It’s all over but the votin’, as the Democratic presidential candidates finished up their final debate before the citizens of Iowa meet to caucus and select candidates from each party next month on January 3rd.

 
The old cliché goes ‘all over but the shoutin’’, but I’d argue that the real shouting will take place after one of these Democrats wins their party’s nomination. The fact that one of these candidates, most likely Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, is going to be making history by placing his or her name on the presidential ballot is enough to make every conservative want to shout (shriek) with pain.

 
Conservative voters will always look beyond personalities to determine whether a person is qualified to hold the world’s highest elected office. If that were the measure -- whether any of these folks is ‘presidential,’ or ‘nice,’ or ‘dignified,’ enough to take the oath of office, then every one of the Democrats would probably qualify.

 
Well, maybe not John Edwards. I take it back.

 
But after following the campaign this year, I’ve come to know all of the candidates from both parties (at least through reading a heap of news stories and watching the debates and media appearances), and by and large, most if not all of them seem to care about the country, and most of them would lead in a way that we could at least respect, if rarely agree with.

 
However, once these Democrats lay out what they’re advocating for the country, the things they want to do to the free market system and the socialistic intervention of the federal government into every aspect of our lives, then none of these Democrats is even close to being acceptable.

 
Take Bill Richardson, who’s been running farther and farther to the left with each successive debate performance, who laid out his philosophy in the first few minutes of the discussion. He said we’ve spent over $500 billion on the War in Iraq, money that could’ve been spent here on domestic programs.

 
Make no mistake, the Democrats don’t care about ending the war for any great moral or philosophical cause – they want to end it because it’s draining seed money for their socialistic fantasies.

 
A conservative would also decry the expenditure of all that Iraq money – but mainly from the perspective that taxes are too high or that we’re bankrupting future generations by borrowing the money to pay for George W. Bush’s conception of a ‘new world order.’ Democrats just want the money, period.

 
The first question of the debate, moderated by the same Carolyn Washburn that was so authoritative and stiff for the Republicans a day before – concerned whether it was a priority to balance the federal budget. And none of the Democrats would simply answer yes!

 
Ronald Reagan repeatedly called for a balanced budget amendment. True, he did sign the congressional budgets that generated large deficits, but at least the ‘concept’ of fiscal responsibility was a centerpiece of his agenda, along with trimming the size and scope of government.

 
Not for the Democrats. They’re more interested in repealing the Bush tax cuts, raking in all the money being spent in Iraq and sprinkling it over the American population like a giant nozzle in the sky.

 
John Edwards is the worst of them all, repeatedly berating the ‘greed’ and power of corporations, like a ‘corporation’ on its own makes conscious decisions to screw the little guy. Aren’t corporations made up of people who pay taxes – LOTS of individual income taxes? If these people are evil, then why doesn’t he just come out and say it?

 
Edwards said “I’ve been fighting them all my life, and winning.” It brings an image to mind of some dragon-like creature spewing fire and wearing a t-shirt that says ‘corporation’ on it, with Sir John Edwards the ‘knight’ ready to slay him. It’s a political cartoon just waiting to happen.

 
Yes, Sir John, you’ve been very successful as a trial lawyer winning large jury verdicts for ‘wronged’ employees in liability suits, then taking a big fat 40% off the top in order to fund your haircuts, huge mansion and the lifestyle of a king. 

 
So next time you hear that Mr. General Electric or Mr. IBM or Mr. Proctor & Gamble or Mr. GM hurts some poor blighted worker-bee, take heart -- future President Edwards is gonna be right there to make sure that Mr. Corporation pays his fair share!

 
Edwards isn’t the only reality-offender, just the worst.

 
Hillary Clinton says “people in Iowa and America feel like they’re standing on a trap door” with an economy so poor that we’re all about to drop through the floor. To shore up the ‘trap,’ she says she wants to repeal tax breaks for the wealthy and raise taxes on corporations. Rob the rich and give to the poor, complete with imagery!

 
One wonders how it ever got this bad.

 
There are big government Republicans, and there are big government Democrats – and there are many in both parties who would strive to accomplish the same conclusions. But at least many of the Republican presidential candidates talk about limiting the size of government, a standard by which we can hold them accountable when they don’t do what they promise. There’s a clear difference between the parties in this respect, even if it’s not exactly a satisfying choice offered by the other side.

 
Conservative leaders are correct – the movement is fractured and will take time to rebuild, but it’s clear that eventually conservatives will unite to defeat this common enemy, the liberal Democrats.

