We were attacked within our borders during both the Clinton and Bush administrations; the second one (9/11) much more effective and devastating than the first. Both attacks were staged at a time when the economy was struggling and a new President was early in his first term. This was purposeful planning on the part of the terrorists. Their objective is not to simply kill people, but rather, to alter our way of life by causing people to live in constant fear and to damage the economic prosperity we enjoy. The high-level mission of Islamo-fascism is to use terrorism to weaken the economy, causing the federal government take more and more control and then expand this federal control to an eventual dictatorship where Islamic Sharia Law could be established.

The first bombing of the World Trade Center was somewhat botched, but the 9/11 attack was quite successful. The result was that the stock market tanked, people stayed at home and most were worried about when and where the next attack would occur. Osama bin Laden, after taking credit for the attack, fled to the Afghan mountains where he knew he would be safe from the week or two’s worth of bombing he expected to get as retaliation. However, President Bush had other thoughts on the matter. He decided that his country was not going to respond to these terrorist attacks with simple retaliation as was done in response to previous attacks. He was not going to have his country live in constant fear and have our way of living dictated by terrorists. Instead, he took an approach to prevent more attacks by destroying and disrupting terrorist networks that were existing and future threats.

Instead of just hunting down bin Laden, he went into Afghanistan with the objective of taking out terrorist control of that country and giving it back to the people. With the people in control, it would no longer be a safe haven for terrorists to plan and train for their next attack against the United States. The other threat to our country was the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. Saddam had a long rap sheet that included using chemical weapons on his own citizens, sponsoring suicide bombers in Israel and invading other countries. He needed to be taken out before he had the chance to obtain and use biological or nuclear weapons that could kill thousands or millions. Although the President got faulty evidence on how far along the development of these weapons were, it was only a matter of time after the weapons inspectors had left that Saddam would reconstitute his weapons program. President Bush’s decision to take down the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003 was bold and necessary and the success of the U.S. military and coalition forces in carrying it out has eliminated a major terrorist threat. Additionally, Iraq now had the opportunity form a democratic government that would no longer tolerate terrorist networks living among them. Then, the opportunity presented itself where bin Laden thought he could effectively counter President Bush’s objectives in Iraq. When the Saddam holdouts and other insurgents were effective in killing Iraqis and American troops, bin Laden added his Al Qaeda network to try and defeat American will and return Iraq to a terrorist-supporting regime. Despite an initially flawed military strategy and the “war is lost” wailing of liberal politicians and the media, the President was steadfast in continuing to help the Iraqis solidify their new government. At the urging of General Petraeus and Senator McCain, the President implemented the “surge” strategy which has significantly reduced violence against our troops and Iraqi citizens. The Al Qaeda ranks have been dissipated and they are on the verge of giving up the fight in Iraq and switching their efforts to Afghanistan. With 12 of the 18 provinces now under Iraqi control, victory appears to be achievable.

President Bush to this day has not been able to get the majority of the American people to understand his mission to protect the country from future attacks and has suffered dismal approval ratings because of it. Left-wing activists, politicians and the media have tried to undercut his efforts at every turn and their propaganda and traitorous actions have been largely successful. In spite of this, President Bush has accomplished what he set out to do following 9/11. Over the past seven years, he has kept at bay the next major 9/11-level attack and has thwarted approximately 30 smaller attacks before they had a chance to be carried out. This was accomplished with a prevention program using finance and communications surveillance, effective interrogation techniques, terrorist watch lists and military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. History will be very favorable to him as a war president. He also pushed through tax cuts that revived the faltering economy and got it growing again until the collapse of the housing market and subprime loan debacle that formed the catalyst for the current financial crisis.

Unfortunately, the current conditions present a “perfect storm” for terrorists to attempt another major attack. The convergence of a major financial crisis with a new, untested President is a scenario where a successful attack could have devastating long term repercussions. The security gaps emerging when the new administration is transitioning personnel and policy will provide the best opportunity to put the attack plan into motion and successfully execute it. With U.S. economy already staggering against the ropes and its repercussions being felt in the global economy, an attack at the magnitude of 9/11 could be the potential knockout blow that the terrorists are seeking. The federal government has already socialized a good chunk of the economy with the recent $700 billion bailout and, after the attack, would likely be the looked at to take more control. The success, frequency and impact of each subsequent attack will determine how fast the terrorized citizens of this country drive the government towards greater and greater control of the economy and loss of their individual liberties. Once the federal government has all the power, a President with a majority party can start to run the country as a dictatorship. The final step in the terrorist strategy is to give the President an offer that he or she can’t refuse; incorporate Sharia Law to stop future attacks.

