The Primary Purpose...

Growing up, one of the more difficult aspects of the American election system to learn (for me) was the purpose of the state primary and caucus elections. Why would some states vote for "President" twice? Why did it make such a monumental impact which candidate Iowa or New Hampshire voted for? How important could the opinion of registered voters be in Ohio, compared to the voting choices of whole nation on the first Tuesday in November?

I learned that lesson by following the election process in 1988.

I watched Bob Dole, Senate Minority Leader from Kansas and the run-away leader after Iowa, self-destruct in front of the American public by venting his anger and bitterness at Bush by accusing him of "Lying about his record".

I watched (live) what can only be called the most amazing "slam-dunk" in political debate prior to the founding of the Bund when Lloyd Benson told Dan Quayle "Senator, you are NO Jack Kennedy!"

I watched Michael Dukakais very nearly lose the Democratic nomination to ultra-liberal candidate Rev. Jesse Jackson... right up till "Hambone" Barber (Jackson's half-brother) was convicted of murder in the first... which cost Jackson Wisconsin and Colorado, and the nomination.

As Ryan posted in his last, the situation in Pakistan has refocused foreign policy within the campaign. Now that Bhutto is dead by an assassins hand, we see the threads of democracy in one of the very few allied Islamic states unravelling before our eyes. We see that al Qaeda can still reach out from the caves and hidy-holes of the world to effect and alter the politics and security of entire nations and regions. We see the renewed threat of a nuclear-capable Iran, and we can all imagine the response that Israel will have to that situation.

In the last few weeks, we have seen Huckabee admit to knowing nothing about the NIE Iran assessment, to have forgotten that Pakistan lifted it's "State of Emergency" months ago, and to not having "read up" on the latest Israeli-PA Peace efforts... all this from one of the GOP candidates with "executive experience", too. Clinton, on the other hand, can boast that she knew Bhutto personally, and had met her more than a dozen times... as did Richardson from AZ.

Giuliani gains in the latest polls because he directed "tough talk" at exactly this kind of terrorist interference in the democratic process numerous times, while Ron Paul still insists that if it isn't happening within the US borders, it isn't our problem... the same crap he has been spouting since the very same 1988 election I referred to earlier when he ran as the Libertarian candidate and came in a VERY distant third.

John Kerry accused Bush of benefiting from the bin Laden tapes that surfaced late in the '04 election, and the Bhutto assassination may have the same effect now. The candidates that can best address questions and concerns pertaining to terror and foreign policy will carry the day in Iowa and New Hampshire, and history tells us that those candidates that win IA and NH win the nomination.