There's a new book out called Why New Hampshire?. I'd really like to read it so I can have a better understanding of why New Hampshire and Iowa, two rather insignificant states, both in population and land mass, have so much influence in who runs for and eventually wins the presidency. It just doesn't make much sense to me.

Perhaps it's about making sure the little states get a say before the big, important states like California, New York and Texas weigh into the fray. But Why these two? Why not Rhode Island and Delaware? And why two in the north? Shouldn't the south and west, where most presidents seem to come from these days, have more of a say?

This feeling could come out of jealousy. Why should Iowans and people from New Hampshire (what do you call people from New Hampshire anyway?) have the opporunity to shake hands, meet with and talk to the next president of the United States? When are the cornfields of the 99 counties become the corridors of the brokers of power.

Sure, every state gets a time to hold it's primary, but so much emphasis is put on the ability of anyone candidate to win in these two states. In the debate on Sunday on CNN, the moderator even asked Carol Moseley-Braun how could the Iowa voters get behind her when she hasn't spent as much time in the state as some of the other candidates? God forbid a candidate waste a precious minute pressing the flesh with pig farmers in lieu of campaigning in a state like California that is the engine of the economy in this country. Have we gone mad?

You know what I say? With all due respect to the nice people of Iowa and New Hampsire, fuck Iowa and New Hampsire. You can take your 6 electoral votes and stuff it up your ass.