The American Spectator : Mitch Daniels and the CPAC Moment

Text Size

A Further Perspective

Mitch Daniels and the CPAC Moment

By Daniel Oliver on 2.14.11 @ 6:08AM

Is the Indiana governor running for president?

(Page 2 of 2)

Gov. Daniels said last year, as reported by Andrew Ferguson in the Weekly Standard that to solve the economic problems, "the next president would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues."

That may make sense, at first: if the country goes broke, a lot of things will have to change. Perhaps the country will have to economize by laying off the Supreme Court.

But even assuming solving the economic problem must come first, how are we going to avoid rafting on Barack Obama's great rolling river of red-ink all the way to bankruptcy on the rocks of entitlement programs?

Daniels said that Americans "are still a people born for self-governance. They are ready to summon the discipline to… put the future before the present, their children's interest before their own." Fine, but putting children's interest before their own -- even getting married and having children -- takes character. And the kind of people who have that kind of character tend to be social conservatives.

The governor's gamble may be that social conservatives know he is one of them; and they may understand that he doesn't want to scare off those people who are concerned about the economy but are not social conservatives. Perhaps.

The other missing stool was national security -- foreign policy and defense. The governor's only reference to national security was to say that even national defense, which he called "the first and most important mission of government," could not get a free pass when it came to cutting the budget.

The same day the governor spoke, the Egyptian government, our ally for decades, had fallen, casting the whole Middle East into confusion at best, chaos at worst.

Now the cons and the neocons, and the realists and the idealists, and the State Department long-timers and the Freedom Agenda proponents are all arguing about what we should have done, and what we should do.

A reasonable position for Gov. Daniels would have been to cut through that fog of argument and call for increasing the defense budget. Another position would have been to call for not cutting it, and notwithstanding that the Pentagon's balance sheet is as unyielding of useful data as a black hole.

Daniels understands that we cannot balance the budget by eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse. But neither can we wait around for the Defense Department to produce a clean balance sheet before buying the defense we need.

Hoosiers are not much affected by illegal immigration, nor is Indiana involved in national security. Hoosiers also know their state government can't determine national abortion policy. Nor can Indiana do much to affect today's culture, which drives so many of the social issues. It may be possible therefore to avoid discussing social issues when running for governor of Indiana. But not for president of the United States.

Because Gov. Daniels avoided both the social issues and the national security issue at CPAC, many observers thought it fair to conclude from his speech -- a very good speech indeed -- that he is not running for president. Or, at least, not running for president yet.

Page: < 12

About the Author

Daniel Oliver is a Senior Director of White House Writers Group in Washington, D.C. He served as Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission under President Ronald Reagan.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (78) | Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.14.11 @ 6:37AM

Republicans have been the party of big spending and it's a myth to beleive otherwise.

I don't see any backbone or honor in any of the candidates yet. When they say we have to have a truce on social issues what does that mean?

Does that indicate nothing will be done about the waste and fraud that permeate those systems?

As far as his observation that we need to stop the spending, it's been made by many but acted upon by no one.

Perhaps he will be a first.

USSAlabama| 2.14.11 @ 10:35AM

Can't understand what makes Republicans such willows; ever-bending to the whiff of what they think some group /may/ want.

Republicans are going to have to become oaks if they ever want to represent conservatives. Never-bending conservative.

And I agree with Kevin McCullough that Libertarians should not be invited to the [CPAC] party until they learn how to act.

idalily| 2.14.11 @ 7:17PM

And I can't understand this insistence that anyone with an (R) beside their name isn't a conservative by some kind of de facto logic. I also can't understand what certain cons don't like about the small government view of libertarians. Nor why Ron Paul libertarians and Palin supporters actually think they can win despite poll after poll to the contrary. Can't we all come together, people, and support a candidate who is conservative, Republican AND fiscally sensible who hasn't been demonized beyond repair and is actually interested in running for the POTUS job? Daniels may or may not be that person. Too soon to tell. But the Palin supporters and the Ron Paul supporters seem to have already made up their minds he's not. The rest of us are keeping an open mind.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.15.11 @ 5:35AM

The proof is in the pudding. Almost all Republican presidents in the last century were expanders of big government. Only one Democratic President in the last century outspent Republican Presidents.

