33 Reasons John McCain Will Be President

On Feb 5th, during his post Super-Tuesday election speech John McCain said;

I think it's fair to say that we might have come a little bit closer to today to the day when mothers in Arizona might be able to tell their children that someday they could grow up to be president of the United States.

<a</p>

This made me think of three things. One, have Arizona mom's been telling their kids they can't grow up to be president until now? Two, do we really want another president who mangles the English language. And three, John McCain is destined to be the next president of the United States.

You see, Arizona is one of the states's on the 33rd parallel, the geographic latitude that defines the heart of the South. This makes him the odds on favorite to win the next election.

In post-World War II America, the President of the United States needs to come from a state on this line of important southern distinction; Texas (Ike, LBJ, the torture president and his CIA dad), Southern California (Ronnie and Tricky Dick), Arkansas (Bubba), and Georgia (Jimmy Carter).

This isn't an absolute rule, of course. John Kennedy, FDR, Gerald Ford, and Harry Truman were the exceptions. Some of you might note that Gerald Ford and Harry Truman were 33 degree recipients of Charleston's Scottish Rite. I suppose you can throw these two into the formula also, as they appear to be sympathetic to the cause.

Roosevelt and Kennedy's success shows that the 33 degree parallel requirement is not an insurmountable obstacle to getting elected. But then again, both men died in office, meeting their fate on the 33 degree parallel.

•  McCain is sanctimonious

  I don't know. I listen to his speeches and he just comes off as sanctimonious and full of false humility.

  by NewAmerican on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:06:39 PM PDT

  •  5 keating reasons...

    this may not work.

    by mayan on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:12:18 PM PDT

  •  What and where is the code located for this diary

    Do I have to send away for another code ring or shall I search the cracker jacks interminablly..The other side of a "C" note..The flip side of an old 45 vinyl doo wopper song...A biblical numerical source..Not the Declaration of Independence again...Dont code me bro !

    by Johnny Rapture on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 02:41:22 PM PDT

•  so

  confused.

  by taylormattd on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:07:15 PM PDT

•  33?

  I'm still waiting for the 33 reasons why McCain will be president.

  by Eloy on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:07:29 PM PDT

  •  that's the slogan

    of Rolling Rock beer. Subtle product placement.

    by esquimaux on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:11:53 PM PDT

    •  33 levels of masonic...

      pyramid

      by mayan on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:12:49 PM PDT

•  McCain is gonna lose

  No matter what some imaginary line says about it.

  by DH from MD on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:07:51 PM PDT

•  Your diary is really confusing...

  makes no sense to me and is pimping for McCain IMHO...please fix, re-title or something

  by dvogel001 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:07:55 PM PDT

  •  Lighten Up, Francis

    by George Gould on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:10:56 PM PDT

    •  LOL...at least I understand your...

      humorous reference...

      by dvogel001 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:21:18 PM PDT

    •  Don't Call Me

      Francis!

      by phidda on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 01:20:15 PM PDT

•  Obama's from the southernmost state

  by Stroszek on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:08:06 PM PDT

•  One of my friends

  played a drinking game during McCain's speech. He took a shot every time John said "my friends." He was smashed within a few minutes.

  McVain is a complete fool - the only thing keeping him alive is the fawning media (they like to prop up his "maverick" reputation).

  by scimitar on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:08:54 PM PDT

  •  really

    I am surprised the media did not call him on his torture flip-flop.

    Romney is a lot more competent than McCain, one of the reasons is he did so poorly is that he probably got the most negative coverage in the media.

    by NewAmerican on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:23:16 PM PDT

  •  gaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!

    I can't imagine 4 years of "my friends"!  That will drive me crazier than the last 8 years of the bush smirk!  BLAH!

    BTW, to the diarist, Ike may have been born in TX, but he was pretty much raised to the north of the line in Abilene, Kansas. If you go by where a president was born, then mcpander doesn't qualify, since he was born in the Canal Zone.

    by dougymi on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:52:33 PM PDT

  •  That is all he

    NEEDS.

    THe media can make or break anyone.

    by Salo on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 01:00:41 PM PDT

  •  Yes!!!

    I never had a reason to listen to a McCain speech in its entirety.  Now I do.

    Senator McCain:  There's a bottle of gin in my kitchen with your name on it!

    by revelwoodie on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 01:16:32 PM PDT

•  not a geography geek here,

  But I have to think that Hawaii is well below that line.

  by Loves me some Freedom Fries on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:08:56 PM PDT

  •  But it's not ON the line

    So we should all just stop doing anything and sit in front of the TV.

    by DH from MD on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:11:10 PM PDT

•  it's all nonsense, but I'll play...

  Obama...native of HAWAI'I, way south of parallel 33!!

  ALOHA

  by penncove on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:09:49 PM PDT

•  i'm 33 years old.

  by Salo on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:09:59 PM PDT

  •  Weird... (nt)

    by revelwoodie on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:48:36 PM PDT

    •  what a coincidink

      I think i'll build a preposterous political theory around it.

      by Salo on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:55:45 PM PDT

•  33 percent after Obama gets through with him

  No We Can't
  vs.
  Yes We Can  

  by crystal eyes on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:10:26 PM PDT

•  It's his idiotic sense of humor

  Black mothers, mothers of daughters--why not Arizona moms?--can tell their kids they can be president this year.   McCain's humor and timing are always just off....you can hear the crickets.

  by chicago minx on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:11:14 PM PDT

•  Have you been reading "Liberal Fascism"?

