picked Bush—his chief rival in the 1980 primaries—in order to have the GOP unite behind him.  Thus, if Mitt wins (and he probably will), he should seriously consider Rick for VP.  (Somehow…I doubt Newt’s ego would allow him to play second fiddle….)  SO—my heart goes for Santorum/Other-Great-Conservative…my mind for Romney/Santorum.  Take your pick.

Attorney General: Here’s a no-brainer—Rudy Giuliani, the legendary former NYC mayor…the “real rain” Robert DeNiro yearned for in Taxi Driver, who’d wash the scum off the streets.  Rudy won over America’s heart, providing a cool head in the aftermath of 9/11.  (Yes…I know some folks hate that—claiming he “took advantage of a national tragedy”.  Pardon my vernacular, but that’s hogwash.)   And I feel his tough anti-crime stances make for a perfect AG.

Secretary of State: I actually have to thank Newt Gingrich for this idea—John Bolton, former Ambassador to the UN.  John can always be counted on to provide a thoughtful, yet firm, analysis of the global issues we face.  Here is a diplomat with a brain…and a patriotic heart.

Secretary of the Treasury: You’re going to love this—Ron Paul.  While I’m certainly contemptuous of his foreign policy (or lack thereof), I’m in firm agreement with his points on monetary policy, the Federal Reserve, etc.  There’s no doubt that he would tackle such issues head on, as Treasury Secretary.

Secretary of Commerce: No, I haven’t forgotten my main man—Herman Cain.  For a department concerned with matters of business…we need a man who knows how to run a business.  Believe me, Herman understands the needs of American business.

Secretary of Defense: Ideally, I’d say Allen West.  But as he’d only be starting his second House term in 2012…I don’t think he’d want to move that high, that soon.  So, Oliver North—another man known for doing what’s necessary.

Secretary of Homeland Security: As Michele Bachmann serves on the Intelligence Committee, she understands fully the threats we face.  Thus, she’s a good choice.

Secretary of Veterans Affairs: This one’s easy—John McCain.  A Vietnam vet himself—who fully understands the plight veterans are all-too-often forced to go through—John would be superb in laying out what needs to be done, to take care of those who served our country.

Secretary of Labor: None.  I’m with Senator Richard Burr—Commerce and Labor should be re-joined.  We must streamline the government.  Rick Perry’s right on; we need to get rid of some executive departments.

Secretary of Energy: I’d prefer to get rid of this department, too—the federal government should have no business imposing national restrictions on business.  However, this one’s going to be hard to get rid of.  Until we can…I’d say Sarah Palin.  Look up her record as Governor of Alaska—and her firm, honest energy policies.

Secretary of Education: This department has been viewed with contempt by Conservatives since its creation by Jimmy Carter—and with good reason.  It’s a cash-guzzling funnel that consistently fails to do anything to improve our public school system.  Get rid of the darned thing—put federal financial aid under block grants to the states.  As for the Secretary, appoint a “fill-in” that won’t cause any more damage to our schools, while we work to dissolve the department.

Secretary of HUD; Secretary of HHS; Secretary of Transportation; Secretary of Agriculture: Appoint “fill-ins” for these departments—then, merge Agriculture and Transportation with Commerce; the other two, with Interior.

Secretary of the Interior: No clue.  Just someone who knows what they’re doing.

There you go, folks!  Here’s hoping Rick and Mitt are reading….

Unfortunately for fans of freedom in its various forms, we’ve got more trouble to contend with. Namely, the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) and the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN). Here’s essentially what our Government has done; they’ve used the old-school sales tactic of bringing to the table something completely unreasonable and asinine expecting us to push back. They then concede and offer us something that’s slightly less unreasonable so it looks acceptable by comparison. Pretty sad, eh? And they even throw in child porn as a bonus. I mean, come on, if you vote against a bill that’s supposed to be against child porn, you’ve got to be for child porn, isn’t that right? Think of the children, won’t you?

