'twas Evil Capitalist Pigs that killed the beast...

The Lieberman-Warner "Let's Kill Capitalism Once and for All Act of 2008" will be debated soon in the Senate. Some background can be found here. However, it looks like the bill may meet the fate of last year's immigration bill. But, thank goodness, this year the media can ignore the grassroots effort to kill the cap-in-trade bill. Why? This year we have a convenient scapegoat...the Fortune 500 company:

An influential coalition of Fortune 500 companies and environmental groups that was formed to support climate-change legislation has splintered over the Lieberman-Warner bill that is headed next week to the Senate floor.

[...]

Without widespread corporate support, passage of the bill - already a long shot at best - becomes even more unlikely this year. President Bush remains opposed. House Democrats have been slow to act.

Besides that, a backdrop of rising gasoline prices and the sluggish economy makes it difficult to win votes for a regulatory scheme that will raise the prices of electricity and gasoline. In fact, a key purpose of the bill is to put a price on the emissions of greenhouse gases, as a way to speed the transition to a clean-energy economy and slow down global warming.

See, the People want carbon taxes. It's those corporations that are impeding progress. Who is John Galt?

But don't worry, there is plenty of time to pass the legislation next year. In fact, the environmental lobby didn't even bring their A-game this time around (emphasis mine):

[E]ven supporters concede that the debate will set the scene for action in 2009.

"This will put us in a position to have action next year," says David Doniger, director of the climate center at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a supporter of the bill. "We expect in the Senate that the 60-vote rule will be applied. That's a hard one to get over."

As currently written, Lieberman-Warner might fall short of a 50-vote majority in the Senate, let alone the 60 votes required to close debate, insiders say. Presidential candidates (and Senators) Clinton, McCain and Obama all support climate-change legislation.

Thanks, New Hampshire!

UPDATE:Heh. Looks like one of the environmental groups pushing Lieberman-Warner is violating McCain-Feingold. I wonder if Sen. McCain will go after them the way he went after Wisconsin Right to Life.

Liebs and Grahamnesty leave Vets group...because the group attacked Obama?

It must be fun to be a Senator and put what's best for your fellow Senator before what is best for the country. Anyways. The other day, Vets for Freedom issued the following ad, asking Sen. Obama why he will meet with Iran, but not with Gen. Petraeus:



In response, Sens. Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham promptly stepped down from their positions on the group:

Senators Joseph I. Lieberman and Lindsey Graham, prominent surrogates for Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign, stepped down Wednesday from their positions with an independent group that released a pair of Internet advertisements attacking Senator Barack Obama on Iraq.

Mr. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, and Mr. Graham, Republican of South Carolina, were both on the policy advisory board to the organization, Vets for Freedom, which on Wednesday released its second Web advertisement in less than a week attacking Mr. Obama.

[...]

After inquiries from reporters, the senators released a joint letter to Vets for Freedom on Wednesday saying they had requested a leave from their positions to come into compliance with the new policy.

“This is obviously something we’re working through,” said Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the McCain campaign. “This is the kind of thing that happens when you have the strictest possible policy on these issues.”

The new policy was meant to head off embarrassing questions about connections of members of the McCain campaign to special interests that run counter to Mr. McCain’s reformist reputation. But adhering to that standard has proved complicated.

So anyways, we're screwed in 2008. Especially if McCain's campaign is going to be that insane.

Exit question: Why did Sen. Lieberman have to step down from his position at Vets for Freedom, but not have to cancel a speaking engagement at a conference held by Rev. John Hagee?

Jonah Goldberg touts Palin for Veep

Writing over at NRO's The Corner, Goldberg says (emphasis mine):

I'm more and more keen on Sarah Palin. [...] Palin is tackling the establishment in Alaska, including the oil and gas industry (much to the chagrin of some of my relatives!). She's attractive (former Ms. Alaska). She could get some real profile out of this polar bear lawsuit. She reinforces McCain's outsider-reformer-Western credentials. And, for the moderate soccer mom types who were all jazzed about Hillary being the first woman president, she might win a few suburbanite female swing-voters for the same reason. Obama is going to have to pick a boring white guy precisely because he's not one. McCain doesn't need to pick a boring white guy because he's got that locked up already.

