Winner Of The Westminster Dog Show Leads In New GOP Poll

In the latest New Jersey presidential poll conducted by Monmouth University pollster, Patrick Murray, 826 likely voters were were asked who they currently support for the GOP nomination for president.

In the poll, 32% indicated they support Westminster Dog Show 2012 “Best In Show” winner Malachy, a Pekingese for the GOP nomination, with Gov. Mitt Romney and former Sen. Rick Santorum with 29% and 26% respectively.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was fourth in the poll at 18%, with Congressman Ron Paul holding steady at 2%. The poll was conducted over the evening of February 14, 2012 and has a sampling error of plus or minus 3 %. With the sampling error, Congressman Ron Paul could have as many as 5% of the vote or -1%.

Les Malkovich of Little Egg Harbor indicated that he would like to see, “a presidential candidate for the GOP who has no problem cleaning his own private parts,” and now he’s not been particularly impressed with Romney, Santorum or Gingrich and their lack of ability in that area.

The Pekingese, or “Peke” (also commonly referred to as “Lion Dog”, or “Pelchie Dog” due to its resemblance to Chinese Guardian lions) is an ancient breed of toy dog, originating in China. The breed was favored by the Chinese Imperial court, and its name refers to the city of Beijing where the Forbidden City resides.

New Jersey State Tea Party Chair Donald Valdis Swartz issued an immediate demand to see “the birth certificate or valid registration papers and dog license,” of the Pekinese so that, “the United States doesn’t have to suffer through another foreign-born elected president.”

Real Message Out of New Hampshire: Vote Democratic

The real message out of New Hampshire was that people voted overwhelmingly for the Democratic candidates. This bodes well for November, whether the Democratic presidential candidate is Obama or Clinton or Edwards.

New Hampshire is an open primary state. This means that anyone, regardless of political party affiliation, can vote for anyone they choose. In a sense, a Barack Obama has as much to fear from a Hillary Clinton as he does from a John McCain.

But here are the numbers from the January 8th NH primary, with 91% of the districts reporting:

Democrats Vote %

Clinton 102,486---- 39%
Obama 95,263---- 36
Edwards 44,283---- 17
Richardson 11,943---- 5

Republicans Vote %

McCain 81,005 ----- 37%
Romney 69,132 -----32
Huckabee 24,364 -----11
Giuliani 18,763 -----9

As you can see, even with Obama in second place behind Hillary, he scored with enough New Hampshire independent voters to outpace McCain, the Republican leader. In 2000, McCain won New Hampshire, and his style still resonates with the independent thinking New Hampshirians. New Hampshirites? New Hampshirers?

Anyway you define them, the folks from the Granite State were rock solid for the Dems.

Romney needs to read the US Constitution, Article VI, Section 3.

The Framers got a good many things right in the Constitution: The First Amendment. The Due Process Clause. Prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. And Article VI Sec. 3 which covers "Debts, Supremacy, Oaths". This is the article that contains the phrase:

"…no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

Even if you’re not a lawyer you can probably understand that one. If you want to hold office, the supreme law of the land says that your religion does not matter and cannot bar you from holding office.

Now, politically, that is another question. Certainly New York Governor Al Smith learned that in 1928 as the first Catholic to run for president. And then-Senator John F. Kennedy found out the same thing in 1960. He won, despite being Catholic. Since then, things have not changed that much, at least politically. Voters still put candidates for national office through a religious test.

Governor Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and his religion has certainly been an issue for some of electorate. So, it is very curious why Romney would say the following:

In an op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor, Mansoor Ijaz writes:

"I asked Mr. Romney whether he would consider including qualified Americans of the Islamic faith in his cabinet as advisers on national security matters, given his position that 'jihadism' is the principal foreign policy threat facing America today. He answered, '…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration."

Ijaz is a prominent Pakistani-American businessman, a financier, and a media commentator on terrorism, mostly in relation to Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan.

It’s obvious that Mr. Romney is making a ‘religious test’ a part of his campaign with regard to who would be in his administration. And not only that ---to make the percentage of Muslims in the population part of the criteria is equally outrageous. The fact that Muslims “could serve at lower levels” in a Romney presidential administration clearly deserves no comment and is wrong on its face.

Far too many Americans agree with the assumptions upon which Romney's answer is based. I wonder if Mr. Romney thinks that Mormons should have to pass the same ‘population’ numbers test he is applying to Muslims.

If so, where would that leave him?