(On a side note, here’s an idea: Let’s get parents to actually raise their kids properly and have an active role in their daily activities, and then we might not have underage kids posting nude photos of themselves online for the whole world to see. Perhaps we won’t need to save the children – again, after all. Then again, the median IQ is 100, which means we’re always going to have some candidates for the Jerry Springer show ruining the party for everyone else.)

Back on topic, we’ve got two new bills to defeat if we want to continue to have the kind of control the Internet needs –- no control. Otherwise, you’re not going to like the Internet we’re left with. It’s going to be sterile and stupid, just like Tom Cruise.

Actually… scratch that. Didn’t the U.S. Government just recently shut down a popular, celebrity-endorsed file-sharing website that was operated from New Zealand whose founder and key personnel are facing extradition to the United States? Yeah, they did! It was Megaupload! Wait, didn’t Megaupload recently sue Universal Music Group over a false YouTube takedown? Hmm… This situation stinks, doesn’t it? It’s not as though Kim Dotcom isn’t as slimy as the record execs he ticked off, but this certainly raises a good question…

If the U.S. Government can not only 86 a website and nab the people involved, along with their possessions this easily, then why do they need SOPA, PIPA, CIPA, and OPEN? Think back to the PATRIOT ACT and the whirlwind of idiocy that followed. Think about the War on Drugs, the War on Terror and all the good they have done for actually reducing drug use and terrorism. This is all posturing and scare tactics to get the people to bend to the will of corporations and government.

Let’s be clear – there is no hard evidence that the “intellectual property” industry is adversely affected by piracy. None. However, an open and free Internet poses a great threat to both the media cartel and the Government, who wish to control the flow of information. Why do you think we don’t have reporters and journalists like Vincent Browne in the United States who aren’t afraid to put the screws to members of the aristocracy when they dodge questions? And while we’re on the subject of the Irish, isn’t it curious how the record companies think it’s appropriate to actually sue a country over their laws?

Lastly, it might interest you to hear about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) that’s currently being rallied against fiercely in Poland, both by Anonymous, and by Polish citizens. Just something I thought was interesting and of note. In addition, it’s pretty intriguing how both the Bush and the Obama administrations denied requests for the public to see the full text of the agreement, stating that it would cause ”damage to the national security“.

Anyone else smell a steaming pile of BS?

WINNERS:

Newt Gingrich

A stellar performance at the debate and a big win in South Carolina has Newt Gingrich back on top of the Republican field.  The Republican nomination may not be as wrapped up as it appeared.  Although Gingrich’s baggage would most likely spell disaster in a general election, it would be something special to see him debate President Obama.

Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum gets a nod for winning the Iowa Caucus three weeks after the fact.  He’d have been far better off with the momentum of the win if the votes had actually been counted correctly the first time, but a win is a win.

LOSERS:

Mitt Romney 

Not only did he lose the South Carolina Primary to Newt Gingrich this week, but he also lost the Iowa Caucus three weeks after he won it thanks to a recount.  Bad news on top of bad news for the Mitt with the pivotal contest in Florida just days away.  Romney’s going to release his tax records now, something he obviously didn’t want to do.  And there has to be a reason why he didn’t want to.  Soon we’ll all know what it was.

I actually had Romney in the Winners’ column in my first draft earlier in the week.  It looked like it would be a good week for Romney when President Obama seemed to be trying to help Mitt Romney win the Republican nomination.  Obama named relatively unknown Jeffrey Zients as Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Zients is a former employee of Bain & Company – the same Bain & Company that is being vilified as vultures in frequent attacks on Romney. Obama has neutered those attacks not only for the other Republican candidates, but for his own eventual campaign against Romney.

Occupy the Capitol –
Occupy Wall Street made a small, pathetic showing at the Capitol this week. Deterred by the weather or just bored and apathetic, the Occupiers stayed home in droves. The few radicals who did show were a poor representation, fighting amongst themselves and flailing at the police on hand. This sad showing was definitely a low point for the Occupy movement.