  Your argument seems to be drawn from the Jonah Goldberg School of "Logic" found in that book, to wit:

  Hitler was a vegetarian.
  Liberals are often vegetarians.
  Therefore Hitler was a liberal.

  by alyosha on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:13:02 PM PDT

  •  Just fascism in general

    Hitler was a vegetarian
    Many vegetarians during Hitler's time were eugenicists
    Vegetarianism has a very checkered past.

    See also Kellogg, 7th Day Adventists

    Goldberg is an idiot.

    by Aaron Dahl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:25:35 PM PDT

•  Even more remarkable

  If you add the digits in the year 2008, multiply by 3 and add 3 to the total, you get 33.

  by George Gould on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:14:02 PM PDT

  •  Even more remarkable yet:

    If you add the alphabet positions of each letter in McCain's last name, you get the number of W's presidency.

    That proves...something, no?

    by perro amarillo on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 01:06:57 PM PDT

•  gwb is from

  connecticut. al gore won in 2000. your 'theory' needs som retooling, sorry.

  by atrexler on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:16:34 PM PDT

  •  Theory Retooling

    Well in that case, you'd really be upset to learn that John McCain was born in Central America!

    George W. and family are transplanted Texans. He was governor of Texas, his dad a Congressman from Houston.

    by Aaron Dahl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:34:21 PM PDT

•  McCain couldn't become President of the

  Local Elks Club.

  by Chamonix on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:18:15 PM PDT

•  Huckabee

  I think he was the Republicans strongest candidate.
  He ran very well with 1/10th of the money of Romney.

  I am listening to him on TV, and am surprised he did not do better. He is genuinely likeable, even when you know you strongly disagree with him. He is talking about energy independence right now.

  If he were not for the Confederate flag (which in my mind is like the Nazi swastika), and was not so anti-science (once saw him use Darwin'stheory of evolution to justify global warming), I would probably have given him serious consideration.

  by NewAmerican on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:20:11 PM PDT

  •  I would never consider him

    The man has more skeletons in his closet than a haunted house.

    by DH from MD on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:22:25 PM PDT

    •  Which is why

      the Democrats should love that he's still in the GOP race, and doing so well.  It drags down the whole GOP brand.

      by beemerr on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:38:41 PM PDT

•  NEITHER Bush is from Texas, neither is native.

  More lies that have been told to the unsuspecting public.

  by goofygringirl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:34:12 PM PDT

  •  Neither one.........

    is a Mason, Blue Lodge or Scottish Rite.

    by Fuzzy5150 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:44:52 PM PDT

•  Uhhhhh

  I think the whole point about being from the South, implies that a Democrat must be from the South. Republicans, Gerald Ford (I know, not elected), the Bushes and Reagan were not from the South.

  The point is not about the geographic area south of some line. The point has always been about the historical South, because of their conservatism and the perception that people from the North (Northeast) are cold and detached. None of this discussed the West or the Southwest, which is of course where McCain is from.

  I find this election to be great, because it's between a (in some fashion) New Yorker, an Illinoisian (what's the real word for that?) and an Arizonan. A Mid-westerner a New Englander/Mid-Atlantic...ite (upstate New York is arguably on the line, no?) and a South-westerner.

  So, despite your 33 point, the general concept of our Presidents coming from the South doesn't really apply.

  by beatengeneration on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:40:09 PM PDT

  •  Response

    I have some problem with your point that Reagan and the Bushes aren't from the South. I live in Southern California, the Southland, and believe me Ronnie embraced the South. Originally, a Dem from Illinois, he moved to Hollywood and became a Republican shill campaigning for state's rights. The idea that George Bush isn't a Southerner is also wrong; Midland High School, Governor of Texas etc. Finally, don't forget that Hillary was First Lady of Arkansas.

    by Aaron Dahl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:47:52 PM PDT

    •  Your point on

      Reagan is just proof of my point. When a non-Southernor wants to get elected, he pushes themes to appeal to southerners. However, Southern California is of course not the South, and Reagan was not a Southerner.

      Bush is part Southerner. That is a legitimate argument. Much of his life was spent in New England of course.

      But you're right. If we consider Bush to be a Southerner, then Hillary is in fact one too. The fact remains though, that it seems likely that we will have a President, either Obama or McCain, who has no ties to South. If we have Hillary, at least she will be campaigning as a Northerner, whereas Bush did campaign as a Southerner.

      by beatengeneration on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 01:56:09 PM PDT

      •  Southern California

        You have a traditional view of the South, those states that fought against the North in the Civil War. This is an error that you need to correct asap, as you will never understand modern politics without appreciating this difference.

