Manufacturing a Reagan

If the Democratic party were just a little more clever - inventive - they would realize that the answer to all of this Reagan worship is to create a Reagan of their own. If you build it, they will come. And if it can act, it will leave a mystique.

Come on - how easy would this be to pull off? Easy... and fun! Done right, it could also be wildly entertaining, while politically feasible.

First, find an actor that everyone admires. Someone tough, but good looking. Suave, a great talker, able to flash a winning smile -- and someone with 'Gipper' name recognition. With a good percentage of Hollywood at their disposal, surely the Dems can find a good candidate to run.

Now as we've seen with Bush Jr., this candidate doesn't have to know anything about politics or be adept at making decisions -- he (I'll explain in a minute why the candidate must be male,) doesn't have to know anything about the job. He's just a figurehead. Someone for the people to 'trust.' Someone the people will 'like.' Better still, someone the people will vote for.

The real power will be vested in whoever slips un-noticed into the power seat (real lawmaker this time) as the running mate. As with Cheney, this person won't be allowed out very often, but will spend all of his or her time undoing the damage created by the Bush Administration, then solving Climate Change, rebuilding our schools, creating a public healthcare system - you get the picture. Its a full time job... but so is talking for the camera. The actor will take care of the media.

Considering that most of the voters in this country are now women, I think George Clooney would be perfect for the 'Reagan' roll. I haven't decided if he has the raw machismo for this - the Dems may want to go with Clint Eastwood instead - but after all, he was voted number 3 of the 10 "Top Sexiest Men" in People magazine, 2003. I think Clooney is the guy.

By the way... the fact that most voters are now women is also, sadly, the reason the Dems can't pick a female actress for this role. Alas, for some reason, women don't vote for women. I haven't figured this one out yet, but it seems to be related to the way women obsess and worry about their appearance when other women may be present to judge them. Other women are the competition; the president is supposed to be either 'daddy,' or someone they view as 'presidential.' Women love the idea of a woman president, but when it comes to actually voting for one, they don't follow through. You also can't forget the great number of worried, sexually insecure male voters out there - we need their votes too. The Dems had best go with Clooney if they want to be assured of victory. As the GOP will tell you, its all about winning. Can't make the mystique until you get elected.

Clooney can speak clearly and succinctly, can demonstrate that he has intelligence, and he even follows current events. He can flash a winning smile - and women fall all over themselves to get near him.

Has he played any very famous 'Gipper-esque' roles with ready-made sound bites that can be replayed, over and over again, in the media? Well, not sure the Ocean's 11, 12 and 13 really count, but everybody knows who he is. And everyone will believe he 'knows about Middle Eastern affairs,' because he made Syrianna and Three Kings.

An added plus: he played a doctor on ER. Beat that, Fred Thompson!

Now for the second person on the ticket, the real mover and shaker in the administration. While Clooney is out front giving the dramatic, moving speeches, kissing babies and charming the pants off the media, we can slip Dennis Kucinich onto the ticket as his running mate. Imagine how this will frighten the neocons... and yet, what can they do? How can they beat a cheerful, funny, good-looking guy like Clooney? Have you seen the guys they ran out there for the GOP debate?

Once elected, Kucinich (and Clooney of course - the man does have a brain and something even stranger, a conscience) will bring in a cabinet of brilliant strategists and matinée idols from both sides of the aisle. This will unite the nation into a state of media-idol "shock and awe." The Dems can gleefully fill the administration with people like Clint Eastwood, Martin Sheen, Sean Penn, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Bill Moyers, Leonardo DiCaprio, the Dixie Chicks, oh what the heck... Chuck Hagel (R-NE) - real politician - and Russ Feingold (D-WI), and of course Barbara Streisand. Maybe even Oprah! They also shouldn't forget John Edwards and Barack Obama - they've earned it. And a nice position for Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) - he's a good guy.