This nightmare scenario does not have to happen. The solution is simple; keep up the efforts to prevent the attacks and allow free market capitalism to spur a strong and growing economy. With the election only a few days away, we all have the opportunity to vote for candidates that we believe will be the best choices to continue to keep us safe from terrorist attacks and implement policies that will ensure that the economy is strong enough to rebound from another successful attack.

As the campaigns come to an end, it is clear which presidential candidate wants to limit federal control of the economy through reduced taxes and spending and ignite the capitalist engine that drives the economy. We also know which candidate wants greater federal control through increased taxes and increased spending.

The missed opportunity in the presidential debates was the question, “There have been no successful terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11. What specific measures would you take as President to prevent an attack from happening on your watch?” Both candidates have been less than clear on whether they would continue with the successful prevention measures used by the current administration.

It really boils down to the candidate whose demonstrated character, judgment and leadership would make him the best choice to be Commander-in-Chief during this time of war. Which one will be the most committed to keep us safe and achieve victory over Islamo-fascism?

It was the best of times for Democrats and the worst of times for Republicans. The 2006 election had given the Democrats complete control of Congress and every reason to believe that they would take over the Executive Branch in January 2009. It was only a matter of time when they would witness Hillary Clinton taking the oath of office as the first woman President of the United States.

So what happened? Well, what happened was that the Democrats made four major strategic mistakes that the Republicans were able to capitalize on.

The first mistake was assuming that Clinton would walk away with the nomination and that the nominating process did not need to be modified in the event that two or more candidates would be able to stay in contention until the end. The process expected a single candidate to get a majority of the pledged delegates during the early primaries and caucuses and then cruise to the total needed for victory even before all the states had the chance to be counted. At that point, the large contingent of Super Delegates could just vote their conscience and cast a symbolic vote that wouldn’t affect the results. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) would have been wise to permanently fix the process by either eliminating the Super Delegate concept altogether or at least force those delegates to commit to a candidate before the first state voted. Super Delegates are supposed to be the enlightened members of the party and, thus, should have weighed in on the candidates early so that the rank-and-file voting could be influenced by these party leaders. The situation was unknowingly made even worse by the DNC disenfranchising the Michigan and Florida delegates because they moved their primary dates up. The DNC figured that Clinton would get enough delegates from the other states so that the Michigan and Florida delegates would not be needed to give her the victory. Additionally, Clinton built her campaign strategy on the assumption that she was the Anointed One and that she would have an insurmountable lead after the Super Tuesday primaries. Further compounding of this mistake came about from the DNC and Hillary Clinton for not taking the time to thoroughly vet this freshman Senator named Obama who was embarking on his first presidential nomination process. The Republicans eventually did the vetting for them, but the Obama train was already rolling towards nomination station before the voters found out about Obama’s sordid associations with Reverend Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko, etc. Had this information been in the public eye before the Iowa caucuses, even the inspiring messages of “change” would not have been enough for most Democratic voters to take a chance with this guy at the top of their ticket in ’08. Unfortunately for the Democrats, they unwittingly took away Clinton’s coronation and put forth a candidate that would have less of chance to win in November.