Mark James| 2.15.11 @ 2:06PM

John Huntsman Jr. -- nuf said.

Patsy| 2.15.11 @ 10:01AM

I agree, Republicans are the best actors. Leave those Libertarians home until they learn how.

Mimi| 2.14.11 @ 7:08AM

I saw and heard most of the CPAC speeches.
Mitch Daniels showed us his character he came across as the most clear likeness of the founders. He did show HONOR and BACKBONE.
I think he came off as a great potential candidate. More than that...... he came off as someone who you could trust and have confidence in....so you could go about the business of re-starting the engine of prosperity,liberty and providing for the children...knowing the NATION would be in GOOD..hands.
Now,,not my pick but.... a good 2nd!!!

Patsy| 2.15.11 @ 10:02AM

Again, good actor.

DCD-in-Indiana| 2.14.11 @ 8:02AM

Notwithstanding Mr. Oliver's lack of knowledge about Indiana (we are quite a few immigrants here, illegal and otherwise, thank you), he seems to have missed Gov. Daniels' point: unless you right the ship of state, none of the other issues matter. What matters a defense budget if there's nothing worth defending?
Dismantling a social welfare state that fosters dependence and personal irresponsibility would have a greater impact on the social issues of concern to Mr. Oliver than any political rhetoric or bluster. Gov. Daniels is exactly right when he speaks of downplaying social issues, which are by definition divisive, in order to build a consensus on fixing government.

Mark James| 2.15.11 @ 2:09PM

Very well said! Social issues are also none of the Gov's business.

Coach G| 2.14.11 @ 8:18AM

When you are drowning as we are, it seems foolish to contemplate future swimming lessons. Deal with the most pressing problem first- survival, so that you will live long enough to deal with the next problem.
Talking about 'strong national defense' is not a priority; DEFINING what that terms means ... will be. The national grows weary of 'words' without 'meaning'. Vacuous phrases have become a rat-hole for our money. Define the term and we can talk about proper funding levels.

MikeD| 2.14.11 @ 8:23AM

One of Gov. Daniels comments was reported to refer to the unfulfilled promise of barack obama and the nation's surprise that barry turned out to be what he has; an unrepenitant socialist who hates his own country and has no understanding of what it stands for. Frankly, even though the media did their very best to wrap barry in lily white paper and tie him with a red bow, anybody who actually paid attention or took the time to learn something about him would have discovered quickly what he was. We got exactly what he said we'd get. No surprises.

I am fond of writing ad nauseum about every democracy needing two things to survive, neither of which we seem to have any more; A free and unfettered press (media) and an educated electorate (With teacher's unions in charge?). But, we also have more sources of information than at any time in history. We need to ensure that we're all educated on the issues and use that information to go after the denizens of the left at every turn. We have no excuses for ignorance until, and unless, barry and his gang, retain sufficient power to control the sources of information like the internet. It is no accident that barry has targetted the net, the Second Amendment, and the schools for his three main battlefields.

Every time he opens his mouth, or is reported to have said or done anything, just pause for a moment and think about what the media and the dems themselves would have done if he'd have been a republican doing the exact same thing.

We are way beyond 'business as usual'. The dems have repeatedly proved that they will lie, cheat, steal, create votes, hide opposition votes, get the cemetery vote; and in general DO ANYTHING to continue their destruction of America. We need to make sure that the "Old Democrats", retired union members, general retirees, etc... are educated that this is not "Their Father's Democratic Party'" We need to hammer over and over that the once proud and compassionate democratic party has been hijacked by hard left power hungry thugs who are actively working to destroy everything that has made our Country the most important force for good in the history of the world.

Ken (Old Texican)| 2.14.11 @ 12:59PM

Folks,
What Mike D said!

EdfromTexas| 2.15.11 @ 3:08PM

Dittos!!!

Pelligrino| 2.15.11 @ 11:00AM

I also concur. What MikeD wrote (above) is correct.

Where is the all-out effort to inform aged 60+ Democrat voters of the real machinery behind the 'ass' (symbol is accurate) party?

