When President Richard Nixon resigned in shame in August of 1974, it was hard to find anyone who said they voted for Nixon. I remember my father laughing about all the Senator George McGovern supporters and voters who mysteriously appeared over that summer. We are witnessing a similar voter “selective memory” shift now in 2008. Heck, I bet if we held another Bush-Kerry election today and told people to vote the way they did in 2004, Kerry would win by a landslide.

Perhaps the most interesting “selective memory” shift is none other than our own Senator John McCain.  There is now a dispute around McCain telling people that he voted for 2000 presidential candidate Vice President Al Gore and 2004 candidate Senator John Kerry. This is reported in the Huffington Report.  If McCain voted for Gore and Kerry, I am not surprised. Remember the horrible way McCain was treated by the Bush/Rove pit bull team in South Carolina during that ugly 2000 primary?  Also In McCain’s case, his friendship with Kerry was well known. At one point, there even was talk of McCain running on the Kerry ticket.  The more I think about it, I am not quite sure why McCain would ever have voted for Bush.

In any case, who McCain voted for is immaterial (that’s why we vote in private). That is John McCain’s business. I just find it interesting that McCain would discuss his vote openly knowing that it would cause such a flap. That does matter because that shows pretty poor judgment. It appears that McCain either lied to the group of people who say they heard him say he voted for Kerry or he is lying now. The only thing this seems to prove is that McCain… lies.  This guy is becoming more and more desperate to say what the hard-core GOP’ers want to hear and it keeps catching him in lies.  That old integrity meter is sliding quickly into the red danger zone!

The GOP seems to have had hit another bump in the road.

One of Congress’ God-fearing family values guy, Congressman Vito Fossella, has expanded the definition of family values.  Instead of one family, he thinks families are such good ideas he decided to have a second.  Normally, however, one either gets divorced from the first spouse or the spouse dies.  Congressman Fossella, however, decided to have the duo-family thing simultaneously.  Hey, I got an idea… maybe he can move to the Fundamentalist LDS Church’s YFZ Ranch in Texas.

On top of that, Fossella has not resigned.  Probably things are a tad tense back at the house (with a small “H”); however, I suggest that the Ethics Committee of the House (with a big “H”) censor this guy.  This past March the Congressman broke ranks from his GOP colleagues and issued a press release saying that the House Ethics Committee needs to , “have an independent office to  review complaints against members.”   Seems like he should get his wish.

In all seriousness, this is tragic because there is a three year old lovechild involved.  Once again, the old adage appears true… sometimes its a shame that a child can not pick his or her parents.

OK, let me get this straight. Senator Barack Obama gets crucified (nice use of that verb) for the comments of his pastor Jeremiah Wright. After a month of turmoil, Obama denounces Wright. It appears that Obama has addressed this issue and is now moving on.

Senator John McCain, on the other hand, is running around on the campaign trail with a preacher also offensive and divisive. Here is a clip of Reverend Rod Parsley from February 26, 2008 at a McCain rally in Cincinnati, Ohio. This guy is dishing up fear and hate at a ferocious clip, yet McCain does not denounce him– he welcomes him to the campaign! McCain calls him his “moral compass and spiritual guide.” Zowie, Johnny boy, be careful whose foxhole you jump into… this guys pretty extreme!

This double standard has me puzzled. Is one form of hate better than another? If McCain were elected to the White House, I certainly would not want him negotiating with Muslim countries while linking himself to the “good words” of Reverend Parsley.

I have an idea… let’s try separation of church and state in the presidential campaign. We have seen Obama separate from Wright… let’s see McCain denounce Parsley. If on the other hand McCain really endorses and embraces Parsley’s message of hatred and calling for the annihilation of Islams, then McCain is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief of the world’s largest army.

By the way, question for Reverend Parsley or Senator McCain: Whatever happened to, “Love thy neighbor?”  Is that nifty notion still discussed in anyone’s church anymore? Just curious… all this talk of violence and mayhem associated with your sermons kind of has me wondering if your moral compass is pointing… south.

History is wonderful for many reasons.  Perhaps the greatest one is that we know it has the ability to repeat itself.  Sometimes, rather than let history repeats itself by mistake, makers of history can manipulate current actions to influence the course of history.  Sounds complicated?  Here is what I suggest.

Senator Hillary Clinton, like her or not, one must admit that she is a tenacious campaigner.  Now that the end appears to be near, Senator Barack Obama needs a way to have her a way to (a) bow out and (b) help heal a very divided party.  Time to go to the history books for guidance.

The past shows us that Abraham Lincoln and Dwight Eisenhower had similar problems with political opponents who were thorns in their sides.  Lincoln had Ohio Senator Salmon Chase and Eisenhower had California Governor Earl Warren.  Like bad pennies, these two did not go away.  Both presidents “solved” their situations by appointing their rivals to the US Supreme Court.  Neither Chase nor Warren had been judges before landing as Chief Justices on the court.