Part of the reason I feel that it is so important that McCain chooses someone like Gov. Palin or Gov. Bobby Jindal are the multiple polls showing generic Republicans losing to generic Democrats. In the mind of the public, "generic Republican" means a white, probably Southern, older man. Like it or not, McCain needs to choose someone who's not a white man as the veep. And, preferably, it will be someone like Palin who is a true conservative.

About McCain's VP selection committee head...

Contrary to popular belief, Sen. McCain will not be heading up his veep selection process himself. While McCain may be "chairing" that committee, a former Reagan official (from 1987-1989) named Arthur B. Culvahouse will be heading with search. As with most things McCain, the "Reagan official" tag is a nice smokescreen for Culvahouse's moderate leanings (emphasis mine):

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has tapped a former Reagan administration official to head his campaign’s search for a vice presidential nominee.

Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) told The Hill that Arthur Culvahouse, who was Reagan’s White House counsel from March 1987 to January 1989, will be helping McCain vet candidates and develop a list.

[...]

Culvahouse has been active in GOP circles, consistently contributing thousands of dollars to Republican candidates. He donated to McCain in 2006, 2007 and 2008. Other Republicans that Culvahouse has contributed to include Sens. Alexander, Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Richard Lugar (Ind.).

I can tell you that most Reagan Conservatives are just so darn excited about Sens. Lugar and Specter that they can't help but donate to their campaigns. Even Sen. Alexander's American Conservative Union rating is only a 72 - and his is the highest of the three by 12 points and 32 points, respectively. If who Mr. Culvahouse is donating to is any indication of the type of people he might choose, we're in for a longgggggg 2008 election season.

On the other hand, at least Culvahouse has some good instincts:

He also publicly supported the controversial nomination of John Bolton to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in 2005.

McCain/Bolton '08? If only...

My take on McCain's immigration comments

The blogosphere is abuzz with fury over some recent comments by Sen. McCain regarding immigration:

“Senator Kennedy and I tried very hard to get immigration reform, a comprehensive plan, through the Congress of the United States,” he said. “It is a federal responsibility and because of our failure as a federal obligation, we’re seeing all these various conflicts and problems throughout our nation as different towns, cities, counties, whatever they are, implement different policies and different programs which makes things even worse and even more confusing.”

He added: “I believe we have to secure our borders, and I think most Americans agree with that, because it’s a matter of national security. But we must enact comprehensive immigration reform. We must make it a top agenda item if we don’t do it before, and we probably won’t, a little straight talk, as of January 2009.”

Ace, DrewM, and Ed Morrissey have all given their takes, and everyone's favorite Nickelback-listening, WWF-watching 'tard has even gone so far as to state that he will not be supporting McCain in the fall on this basis. I think worry about these comments is premature. I agree with Jim Geraghty:

Team McCain tells me the senator's comments were poorly worded. There's been no discussion within the campaign of altering their stance on illegal immigration, and as far as everyone on the campaign is concerned, the policy is still, 'secure the border first.'

I said, "so, this change away from border-security-first wouldn't happen, unless John McCain and his top advisers had gotten together, studied it in great detail, weighed all the advantages and disadvantages, and came to the carefully-considered conclusion that they're really not interested in winning the election?" The strategist laughed and agreed.

I think that if McCain meant these comments the way bloggers are taking them, he is profoundly stupid. He likes to agitate conservatives, but I doubt he thinks agitating conservatives is worth losing the election.

This would be like Sen. Obama saying "You know what we need on the table as of January 2009? We need to start a massive government program to cure AIDS. After all, the government started it, so they need to stop it." (Or, noting agreement iwth any number of crazy Hate-monger Wright sayings.) Sure, McCain may believe it and he may even try to resurrect amnesty, but he's not going to start beating that drum until he wins the general election.

Gov. Jindal's proper role

There has been a lot of buzz around Gov. Bobby Jindal of late, especially after the media found out he was spending Memorial Day at Sen. John McCain's place in Scottsdale, Arizona with several other potential vice presidents.

While I'm not ashamed to say that I'd be one of the first people to join a Jindal '12 campaign, I don't think he's ready for the national stage...yet. But there is something that could both introduce him to the nation and prepare him for national scrutiny and campaigning:

Which is why I think Jindal's a long-shot here. He's too young, and whatever "ageism" the Louisiana governor might offset being on the ticket undercuts McCain's central theme of Obama's inexperience. Jindal's presence at McCain's home could very well be just an acknowledgment that Jindal is now a central figure in Republican politics. It could be something more.