For that matter newly minted voters who are immigrants from countries -- those who came here longing to be free -- where's the BIG effort to win them to see that the Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, Schumer, Clinton party is daily making this land just like the broken ashheap they departed?

Education. Reading for oneself. Reading history -- and not People magazine. Reading the great biographies. Knowing that this land was indeed founded by Christians who wanted freedoms for all but the basis foundation to rest on solid Christian principles.

Curly Smith| 2.14.11 @ 8:31AM

Is the entire article fatally flawed: One Leg Milking Stool (http://www.lehmans.com/store/Tools_Farm___Farming___Milking_Equipment___One_Leg_Milking_Stool___MS?Args= )?

I see the article as a repeat of the social conservatives complaint about the Tea Parties. It's the old "you don't care about our issues!!" mantra. And the social conservatives are right, I don't care, I'm broke, I couldn't fund your issues if I did care. The house is on fire and you're worrying about changing a light bulb. In reality, the mantra is designed to prevent cutting any government spending and to cede more power to the central government. In reality, it's not the social conservatives who are raising the issue but, rather, those who wish to profit from the issues. If you're a social conservative then how does spending federal money reflect conservatism? How does is result in a smaller central government? It doesn't, but it does give power to the various "advocacy" groups.

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.14.11 @ 8:40AM

I don't mind his truce on social issues, if that means he would just focus on cutting the budget/deficit exclusively, and if he means to reach that goal by cutting out the socially funded Government programs that the Government shouldn't be funding in the first place, like NPR, and Planned Murderhood. The social issues of today won't mean a thing if the entire economy collapses around us because the Dollar isn't worth the paper it's printed on, anarchy will be our biggest social issue then, not if we should or should not raise the retirement age for Social Security to 70.

Tim the Enchanter| 2.14.11 @ 11:23AM

"Planned Murderhood". I'm stealing that. Shamelessly.

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 2.14.11 @ 12:23PM

In the urban areas, the Democratic Party wanted to call it Planned Let'skillalltheblackbabiesinthehood, but they figured that might not go over very well, and it could cost them a few votes in the next election if they used it. It's the truth, but it doesn't sell too well, so they changed it to Parenthood!!

Mark James| 2.15.11 @ 2:18PM

What "Social Issues"? The Constitution makes no legal ability for the Feds to spend on "Social Issues". Abortion is not a social issue, it's a legal issue. Funding the practice is illegal as hell and in my opinion should be prosecuted in court.

Then defund any other "social" areas and we're done.

Bob| 2.14.11 @ 9:06AM

Mitch Daniels is a bald headed runt with a wife who cheats on him. If he runs TMZ and the various scandal sheets will dig up his wife's lover and have a field day. He doesn't talk social issues before conservative mobs because he is pro-abortion and that is the only good thing about him.

REALLY?| 2.14.11 @ 9:31AM

Wow. You couldn't be more mis-informed. 1) His pro-life credentials speak for themself 2) Character assinations only make you look weak, especially when they are lies. Keep it classy, Bob.

Bob| 2.14.11 @ 9:45AM

Pro-life? Really? Then why did he fail to address social issues code words for abortion and why did he call for a GOP truce on social issues? Sounds like he has morphed to abortion as a non-political issue, Roe v. Wade remains intact hence pro-abortion. I think I'm beginning to like the runt governor more and more.

John| 2.14.11 @ 11:15AM

WOW Bob You must be a liberal by the hate in your speech!!!!

EdfromTexas| 2.15.11 @ 3:14PM

Whaddayou . . . live next door to Mitch with all this inside info? And did he show his babykiller approval card?

Susies Q'd| 2.23.11 @ 1:11AM

I just did a quick search on your accusations and couldn't even find a left leaning liberal website saying these things. Could you cite your sources please?

Derek Leaberry| 2.14.11 @ 9:40AM

Daniels is basically a Bush globalist who was able to enact some fiscal restraint in Indiana, the most conservative of the Midwestern states. As Bush's budget director, he played the bullfighter's cape to Bush's big bull spending spree. He failed as a fiscal conservative under Mr. Compassion. Daniels supports the Bush agenda on immigration, free trade and outsourcing. On cultural issues, at least Daniels is honest in not caring about them. Given his family situation how can he be considered as anyone favorable to conservative cultural issues. In the end, if Mitch Daniels is the answer, the wrong questions are being asked.