Clinton would make an interesting associate justice.  She is smart.  She was the first female partner at the prestigious Rose Law Firm in Little Rock and twice listed as one of America’s top 100 lawyers by the National Law Review in 1988 and 1991.  I suspect that she would do quite well on the court, and it would be a wonderful face saving opportunity.  I also suspect that such a deal if offered to her would get her fully on board a Obama presidential campaign.

A few weeks ago I commented on Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne hiring a convicted embezzler at $140,000 a year to work at the Department.  As you may recall, Horne was fine with having an embezzler on the staff.

The plot now thickens.  It appears that Donald Houde may have landed the job via nepotism.  You see, while a consultant for the department Houde married his supervisor Janice McGoldrick. She, in turn, suggested her new hubby for the job.

Ironically, no one bothered to have Houge fill out an application nor did the ADE bother to run a back ground check.  The fact that he does not hold a four-year degree seems irrelevant because his boss (and wife) wanted him in that job.  The fact that he spent two years of an eight year sentence in prison for embezzlement seems irrelevant.  Horne told Channel 15 that he knew of the conflict but apparently he is AOK with the practice (and the hiring.)

I asked Horne’s office if having a convicted embezzler required any special bonding.  Art Harding, Horne’s spokesman said no.  I sure wonder if the ADE’s insurer knows about this special situation over at the department?

It seems ironic that this guy would not be able to teach in our classroom but he is AOK with handling our money at the department.  This, in my humble opinion, stink.  Even Horne should smell see his mistake on this one.

The Arizona Republic buried the article on page A14 in the May 7, 2008 paper.  Shame on them….

Anyone appalled by the recent erosion of liberties and rights by the United States Supreme Court should be appalled by Senator John McCain’s comments yesterday saying that he would continue to appoint justices like Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.  The paper did the senator a real favor by hiding this McCain-ism off the front page.

McCain has now embraced Bush’s economic policies, war on terrorism in Iraq policies and  Bush’s goal of sending the court back into the days of Dred Scott thinking!  By the way, in case you missed it, on the same page was an article telling of a dozen nuns being denied the right to vote yesterday in Indiana because nuns have no government issued photo id.  This ridiculous suppression of voting rights in brought to us by the US Supreme Court.  We live in dark times…. McCain appears to want to make them darker.

Dear Phoenix Voters:

We elected Phil Gordon in September of 2003. To refresh your memory, Mayor Gordon ran against an anti-immigrant, send-them-back-across-the-border zealot Randy Pullen. Mayor Gordon beat Pullen like a rented mule (PG 57,311 to RP 20,922).

Now a group calling themselves the “American Citizens United”, headed up by community flame-thrower Anna Gaines, is out trying to collect 23,751 signatures to put a recall election on the ballot. What I do not understand, why does not Gaines run for office herself? She seems sure that she speaks for a majority of the people (afterall, she feels that American citizens are united with her based on her group’s name)… why not be a real leader and run?

This group of angry people want to recall Mayor Gordon because he is not Randy Pullen.  Perhaps the folks in that group should have worked harder to get Pullen elected.  To paraphrase someone many in that group probably adores, United State Associate Supreme Court Justice Nino Scalia, “Get over it!”

I went to the group’s website. The Mission Statement is one of those wonderful self-justifying diatribes saying it is not a hate group but it hates all groups unlike itself. For example, no one with dual citizenship is allowed to be a member. That certainly is a well thought-out “blanket” statement showing open mindedness! Madeleine Albright, Martina Navratilova and Pelé need not apply.

Russell Pearce, to say the least, is a complicated figure. A couple weeks ago I was reading about his distaste for voter initiatives and referendums putting issues to the voters directly. Now, a couple weeks later he holds a press conference imploring the legislature to approve HIS referendum and support HIS voter initiative.

Is it just I, or does anyone else find this behavior, shall I say, somewhat illogical?

Here is the problem. Pearce appears to oppose the process when he is opposed to the idea being promoted (like funding schools or early childhood development). Conversely, when the system suits his narrow thinking (I use this word liberally in Pearce’s case), then he is all for the process. I guess this would make him a hypocrite of the first order.

A friend of mine heard a piece on Pearce on the radio. He asked if this self-proclaimed patriotic ideologue drunk on power is really as clownish as he appeared on the radio. Well, I believe a picture is worth a thousand words. In this photo (for those of you who do not know Russell the clown legislator, I will let you guess. Hint: think of Betsy Ross on acid!), does anyone else find a politician “wearing an American flag” somewhat disrespectful to our flag? Although it certainly looks clownish on a grown man, in my opinion, the flag was not made to be Russell’s personal wardrobe.

Thursday night I was on a flight to New York from Phoenix.  While waiting for the flight I was speaking with a lady who is a big John McCain supporter.  We had a civil conversation (seriously).  She was touting the point that the “surge” had all but stopped violence in Iraq.  She continued by saying that because of John McCain, our troops were safer now than pre-surge.

Unfortunately, I did not have the stats in front of me, but I told her that, with all due respect, that April was not a great month to support her claim.  Well, it turns out that over 50 American troops were killed in Iraq in April (and April’s not even one of those pesky 31 day months).  This was the worst month for American military casulaties since September 2007.

Thanks John McCain….