[...]

But let's remember what launched Obama on the national scene: It was his 2004 convention speech in Boston. Almost immediately Obama's name entered the list of potential candidates. Without that, Obama, who would have won his Senate seat anyway, would almost certainly not be running today.

I think this analysis is largely correct. Sen. McCain needs to have a vice president that is younger than him, but not one that is so young that it highlights his old age even more. Giving Gov. Jindal a prominent speaking slot at the convention would give him exposure, and provide the country with a reminder that hope^tm and change^tm have the be actions, not words. I think a case can be made that Gov. Jindal has brought hope and change to the citizens of Louisiana, while Sen. Obama has just provided flowery, generic speeches.

To be honest, I can't see Gov. Jindal running for president in 2012, either. I think that McCain will probably choose Mitt Romney and limit himself to one term (if he wins). And, since Republicans tend to nominate the person "whose turn it is", you can expect a Romney nomination in 2012 whether McCain wins or loses, with Gov. Jindal (who would by then be in his second term as governor) chosen as Mitt's VP.

The Long (Veepstakes) Weekend

Sen. McCain is is taking a, ahem, "purely social" break from campaigning to host a Memorial Day getaway in Arizona for some Republican (and Independent) officeholders:

The Memorial Day guest list at Sen. John McCain's Arizona home runs to at least three Republicans mentioned as vice presidential running mates, but a top aide said Wednesday that vetting possible veeps is not on the agenda.

"It's purely social," said Mark Salter, a senior adviser to McCain.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney were all invited to a Memorial Day gathering at the senator's home in Sedona, Ariz. Romney ran for the Republican presidential nomination in last winter's primaries, but dropped out months ago and has endorsed McCain.

[...]

Among other guests expected were Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., close confidantes of McCain.

Hmmm. The good news: Mike Huckabee isn't there, while Gov. Bobby Jindal and (sigh) Gov. Mitt Romney are.

The bad news: McCain, apparently, sees moderate Florida Gov. Charlie Crist as an acceptable choice for vice president. Also, Lieberman and Graham will be there, although there is a real possibility that those two are just there for social reasons.

Out of those choices, my favorite is, of course, Jindal. He's the best conservative for the job, although there is a risk of him ruining his future by signing on to a losing campaign. (Even though I would support him right out of the gate in 2012 should he run for VP and lose to Obama.)

Is this the truth or just Bill O'Reilly being Bill O'Reilly?

McCain might cut off Newsweek from the Straight Talk Express?



I agree with the panel that this wouldn't be productive. He should keep Newsweek reporters on the bus, but mock them at every turn.

The biggest problem with John McCain's 2013 speech...

The biggest problem with McCain's 2013 speech is that I can already see, in my head, the Democrat's 2012 campaign election ads when McCain inevitably doesn't come through on his promises (especially since so many of those promises are dependent upon Democrats being bipartisan).

(Nevermind the fact that every Democratic electoral success requires them to either run as conservatives or promise things they can't deliver.)

The most depressing story I've read all election season.

Granted, stories and rumors like this abound before the VP is chosen, but this name shouldn't be on any list:

Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and defeated contender for the GOP presidential nomination, is currently at the top of John McCain's short list for a running mate. At least that's the word from a top McCain fundraiser and longtime Republican moneyman who has spoken to McCain's inner circle. The fundraiser is less than thrilled with the idea of Huckabee as the vice presidential nominee, and many economic conservatives—turned off by the populist tone of Huckabee's campaign and his tax record as governor—are likely to share that marked lack of enthusiasm.

Ughhhhhhhhhhhh.

The problem with this line of thought is that it wasn't just economic conservatives who thought it was a bad idea to have Huckabee on the ticket. National security conservatives opposed him because of his lack of foreign policy experience and on the basis of how easily swayed he was on abandoning Guantanamo Bay. Some social conservatives liked that he was a Christian, but disliked his use of identity politics. Conservatives of all stripes can question his previous, liberal stances on issues ranging from crime to immigration.

If McCain's team is so inept that they don't realize that conservatives of all stripes have reason to oppose Huckabee, they deserve to lose.