Rather than conserving the bi-party globalist system that Daniels, Bush, McCain, the Clintons and Obama favor, better to let the structure collapse. Better yet to see the collapse continue under Obama's watch.

Susies Q'd| 2.23.11 @ 1:05AM

I think after the Obama election we all need to do our homework and vet these candidates for ourselves, no matter what party they belong to. I like Daniels, but what you say may very well be true, and that would kill any vote I may have cast for him. Thanks for reminding me to do my research.

JayDick| 2.14.11 @ 10:52AM

I found Daniels' speech most impressive. His (almost exclusive) focus on spending and the economy is smart politically because there is such widespread agreement among the electorate that we must spend less and that everything should be on the table. As noted above, if we can't get our spending under control and our economy going, nothing else we need to do will be doable.

He's the best (potential) candidate I've seen so far.

P.Smith| 2.14.11 @ 12:13PM

that to solve the economic problems, "the next president would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues."

I am assuming that Governor Mitch Daniels is saying that the next President will need to ignore moral issue to solve the fiscal problems of the nation. What he fails to realize is that most economic problems are rooted in immoral behavior. Walter Williams gives a very good case for this here: http://www.capitalismmagazine......lity.html#

WM| 2.14.11 @ 4:23PM

P. Smith, what you are implying that Walter Williams said is not what he said. Williams said that slavery, or the "initiation of some kind of force" to make one person serve another, is immoral. He cited Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and other programs as examples. These are all programs supported by social conservatives. Social conservatives support the principle of government wealth redistribution schemes to help the poor, and they always have in practice. If they did not, they would be economic conservatives, not social conservatives. They only quibble with Democrats over exactly how much money should go to them.

JP| 2.14.11 @ 1:33PM

My Man Mitch just sealed an Obama 2012 victory. Mitch is eyeing Moderates and Independents -a tactic McCain used much to his chagrin. Daniels' efforts will do nothing but split the GOP vote along ideological lines; thus making Obama's job all the more easier. Remember, Obama only has to pick up 11 pts in key voting districts to win in 2012. He could lose Ohio, Indiana, and Virginia and still beat his GOP opponent. Good grief, who's briefing these people?

chris haynes| 2.14.11 @ 2:00PM

Air Headed Platitudes.

On his alleged strong suit, he gives us no specifics. Why? How about this. He doesnt have any. To balance the budget, we will need to cut 2 trillion a year, by 2020. Raise social securityand medicare to age 74? Cut defense 2/3rd? Not enough. Not even close.

his message is: Stop worrying about the greatest holocaust in history, we need a truce" Shouldnt you spell out what, if anything, you have in mind?

Sue| 2.14.11 @ 2:06PM

So in order not to scare off people concerned about the economy but are not social conservatives he is willing to scare off social conservatives? He won't get my vote should he run.

idalily| 2.14.11 @ 11:40PM

If he ends up the candidate against Obama, you don't vote for him because he isn't the perfect candidate YOU wanted? Grow up. We have a country to save here. If Daniels is the candidate and enough people like you stay home, Obama will get at least one more Supreme Court Justice when he wins, and then the USA will die. And I'll ask you, "Was it worth it?"

Susies Q'd| 2.23.11 @ 1:14AM

Exactly!!

martin j smith| 2.14.11 @ 2:35PM

Any candidate who is not candid with the voters about ALL ISSUES is not a viable candidate. NO MORE BUSHES,MCCAINS, OR OTHER RINOS.
I think the Tea Party Leadership will have to push the Republicans to come thru or take whatever measures needed to politically punish those who still do not hear the people. This guy Daniels does not sound a like a winner thus he does not seem like a good candidate. Next....

John of NJ| 2.14.11 @ 3:27PM

As a nation we place too much impetus for a POTUS candidate on social issues. He is the chief executive and the commander in chief. Social issues are to be worked out by states. Defending the country and balancing the federal budget are foremost. Daniels has the mustard to do both.

idalily| 2.14.11 @ 11:41PM

THIS.

