Presidential promises empty without details

By Freedom New Mexico

New Hampshire fulfilled its traditional function by offering the pundits and pollsters a surprise on Tuesday.

Most had Barack Obama multiplying his momentum from Iowa by beating Hillary Clinton soundly, perhaps by double digits.

But the campaign eternal has taken another unexpected turn.

Even if only a week into the election year, Clinton’s narrow win against the expectations allows her to claim her husband’s erstwhile title of Comeback Kid with some justification.

On the GOP side John McCain rose from the dead and Mike Huckabee did well enough to maintain a semblance of viability.

It would take a miracle to resurrect Mitt Romney.

Ron Paul did well enough to be taken seriously within party councils, which probably won’t happen, but he has enough money and support to continue.

Fred Thompson is on life support.

The cliché uttered every four years that this is an especially critical election is often enough false, but this year it just might be true.

So the longer the battle for votes goes on the better the chance that a fairly lengthy discussion will ensue.

The political process is far from an ideal way to have a rational debate, given all the mud that candidates sling and the distortions they put out.

But it’s what we have, and it produces at least a rough approximation of what some significant portion of the electorate prefers.

Going forward, we hope all the remaining candidates will get more specific.

“Change” is a nice mantra and understandable in the wake of the Bush years, but it has no content.

Change in what direction?

How should we handle withdrawal from Iraq if it happens?

Should the size and scope of government be increased or decreased?

Details, please.