(Page 5 of 14)
Great article on a man who would, undoubtedly, make a fine president.
Unfortunately, with our present system of selection of each party's nominee, i.e., primaries that are nothing more than beauty contests, with the "beauty" rules dependent on how much money is spent, and debates with absolutely ridiculous rules, his chances aren't very good.
p>There needs to come a time in the U.S., when each candidate is judged, not on sound bites, but on their record, and their proposals for solutions to the problem the country faces. If we continue down the road we are on, freedom in this country is doomed. br> -- R. Goodson br> Vero Beach, Florida /p> p> If only they could be the Republicans' nominees in '08 -- two decent, manly conservatives of whom we could be proud. (I'm ashamed of any spurious comparisons I've made of Bob Livingston's and Newt Gingrich's characters. Quin Hillyer's narratives about his friend and boss have convinced me that they are not in any way in pari material .) If the conventions were as wide open as they once were, these are the kind of candidates who might emerge. Can anyone seriously argue that the "democratic" primary system has produced better candidates or office-holders -- not to mention high drama during convention weeks? The successful candidates have been among those who have raised the most money -- often from dubious sources, such as governments inimical to America and its values, megalomaniac foreign billionaires, and hustlers of assorted stripes. The presidents produced include the completely amoral -- one of whom is now shilling for his equally amoral life partner -- and mean-spirited, vindictive, little, human ferrets with long memories. There is also a poorly educated failed divinity and law student ignoramus -- all the rage among the Hollywood ignoramus's -- who won the popular vote for president and lacks the common sense to turn out the lights before leaving for months-long sojourns among his familiars and Yahoo followers. br> -- Jim Wheatley br> Harper Woods, Michigan /p> p>
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
louis vuitton| 4.27.10 @ 1:12AM
the word nepotism in any articles about this topic. She apparently is sensitive to the issue. She should be, she shares in the treasure canada gooseAfter the immigration bill failed in the U.S. Senate, the postmortems deplored the new power of bloggers and the Internet.