Mark James| 2.15.11 @ 2:24PM

Right on the money but I prefer John Huntsman Jr.

Cincinnati Rick| 2.14.11 @ 3:42PM

You miss the obvious: He, like Judd Gregg, would make an outstanding Vice President.

richabbs| 2.14.11 @ 3:48PM

Well, if you simply do the math, the only two apparent Republican candidates who could beat Obama in 2012 are Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie. That's it! Palin, Huckabee, Gingrich, Perry and Santorum are too socially conservative and, other than maybe Perry, carry way too many negatives with most independent voters. Barbour, Thune and Pawlenty are lightweights (their lack of intellectual depth will be exposed very early in the primary season). Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are too libertarian. Huntsman could attract a lot of independents, but could not win the Republican primary. And Romney carries his Mass. RomneyCare Plan around his neck like a noose that gets tighter and tighter. I really think the best ticket would be either Daniels or Christie for President, with Marco Rubio on the ticket as Vice President.

Seth| 2.14.11 @ 4:24PM

The national security leg could easily be added with a Daniels/Bolton ticket. Daniels knows the home front and Bolton has the experience to fill in any of Daniels national security/foreign affairs gaps.

WM| 2.14.11 @ 4:27PM

That's not a bad idea. I like Bolton.

WM| 2.14.11 @ 4:27PM

One leg = libertarian or social conservative
Two legs = Tea Party
Three legs = no such thing. Social conservatives support the principle of wealth redistribution and government interference in morality matters, and libertarians are weak on national defense.

I want a two-legged President.

MikeTC| 2.14.11 @ 7:26PM

AMEN WM!

Mayor of Melonville| 2.14.11 @ 4:33PM

Perhaps most of you posters could actually examine his record, in federal government, private business, and, now, state government. Most of you have an agenda (i.e., "scares off social conservatives") or dislike the man for reasons entirely unrelated to his ability to govern ("runt"). Or, "Daniels does not sound like a winner"...what? Show me another state that's in the same fiscal shape as Indiana, friends. Maybe Illinois, NY, Calif, NJ...ha ha ha.

Tennisman| 2.14.11 @ 8:38PM

Dear Mayor, if anyone takes your good advice, they will discover that Gov Daniels gets things done!

He is indeed a terrific governor of Indiana, and would be a terrific president of this great country.

A serious man with serious ideas.

martin j smith| 2.14.11 @ 4:38PM

Christie and Rubio in their own right or others like them would be a good match. As Presidential; candidates they are new and have the right character.

Tennisman| 2.14.11 @ 8:42PM

Both good men, with lots of potential.

The one thing Daniels has that they do not have is a
PROVEN TRACK RECORD of achievement.

Tennisman| 2.14.11 @ 8:42PM

Both good men, with lots of potential.

The one thing Daniels has that they do not have is a
PROVEN TRACK RECORD of achievement.

jack carlson| 2.14.11 @ 4:41PM

I think it is hilarious that the "social conservatives" would not like Mitch Daniels. He is one of you!! He merely has his priorities straight when it comes to the use of government power. Fix what must be fixed right now.

Mitch IS Presidential timber, something that the GOP desperately needs. He is plainspoken and trustworthy, a no-nonsense guy.

In any debate, he would wipe the floor with Obama. As for foreign policy, he has been deliberately quiet. But, he has a history of surrounding himself with very competent advisors. How about John Bolton for Secretary of State?? And, Fred Thompson for Attorney General? If you get Daniels as POTUS, you will likely get a real All-Star Team in the cabinet, not like the current crop of bozos and "czars".

Red Phillips| 2.14.11 @ 5:38PM

Mr. Oliver, have you been paying any attention to what has been going on recently within conservatism with CPAC being a prime example? An interventionist foreign policy as the third leg of the three legged stool that unites conservatives is no longer unchallenged. How is Ron Paul, who won the straw poll, on that third leg? To seriously call for increasing the defense budget when we are totally broke and there is an increasing uprising from non-interventionists to your right is delusional.