Charles Mainor
NJ Assemblyman Charles Mainor got into hot water this week for calling the Philadelphia Eagles the “Gaybirds” and the Dallas Cowboys the “Cowgirls” on a Facebook post. Gay slurs from a Democratic politician in the Norteast won’t go over very well on his home turf. Doubly so since half of his State falls squarely in the Philadelphia Eagles’ market. Yet another low-level politician who forgot the perils of the 21st century’s social media.

(Image: USGS/NASA)

So, the number one expectation on this list will likely come as a surprise to some. The very first thing that Congress and the President should do at this moment is to get the budget passed. There hasn’t been a real government budget since President Bush left office. Yes, you read that right. President Obama has never had to work within a government budget. This is perhaps the biggest reason why spending is so out of control. There is no budget.

Every person who has ever spent money knows that the instant you lose track of what you’re spending, you lose control. Once you lose control, you get into financial trouble. Any financial adviser will tell you that one of the very first things you should do is to create a budget. In fact, the only way out of this mess is to make a budget.

This issue can’t really be stressed enough, because it really is the first step to getting out of the mess that the President and Congress have gotten the American people into. So, President Obama, quit the campaign trail, get back into Congress, pile the pressure on the Senate Democrats and get an actual budget passed.

In other words, for both Congress and President Obama, DO YOUR JOB.

Second on the list, probably of less importance, but still involving a huge military mistake by someone, is to deal with the spy plane in Iran. Again, this is the President’s job, as listed in the US Constitution as the Commander in Chief. Simply put, the spy plane is a military embarrassment that needs to be dealt with quickly. In fact it is so embarrassing, that it negates any of the past military victories that President Obama has had. Yes, it is even worse than GITMO and that’s saying a lot.

So, President Obama, get your military leaders on the phone, meet them in person, use whatever means at your disposal to get a plan in place to deal with that spy plane. All you are really being asked here is to DO YOUR JOB.

Third on the list is approval of the Keystone project. This project has been in the works for years and is likely President Obama’s only hope for the creation of real jobs (since clearly, all other proposals for job creation have either failed or have been sidelined). Not only is it a step toward energy independence, it is a political feather that can be placed in the Presidential cap. The environmental impact surveys have been done. The time to act is now. So, President Obama, if you want to keep your campaign promise of creating jobs, here’s your best chance for doing so. Delaying this will hurt America’s efforts toward creating energy sources closer to home. Approval of this will fulfill promises made during many, many Presidential speeches.

Since this is getting rather long, these three are the top expectations that should be accomplished before hitting the campaign trail. President Obama, GO DO YOUR JOB and stop the campaign until you get this done. You have plenty of cronies to sing your praises and raise money for you. You need to DO THE JOB you were elected to do.

Congress, the only way you can end the constant disappointment and bring at least some respect back is to do the one thing you are tasked to do by the US Constitution, pass a budget. So, Congress, do some compromising, take the first step to getting America back on a financially smart course, and DO YOUR JOB.

(White House photo)

This is it.  There are only four left.  Many a candidate has dropped out, been thrown out, or otherwise been weeded out.  Needless to say, none of our choices is perfect—Marco Rubio flat-out stated, “No—not this year.”

So let’s look at the folks we have—and let the chips fall where they may.

Mitt Romney: The most electable candidate—the most powerful candidate—the strongest against Obama—all that’s been said.  And in some sense, that’s true.  Mitt’s a devoted capitalist—he should be hailed by conservatives for his defense of profit, and the free market system.  Indeed, attacks on Bain Capital for “vulture capitalism” have been frankly disgraceful—and have rallied many conservative icons, like the great Rush Limbaugh, to his defense.  His big problem, of course, was his…less than ideal record as governor of Massachusetts.  Romney-Care comes to mind—he has a legitimate “state issue” defense, but unfortunately, the fact is that he did implement a government-run health care system.  The problem is consistency.  Can we trust him?

