Reality Checking In

One of the first things you notice about the high mountains is their "Zero Tolerance" policy for bullshit.
That griz you figure ISN'T interested in you might be half-lame and all hungry.
That clear blue sky can turn into a blizzard despite your most ferverent wishes.
What is, most assuredly IS.
There's no equivocating, no bargaining, no "nuance".
It's beautiful, brutal, and uncompromisingly REAL.

THAT is the lesson of the wilderness, and those who refuse to learn it - real fast - end up feeding the scavengers and fertilizing the trees. You either get rid of the bullshit and get down to the facts of the situation or you very quickly realize just precisely how little the mountains give a damn about your illusions of "how things should be".
The mountains don't even NOTICE how "important" you might think you are down in town...if you persist in your illusions, you're just another link in the food chain.
...and that is the lesson I reconnected with this year out hunting.
In the high country, the FIRST thing you need to get rid of is any form of self-delusion.

"Nuance" is bullshit.
A lie is a lie. Something either IS...or it IS NOT.
Period.

When I scan the news these days, I see an entire NATION that needs to spend some time in the mountains.
Politicians are some of the worst.
I don't give a damn about "words" and "campaign promises" and "convenient conversions". It is ALL about ACTIONS - past and present, since that is the ONLY way to have an accurate estimate of their FUTURE actions....and isn't that what elections are all about?

Let's run down the list:
The dem candidates ALL want to raise taxes, take away the Second Amendment for gun owners, cut'n'run in Iraq, "talk" with the terrorists (now THAT is something I'd like to watch), destroy the health care system by having the government run it (since when has it EVER been a good idea to allow D.C. to run ANYthing?), and basically turn this nation into some idealized notion of a socialist nanny-state utopia.
"Utopia" is a FICTIONAL IDEAL that has NEVER occured in reality.
The mountains are all about reality, so any vote for a dem is a vote for wishful thinking - which is nearly always fatal, both in the wilderness of Montana AND the wilderness of national and world politics.
So much for the dems.

Of the reps, it comes down to key issues:
Huckabee has "changed his mind" on illegal aliens and raising taxes - so much for him.
...oh, and that "endorsement" he got from Gilchrist (of the Minuteman Project)? Sorry, but as a 501(C)4 organization, the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (the REAL Minutemen, who actually DO watch the borders) CANNOT legally endorse ANY candidate. The Minuteman PROJECT (a whole separate bunch, who haven't spent even one minute of their time reporting illegals on the border!) is ALSO a non-profit, and can't endorse any candidates, either.
Gilchrist's endorsement is PERSONAL, and should NOT be interpreted as any sort of endorsement by actual Minutemen....like me.

Giuliani has "changed his mind" on abortion, ran a "sanctuary city", and helped take away gun-owner's rights - so much for him.

Romney has "changed his mind" on abortions, taxes, and never did a thing about the "sanctuary cities" in the People's Republik of Messed-Up-Choo-Choos - so much for him.

McCain helped draft the "McCain-Feingold Laws" which step on every American's First Amendment Rights...and don't get me started on his Amnesty Plan - so much for him.

Paul? You've got to be kidding. Last year, a bill was up for vote to slow the growth of "entitlements" (meaning: "nanny-state butt-wiping" for the terminally lazy). All the dems voted against it - along with the usual RINO's - as well as Paul...seems he didn't think it fit his unrealistic fantasies of zero government growth.

It failed by ONE vote.
In short, he allowed his personal feelings to get in the way of something that he SHOULD have wanted to see happen...he's an idealistic fool. He's also in lock-step with the dems about raising the white banner of retreat in Iraq.
So much for him.

And one of the KEY factors - for me, anyway - is the fact that ALL of the above have "reached compromises" with or actively aided the leftists....and when one "compromises" with the left - or allows unrealistic ideals to keep them from being defeated - then the leftists win.

Thompson? He's pro-Second Amendment, against illegal aliens getting anything but a ride back to wherever they came from, against abortion, against socialist medicine, against more taxes, is for WINNING the war, and - above all the rest - his words now are CONSISTANT with his actions of the past.

I'm basically a stone-cold Conservative - although I do confess to a few Libertarian notions like keeping Big Brother out of schools, bedrooms and the internet - so you can likely guess who I'm supporting in the primaries.

However, regardless of who wins in the primaries, you can bet your sexual organs that I will NOT be voting for the dem....and neither will I be voting for a "third-party" candidate nor abstaining - either of which are the same thing as a vote FOR whomever the leftists put up.
Whether I like 'em or not, I'll be voting Republican, since ANYONE they put up (thank God paul has zero chance of winning) would be infinitely preferable to the alternative.

Reality cuts through bullshit, and I trust actions over mere words.

I'm a mountain child, a soldier, a father, and a realist, which is why I'm a FredHead.