Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

I wish I had something profound to offer in anticipation of the election tomorrow. I don’t. What I keep thinking of is election night 2000. And the days that followed.

The DNC have never forgiven Dubya for winning that election. And their disappointment grew into hatred when he took charge after 9/11. It was as if they were holding onto a lifeline in December 2000, and by the same time next year were seeing it pulled through their fingers no matter how hard they tried to hold on.

They are close to the end of their rope. And they seem to know that.

I expect the DNC to do everything they can to destroy what is left of the electoral process. They got a taste last time, and found many Americans were willing to let them get away with it. They will go to at least another level this year.

Regardless of outcome tomorrow, we need to cleanse all votor rolls and re-register every eligible person. And we need to eliminate the process of having voter registration by proxy, allowing organizations to handle what should be one of the few tasks government does. When voting laws were first established, people knew nothing of photographs, let alone photo ID. Identification must be presented when registering, and again when voting. These are not difficult. They are essential.

Steve Sailer did some extensive research and analysis for an article at VDARE.com comparing the intelligence of both presidential candidates. Steve concludes, among other things:

The subtle difference between Bush and Kerry in two words: Bush is competitive and Kerry is ambitious.

Read the article to see who is smarter.

Sarah saw it linked by Hud, and virtually challenged me to comment. Even though my brain power has been consumed by MT and comment spam issues the last few days, I thought I should at least give it a try. After all, I’ve taken all the Air Force versions of the tests mentioned, and at about the same timeframe as the candidates.

In an aircraft, an attitude indicator, also known as an artificial horizon, gives a pilot visual indication of the aircraft’s orientation in 3-dimensional space. An aircraft can be oriented through pitch, roll, and yaw. The attitude indicator gives roll and pitch information. The pilot portion of the AF test gives attitude indications, and the examinee must select the drawing of an aircraft which reflects the correct orientation based on the indication.

For me, this was pretty simple, although inverted flight might catch me off guard. I had experience flying, and understood instrumentation. Others without that experience would have more difficulty. The score Bush got reflects that lack of experience.

The other portions of the tests are quite similar to the ACT, SAT, and various IQ tests. I didn’t take the SAT, but I’ve taken several versions of IQ, as well as the AFQT and AFOQT mentioned. The difference is in scoring.

Both the AFQT and AFOQT scored on a percentile basis when I took them, and the maximum score was 95. All the Air Force cared about was what percentile you fit in. A score of 95 meant you scored better than 95% of those who took the test.

I won’t tell you what my scores were, but I agree with Steve that the AFOQT, AFQT, and IQ scores correlate well. Mine did. I will brag on myself a bit, though, and tell you my scores were better than either Kerry’s or Dubya’s.

What does that really mean?

Kerry has generally tried to portray himself as an intellectual, which has been a successful strategy for him in college-crowded Massachusetts.

In contrast, the only election Bush ever lost was a 1978 Congressional race in the Texas Panhandle, where his opponent made fun of Bush for having degrees from Yale and Harvard.

Bush resolved never to get out-dumbed again.

I voted yesterday, so now I can sit back and watch the rest of you ponder. I no longer need to. Of course, it really took little weighing of facts to draw my conclusion, so any further mental energy expended in the process would have been wasted. John Kerry is nowhere close to being as qualified as George Bush.

Bush always seemed sincere to me, but really nothing more. He did well as Governor, which is a job with little real authority or responsibility other than building consensus. I voted for him in 2000 for that reason. I felt we needed someone who could pull both sides back together.

He tried. But the other side was completely unwilling to move toward the center. They now blame him for their constant move farther left.

9/11 changed us all, but it really played to Dubya’s strength. He is decisive, not divisive, although that charge is still levied on him. He showed strength and determination. Most politicians actually do see the world as it is, in spite of what they might say. But Bush said the things that needed to be said. And he meant them.

Afghanistan was the killer of empires, and a human calamity waiting to happen. Bush took the politically risky step of going after the Taliban. And never forget how big that political risk was. Within days of our attack, the naysayers were already claiming quagmire. It wasn’t. People like John Kerry will now say they supported those actions. They didn’t. They constantly warned we were going to fail, just like in Vietnam.

Bush proffered many reasons for going after Saddam, the least of which was his potential for furnishing WMD to terrorists. The original Cease-Fire agreement from 1991 gave any UN member authority to take him out if he failed to comply. With nothing more than that, we already had UN support. Bush went to the UN once again to try and build consensus, already knowing France and Russia intended to block him if necessary. When they did, he ignored them. Again, a political risk which he may now pay for.

Most Americans will whine and complain about their choices at the ballot box every election. I don’t know how they can seriously do that this year. If we had two John Kerrys running against one another, I would be complaining, too. Is Bush perfect? No way. And he would tell you that and mean it. Will he whine about how unfairly he’s been treated? Hasn’t yet.

But if you want a President who is not just another politician, this is your chance. For all his faults, George W. Bush is the kind of man I always wanted to have in my organization. He will look at the issues, and make a decision. He won’t check the latest poll or focus group data before doing so. When he says something, he means it, and wants to be as clear as he can be. Not once has he whined about lies being told of him. He has always been positive about the direction he wants to go.

Hell, I would have liked to have him as a commander. It doesn’t surprise me that most in the military like him as their Commander-in-Chief.

I see no option, and that’s exactly how I voted.

Early voting began today. Since I was already at the courthouse for jury selection, I got in line.

