Iowa Caucus Ruckus

The Presidential primary election is starting to resemble a three-ring circus; it's full of clowns.

Yesterday, Mike Huckabee won 34 percent of the republican vote in Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucus. People seem to like Huckabee because he has a proud religious background and sticks to his ideals. It's the same kind of mentality that elected Bush in 2000, when the White House was ripe with personal scandal and the issue that drove voters was electing a leader with good moral character. But good moral character without experience or knowledge makes for poor leadership. A president, ideally, should have both.

It's important for a leader to be able to admit when he or she is wrong – a trait our current commander-in-chief seems to lack. So I applaud Mitt Romney for his willingness to change his opinion on an issue like abortion. But Romney has changed his political stance on more than one issue, one more than one occasion, throughout his political career. We can't afford to elect someone who's wrong that often.

I was glad to see Rudy Giuliani's sixth place finish in Iowa. The only candidate, democrat or republican, who could do worse by this country than Bush is Giuliani. I can't even believe that he's still capturing the top spot on national republican polls. He's the former mayor of New York City. Seriously? He's still a candidate? My plumber has more foreign policy experience.

Barack Obama won 38 percent of the democratic vote in Iowa. Like Huckabee, Obama appeals to our optimistic side with his message of hope, pledge to change the world and bipartisan record. He talks a pretty big game for someone who was a mere state senator until 2005. I don't doubt his intelligence, only the scope of his experience in office. Degrees from Columbia and Harvard don't forgive inexperience, and book smarts can't replace practical knowledge. With four or eight more years of experience in the US Senate, Obama could become a viable candidate. But for now, what is he doing?

I won't rip on John Edwards too much because I know RJo is a supporter. I guess I just can't get behind a candidate once I know they spend $400 on haircuts. Especially if that candidate is a dude.

The only fair election would be one with Hilary Clinton as the democratic candidate and John McCain running as the republican. Everything else is just a joke. Sure, Clinton can be polarizing, and McCain is older than dirt. But varied personal and professional experiences are what prepare a future president to react to the challenges he or she will face while in office. Regardless of your opinion on their politics, you can't deny that Clinton and McCain are the most experienced candidates.

A lot of candidates build their platforms on promises that appeal to the idealist in us all, but they'll never be able to deliver. Not because they lie, necessarily, but because even our most cynical politicians are too naïve for the office of President.

They promise lower taxes, and inevitably raise them. Washington outsiders think they can, in addition to the daily demands of their office, reform all three branches of government. Career businessmen believe they'll be able to run Washington like a Fortune 500 company. They even have detailed plans outlining their strategy for success.

But the president, influential as the position may be, can't change the world on his or her own. And our founding fathers created a near-bullet proof constitution designed to make our government run slower than molasses. They feared monarch-like rulers who could shape the laws to suite their personal tastes. That's why we have three branches of government and that's why we have checks and balances.

Iowa is just the first stop on a long and bumpy road to the White House. America's attention now turns to the Granite State, where its first-in-the-nation primary will be held Jan. 8. Happy voting, New Hampshire!