Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine is one of this year's six Republican gubernatorial candidates Elected in 1994 - becoming the first Georgia Republican to be elected to statewide office - he's now the longest serving statewide Republican officeholder.

Last week, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Kyle Wing field asks whether or not Commissioner Oxendine should resign his office because of the cozy relationship he has with those he regulates.

"...And much of the scrutiny on Oxendine centers on whether he’s spent his time in office seeking - some would say demanding - the help of the people he regulates to build his political career and fill his campaign coffers...” (“An image that Oxendine can't resolve in office, “ February 26).

No stranger to controversy, Oxendine's career has been spotted with erratic behavior and intemperate remarks. One GOP operative described Oxene as being, well, “just a little nutty.” Among politicos and capitol hill observers, he's known as an arrogant, heavy-handed lightweight and not a very likeable guy to boot.

 Oxendine flirted with running for U.S. senate and lieutenant governor in previous years. But since 2002, when Sonny Purdue broke the Democrats' 135 year old strangle hold on the governor's office, he's had his eyes set on 2010

 A recent Insider Advantage poll shows Oxendine leading - registering 25% - the lackluster pack of other Republican candidates - with 45% being undecided.

 His “Working for Georgia” campaign is gearing-up to be a slashing, take no prisoners effort staffed by ideological wing nuts and aimed at the hardest of hard right Republican primary voters. It will mirror Oxendine's persona and rigid, far right-wing zealotry. In a field already dominated by the right, Oxendine will make them all look like liberal-left Democrats in comparison.

Should Republican voters be suicidal enough to tap Oxendine as the party's 2010 nominee, the Georgia GOP will live to regret it.

In “Keeping Georgia Republican in 2010,” (February16), I wrote that “Republicans must appeal to Independents and avoid party hardliners...This is critical to Republican fortunes in 2010. The electorate is more diverse now and is also less wedded to party affiliation or loyalty. Republicans cannot elect a gubernatorial candidate who ignores this.”

“The Georgia electorate - within a few points - is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. Each can generally count on a base of about 43% of the general election vote. The rest comes from Independents and Libertarians.”

If John Oxendine becomes the Republican candidate for governor, his general election campaign is sure to be a tiresome replay of the liberal versus conservative playbook. And his copy goes far beyond just the conservative realm. It will feature strident, far right-wing play calling. And it won't work.

John Oxendine is just too toxic and Georgia voters will affirm that in November when the GOP loses the governorship. Bet on it.

 Last November, following the release of Sarah Palin's book, “Going Rouge,” I posted a commentary on what I thought the Palin phenomenon was all about.

 In addition to that post, I've written three others:

--- Commenting on her resignation as governor of Alaska and recounting my 2008 articles in Georgia Politics Daily on her national candidacy;

--Hitting back at the New York Times columnists for their hate Palin mentality; and,

-- Highlighting - gleefully - the Times' columnists slight admission that Sarah Palin does, indeed, matter...well, sorta.

Now comes the estimable George Will, who opines February 18, that, while admirable, Palin will never be president and that populism isn't the road to victory for Republicans.

On Palin, Will writes, “... The more attention Palin receives, the fewer Americans consider her presidential timber. The latest Post-ABC News poll shows that 71 percent of Americans -- including 52 percent of Republicans -- think she is not qualified to be president.

“This is not her fault. She is what she is, and what she is merits no disdain. She is feisty and public-spirited, and millions of people vibrate like tuning forks to her rhetoric. When she was suddenly forced to take a walk on the highest wire in America's political circus, she showed grit.”

“She also showed that grit is no substitute for seasoning. She has been subjected to such irrational vituperation -- loathing largely born of snobbery -- that she can be forgiven for seeking the balm of adulation from friendly audiences. “

I agree with that assessment but add that she will be a force to be reckoned with this year and in years to come. “Palinism and what it represents, is far more significant for our politics today and the future than Palin herself...”, (“What is Palinism?, November 20, 2009).

On populism, he says, “Populism has had as many incarnations as it has had provocations, but its constant ingredient has been resentment, and hence whininess. Populism does not wax in tranquil times; it is a cathartic response to serious problems. But it always wanes because it never seems serious as a solution.”

 That may be true but the essential message - the basic principle of populism supports the people versus the elites . is here to stay. “The resurgence of the Republican Party must include an affinity for everyday, ordinary Americans and shedding forever the party’s corporate image and aurora of elitism. Conservative populism can lead the way,” (“The Case for Conservative Populism,” March 4, 2009).

“What is Palinism? It comes from a proud, old American political tradition - Populism,” (“What is Palinism?,” November 20, 2009).

What sends me to he barricades is when the liberal media and their acolytes trash Palin with utter disdain and contempt. Consider these choice morsels from just a few of the liberal-left's more loathsome characters:

“Father Coughlin with boobs,” (Andrew Sullivan, The Atlantic);

Palin's book is a" steaming pile of shit." (Stephen Colbert, Comedy Central);

“I’m not that convinced that that’s her baby,” (Bill Mahr, HBO's 'PrimeTime') when questioned whether Palin’s infant son Trig was her child or that of her teenage daughter, Bristol.

