[insert name here] for president!

*sigh*

Conservative Werewolf truly does not enjoy bitching about the state of politics in the US…

…but there’s SO MUCH about which to bitch.

Such as the lack of an awesome Republican candidate for president.  Previously, I threatened to go crotchety and vote Ron Paul.  Lately, that threat’s looking less empty.  [No, I do not want Iran to get a nuclear weapon, but I also do not want to send troops in to wage a ground war or attempt regime change – why?  Oh dear, that will probably warrant another post.  Suffice it to say for now that Conservative Werewolf is a fan of creative solutions.]

Moving along.  I would like to say that of all the current candidates for the Republican nomination, the one whom I would most enjoy punching in the face is Mitt Smarmy.  The king of the RINOs has made friends with the right people and hopes to be elevated to the position of Prime Minister of Douchiness.  He cannot possibly hope to be our nation’s leader, being that any politician so extremely phony and flip-floppy already understands how the game is played and is fine with being a glorified puppet (such as Obama).

Newt.  Oh, Newt.  You wish you were Romney.  You tried to steal his thunder by appealing to Tea Partiers.  But  most of us see through you.  We are not impressed.  We merely appreciate that you are not Mitt Romney.

Perry: Phony-baloney panderer.   Shoot a coyote of the human-trafficking kind down on the border or go home.

Santorum.  I am, obviously, conservative, and I’m totally down with Jesus, but you creep me the hell out.  For real.  Go away, please.

Michele Bachmann: You seem like a very nice person, but do you listen to yourself?  Honestly, woman, you’ve been playing politics too long or something, because you hardly sound like a real person.  Get some authenticity!  I’d like a female president in my lifetime, but I am not impressed by you.

The other guys: Hunstman is a creeper, and that other guy, well, I don’t know.  He’s ignored a lot, probably because he doesn’t seem interested in making a splash, which I understand and respect.  But still, what’s your name again?

AND NOW!: Ron Paul.  Weird guy, but consistent.  Like, consistent over the course of decades.   And right about things we know today… thirty years ago.  And probably not even as weird as he seems.  The thing with being the one guy who appears to be for real and appeals to people across the ol’ spectrum is that, being one of a kind, you’re going to have a lot of REALLY DEDICATED fans.  Some of whom are nutcases who will not represent you well.  Keep telling us you’re not racist or a 9/11 truther.  If you say it enough, we might actually hear it (can’t help but root for a guy the media tries so hard to sink).  I swear, I can’t help but like this guy, even when I think he’s being fucking stupid.

Did I forget anyone?  Please, tell me I forgot someone really really awesome.  No?  Darn.

I swear to God I will vote for Ron Paul

Okay, maybe.  I’m not sold on the old fart, but the grumpy old man is surprisingly logical, whereas Santorum is unappealingly emotional.

Santy and Paul got in a tiff at the Iowa debate about how to handle Iran.  Paul doesn’t seem to think we should do anything with them, except try to trade with them.  Santy got in a huff about how Iran is a threat – which it IS – and then proceeded to appear as if he doesn’t even understand why.

It’s not merely that America-hating radical Islamists are nutbags.  It’s that the America-hating radial Islamists are in charge in Iran largely because of SOMETHING WE DID.  Oops.

“Paul responded that conflict between Iran and the United States goes back much further than 1979 — going to when the United States installed the Shah of Iran in a military coup in 1953, with blowback coming later in the Iranian revolution of 1979.”

Fact: we got rid of one douche and got some worse douches.  If Santorum understands that, he didn’t show it:

“Santorum responded that Paul sounded like President Obama — in apologizing for the United States.”

No, dipstick – he was explaining history.  What happened.  Go look it up.  Do I really need to tell you that the US government has always been comprised of MANY PEOPLE who give advice and make decisions, and sometimes the results of these decisions are not so great?

I’m on the fence about whether we should just blow Iran the fuck up (well, not entirely – strategically, with conventional weapons, not nukes) or keep a close eye on it while using our resources to strengthen America and regroup our military (in case some shit does go down and Israel needs backup*).  America’s in bad shape right now, and I don’t think we’re in a position right now to tell Iran it can suck it, particularly not with our borders wide open and nearly goal-less** wars in 3.5 countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan).

*When Paul said, in debate one, that Israel is too dependent on the US and that it, being a sovereign nation, shouldn’t need to get our approval for anything, I cheered – it makes me happy when people on TV say what I’ve been thinking.

**”Fighting terrorism” is not a MEASURABLE goal.  Terrorists need to eat dirt, but there will be a plethora of terrorists for centuries to come, and bombs alone won’t get them to stop being jerks, because bombs do not kill ideas.  We need to fight smart, and the smartest things we can do right now are:

1) SEND BARACK BACK TO CHICAGO, where he’ll get a cushy do-nothing high-paying job, and ideally not do too much more damage to our country;

2) FIX THE ECONOMY by not being class-warfare-fomenting Marxist whiner assholes [Hayek, not Keynes, dammit!]; and

3) SECURE OUR BORDERS, because, um, duh.  Also, 3B: leave Libya because Congress didn’t approve military action there.

Then we can get to work on deprogramming the populace (NEA, Department of Education – looking at you), addressing the causes of high healthcare costs, repealing unconstitutional bullshit, etc.

Then, we will be so undeniably awesome again, and The Superpower once more.  Then our threats will mean something.  Until then, we’re spreading ourselves too thin and not being terribly impressive.

Meanwhile, let’s let the guys on the ground set some achievable goals for Iraq and Afghanistan since they’re already there, and plan to bring them home – but NOT TELL EVERYONE EXACTLY WHEN.  Oh, and never negotiate with the Taliban again.  They suck.

So that’s the  Conservative Werewolf plan.  Not exactly in line with Paul’s, considering his desire to bring the troops home ASAP, but not entirely out of line, either.  The question, as with any candidate, will be: What differences am I willing to put up with?

Oh, and you know what?  During the next debate, Paul should just read from his website when asked about issues of national defense.  Apparently, he’s not against military action.  Who knew?  Seriously dude, you need to tell us these things.