The other early mistake by the Democrats was thinking that McCain would be the easiest Republican to run against. They knew that his reaching across the aisle and sponsoring liberal legislation would alienate him among conservatives, many of whom they hoped would stay away from the polls. Also, they figured that their historic first woman presidential candidate going up against the old, curmudgeonly maverick was a matchup made in heaven (separation of church and state aside). The NY Times endorsed McCain simply for the purpose of attracting interest to him in the primaries and many others in the liberal media sang his praises.  On top of that, many Democrats crossed over to vote for McCain in the early primaries, and with the help of a strong showing of Independents, McCain got his first victory from the New Hampshire voters. If the Democrats would have realized at the time that McCain was the only Republican candidate that stood a chance of winning in the general election, they would not have been so quick to help revive his dying campaign and help get him back into contention. However, the Democratic CPR was not enough by itself to propel McCain to the nomination. It also required having a slate of Republican candidates from whom the conservative base could not readily identify their next Ronald Reagan. As the primaries got rolling, the conservatives were in disarray on who to vote for and the results got spread out and watered down among several candidates until McCain was able to slip past everyone with the moderate, independent and Democratic crossover vote. By the time conservatives decided that Romney could be their guy, McCain had too much momentum to overcome. So the Democrats got the Republican nominee they wanted – unfortunately for them, it was another big mistake.

As the primary season was coming to a close with Obama holding a narrow lead in pledged delegates, another major mistake was made. That mistake was for the Super Delegates to give the nomination to Obama instead of Clinton. The writing was on the wall; Obama had only a slight polling lead over McCain when he should have been up by 15-20 points and Clinton had thumped him in key states down the stretch. His inspirational rhetoric could no longer mask his past associations, his #1 liberal voting record or his lack of qualifications. At this point, the DNC, Clinton and the “super” Super Delegates should have met with him and asked him to step aside and take the VP spot on the Clinton ticket. With enough support from the Super Delegates, they could have made him an offer that he couldn’t refuse, because they would have had enough delegates to swing the victory to Clinton. They could have pointed out the benefits for him; he would be the first black Vice President, he would have more time to distance himself from Reverend Wright, et al., get valuable VP experience and be the next Democrat in line for the Presidency. It would be a dream ticket for Democrats and ensure a victory in November. Unfortunately, the black contingent of the Democratic Party would not consider the idea that Obama had to give up his opportunity for the good of the party. Obama was their chance to have a historic President and they deserved to have the first black President as much as others felt entitled to have the first woman President. There were even threats that if Clinton was handed the nomination, blacks would stay at home on November 4 and that there would be the chance of rioting in the streets. The Democrats could not afford to risk losing the black vote and, thus the third mistake became reality.

The fourth mistake for the Democrats was Obama’s VP selection. Putting Hillary Clinton (or should I say “Team Clinton”) on the bottom of the ticket would have at least shored up most of the disgruntled Clinton voters and been a historic first for both slots. Besides showing total disrespect for the person who was supposed to be the Anointed One, the Biden decision was a huge mistake because it highlighted Obama’s inexperience, especially on foreign policy, and basically added nothing positive to the ticket. Biden’s relatives and friends in Delaware are not enough additional votes to offset the lost Clinton voters. Correspondingly, McCain, with the advantage of going second, totally trumped Obama’s choice by putting a woman in the number two slot. She would likely have been the selection no matter who Obama chose, but the impact to the ticket is much more significant with Clinton standing on the sidelines. Also, Palin adds much more to the ticket than just being a woman. She has energized the Republican base with her conservative credentials, she is a strong communicator and complements the change McCain wants to bring to Washington with her reformer image. Palin provides a boost to the McCain ticket regardless, but the impact would have been much less if she was matched up against Clinton and the upside-down dream ticket. Obama had the chance to show his good judgment with his first major decision as the nominee and he blew it royally.

With several weeks left in the campaign, the cumulative effect of these major strategic mistakes has turned the best of times for Democrats into panic time. The only “hope” they believe in now is to adopt an all-out attack on the Republican ticket and hope they can inflict a mortal political wound in the eleventh hour. Maybe they will even resort to an October surprise of dumping Biden for Clinton. Can they pull out a victory from the jaws of defeat…or will they just be making another mistake?

There are 22 subject areas in this guide with each containing two opposing views. Depending on which of the views you align with, it will indicate which presidential ticket you should vote for.

If you have already made up your mind, go through this and see how strongly you really match up with your candidate on the 22 subjects. This may be especially helpful for those who have locked in on a ticket, but don’t know much about the candidates or where they stand on the issues.