And, of course, there's the smug condescention of Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, et al., (“The 'Hate Palin' Royalty at The New York Times,” July 14, 2009).

What's so ironic is that Palin's liberal critics are, themselves, so damn unlikeable. When they go after Sarah Palin they're going after me, too and I rebel at their attacks.

I think George Will does too.

This year's gubernatorial election will be the first since 1998 without an incumbent on the ballot. That year, one of those non incumbent candidates - Roy Barnes - was elected and then defeated in his bid for a second term for by Sonny Perdue in 2002.

Former Governor Barnes wants his old job back and appears to the front runner for the Democratic Primary nomination. He'll be a formidable opponent for the Republican nominee.

I've made no secret about being less than enthused with the currently announced same ol', same ol' Republican gubernatorial candidates and have encouraged Herman Cain to enter the fray. I've also taken to task so called “Family Values” Republicans.

However, Georgia can't afford to go back to a Democrat in the governor's mansion. 2002 was a watershed year in our politics when voters elected the first Republican gubernatorial candidate in 135 years.

When the legislature adjourns in a month or so, the serious politicking begins. An InsiderAdvantage poll of February 11, shows the Republican race for governor knotted among four contenders and a three-way race for second place:

– John Oxendine, 25%

– Karen Handel, 10%

– Nathan Deal, 9%

– Eric Johnson, 7%

– Austin Scott, 3%

– Ray McBerry, 1%

– Undecided, 45%.

The poll doesn't mean much this early - the primary is July 20 - but it does portend a run off and reveals a large number of undecided voters.

Last October, I cited a political memo from a Democrat written to Georgia Democrats and offered my own memo to Georgia Republicans, (“Political Memo for Georgia Democrats and Republicans,” October 12, 2009).

It's reprinted here - with only slight revisions - as my recipe for success in November:

•  Present an attractive Republican brand to voters: Georgia made remarkable progress since 2002 practicing the virtues of low taxes and fiscal restraint. This is a patented Republican brand and the party should never, ever stray from it; . Georgia is fortunate to have a Republican governor and legislature. This year, we must all work to keep our state in those hands.

• Acknowledge the role of race in politics: Identity politics - including playing the race card - is not a Republican problem. A third of Democratic Primary voters are African-American and they vote overwhelmingly Democratic in the General Election. While that won't change in 2010, Republicans must continue to preach the gospel of opportunity, limited government and individual freedom to black and Hispanic voters;

• Avoid costly primary battles: Unless there's a consensus candidate emerges - as Barnes is likely to be in the Democratic Primary - a costly Republican Primary battle looms. While Republicans may be gleeful about a possible rematch with “King Roy” Barnes the fall, he'll be a tough and resourceful challenger. If there's a Republican Primary brawl resulting in a bloody runoff - similar to the Democrats self-destructing primary battle in 2006 - the Republican nominee will face a an uphill General Election fight.

• Run strong everywhere: There's no dearth of good Republican candidates which is one reason the state legislature is now in Republican hands; and

• Republicans must appeal to Independents and avoid party hardliners on such issues as Sunday alcohol sales. This is critical to Republican fortunes in 2010. The electorate is more diverse now and is also less wedded to party affiliation or loyalty. Republicans cannot elect a gubernatorial candidate who ignores this.

The Georgia electorate - within a few points - is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. Each can generally count on a base of about 43% of the General Election vote. The rest comes from Independents and Libertarians.

Georgians, like Americans generally, are angry, frustrated and fed-up with government and politicians. There’s a simmering but growing populist sentiment out there. Republicans cannot elect a gubernatorial candidate who ignores this too.

 While Republicans may be gleeful about a possible rematch with “King Roy” Barnes this fall, he'll be a formidable and resourceful challenger. If there's a Republican Primary brawl resulting in a bloody runoff - similar to the Democrats self-destructing primary battle in 2006 - the Republican nominee will face a tough General Election fight.

Governor Sonny Perdue has plans for a major restructuring of state government that would make four constitutional offices appointed rather than elected.

The plan, which would require approval of voters in November - if it receives a two-thirds vote in both the state House and Senate - would allow future governors to appoint Georgia's insurance, labor and agriculture commissioners as well as the state school superintendent. Each appointment would have to be confirmed by the state Senate.

Georgia is currently one of only five states that elect a labor commissioner and one of only nine states to elect its agriculture commissioner. Twelve other states elect an insurance commissioner and 14 vote for state school superintendent.

If the plan gets through the legislature, it faces rough sledding on the November ballot. Opponents of the governor's plan have coalesced around the loss of a voice in choosing their leaders. Democratic, some Republicans and conservative grass-roots organizations expressed surprise and dismay at the governor's proposal.