I'm going to try to concentrate on this, and not the McCain Global Alarmism Tour

McCain advisor Mark Slater ripped into Newsweek for their current, extremely biased cover story on those always-positive paragons of virtue, those Messianic masters of post-partisanship, those harbingers of hope^tm and change^tm the Obama campaign. It's slightly long, but worth reading. Here he is responding to the article's claim that McCain's campaign would rely on distortions, negative advertising, and 527 groups:

By accepting the Obama campaign construct as if it were objective, Evan and Richard framed this race exactly as Senator Obama wants it to be framed—every issue that raises doubts about his policy views and judgment is part of a smear campaign intended to distract voters from the real issues at stake in the election, and, thus, illegitimate. And even if Senator McCain might not be inclined to support such advertising, if he can't stop them from occurring then he will have succumbed to the temptation to put ambition before principle. How this notion could appear credible after MoveOn, the AFL-CIO and the DNC launched negative ad campaigns weeks ago, and after leaks from the Obama campaign that they would soon start running negative ads against McCain, is mystifying.

Bravo.

Between this and Salter's previous smack-downs against Obama and the media (but I repeat myself), I'm just about ready to write in Mark Salter's name in November.

Next up, The McCain-Feingold Tour!

Sen. McCain, who has done theme tours on his military service, "forgotten" laces, and health care access, plans to do more tours in the future:

"John McCain is going to be doing more of these themed tours of America, and one of them is going to be on energy and global climate change. It could get him into trouble with Republicans, of course, and with the base, who don't think there is much climate change going on, but it is something that he's very passionate about and he's going to be talking about it."

Thanks John. I would have absolutely no problem with this tour if McCain was offering free market, conservative solutions to environmental problems. But based on his co-sponsorship of bills like McCain-Lieberman, there's no reason to believe this will be the case.

Never underestimate the ability of a Republican to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Fund drive for "Rev." Parrish

Yesterday Gateway Pundit reported that "Rev." Marty Parrish's church has disowned him, stating that not only is he not a minister there, hes not even an active member. Not only that, but Parrish was using his web site to try to make money off of the stunt.

Well, after all hell broke lose in his unmoderated (hint, hint) comments section, Parrish has deleted all the text of the original post, and responded in the comments:

You guys are all CORRECT!

Now I am going to visit each one of you at your home while you are in bed at night asleep under the blankets just after Mother kisses you good night and...


I AM GOING TO WEAR THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF ALL OF YOU.

Bastards.

I am.

Marty Tarrel Parrish

PS. Kiss your ass goodbye cause God just gave it to me.

Hmmm...he must have gone to a very interesting seminary. Maybe he's angling for that associate pastor position at Trinity United. If only he weren't the White Devil...

Nuance.

The New York Times continues to have trouble finding life-long Democrats who will be voting for John McCain in the fall. They sure seem to have no trouble finding "Republicans" itchin' to vote for Obama, though.

Seriously guys, it's not "news" if you run the same story at least two times a week.

19 rules for McCain's running mate...

Over at RedState, Dan McLaughlin has a list of veepstakes do's and don't's. It's a handy little list, albeit one that completely takes any dark horses or otherwise interesting picks off the table.

The "Don't's" list eliminates consideration of the following people:

- Sen. Joe Lieberman
- Sen. John Thune
- Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchenson
- Sen. Lindsay Graham
- possibly Rep. Marsha Blackburn
- Rep. Eric Cantor
- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
- former Representative and SEC Chairman Chris Cox
- former Representative and OMB Chairman Rob Portman
- former Sen. Fred Thompson
- former Sen. Phil Graham
- Rhode Island Gov. Donald Carcieri
- Gov. Bobby Jindal
- Gov. Sarah Palin
- Gov. Matt Blunt
- former Lt. Gov. Michael Steele
- former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina
- NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani
- Gov. Charlie Crist
- former governor and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge
- Rep. Ron Paul
- possibly Sen. Tom Coburn
- Sen. Chuck Hagel
- Gov. Haley Barbour
- former Rep. JC Watts
- former Rep. John Kasich
- former Gov. Jeb Bush
- Sen. Elizabeth Dole
- Gov. Linda Lingle

The "Do's" list leaves the following three people:

- former Gov. Mitt Romney
- Gov. Mark Sanford
- Gov. Tim Pawlenty
- Gov. Jon Huntsman

Naturally, since this is RedState, they seem to be focused on the most boring choice possible: Mitt Romney. What is interesting about this is that Mitt Romney breaks several of the "don't's" they have listed. Despite his looks, the man is 61 years old, he would have lost the governorship in 2006 had he chose to run for re-election, and he is a one-term governor. And let's face it: the only reason conservatives even flocked to him at all was because he was seen as the anti-McCain. Choosing Mitt would be a bad idea.

