Here is why I would make the world’s coolest Presidential candidate. I will take some current topics that the big three have recently commented on and give you what I, in my nigh infinite wisdom would have said. You tell me if a candidate said this, would it make you more or less likely to vote for said candidate.

Senator Obama is having all manner of trouble because of the Rev. Wright. I am not going to deal with whether this is deserved or not. He has finally just renounced Wright all together. Here is what I would have said:

"Look the man is a friend and yes, he is a mentor. However, the things that are being touted in the media simply don’t reflect my point of view. I wanted to be loyal to a friend and hearing him being torn apart by the media has not been fun. I don’t want to see my friend beaten up like that. But at the same time, the things he has said, specifically about AIDs and (fill in the blank here senator) are outraging many people for a reason - they are not indicative of reality. That does not diminish his or anyone else’s right from having those opinions or expressing them. But if someone says something out of bounds and they do so in a public and yes, influential manner they need to be called out. I think the media and the pundits in this particular case have done a good job of doing what Thomas Jefferson asked of the press - to call leaders to account of their words.

John McCain wants to look like a very empathetic fellow and is bemoaning the American economy. He, once again, is trying to sound like a Democrat. Obama, Clinton, Chuck Schumer and others are using some very panicky words. They are doing everything they can to convince Americans how horrible we have it. This in spite of the fact that unemployment is very low and the vast majority (76%) of Americans according to a recent poll describe themselves as doing either "Great" or "OK" as opposed to "Lousy." Our economic growth is not what it could be, but it ain’t bad either folks. If I were McCain here I what I would have said:

"Let’s be honest, the economy has been, could be and once again will be better than it is right now. But to talk about it like we are entering the Great Depression is just plain madness. If I stand up here and rah-rah the economy, I look like I have no sympathy for those that are experiencing tough times. I don’t want to do that for the obvious reason that I am running for President. As President, part of my job is to look out for people in tough times. But how to do that? The principles of the Republican party state that the best way to help people is to release them from the oppression of a nosy government. We aren’t having problems because of taxes being too low. Just the opposite. The reason I endorse a temporary holiday on gas taxes is two-fold; to ease the burden on people buying gas and to demonstrate the hidden cost of taxes in everyday purchases. It’s not just gas that government adds cost.

Right now, our unemployment rate is still very low. The economy is growing but at a low rate. As problems go, this is one the American people, who by the way ARE the economy will work our way out of together. Raising taxes and having the federal government dole out your hard earned money as we see fit is not the answer.

Hillary Clinton keeps getting told she should drop out. We in the conservative side hope she stays in for all the right reasons. However, here is what I would say if I were her:

"If you look at the voting record of Senator Obama, it is the most reliably liberal in the Senate. I have no problem with a liberal voting record. I am a proud liberal. However, this simply does not represent the point of view of the overwhelming majority of the American people. My voting record is one that shows I am able to reach across the aisle and work with those whose views I disagree with on certain issues and compromise for the sake of the American people."

So how exactly did we get John McCain as the Republican nominee? Weren’t all those guys on the stage a few months ago all trying to "out-Reagan" one another? True, conservatives vote in the primaries, so that is the audience they were gunning for, but still, couldn’t we have expected someone a bit more conservative?

The answer is simple, we felt the need to defend President Bush. If you look at the presidency of this man, it is simply not filled with too many conservative benchmarks. In many ways we probably would have been better off with an Al Gore administration for four years. Trust me, he would not have lasted eight.

Think about it, could even a liberal like Gore messed up the use of the military any worse than Bush. Feel that reflex, to defend Bush? That is what I am talking about. Yes, we need to win in Iraq. But let’s not go back and redefine the goals. We went in as a preemptive strike against a threat to national security. We did NOT go in to liberate the people from an evil dictator.

Liberals like to go back and redefine the goals of fiascos such as the war on poverty, we should not get sucked in to doing the same thing.

We are there, we need to win, we know that. Even the Democratic presidential candidates know we can’t pull out now. But we have been there for six years now! Think about that! We have spent trillions with a "T"! Even if you are able to rationalize us going into Iraq, and that is actually not too difficult, you simply cannot say that the Bush administration has done anywhere near a competent job of prosecuting this war effort. The surge proves that.

American military might has always been predicated on a simple philosophy - go in with overwhelming force. But Donald Rumsfeld didn’t do that and Bush followed his lead. We tried to get in and get out with a minimum of manpower. This was one of so very many mistakes that need not be listed here.

But we have to defend Bush.

No Child Left Behind and the creation of an entirely new branch of the government - that of Homeland Security - have seen an increase in federal domestic spending that is simply unprecedented in the history of this country. Yea, the tax cuts were good and the number once again show they increased federal intake. But the spending has been out of control.

Bush did not veto a single bill in his first term. Think about that. Every single spending bill, heck, every single bill period that came across his desk was signed into law.

The Republicans did what fallible humans do in power, they sought to keep it. They sought to buy the votes of their constituents instead of doing what they were elected to do - get the federal government in check and secure this country.

But we feel the need to defend Bush.

Here’s where it leads to McCain. For some reason the media continue to portray the Bush administration as conservative. Probably because W is so religious. Who knows? No matter that the record indicates otherwise. Liberals hate him with a passion that is breathtaking to behold, so he must be conservative.

So, how do we react? Go with the "moderate." thus, John McCain - author of the power-grabbing first-amendment smashing McCain-Feingold finance reform bill. All but assuring maximum retention in Washington. Just wait until we have to defend this guy.