Santorum:
Why Doesn't Fox Suspend Palin, Huckabee? |
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Santorum:
Why Doesn't Fox Suspend Palin, Huckabee? |
|
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
This will be the comment box |
Chris Christie, Haley Barbour, Fred Thompson, John Bolton... only ones I see as carrying the torch and have prayer of winning. Any other suggestions?
Santorum is an idiot. Please feel free to quote me on that.
John Bolton-not a chance
Haley Barbour-not a chance
Fred Thompson-I went to Iowa in the last go around to work for Fred and saw first hand his lackadaisical approach-not a chance
Chris Christie-he'd get my luke warm support and has a good shot
If we run Newt, Huck, Pawlenty or Mitt I'm sitting the top of the ticket out and I know a bunch of conservatives that feel the same way-ahhh, remember 2008?
I still want Sarah to run, she is the one true conservative in the field that has a chance. And if she picked Col West for her veep, I would suspend my life to work my ass off for them.
She would, more than anyone else, clearly define our values and would be the best contrast to President Training Wheels.
The Biden/West debates could be pay per view and unlike Sarah last time, when old Slow Joe starts making crap up, Col West ain't gonna let it slide.
MM
MM
Fred Thompson only got involved during the run-up to the last election to could peel off enough votes from other contenders so his old buddy McCain could win. Once he diluted the field in favor of McCain, he quit.
He's part of the problem.
I have to agree with Keller. But, as is usual with leftists, he gets it right for the wrong reasons. Fox's "Fair and Balanced" is deeply cynical, because it assumes -- or invites the assumption -- that both "sides" deserve equal weight.
When one "side" is right and the other is left -- er, I mean, wrong -- then fair and balanced is every bit as much B.S. as the left-only perspective the NYT purveys.
M
An aspect of leadership is the willingness to work with people that you don't like and who are intellectually smarter than you are.
It takes more than just an ego to do that. It requires "character." You have to have a basic liking and understanding of people. When you vote for a President you also vote for his team and his friends. Ideology is important people smarts perhaps more so. Christie
presents well but in one interview he said in effect that he didn't want to run for president until he had more experience and would be "ready" for the snake pit that is Washington DC. I've been thinking about that and I don't think any individual will be "ready" for that job and now I'm wondering about who does Christie have on his team????
"Cynical", I assume, means not believing in the immanent arrival of President Obama's skittles-crapping unicorn brigade to save us all?
Yup, we're all lib'tard-agenda skeptics here ...
I can't believe any conservative would seriously consider Chris Christie--no matter what he says, the man is from New Jersey, and there is no such thing as a New Jersey conservative. Like a Massachusetts conservative, a New York conservative, or an Illinois conservative--they haven't existed for the past 40 years. Sarah akbar!
Christie is anti-gun. While not a Bloomberg, he's no friend. Fred got in the race 'cause Mrs. Fred wanted to be 1st Lady. "Fred, if you run for Pres. I'll **** your ****!" He was still "gittin' it" so he quit. Newt, Nit, Hick, and the rest weren't wanted before so why would we want them now? I don't see anyone out there other than Bolton or Palin I'd support, and the GOP brass will see they don't run. I guess Odumbo may win again after all.
Snackeater: I share your concern. I hope I'm wrong, but I suspect by the summer of 2012 we will be in extremis !! - 1933 all over again. Only this time we're a relatively lawless, self indulgent, Balkanized society. Whoever is elected will have to possess Christie's leadership traits, and have the metal to see things through. Sarah Palin is my personal choice right now, but we'll have to see. She has, you know, had a multi-billion dollar media smear campaign waged against her for three years now.
BTW, the best person for the job? Me. I'm not kidding. I'll even submit to war crimes trial and execution by firing squad after my first term as benign dictator. The country will rock!
Rodger: has the Television-Print media toned down their attack on Governor Palin? Not so much the rhetoric as the frequency? Sure, PDS is alive and well on the intrawebz and what passes for liberal talk radio, but you don't hear her name mentioned much on ABCNNBCBS. Makes me wonder if the plan is to try and keep her out of the national spotlight.
Even so, if Sarah Palin is the (R) candidate in 2012, rest assured the T-P media will come at her with a viciousness we've never seen before. But I think it will backfire: Americans naturally side with the underdog, and when Americans see the media savaging her--and especially when American men see a woman being savaged--they will support her. Sarahu akbar!
Unless you get the nomination--then it's RKOF! FORK! RKOF!
No kings,
not even TRKOF (no offense* to Frogs).
* That's their job, and the job market being tight ...