UPDATE: David Freddoso points out another possible VP for McCain : Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. I added him to the list.

McCain's POW time & the general election

Karl Rove writes in the Wall Street Journal today on Sen. McCain's unwillingness to talk about "private" stories. For example:

[Col. Bud] Day relayed to me one of the stories Americans should hear. It involves what happened to him after escaping from a North Vietnamese prison during the war. When he was recaptured, a Vietnamese captor broke his arm and said, "I told you I would make you a cripple."

The break was designed to shatter Mr. Day's will. He had survived in prison on the hope that one day he would return to the United States and be able to fly again. To kill that hope, the Vietnamese left part of a bone sticking out of his arm, and put him in a misshapen cast. This was done so that the arm would heal at "a goofy angle," as Mr. Day explained. Had it done so, he never would have flown again.

But it didn't heal that way because of John McCain. Risking severe punishment, Messrs. McCain and Day collected pieces of bamboo in the prison courtyard to use as a splint. Mr. McCain put Mr. Day on the floor of their cell and, using his foot, jerked the broken bone into place. Then, using strips from the bandage on his own wounded leg and the bamboo, he put Mr. Day's splint in place.

Years later, Air Force surgeons examined Mr. Day and complemented the treatment he'd gotten from his captors. Mr. Day corrected them. It was Dr. McCain who deserved the credit. Mr. Day went on to fly again.

Rove goes on to make the case that McCain needs to be more open to letting the public know about these events. I'm not sure. I agree (in part) with Ed Morrissey that the article would have sounded better coming from a fellow POW such as Col. Day. I think a better idea would be a 527 group of McCain's fellow POWs, Vietnam veterans, etc. to deliver ads in the fall to tell these stories for McCain. That way, the general public will still get a sense of McCain's service in the Vietnam war while McCain runs primarily on the issues (with a little war-hero biography thrown in here and there).

The darkest of dark horses

I had held off even mentioning Carly Fiorina as a possible choice for Sen. McCain's running mate, but VP Watch has pointed out this news item that suggests we may have to start looking into her background:

Former HP chief Carly Fiorina is rumored to be near the top of a very short list of possible Vice Presidential candidates.

Fiorina has already joined the Republican National Committee as the party's "Victory Chairman." She has been promoting presumed GOP presidential candidate John McCain on the campaign trail. "John McCain has the right vision for our country and the character, experience and judgment to lead," she has said.

While the article goes on to point out that this could just be a red herring to trow off the Democrats, I think it's worth looking into.

Her obvious positives: as a former CEO and business leader she knows more about the economy than McCain, she brings gender diversity to the GOP ticket (which will be especially helpful if Sen. Obama gets the nomination), and she has the executive experience that Sen. McCain lacks. Now, on to the negatives.

Fiorina's most glaring negative is that she has never run for any public office before. While she has done some campaigning for Sen. McCain already, it is my understanding that this campaigning has been confined to the business/technology community. McCain needs a VP who is at home on the campaign trail and can connect with everyday workers with as much ease as they connect with executives. Having never run for office, most of Fiorina's views outside of business issues are unknown. If she is socially conservative (which is what McCain will need), she has to be able to prove it somehow. Her tenure as CEO at Hewlett-Packard ended when she was forced to resign by board members due to what they saw as poor performance.

As I said before, most of her views are unknown. However, she has done some interviews which have touched on important political issues. She, like McCain, sees great promise in guest worker programs for foreign workers:

I think first of all the H-1B Visa program is very important to the technology industry. The American people get concerned and understandably emotional about it when they perhaps don’t understand the differences between the H-1B Visa program and illegal immigration. So we have to make these differences clear because as McCain said, illegal immigration is a hugely emotional issue and it’s a very difficult issue in a state like California. So we have to be very open and specific about why the H-1B Visa program bears no resemblance to illegal immigration. We also then have to recognize that American workers all over this country are increasingly concerned about their ability to compete against foreign workers, whether those foreign workers are outside our country or whether they’re coming into our country.

However, in the interview quote above, she segues into the need to retrain American workers, so that businesses are less reliant on guest worker programs in the future.