No, I didn’t vote a straight ticket. But it was mighty tempting.

If you are truly undecided, and I doubt many are, I ask that you read this in its entirety, and check the VodkaPundit link for an even more heart-felt opinion.

This election cycle has come to define for me something very clear. I look at things, I believe, with a very open and logical mind. I listen to all sides, and don’t evaluate words from a single instance. Rather, I try hard to listen in context, and that means more than simply the words around the words. It means paying attention to past actions to see how well the new words fit.

The common statement by Democrats, with no basis in fact as shown many times, that Bush stole the 2000 election is a case study of what we will see in three weeks. It doesn’t require clairvoyance to see it coming. They are already prepping us for their onslaught. Lawsuits will be filed in every single swing state.

Our military personnel have become pawns in their game–and they do seem to consider it one. The Democratic Party either doesn’t understand international relations, or choose to ignore the ramifications of their words and actions. Remembering how Johnson was brought down by Vietnam, they see a chance to do the same to Bush. They want Iraq to be another Vietnam. That is fact. It is undeniable if you simply look at how they continue to use the same words and actions as they did when teenagers. They can talk all they want about supporting the troops, but their actions speak much louder. Those men and women know. Every slander of Bush adds to the morale of those we fight. Certainly the leaders of the DNC know that. Yet they continue. They could disagree without slandering, but choose not to do so. As long as the enemy believes they are fighting a winning cause, they will continue to fight.

Why?

I often ask myself what it is that the Democratic Party wants to do with the power they cherish above all. I just don’t know. Every specific they mention, and there are damn few of those, has proved to be a failure, and a horrendous waste of money.

They speak of getting back to a balanced budget, yet were dragged yelling and screaming to the last one by Newt Gingrich. Clinton only signed that one after sending it back two times, and having the Congress send it to him a third. And even that wasn’t truly balanced. Excess Social Security receipts offset the real budget deficit–another Democrat sleight-of-hand from the Johnson era. Still in use today.

A National Health Care System is a false dream. Ask anyone in the military what it is like. Or ask the Medicare patients you know about their pleasure in having government assistance. Ask a Canadian with health problems what he thinks of their system.

Why is that power something they crave? The term “Public Service” is false. Public service is volunteer work, not your career in an elected position. Career politicians are serving themselves, not the public.

They want to do good. Please. Their actions in the last year have shown that “good” isn’t on their agenda.

Steve Green of Vodkapundit has had enough himself.

If Drudge has it right, then the Kerry-Edwards campaign is going to do its damnedest to turn our fine nation into a banana republic.

And he feels much as I do.

The rules don’t matter. The reputation of the country doesn’t matter. The political health of the nation doesn’t matter. Power matters.

I have voted a straight ticket only once in my life. The last week or so I have been trying to pay closer attention to local candidates. I feel it is important to vote for someone rather than some Party, and I want to make intelligent choices. But I’m beginning to believe Steve has the right approach.

But for the first time in 16 years, I’m going to vote Republican straight down the line. If I have to punish a couple of local Democrats I’m fond of, then so be it, but I have to try to get a point across: The national Democratic Party is bad for this country.

The only thing that will end this is a landslide for Bush. I really see no other prospect.

Last night I heard bits and pieces of some Democratic pundit calmly insulting Dubya. Standard fare. He then mentioned something about Bush not having a plan for getting us out of Iraq, something I’ve heard almost daily since the fighting began.

Exit plans are for losers.

We had an exit plan for Vietnam. That certainly worked out well.

You go into a fight to win. If you do otherwise, you lose. Once you’ve won, you don’t need an exit plan. You walk away. That’s what we are doing right now in both Afghanistan and Iraq–setting up the circumstances so we can let them handle things on their own. Once that is done, we have won.

Please, please, someone ask one of these morons to answer in perfect 20/20 hindsight what the exit plan was for World War II, Korea, Kosovo.

Kerry has lots of plans. That sounds very forward-looking. Does he have an exit plan?

Last month, Michelle Malkin wrote something that really caught my eye.

To his credit, Texas Democrat Rep. Solomon Ortiz (call him the Dems’ Tom Tancredo) has been recently sounding the alarm about the al Qaeda/illegal alien gang connection–as well as our idiotic catch-and-release policies. Too bad more of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle have failed to join him in stopping the revolving door.

I’ve never seen anything to indicate that Ortiz, my Congressman, was interested in illegal immigration at all. So, I thought perhaps I had been ill-informed, and needed to learn some more. I don’t want to vote against someone here in South Texas who actually wants to do something to stop illegal immigration. Michelle linked to this press release which seems to indicate he cares about the issue.

I went to Project Vote Smart to find out how he has voted in recent years on immigration issues.

I wasn’t wrong.

Since 1997, he has voted against restricting Social Security, health care, and even a new form of Social Security card. He voted against prohibiting illegals from getting Medicaid benefits, and another bill requiring health care providers to notify authorities of illegals who seek health care. Immigration reform organizations give him terrible marks. Most, including Border Patrol officers, say he votes in support of their issues 0% of the time. The Immigration Lawyers give him a 50% rating.

I followed another link which took me to a recent news report.

Congressman Solomon Ortiz announced El Savadorian gangs members are in the Valley possibly to help Al-Qaeda members cross into our country.

It all became quite clear. When illegals are Mexican, it is apparently okay in Ortiz’s mind to welcome them with open arms. But when they come from El Salvador or Brazil, they need to be detained and sent back.

Must be an election year.