Ok, I’ve been gone a while and there are some things that happened that I want to talk about and get off my chest before we go any further.

First, McCain’s nomination of Sarah Palin. I had some blogger friends email me and ask what I thought and if that would change my mind about not voting for McCain. My answer was no, and I stuck to that. When I cast my ballot, I left that part blank. McCain was such a bad choice that he could have chosen just about anyone and I still wouldn’t have voted for him.

I do think that the choice of Palin was a shrewd political move, however. It exposed how liberals really feel about successful women (and minorities). As long as they are successful liberal women (i.e., they got where they are today by being good liberals or benefiting from the liberal agenda), then they don’t have a problem with that or them. In fact, if they got where they are today because of liberalism or its policies and agenda, they automatically love them. But if they got where they are the old-fashioned way (that is, actually working for it and earning it), then they are reviled and hated by the left, simply because that exposes the fraud that is liberalism, that women (and, again, minorites) cannot get ahead without government intervention. So I think McCain did us a service by exposing that.

Do I think she would have made a good Veep? Without a doubt. I mean, it’s not a hard job and doesn’t require a lot of effort or experience. Look at it this way: if Gore, Mondale, Quayle, etc. — and now Biden, of all people — were up to the task, then you know that anyone can do the job. However, being Vice President means other things than just casting tie-breaking votes and presiding over the Senate. It means waiting for the President to die or resign.

Do I think she was ready for that to happen, given the fact that McCain is in his seventies and could drop dead at any given moment? No, I don’t think she was. She may be ready someday (I think 2012 is pushing it), but not right now.

Second, the November election. I’m sure old readers will remember what I had written, but for new ones, let me boil it down like this. Obama is a liberal (just how liberal remains to be seen). McCain is a liberal (despite his claim to be a conservative, he isn’t, and he’s proven it time and time again). No matter who won, we were screwed. I said, months before the election when it was anyone’s ballgame, that there was no way I could, or would, support McCain…and I didn’t. I figured (and still do) that either one would do serious damage to the country, and if that damage was going to be done regardless of who won, I’d much rather it come from an open liberal Democrat than a liberal Democrat who merely pretends to be a conservative Republican. Let the American people see what liberals and their agenda are all about, and conservatism will rise again. I have absolute faith in this, and that’s why I’m not swimming in despair or feeling “doom and gloom” about the results of the election. Yeah, we’re probably in for at least two years of crap — four at the most — but in the long run, things will be ok. But if a guy who claims to be (but isn’t) a conservative Republican won and did the kind of damage I expect to see, then conservatism — and perhaps the Republican Party — would be dead and buried forever. We couldn’t survive another four years of a faux conservative Republican (Bush, after all, may be a Republican, but he sure isn’t a conservative, not as I define it, anyway).

As I said in my “I’m Back” post, I sincerely hope I’m wrong about Obama. I hope he succeeds and does great things for our country, and if he does, I’ll be the first one to congratulate him. But I won’t hold my breath. I’ve known liberals and dealt with them for too long to be fooled.

Third, the bailouts. Right here is where Bush has proven that while he may be a Republican and have some conservative tendancies, he isn’t a conservative at all. There’s no way a conservative would sign off on these plans. If these businesses made poor decisions, then they should face the consequences of those decisions, even if it means going belly-up. Any other business owner that has made bad choices has had to face the music, they should, too.

But I will say this: the auto makers aren’t totally to blame. I’ve railed in the past about how the Unions are playing a large part in the demise of these companies (think of a virus that slowly sucks a host dry for years until the host finally dies), and we’re seeing it right here. The Big Three cannot compete because they’re being squeezed by Unions for higher wages and benefits, whereas the other companies that are non-Union, they’re doing ok (not perfect, but they aren’t asking for a massive taxpayer-funded bailout). Now, that’s not the only reason, , to be sure, but it is a major one.

I just wish the Republicans would have used this chance to expose what the Democrats really wanted and were really concerned about. They don’t care about the Big Three, nor do they care about the workers in these plants. Their main concern here was the Unions and making sure that this source of campaign money wasn’t cut off or diminished. Republicans should have said, “fine, we’ll support the bailout. But you gotta approve legislation that prohibits Unions from giving money to politicians or PACs.” And when the Democrats rejected that idea (and they certainly would have), Republicans could then say that if they care about these jobs so much, what’s the problem?

The simple fact is, Democrats could care less about blue collar jobs, they care about the money the Unions bring in from them and the way Unions goad their members into voting for Democrats. That’s why Dems are so gung-ho about unionizing bigger businesses these days. They just see huge dollar signs and votes, not the interests of any of their employees.

Unions outlived their purpose (which was necessary and noble) decades ago, and they now exist only to fleece big business and get Democrats elected, plain and simple. That’s why Democrats want a bailout, and that’s why they’re suddenly interested in saving a big business, especially one so “evvvilll!!!” as Big Auto.

Next, Rod Blagojevich. I’ve said it countless times, but I’ll say it again: “When it comes to corruption, Democrats wrote the book on it.” And, in typical Democrat fashion, he blames everyone else and refuses to step down. This is the Democrat Party in all its naked glory, folks. This is what they do and this is who they are. The ONLY reason you heard, in 2006, about a “culture of corruption” when a few Republicans were implicated (Republicans who, btw, stepped aside while justice ran its course) was because the Dems were upset that they weren’t the ones doing it. As I said before the 2006 elections, the real agenda for the Democrats wasn’t to end corruption at all, they just wanted to be the ones doing it. It pissed them off to no end that it wasn’t them! “Put us in power, WE’LL show you how corruption is REALLY done!”

And since I wrote those words, we’ve had Blagojevich and Spitzer. We’ve had both Clintons and Bill Richardson. We’ve had Rangel and Reid. And there’s more, with undoubtedly more on the way (Obama’s past dealings and friendships, for example, will come to light eventually). Any way you slice it, the Democrat Party is the real party of corruption and they think the American people are too stupid to notice or care.

I think that just about covers it and gets me up to date. If I’ve missed anything major (and I surely have), feel free to leave a comment and ask my opinion on it (first-time comments are held in moderation).