        Geographically, Southern California is at the same latitude as Charleston, SC, the spot where the Civil War started. Significantly, the Carolina Colony originally stretched all the way to the Pacific along the 33 degree parallel. Southern California is indeed the South and many Southern sypathizers came to places like Arizona and San Diego after the war. Reagan and Nixon pursued the Southern Strategy with such conviction because they believed themselves to be Southerners.

        One point you might want to explore further is the fact that all the "Red States" are part of the Scottish Rite's Southern Jurisdiction. As for John McCain, he knows all about what I'm saying and he would never say he has no ties to the South.

        by Aaron Dahl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 04:47:32 PM PDT

        •  I don't hold

          arguments based on theories of Freemasonry to be relevant in this arena. Sorry. I will not attack your ideas, I'll just leave them alone. Please don't treat me like I'm ignorant, just because I disagree with you on the basis for discussion.

          by beatengeneration on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 05:09:34 PM PDT

          •  Who said anything about freemasonry?

            I don't treat anyone like they're ignorant. I responded to your post because I respected your comments. I was sorry to see your response which was a thinly veiled attack using ridicule. If you want to play the victim, don't throw the first punch.

            If you can't even concede that Southern California and Arizona are geographically in the south there's not much use in trying to convince you of other things. Sorry I tried to enlighten you.

            As for freemasonry, that's a pretty lazy comment on your part.

            by Aaron Dahl on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 11:25:21 PM PDT

            •  Good god.

              The point is and remains that Arizona, where John McCain is from, is not part of the historical and cultural South. Obviously it is in the geographical south. That you act as if it's possible that I don't understand that is completely disingenuous.

              You act as if times have changed. Yet when people speak of the "New South", they are referring to Birmingham, Atlanta and the Research Triangle, not San Diego and Phoenix.

              Why do you bring up ideas from the Scottish Rite and then attack me when I refer to Freemasonry? I'm not the one that attempted to win the argument by discussing that. I am wary of discussing anything with people who use that as justification, so I tried to tell you as much and get out of the discussion. Now you treat me like I'm a fool and call me lazy? What's going on?

              by beatengeneration on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 08:52:45 AM PDT

              •  good God

                So we agree that SoCal and Arizona are geographically part of the South, and that politicians like Goldwater and Reagan used the Southern Strategy, voted against the Civil Rights Act and were supported by the former Confederate States. I'm not sure what we're arguing about.

                I grew up in the Deep South, I've traveled the entire country, and so I understand your view of the "historical and cultural South". I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just pointing out another way of looking at it.

                Fact: Arizona was recognized by Jefferson Davis in 1862 as part of the Confederacy. Fact: Phoenix was founded by a Confederate soldier called Jack Swilling. Fact: Arizona opposed the Martin Luther King Holiday, McCain supports the Confederate flag, and anti-immigrant racists are roaming Arizona streets as we speak.

                Fact: John Diedrich Spreckels is considered the founder of San Diego. Born in Charleston, South Carolina, Spreckels built a railroad and real estate empire in San Diego. He owned the rail lines and the newspapers and was very active in the Scottish Rite.

                Fact: The Chandler family of Los Angeles were the richest and most powerful family in California. Worth over a billion dollars in the 1930's they owned huge portions of California. As owners of the Los Angeles Times, they pushed a right wing agenda that made the paper the laughing stock of the trade. They too were part of the Scottish Rite.

                If you know these facts, I'm impressed, few do. I could go on forever detailing how this part of the country is more aligned with the C.S.A. then the U.S.A., but I fear it would be a waste of time.

                As for the Scottish Rite, you might want to investigate something that plays such a key role in these powerful people's lives. The fact that you relate it to freesmasonry indicates you've never studied it.

                Be careful what you rule out of bounds for discussion. There are reasons why secret societies exist and you should not be afraid to explore them. I'm willing to bet you'd like to know what I know, but on a public forum, you'd rather raise your nose and say you don't partake in such silliness. Your loss.

                by Aaron Dahl on Sun Feb 17, 2008 at 03:08:00 PM PDT

•  You have the wrong number.

  Reagan was born in Illinois. Eisenhower was born in Kansas. George Bush was born in Connecticut.
  What you're saying is quite insane. Because your number is way off.
  The real number is 23. Open your eyes, and you'll know what I mean.
  This is the 21st Diary I've read today. Today is another way of saying 2 day! 21 + 2 is 23!
  The diary has 5 paragraphs. In five days it will be the 21 of February!
  Plus, February is the # 2 month, and it has 28 days, and this is 2008! and 2 and 8 is 11, and that with a face card is 21!  
  I'm scaring myself.

  by AWhitneyBrown on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:41:19 PM PDT

  •  Ike born in Denison, TX.

    Raised in Abilene. It's in his bio.

    You're right about 23, however.

    by dougymi on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:55:29 PM PDT

•  Someone, PLEASE..........

  .....pass me the tinfoil......I think I need to make a hat......the rays are starting to penetrate!

  by Fuzzy5150 on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:43:52 PM PDT

•  Wow...

  When I clicked on this diary there were 33 comments...

  ...weird...

  by revelwoodie on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 12:47:35 PM PDT

  •  Me tooo and now there are 46 ! !

    by Johnny Rapture on Sat Feb 16, 2008 at 02:49:08 PM PDT