 
Winners and Losers

 
Momentum is everything in politics, and right now, Barack Obama has the ‘mo,’ and at just the right time. He’s got Oprah on his side, a swagger in his gait and the media to keep him on the front page. Hillary Clinton’s brought out her attack fangs in recent days, but none of it appears to have wounded Obama.

 
Obama ‘won’ this debate, in the sense he sounded credible and confident.

 
He effectively used his 30-second ‘free statement’ to invoke Dr. Martin Luther King, and the “fierce urgency of now.” Obama’s latched onto the theme of change which this country is hungry for, and he’s beginning to link Hillary with the forces of the status quo. Whether that’s enough to carry him to victory, we’ll find out in a few weeks. If Obama fails to win in Iowa, it’s probably over for him.

 
Hillary didn’t ‘win’ the debate, but I don’t think she hurt herself. She continues to spout a lot of politician-speak nonsense when answering questions, but then again, her husband was great at doing just that, and kept it up for eight long years!

 
As an example, Hillary says there needs to be a ‘bi-partisan commission’ to solve the entitlement problem. Obama at least proposes some specifics, but Hillary hides behind a set of policy platitudes that commit her to absolutely nothing. 

 
Democrats seem to love such ambiguity, which is the reason why Hillary still has to be considered the favorite, even if she should lose in Iowa.

 

 
I’m consistently wrong in reading Democratic voters’ minds, but from a conservative’s perspective, John Edwards lost this debate, and every other such meeting to date. Anyone who buys into Edwards’ phony populism is truly ignorant, and frankly, a little scary.

 
One particular moment demonstrated his folly. Carolyn Washburn asked Edwards about his harsh rhetorical war against corporations and special interests – and that if he were elected president, wouldn’t he have to sit down and work with those same people in Washington that he’d just labeled as corrupt?

 
Undeterred, Edwards set off on another diatribe, painting himself as the good guy who will fight for the downtrodden against the beast. Just what we need, another phony trial lawyer on a mission. Reasonable minds can differ, but Edwards is as bad as Al Gore and John Kerry, clearly the most potentially destructive Democrat in the field. If Edwards were elected, it’d signal some of the most contentious years of our times.

 
And he says he can ‘bring the country together.’ 

 
Other losers? The rest of the field.

 
Unlike the Republicans, there never really was any potential for a break-out from one of the lower-tier Democrats. Hillary Clinton started out with a HUGE advantage which she wouldn’t be likely to surrender to more than one potential challenger – and the liberals and media decided long ago that that ‘alternative’ would be Barack Obama.

 
For that reason, the rest of the men on stage are pure window dressing. Bill Richardson is revealing himself to be a true unabashed leftist who seems to think that government is the solution to every ague in the country.

 
To his credit, Richardson did say he wanted to eliminate all Congressional earmarks, but in the next breath he claims that he’d use any potential savings to spend in other areas. He also said that he wants to raise fuel standards to 50 miles per gallon…!!!! Talk about bankrupting what’s left of the American auto industry.

 
What’s wrong with people choosing what kind of vehicle to drive – and to pay for the gas to put into it?

 
Choice is only popular with the Democrats when it comes to ‘choosing’ to terminate the unborn. Instead, Richardson says the American public must sacrifice to stave off the possible effects of Global Warming. Great, Bill. We know you’d make a heck of a president.

 
Joe Biden talks the loudest, yet he’s mostly invisible. 

 
I do think he captured the ‘emotional’ apex moment of the debate, when asked what his New Year’s resolution would be, he said “to remember where I come from.” It didn’t seem to hit home with the Democratic audience, but Biden was essentially bidding goodbye to the process – similar to John McCain. This was Biden’s last chance – he gave it a good effort, but just came up short.

 
Biden’s liberal message doesn’t work for me, but throughout the course of the campaign, he’s gained credibility.

 
Ditto for Christopher Dodd. Dodd is ‘presidential’ and talks like a moderate, even if we know better. But he’s less ‘offensive’ that Hillary or Edwards. Dodd’s an unapologetic liberal, yet seems apart from the elites in the Democratic Party.

 
Run for the polls

 
For those expecting an all-out war in the final Democratic debate, they were sorely disappointed. Now that Hillary’s lost some ground, it wouldn’t have been a wise strategy for her opponents to single her out for a rhetorical beating.

 
Nor would it have behooved her to try and beat up the others.

 
For that reason, the forum was issue-oriented and fairly tame.

 
When Carolyn Washburn called time at the end, there was a feeling of finality to all of the campaigning, all the news stories, all the hoopla and hot air. Sure, there will be more of the same in the coming weeks, though now the voters will get their turn to say something.