Direct elections by voters of statewide officials - including judges and magistrates - remains a strong tradition in the South especially in rural areas. The issue is likely to be a topical one in the gubernatorial race and elections for the legislature. Perhaps the most controversial proposed appointee is state school superintendent and the one to draw the most opposition.

Last November, in “Fort Hood and the Legacy of Islam,” we wrote that “The Fort Hood tragedy - a domestic terrorist attack - should finally be a wake-up call to our PC attitude when it comes to Islam and the evil it still generates in the 21^st century.”

Since then, we've had the failed terrorist Christmas Day attack on Flight 253 but President Obama and his administration seemingly still don't seem get it.

Hey: THEY WANT TO KILL US! Duh.

Who are “They?” Read on.

 We're told by the well intentioned that Islam is a “religion of peace, “ that its been hijacked by radical, fundamentalist extremists. They say the jihadists are a minority faction that doesn’t represent Islam. An Islamic website reads “It (Islam) emphasizes the principle of brotherhood and equality of man…” We get selected feel good quotes from the Koran citing the peaceful, loving tenants of Islam. Apologists for Islam also emphasize that it's a faith built upon high ethical standards.

And yet, over the past decade:

It wasn't Hindus who attacked the USS Cole.

10 year old Jewish kids don’t strap explosive devices around their waist and pull the plug inside a crowded Palestinian café.

Buddhists didn't riot when their temples are bombed in Sri Lanka and Thailand; and it sure wasn’t a bunch of Methodists who hit America on 9/11 or later Madrid and London. And Major Hasan and Mr. Abdulmutallab aren't Baptists either.

 Muslim Shiites are killing Muslim Sunnis and vice versa. Violent demonstrations erupted over a newspaper caricature of the Prophet Muhammad. A cartoon! And, of course, the almost daily suicide bombings, kidnappings, beheadings and the ongoing works of an Islamic al-Qaeda - all in the name of this “peaceful” religion whose adherents are responsible for the majority of terror attacks around the world. Yet, apologists for Islam emphasize that it is a faith built upon high ethical standards. Say what?

With 1.57 billion Muslims, Islam is the second-largest religion in the world. So where are all these non jihadists, “peaceful” Muslims? They're sitting on the sidelines while their “minority” brethren are engaged in barbaric behavior throughout the world.

A quick hopscotch through ancient history reveals the true nature of Islam.

According to traditional biographies, Muhammad was born in 570 in Mecca. He is seen by Muslims to be God’s final Messenger to mankind. Muslim belief says the angel Gabriel appeared and proclaimed him the Prophet of God. He then heard the voice of the Lord which was recorded and became the text of the Koran. Islam spread throughout Arabia and, after his death in 632, it united all of Arabia and conquered Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Armenia and much of North Africa.

Within a century of Muhammad’s death, Islam stretched from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to Central Asia in the east..For ten years Muhammad was a warrior as Islam expanded. That the founder of Islam lived by the sword would seem to be the genesis of the violence we see today among his believers.

Muhammad was a killer, a warrior. The founders of Buddhism and Christianity traveled quite different paths. Therein lies the problem with Islam. Muhammad's followers are still fighting their Holy War - the Crusades redux.

 “We are at war against al-Qaeda,” (President Obama, January 7). No, Mr. PC President, we're at war with Islamic terrorists. And, by the way, Islamic terrorism isn't a law enforcement issue.

In1899 - 111 years ago - a young Winston Churchill wrote a prophetic observation of Islam:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lay on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries...”(Winston Churchill, “The River War”).

“Islam is a violent, repressive, degrading religion antithetical to freedom and tolerance. It remains mired in the 11^th century but its hatred and violence are alive in the 21^st.,” (“Fort Hood and the Legacy of Islam”).

A “religion of peace?” Not.

In an effort to remake its scandal plagued image from last year, the Georgia House is having a fundraiser for Haitian relief next month.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Jim Galloway gushingly wrote in his “Political Insider” column, “I’m happy to stand corrected, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a press release like the one below coming from the House speaker’s office – whether Republican or Democrat. Consider it an astute and worthy move, by a chamber trying to rehabilitate its image...' (“House looks to move past sex and cash scandals with fund-raiser for Haiti,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, January 26).

We've omitted the boiler plate press release but couldn't resist printing the harsh reader comments (names withheld) about Mr. Galloway's effusive kudos to the supposed good intentions of the legislators:

--“Gag me, pluzeese!! Most of these clowns have no idea where Haiti is but they don’t want to miss an opportunity to bandwagon if it helps their image.”.

--“What’s next? How about an awards show where they get trophies and talk about how great they are? What a bunch of self-serving aggrandizement. I expect they will be using tax dollars as donations for the fund raising and then claiming credit for it.”

--”Haiti? That’s on an island next to Lovie, right? Unfortunate name, Haiti.”

Well, so much for image making.

Whether it's the U.S. Congress or the Georgia state House, it doesn't seem to be a very auspicious time for politicians to do much preening and posturing these days.