On Iraq, Fiorina doesn't seem to be anti-war, but she may have doubts over whether it was the right thing to do in the first place:

Whatever people think about how we got here, what we do now is a matter of grave importance. And Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama think that what we should do is depart even though we're finally starting to see success. John McCain believes that we need to build on the success that we've seen in the last year or so and win in Iraq - not because he wants to stay there for 100 years but in fact because he believes a stable country is in our interests.

In my heart, I think it takes a soldier to bring us home with victory and honor. I think it takes a soldier, someone who really understands war - how terrible it is, the cost of war, the price of war - I think it takes someone who really understands it, to finish it.

On a better note, she doesn't seem like the type of person to play the gender card. For example, she has questioned Fortune magazine's list of top female executives:

It’s a terrific thing to highlight women leaders ... [but] the list sends the wrong message. The list says women have to compete against each other one to 50, because they can’t play with the big boys. It’s not the fact that they’re highlighted that’s the problem. ... I think part of the reason we haven’t made as much progress as we should is that women leaders are thought of as different somehow. There is no men’s list.

I'm sure that if Sen. McCain is seriously considering her for VP, we'll subtly start learning about more of her personal views on political topics outside the realm of business. But, as I wrote this post, I have become increasinly convinced that this won't be the case. McCain will have to bring his A game this year, and choosing an RNC insider unknown to most voters might not be the best idea.

We'll see.

John McCain in Kentucky Today

...about 65 miles from my hometown, no less. I wasn't able to make it, as Inez, KY is pretty hard to get to from Lexington, but the text of Sen. McCain's speech is posted at his site. Some excerpts, emphasis mine in all:

I think we should establish a "People Connect Program" that rewards companies that offer high-speed Internet access services to underserved, low-income customers by allowing these companies to write off the cost of this service. The government should enlist the help of private/public partnerships to devise creative and successful solutions to the lack of access to information technology. In many places, cities and towns are working with businesses that have experience providing high-speed Internet services to share the cost of building and improving that service. Where companies are unwilling to build information infrastructure, the federal government can support towns through government-backed loans or by issuing bonds with a low interest rate.

This is a practical, free-market alternative to plans for ineffectual municipally-owned wi-fi in major cities. In my hometown, which is much easier to get to than Inez and has a higher population, high-speed internet only became available in the past 3 years. I would still venture to say that a large number of people in my community still have dial-up. In a community like Inez, where 37% of families were below the poverty line, this program will certainly help increase the flow of information and jobs to the area.

Rural areas often struggle to attract young highly qualified and motivated new teachers. At the same time, we make it very difficult for Americans with exceptional skills for teaching to enter the field of education through non-traditional means. These are often people who would like nothing better than to take advantage of the quiet beauty and traditional values that are the foundation of rural America. But the path to teaching is often made up of more barriers than gateways. You can be a Nobel Laureate and not qualify to teach in most public schools today. The next president should aggressively support state and national initiatives that attract exceptionally qualified candidates into teaching and that provide certification based on the candidates' demonstrated knowledge of the subjects they will teach, as well as their knowledge of how to teach. Terrific organizations like Teach for America attract the very best young college graduates from all disciplines to enter the teaching profession. The Troops to Teachers program takes advantage of the sense of heightened responsibility and duty that military veterans were taught in the discipline of the armed forces, and which makes many of them excellent candidates to impart those virtues to our children, and help them see the value of learning as a means to self-improvement.

If my time in an Eastern Kentucky public school taught me anything, it's that there is a need for good teachers in the area. I had many that were excellent, but just as many that spend most of the class debating various NASCAR-themed topics with the students.

Not to knock Inez or Martin County, but if someone wants to show up in a town of 466 people and spend their life there as a teacher, there should be few barriers in their way.

Before I take your questions and ask you a few of my own, which is why I came here today, I want to close by saying that if I am president, I will not forget that the decisions I make will affect, for good or ill, your ability to make decisions for your families. I will not forget my responsibilities to every American community. I will not offer talk as a substitute for action. I will not make promises I intend to forget. And I will not make this my last visit to Inez. If I'm elected, I will come back here in the course of my administration; hold another townhall meeting, and invite you to hold me accountable for the decisions I have made and the promises I have sworn to keep.

All I can say is, if Sen. McCain is elected, he better make sure that he keeps this promise. Small town people don't forget statements like this.