Newt Gingrich: To be clear, the problem with Newt is not his personal life—and certainly not this “he-said/she-said” fiasco regarding The Ex-Wife!  No…his problem is simply this: while Newt is a brilliant man, with many grand, visionary ideas…those ideas are often unstable—and at times contradictory.  What does Newt really believe?  He’s praised Big-Labor union boss Andy Stern…he’s a self-proclaimed “realpolitik Wilsonian” (as in…uber-Leftist president Woodrow Wilson)—and as Rick Santorum noted, he had long been a major supporter of an individual mandate for health care.  And then, of course, there’s the fact that, way back when, he was busted out of the House for ethics violations (along with the fact that his own party was getting really frustrated with his unstable style of leadership).  Mitt’s calling for the report to be shown to all.  In short, Newt did a lot of great things—such as balancing the budget four years in a row, back in the ’90s—but do we really want to take the risk?

Rick Santorum: For all the smearing from the Ron Paul campaign, Rick is the true, honest, 100%-solid conservative left on the ballot.  Mitt Romney is quite appealing to independents, to be sure—but as I’ve stated before, Rick is the ideal candidate for getting the working man “blue-collar” Democrats and independents, who eagerly wait for policies that focus on bringing manufacturing jobs back to America.  The claims that Rick is “unelectable” simply for his social conservatism is poppycock—they are the same views held by Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and so on.  His views on gay marriage are virtually identical to Obama’s.  What do provide challenges for Rick are his problems with style—some see him as cold and unlikable; he lacks the rhetorical power of Newt and the suave charisma of Mitt.  Substance is not Rick’s problem; style is.

Ron Paul: As expected, I’ve gotten grief from Revolutionaries about my previous article on Ron Paul.  I stand by every word in that piece—and will repeat my points, here.  Ron Paul is a terrible speaker—given to non-sequiter ramblings and a very weird sense of humor which only the Revolutionaries seem to get.  (As for those nuts…they seem to have almost no sense of protocol or decency, as their hecklings during the debates indicate—along with the death threats Glenn Beck has gotten, and the anti-Semitic slurs against Mark Levin and other Jewish conservatives.)  He also constantly invokes  straw men (“We can’t act like all Muslims are the same!”—“Well, my policies are only dangerous if you don’t like the Constitution!”), which the Leftist media (oh, I’m sorry…“corporate-controlled media”) would have a field day over.  While his ideas on limited government are excellent, he is not a good spokesman for them.  (His son, however, is an excellent one—and I freely admit that I would vote for Rand Paul in a heartbeat.)  As for foreign policy…well, need I say more?

Well, there you have it, folks.  You know where I stand.  Here’s hoping America will take note, and choose wisely….

These bills (SOPA being the House version and PIPA being the Senate version) were introduced as a way for the entertainment industry and the Government to “combat online piracy”. What this really means is that it’s a way for the Government to censor websites they feel threaten the status quo, and it’s a way for the entertainment industry and big corporations to take down websites that threaten their right to make tons of cash.

Here’s the thing about these bills – they were penned by lobbyists for the big media companies. Remember the big six we talked about before? These guys control all the news, and are all for the bills, which is why you haven’t seen much in the way of criticism on your nightly news. And before you begin thinking this is a partisan issue, let’s examine who introduced these bills. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced SOPA and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced Protect IP – a Republican from Texas and a Democrat from Vermont… Doesn’t get any more bi-partisan than that, folks!

Now, let’s look at their recent campaign contributions… Why, Lamar Smith’s top contributions came from AT&T, Clear Channel Communications, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, Verizon, and Time Warner. Meanwhile, Patrick Leahy’s top contributors were Time Warner, Walt Disney Co., General Electric, Viacom Inc., and Comcast Corp. What do all of these companies have in common? They’re all major media and telecom companies who have a storied history of stifling progress and innovation in order to maximize their own profits and maintain their stranglehold on what the people are exposed to.