National Security

If you believe that 9/11 must have been an isolated attack based on the fact that no other attack has occurred since then and that we are not currently at war with Islamic terrorists and that "Iran is a tiny country that doesn’t pose a serious threat", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe the United States has not been attacked since 9/11 due to the defeat and disruption of terrorist networks in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with the enhanced intelligence gathering and surveillance requested by the current President and that we are still at war with Islamic terrorists who are looking for their next opportunity to top 9/11 and that Iran is a serious threat and needs to be stopped from developing nuclear weapons, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Iraq

If you believe it is in the best interest of our country to "pull all of our troops out of Iraq in 16 months", even if it results in their democratic government being toppled by terrorists, that the United States loses its second war (Vietnam) and that we may have to send the military back there to fight in the near future, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that helping sustain freedom and democracy in Iraq is a key to maintaining our national security and that our military can, and must, defeat the terrorist insurgency and support the Iraqi government until the country can fully defend itself and that the recent surge of troops is putting us on the road to victory, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Energy

If you believe that this country should continue to pay for foreign oil, even when some of it comes from countries that have sponsored terrorism against us, and that we should not drill for our own oil because it would take too long to get or that it may disturb some eco-system and that we can resolve the current energy crisis by "properly inflating our tires and cutting back on our driving", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

It you believe it would be better for this country to reduce its dependence on foreign oil and the terrorist-supporting countries we are getting it from and that we have vast oil reserves in this country and in our coastal waters that can help us achieve energy independence in the next couple of decades, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Nuclear Power

If you believe that nuclear power plants are too dangerous to build, even though other countries like France use nuclear power for up to 80% of their electrical needs or that disposal of nuclear waste poses too high of a risk or that solar, wind and hydroelectric power can provide all the electricity we need right now, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that the current nuclear power technology is now very safe, does not emit greenhouse gases and is very cost effective and that by building more nuclear power plants, along with leveraging solar, wind and hydroelectric solutions, we could eventually meet our nation’s electrical needs and eliminate the polluting coal-burning power plants, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Taxes

If you believe that the federal government can make better decisions than you can on how you should spend your income and you want the government to "spread your wealth" to others or you just believe that "paying more taxes is patriotic", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you want to keep more of the income you earn through reduced taxes and be able to make your own decisions on how to spend it and you think that the federal government already gets more than enough tax revenue to perform their limited role as stated in the Constitution, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Federal Budget

If you like the idea of Congress spending more money than they take in from your taxes and continue to fund pork barrel projects through earmarks that bloat their spending bills, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you want to see Congress spend less of your tax money, eliminate earmarks, work towards balancing the federal budget and have your President make frequent use of his veto pen, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Health Care

If you believe that the problem with health care is that we just need to contribute more of our earnings to the federal government so they can regulate the care and drugs we can, or cannot, have and that when the federal government mandates below-market payments for medical procedures and prescriptions it won’t cause doctors and pharmaceutical companies to provide lower quality and less innovation, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe the problem with health care is that health insurance costs too much and that people need more options for purchasing it at a reasonable price by driving more competition among health insurance providers and ensuring that we continue to get the best quality care and new life-saving drugs, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Marriage

If you believe that the definition of marriage is discriminatory and that same-sex partners should be able to be married and yet you can rationalize that it is not discriminatory to prohibit polygamy, incest or other relationships and you don’t believe that the redefining marriage will have a negative impact on society because it doesn’t have a direct impact on you personally, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that preserving the traditional definition of marriage is in the best interest of a healthy society and that children growing up with both a mother and father have the best odds to be well-adjusted and successful in life and that same-sex couples can legalize their relationship through a civil union, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Abortion

If you don’t believe that it is morally wrong for a woman to make the choice of aborting her child during pregnancy for any reason or letting the baby die after it is born following a botched abortion attempt and that "determining when a baby gets human rights is above a Senator’s pay grade", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that it is morally wrong to have an unborn human life killed unless the mother’s life is in danger and that all human life should be protected, including a Down’s syndrome baby or a child conceived out of wedlock and you want "an advocate for special needs children in Washington", then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Global Warming

If you believe that the man-made production of carbon dioxide is going to bring about a global warming catastrophe and you have closed your mind to any scientific or common sense evidence to the contrary because Al Gore says "the debate is over" and that the Obama nomination was "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you don’t believe that man-made production of carbon dioxide is going to bring about a global warming catastrophe or at least you don’t think that the debate is over and you don’t want to stifle economic growth based on the faulty assumption that we can actually control the earth’s climate, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN (Palin will hopefully change McCain’s mind on cap-and-trade).