Maybe they can even create a new position for Arlen Specter, perhaps called 'Grumpy Defender of the Constitution.' Specter proved repeatedly that he had the cajones to stand up to Cheney and the rest of the GOP when it came to defending the Bill of Rights, so he should be rewarded - whether he likes it or not!

And if the Dems want to have a little fun with the now horrified neocons, they can make Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert the new Press Secretary (Stephen did audition for the job.) They can also - while stifling giggles - appoint Michael Moore to head up the FDA, and put RFK Jr. (or the Goracle himself) in charge of the EPA.

Ellen Degeneres can take over FEMA (she's from New Orleans: guess who'll be getting new levees?) Judge Judy would be a shoe-in to replace Alberto Gonzales at the helm of the In-Justice Department. At last... someone would actually know - and remember - what is going on over there.

And for their ultimate neocon-slapdown... Cindy Sheehan, Secretary of Defense!

Americans & Iraqis: All want US out of Iraq

Not that something this important would ever be covered by our corporate media, but in a vote taken yesterday, over half of the Iraqi parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country.

144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.

It's a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country's civil conflict, and at times it's been difficult to arrive at a quorum).

They don't want us there.

In an interesting convergence, a new USA Today/Gallup Poll that came out today indicates that 6 out of every 10 Americans favor a time table for withdrawal from Iraq.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Six out of 10 Americans support setting a timetable for pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, even though a clear majority predict civil war there if U.S. forces withdraw next year, according to a poll published on Wednesday.

The USA Today/Gallup poll also found a majority of Americans expect terrorist attacks on the United States regardless of whether U.S. forces pull out in 2008.

The poll results "underscore the limited traction the Bush administration's arguments have gotten as White House officials and congressional Democrats negotiate an interim bill to finance the war," USA Today said.

So... both Iraqis and Americans want a timetable for U.S. troop withdrawal. And remember, this is the 'Democratically elected parliament of Iraq'; the lawmakers for this now supposedly Democratic nation (remember all of those ink-stained fingers waving at the cameras?)

Bush and Cheney are running out of arguments behind which they can hide. It is painfully obvious that the only people who don't want a timetable are Bush, Cheney... and of course the contractors. Iraq is a money machine.

Not for us of course. Hell no. Its an elaborate money laundering scheme. The money goes in - via our tax coffers, enabled by the Democratic Congress - filters through the American contractors in Iraq (who over-bill for everything, and deliver next to nothing,) and then... they take home the cash! Halliburton now takes it home... to some country in Saudi Arabia. No American taxes for Cheney's boys!

Congressional Democratic majority - yo - are you listening? If this isn't a mandate for demanding that timetable, we need to toss y'all and try again, because you're just not tough enough for this sport.

Oh why couldn't Arnold Schwarzenegger have been a Democrat?

Hmm... somebody tough. But wait... according to this interview, perhaps we've got Clint Eastwood!

"I'm not really conservative. I'm conservative on certain things. I believe in less government. I believe in fiscal responsibility and all those things that maybe Republicans used to believe in but don't any more."

Clint - buddy - we need ya! Ride now to the aid of your country!

Pull out that Dirty Harry attitude and put on your Pale Rider hat (nice and low on your forehead,) and saddle up. Its obvious that the Democrats can't muster the courage -- we need someone to represent us, someone that a wannabe cowboy president will respect.

Ride up to the gates of the White House - under a flag of truce, if necessary - and hand them our demands. Yes, we're sending in our champion: going over the heads of Congress this time (they take too long, diddle around too much and then cave. We can handle this ourselves, right?)

We desperately need someone with a little 'Go ahead... MAKE MY DAY' or perhaps "I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it” in his spirit. W likes to dress up like a cowboy, but he just looks silly - and he can't act worth a damn. His 'sad' face is a joke. You could take him.

Just watch out for Cheney. He'll be lurking somewhere in the shadows - you can count on it - probably with his shotgun cocked. And he shoots at anything that moves. He probably won't hit you (Condi! DUCK!) but expect some armed resistance.