Now, let’s forget the fact that these representatives are bought and paid for, just like every other member of Congress. Let’s take a look at the generation these men came from. Smith was born in 1947 while Leahy was born in 1940. When they were growing up, color televisions weren’t even readily available. These guys are actually proud of how little they know about technology and the Internet. Why should we be allowing them to regulate it? And before you start thinking that these are isolated instances, let me remind you that the average age in Congress hovers around 55. For a more startling look, check out this chart on Wikipedia, which details the currently serving Senators by age. You ever have to troubleshoot your grandparents’ computer problems? These are the kinds of people we are dealing with.

The solution is simple. Stop reelecting them. Unfortunately, it’s going to take a lot of convincing and education before we get there. This is why I got even more irritated when I saw this response from the Obama administration on their disingenuous White House Petitions website. Here’s the thing; compromise on these bills is completely unacceptable. They must be defeated and we need to stop bowing down to these corporations. There is no “real” threat from piracy. It has always existed and will always exist. Censoring the Internet is not going to magically make piracy go away.

In case you’ve got any delusions about Obama being a grand beacon of hope in all of this, let me remind you that this is the guy who put his signature on NDAA, ordered the assassination of (at least) two American citizens in drone strikes, has kept Guantanamo Bay open, continues the war on drugs, and praised whistleblowers while attempting to kill WikiLeaks in the same year.

So, how does it feel to be represented? This is the not the face of someone who cares about you or your liberty.

WINNERS:
Tim Tebow
Sure, he and his Denver Broncos lost the AFC Divisional playoff game to a vastly superior New England Patriots team. And yes, he’s being mocked by the likes of Bill Maher and his bigoted, anti-Christian ilk. But Tim Tebow is obscenely popular across the Fruited Plain for a first year starting quarterback. His name has become a verb. Aspiring athletes everywhere are Tebowing to celebrate in all manner of sports. Although Tebow classily refuses to endorse any political candidates, his open faith and role-model behavior ensure that every candidate on the Republican platform will be claiming him as their own.

Stephen Colbert
Comedian Stephen Colbert is running for president again. He started his faux-campaign so late that he can’t even be a write-in candidate in South Carolina. But that won’t stop some of his fans from trying. Colbert is having a ton of fun and is getting a whole lot of extra publicity for his show while simultaneously messing with the Republican establishment. Of course, his mockery of a campaign is really just a pale imitation of my mockery of a campaign.

Mitt Romney
It’s all over but the shouting. Mitt Romney has played the slow and steady role to the Republican nomination. The attacks from Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry aren’t sticking with the Republican faithful. In fact, their sudden anti-capitalist viewpoint has only served to further alienate them and fuel Romney’s campaign. Jon Huntsman has already dropped out and endorsed Romney as of Monday the 16th, shifting all 12 of his supporters to the Mitt camp. It’s been a good week for Mitt and next week in South Carolina should be even brighter. Then it is on to Florida. If that works out well for Romney, there will be nothing left to talk about.

MLK
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr would be 83 this week. I’m sure wherever he is, he is singing a glorious “hallelujah” seeing his dream fulfilled with a black man in the White House.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul picked up a key endorsement in South Carolina this week from Senator Tom Davis.  Paul’s future in this campaign is looking short, but for now he’s still putting up big numbers.  He is influencing the debate and he isn’t going away gently.

Consumers
Nothing happened to actually disrupt the flow of oil to the United States. The whole Straights of Hormuz debacle potentially, possibly, maybe could. But they haven’t yet. But somehow we all end up paying more at the pump.

Europe
Nine European nations had their credit ratings downgraded last week. More bad news for a region that’s had their fair share of economic woes recently.