Saturday, March 05, 2011

Four Horsemen

Santorum: Why Doesn't Fox
Suspend Palin, Huckabee?



santorum-sarah-newt-hukabee

Rick Santorum asks an almost good question here, but for the wrong reasons. 

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, a likely candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, understands why he and likely fellow presidential contender Newt Gingrich were suspended as commentators for Fox News. But he doesn’t understand why potential presidential candidates Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee weren’t suspended, too, The Hill reports.
  1. Starting with Santorum: He's running for whatI have not forgotten that Santorum acted on behalf of President Bush in getting Sphincter reelected, when we could have had Sen. Pat Toomey.
  2. And Newt: Newt's   running for what?
  3. And Huckabee: I don't like Huckabee because he's a "program" candidate. That is, he fingers the political winds, and he gets stuff wrong.  His latest "birther moment" is a good example.  Just about everything he said was factually wrong, which allowed equally ignorant Obama apologists, like here,  to spew away, unabated. Here Mike, read this and get it right next time.
  4. And Sarah : Her strength is I think diluted by scheduled appearances on FOX. Making sane, timely observations via Facebook and Twitter allow3ed her to change the political landscape last year.  Sarah Palin's Alaska series was a tour de force.  As things stand Sarah Palin is a kingmaker with a following much larger, and more diverse than either party wants to acknowledge.  Still, who needs to be king when you have the king's ear?  Besides, Chris Christie is unbeatable as things stand.
Yes, I'm trurned off anymore by old talking heads whose sentences I can finish before the question is asked.  Still, I love FOX NEWS.  Who else could prompt fumbling New York Times executive editor Bill Keller to say:
.
"I think if you're a regular viewer of Fox News, you're among the most cynical people on planet Earth," Keller snarled. "I cannot think of a more cynical slogan than 'Fair and Balanced' "

Unless it's "All the news fit to print"



12 comments:

wmprof said...

Chris Christie, Haley Barbour, Fred Thompson, John Bolton... only ones I see as carrying the torch and have prayer of winning. Any other suggestions?

Chuck Martel said...

Santorum is an idiot. Please feel free to quote me on that.

Anonymous said...

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

Anonymous said...

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.

Mark Alger said...

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

toadold said...

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????

Kristophr said...

"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 ...

Snackeater said...

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!

Anonymous said...

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.

Rodger the Real King of France said...

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!

Snackeater said...

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!

DougM said...

No kings,
not even TRKOF (no offense* to Frogs).

* That's their job, and the job market being tight ...

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.