There is the north and west and central sections which tend to be more rural and therefore more conservative. People here tend to be fishers and hunters and church-goers, all unwelcome in today’s Democratic Party.  Agriculture here is an important part of the economy and farmers (out of necessity) tend to be a more independent and self-reliant breed.

And then you have the populous south and east sections. Transplanted north- eastern liberals, in the last century, have transformed orange groves and swampland into something akin to what has happened to Vermont. That is: by overwhelming numbers, the conservative, independent, religious base has been drowned in a wave of do-Gooding, nanny-state, guilt-ridden pseudo-intellectuals.

There has even been talk of succession by the more radical elements on the left. I mean, just use Vermont as an example. Their Senator is a communist sympathizer and the crotchety old Yankee rural base was always conservative. It still is, but New York and Massachusetts “flatlanders” drove them out of power a few decades ago. Hell, I can almost remember when “jumping” Jim Jeffords was a conservative Republican.

Anyway the battle has started. Obama has a new ad using the tried and true liberal tactic with regards to Roe vs. Wade. McCain, the ad claims, will support its reversal and therefore deny abortion to desperate women. Then, of course, these women will seek “back-alley” abortions and die.

Even though this argument is simply nonsense, it has been used effectively.

The President does not have the power to overturn any law. The courts made an ill-advised and absurd decision with Roe. This is even acknowledged by its supporters. Repealing it would NOT stop abortions. All it would do is give the power back to the states to determine what type of abortions would be permitted. There has to be SOME restriction. As the law stands now, some states come close to permitting infanticide. As medical advances occur, the survival rate for premature births has been extended.

I even have read stories of second trimester fetuses surviving with the miracles of modern science. Just for a moment, picture two babies, one just happened to be born 3 months too soon and the other expelled from the womb by induced abortion. Doctors fight with millions of dollars of equipment and years and years of expertise and can quite often save the child. On the other hand, I guess the aborted child can be left to squirm, gasp for breath, and die on a cold table. Perhaps someone can tell me the difference in value between the wanted child and the aborted one. I don’t see it, because it’s not there. Our entire legal system is based on the notion of equality and inalienable rights. What right is more inalienable than life? What right can exist without first the reverence for all life? If you support Obama-I know your answer.

So Obama is now playing the abortion card. He has already played the race card, with limited success, since he already has 90% of the black vote. That’s like McCain speaking to the VFW…what does it gain him?

Obama is having trouble with the war issue, since (horror of horrors) our troops seemed to have quelled the violence in Iraq. Obama is having trouble explaining how to pay for the hundreds of billions of dollars needed for universal everything that he so is enamored with. Obama is having trouble with the white vote, the male vote, the religious vote, the rural vote, the military vote, the gun owners, the libertarians, the conservatives, the energy users, the truck drivers (due to his complete capitulation to the no-growth environmentalists). He is having trouble with the Hispanics, who are overwhelmingly Catholic. He should be having trouble with the Jewish vote, due to his embrace of the Muslim world and his predictable double-speak about Iran. You remember Iran, don’t you? That would be the country who daily vows the destruction of Israel. I somehow always thought the UN would frown upon such threats. They do, I suppose, just not for the Jews.

To sum it all up, I’m not sure he can be elected with a base that consists of Hollywood elitists, Journalistic left wingers, academic and environmental radicals, unrestricted abortion proponents and the 10 to 12 % who identify themselves as black. (And the guy is only ½ black, anyway)

I think he will hold this 40% that he already has. It would be next to impossible to lose the kool-aid lovers anyway. But that’s about it. He certainly does not help his cause by rehashing the abortion debate. But an ideologue is always an ideologue. He can’t help being one and will eventually expose all of his radical beliefs. For that, he will lose the other 60%. That would be called a landslide, and a well deserved one at that.