Gun Control

If you believe that the Second Amendment only allows the military and police officers to own guns and that gun control laws will keep criminals from getting and using them and that bitter law-abiding citizens will be safer if "they can’t cling to their guns and religion", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that the Second Amendment allows all citizens to own guns and that gun control laws do not stop criminals from getting them and that citizens will be safer if they are able to have guns to defend themselves and their property and that hunters can still shoot caribou and moose, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Talk Radio

If you fear that hearing conservative talk radio may cause people to change their long held liberal views and you believe that the government should force radio stations to broadcast an equal amount of liberal talk radio, even though the mainstream television and print media is totally dominated by liberal views, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe in the free expression of political views over the public airways and that radio station owners should be able to broadcast talk shows with any, and all, political opinions as they see fit, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Education

If you want a candidate that is beholden to the teacher unions that have helped ensure that good teachers are not paid for their performance and that bad teachers keep their jobs and that parents and students should have no affordable options other than their local public school, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that the best teachers should be paid more than average ones and that poor-performing teachers should be fired and that parents and students should have affordable options for schools, including the choice of a better public school, charter schools, private schools, religious schools and home-schooling, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Union Organizing

If you believe that unions should be able to force workers to openly declare their vote on whether they want to unionize or not, so that the unions can coerce those who are against it and intimidate those workers into changing their mind, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that workers should be able to submit a secret ballot with their vote on whether or not they want to unionize so that they are protected from union thugs who want to pick out those workers not wanting to unionize and pressure them to change their mind, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Illegal Immigration

If you believe we should not try to stop illegal immigration with a border fence and that we should give amnesty to those that are already here illegally and protect them with sanctuary cities, even though they have broken U.S. laws, taken jobs that U.S. citizens could be hired for and are getting billions of our tax dollars for education, health care and other benefits, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe we should try to stop illegal immigration with a border fence and that those here illegally now should not get a free pass to citizenship and that current laws dealing with illegal immigrants must be enforced, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Foreign Trade

If you believe that American companies can stay in business and maintain their good paying jobs by restricting and taxing imports, even if it leads to other countries restricting and taxing our exports and we need to do this because many American goods and services can’t compete on a level playing field (free trade) with other countries, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that free trade agreements provide the best opportunities for companies to grow their workforce by expanding the sales of their goods and services to foreign countries and get the opportunity for our country to import other competitively priced goods and services that we need, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

National Pride

If you don’t believe that the United States is the greatest nation on the planet, that it has done more harm than good in the world and that it should become more like some of the European countries and you "didn’t become proud of America in your adult life until Obama won some primaries" and you agree that "America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was", then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN (or pack up your things and catch the next plane to Sweden)

If you believe that, despite all its faults, the United States has always been the greatest nation on the planet and that it will continue to be a beacon of hope for all freedom-loving people on the planet and that politicians need to put their country first, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Foreign Policy

If you believe that the United States is better off if we are liked by our allies and enemies and that we can get other countries to like us by simply talking to them and apologizing for our past actions that may have offended them and that will ensure that our enemies won’t attack us anymore, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you believe that the United States is better off if we are respected by our allies knowing they can count on us in time of need and also feared by our enemies knowing we will destroy them if they attack us or our allies, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Historic Presidential Candidate

If you want to witness the milestone of the first bi-racial President or think it would be cool to have a President with dark skin and don’t care whether or not that person is ready to lead the country, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you want to witness the milestone of the first bi-racial President or think it would be cool to have a President with dark skin, but want that person to be ready to lead the country, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN (Bobby Jindal and others are on the way).

