Mets Make Twins An Offer They Couldn't Refuse. McCain Makes Republicans An Offer They Couldn't Understand.

It looks like the Mets will have Johan Santana pitching for them for 2, 6 or 7 years depending on how you look at it, and all it cost them was Gomez, an OK prospect, Humber now just a suspect because of injuries, and a couple of players from the low minors. And $20mm/yr which as we know from our study of tax law, really means that Santana's playing for free because his yearly salary is written off as a current expense and his entire compensation package is discounted to present value, capitalized, and depreciated on a 5-year ACRS. Don't believe the hype. It's gooooood business to own a baseball team. As skeptical as I've been of the Wilpons' willingness to win but more than that build an international brand so that they can continue to win all the time the way Rudy Giuliani's Girls do, I LOVE THIS TRADE!!!!

And speaking of goooood businessmen, there was a Republican debate last night at the Reagan Library in (where else?) Simi Valley, CA, as in ..."go to Simi Valley and surely/somebody knows the address of the jury/pay a little visit/who is it?/may I talk to the Grand Wizard?...." The gooood businessman was Mitt Romney. It's clear that whatever his rhetoric is now, it is a business decision and nothing more. Mitt Romney is the very definition of a country-club Republican. He's a smart motherfucker, though. He's one of the few consultants who was able to shift over to the money-moving side of the business, effectively establishing Bain Capital, and was able to get away from the bullshit Dilbert-esque side. His essential centrism and growing up George Romney's son made him a viable candidate for Massachusetts governor, and his experience in the Church Of Jesus Christ And Latter Day Saints has given him a very good sense of how to emulate a Fundie. Their liturgy isn't quite the same, but the authoritarianism is. That's Romney's game. He's not bad at it. Not great at it, but not bad. There is no mistaking, though, that he is sharp as shit.

There was Ron Paul. Rudy Giuliani was absolutely right about Ron Paul. He's won every debate, because his ideas are unusual and though he's not quite the Libertarian say Hunter Thompson was he's a whole lot saner than the rest of today's Republican Party. He's been right on Iraq. He's been convincing on fiscal prudence and monetary neutrality. He's been convincing on taxes. He doesn't do it for me on the workplace and environmental laxity and it's odd to find a Libertarian so aggressively "pro-life," though I'm not convinced he's anti-choice on a state level. He's clearly thought these issues through and has been comfortable with them for some time and he was dedicated enough to get his M.D. Whatever you think of him, he's also pretty sharp and despite what the RNC thinks, he's a good club in the Republican bag.

There was Mike Huckabee. The opposite of Ron Paul. A right-wing populist. An authoritarian who would meddle in the markets and the bedrooms to serve the needs and wants and disappointments of the NASCAR and fluffer-nutter electorate. He's smooth as silk when he speaks, and while he's not the most profoundly educated guy in the whole world, he too is possessed of high intelligence.

But none of these men are the favorite for the nomination and all of these men have been to a greater or lesser extent completely demonized, ridiculed, vilified, or ignored by the MSM in favor of the the favorite, John McCain. John McCain is as dumb as a block of granite, and isn't shy about bragging about it, much like his erstwhile rival and current asshole-buddy, George W. Bush. As much of a McCain-lover as Tim Russert is, and as much of a dick as Tim Russert is, Russert quite properly questioned McCain last Sunday on Meet The Press about McCain's statement bragging to the Wall Street Journal about his economic ignorance. With the Giuliani mantra of "9/11" now in repose, we have McCain's mantras of "the surge strategy" and "my military service" as his answer to every question whether on foreign policy, economic issues, or social issues. Just like Obama has done, without doing a thing to conceal his true Right-Wing ideology, McCain is perceived as a "liberal" by fellow Republicans, a "straight-talking reformer" by the MSM, and as a centrist by everyone else. Move everything slightly to the left to complete the Obama analog.

I watched the debate and saw three intelligent men and one vacuous dunce. And guess who "won?" Guess who'll "win" tomorrow with the MSM. Because somehow McCain is seen as not-quite-Republican-enough (Chirst, the man wants to blow the world in two and has a perfect anti-abortion record; how much more "Republican" could he be?), there were a couple of McCain skeptics and I'm sad to say Anderson Cooper was not one of them. Cooper got this marching orders along with all the rest, apparently. Anderson Cooper told me what a "huge" night it was for McCain with the Giuliani and Schwarzenegger endorsements and McCain's brilliant debate performance. I can't believe I'm even writing this, but I found myself for the first time in my life in full agreement with Bill Bennett and Amy Holmes. Both made the point that this was a "terrible" night for McCain in that he said nothing of substance, showed a weak grasp of the issues, an inflated ego, and could not have seemed more petulant and cranky. Just like my good buddy, the Jr. Senator from Illinois.

Wow. Obama versus McCain. It really could come down to that. What a choice! Do you want it in the belly or the back? Yeah, I mean do you want it in the belly or the back? Me, I kind of like Senator Hillary R. Clinton for President of the United States Of America and Minister Of Health Balbina Herrera for President Of The Republic Of Panama in 2009. But should Perez-Balladares or even an opposition candidate like Varela succed Torrijos, it's not like the bedroom and bank-account police are going to be a big part of my life.

Kelso's Nuts love you