Qualifications

If you prefer to have a President that is a Harvard-educated lawyer, did some teaching and community organizing with no major accomplishments to speak of, spent several years in the Illinois legislature with 130+ “present” votes and is now a freshman Senator in Congress who has not authored any significant legislation but has written two memoirs, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If you prefer to have a President that graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy, fought for his country with honor in Vietnam during his 22 years of military service and served in Congress as a Representative for 4 years and a Senator for 22 years where he authored key legislation, including some that were co-authored with Democrats, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Historic Vice Presidential Candidate

If you want to witness the shattering of the political glass ceiling with the first woman Vice President or just think it would be cool to have a female on a winning presidential ticket, but insist that the woman be a Democrat, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN (and hope that Hillary rises from the ashes in 2012).

If you want to witness the shattering of the political glass ceiling with the first woman Vice President or just think it would be cool to have a female on a winning presidential ticket, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Change

If the change you are hoping for means losing to terrorists in Iraq, raising our country’s risk of another terrorist attack, increasing taxes and spending to have more government control of your life and continuing our energy crisis by not allowing more oil drilling or construction of new nuclear power plants, then VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN.

If the change you are hoping for means winning in Iraq, protecting the country against more terrorist attacks, decreasing taxes to spur economic growth and pursuing energy independence by replacing foreign oil with our own, adding more new nuclear power plants and finding cost-effective alternative solutions, then VOTE FOR McCAIN/PALIN.

Here’s my dream scenario…

John McCain selects Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his VP running mate. Her presence on the ticket firms up his credibility on oil drilling and his overall commitment to achieve energy independence. She draws a lot of votes from former Hillary Clinton supporters who want to see the first woman VP and are not happy that Obama has selected a white guy with foreign policy credentials to be his VP running mate. Palin’s relative youth and conservative views win back many of the conservatives who had left the GOP reservation during the primaries.

In the coming months leading up to the election, Iraq continues to stabilize from the “surge” and Obama looks more and more foolish trying to justify his opposition to the war and his timetable for retreat. Gas prices stay high and a huge majority of people want to do whatever it takes to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Also, people finally realize the huge tax increases that Obama will need to ask for to fund his new entitlement programs. When push comes to shove, many who thought it would be cool to have the first bi-racial President, finally realize that a freshman Senator with radical liberal views and questionable associations with a bigoted, anti-American pastor, an unrepentant terrorist and convicted racketeer is too big a risk to vote for.

The McCain/Palin ticket wins handily enough, so there is no outcry for recounts or whining about disenfranchised voters. McCain becomes the oldest first term President and Palin the first woman VP. Also, Congress, with their 9% approval rating, gets unexpectedly bush-whacked (get the pun?) and the Senate comes back to Republican control and the Democrats lessen their majority in the House.

During the first term McCain ends the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and their democratic governments and security forces become self-sufficient. No terrorist attacks on U.S. soil are successful. Drilling gets started in the coastal waters and in ANWAR and 25 new nuclear power plants come on-line, resulting in the average price of gasoline coming down to $1.78 per gallon. Al Gore is committed to an insane asylum after his man-made global warming catastrophe is officially debunked and his Nobel Peace Prize is revoked. The big income tax cuts McCain proposes get through Congress and the stock market soars with the Dow Jones breaking the 20,000 mark. McCain also replaces two Supreme Court Justices whose confirmations win rave reviews from conservatives.

With huge successes under his belt, McCain decides to go out on top and not run for a second term. VP Palin wins the Republican nomination with no significant opposition and the Democrats resurrect Senator Clinton to oppose her. Palin and her VP running mate, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindall, defeat Hillary and Chelsea in a landslide. Now the Republicans have added other firsts, the first woman President and the first bi-racial VP.

Palin ends her second term successfully, having appointed another four Supremes, protected the country against terrorism and oversaw an ever-growing economy.

Following the Palin presidency, Jindall becomes the first bi-racial President and the Republicans get another eight years in the Executive Office.

For over a quarter century following Bill Clinton, the Republicans control the Presidency.

As for the others…Hillary Clinton lost her Senate seat and the Clintons traveled around the world for years unsuccessfully trying to fix their legacies. After his failed presidential bid, Barack Obama continued to win reelection to his Senate seat with an exciting message of “hope and change”. He eventually stopped reminding people that he gave a speech in 2002 opposing military action in Iraq (now a strategic ally). Al Gore spends his typical day drawing “hockey stick” diagrams in a notebook and mumbling about how the debate is over…

If only dreams would come true!