Tennisman| 2.14.11 @ 8:33PM

Red, thank you for bringing up the point about increased defense spending!

I thought the article was a fair presentation of the reaction by some to Gov Daniels speech, but clueless with his claim that we need to increase defense spending.

The governor was speaking as a governor, not as a candidate! At this point, his contribution is properly focused on economic matters.

Should he decide to run for the nomination, he can more appropriately address these other issues.

But increased defense spending, I'm afraid not!

Diana| 2.14.11 @ 5:39PM

Gee,
can't the Republicans come up with a candidate who is physically attractive? Daniels is short and bald, Christie has too much blubber, Gingrich and Romney are too old. I can't vote for any of these. Please provide a candidate with movie star qualities I can vote for.

chris haynes| 2.14.11 @ 5:52PM

Great Platitudes!!!!.

"Americans are still a people born to liberty. "
"The new Red Menace: the sea of red ink."
"We believe in paying our bills"
Cant beat him for banalities.

Of course he doesnt mention how he would balance the budget. We need to do SEVERAL of these: Raise social security and medicare to age 74. Cut Defense 2/3rds. Default on interst payments. Raise the income tax 50% . Cut discretionary spending 2/3rd. "No-Nonsense" Mitch wont say which ones.

The promises he has made is this: Let the abortions continue.
If he's President for 8 years, he's promising us 11 million more dead. Almost twice the Furher's total.

jack carlson| 2.14.11 @ 7:46PM

Chris, I don't know what you're smokin', but I want some of it!

Some of the suggestions you made would either destroy the economy or leave us so defenseless that someone else could destroy us......

Champion| 2.14.11 @ 11:21PM

If you are going to use the holocaust as an example please at least get your fact correct. 11 million is the amount of people killed in the concentration camps by the German government. 6 million of them were Jews, but there were 5 million homosexuals, communists, gypsies, political opponents, and Christian preachers as well. Hitler killed many more than that if you count the war dead. If you are going to validate Godwin's law, please do it correctly.

Concise1| 2.14.11 @ 5:56PM

Indiana is the only rust belt state that did not tank during the recession. No easy task Results................It's all that matters. Quit hand wringing.

Wayne | 2.14.11 @ 6:07PM

First Daniels needs to quit calling Laura Ingraham, Dr. Laura. Then he needs to quit apologizing for China. I think that is his achilles heal. He no doubt wheeled and dealt with China as governor. The next president better be tough on China, as it in my opinion is far more dangerous than terrorism.

Bruce Anderson| 2.14.11 @ 6:48PM

Mitch Daniels cutting what! he use of salt? If was so cutting back on anything as he so complains needs to be so done , then why not repeal the over use of Nationalism he was apart of creating that is the red line! Like The Tax Hikes so pass for Indiana Counties to help pay for the building and then to maintain the lucs oil stadium for the NFL and the Colts as they Make millions a years. God be over the over seas markets but what is the point of sayuing your seeking cut back to help grow but maintain over use of nationalism with a so called all American Sport that 90% of products made to support it all is made in the over seas market using over seas resources not the United States. " Good News Indiana Voters in the 2010 Midterm Passed a State Cap Tax. [www.bing.com]

brandino| 2.14.11 @ 7:30PM

Brilliant.... just.... brilliant.

You, sir, are a shining beacon of light exposing the dark shadows of ignorance.

Champion| 2.14.11 @ 11:14PM

As I read your comments all I can think is, "Are you Drunk." WEad bea mores accepteng of your postions if you bothred to proof them first.

Bruce Anderson| 2.14.11 @ 6:57PM

Press Release
Up dates will be made!
http://Writing.Com/authors/epistemology

Filed 01-04-2011, a $33 million Dollar Tort Claim to Suit City of Bloomington Monroe County Indiana Elected & Appointed for Direct Constitutional Contempt. For Restraint of 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech & Redress of Grievance. No taxation without representation is tyranny! So Out lined in the rules of Public Comment So passed & unconstitutionally upheld.

Tennisman| 2.14.11 @ 7:38PM

Gov Daniels is a serious man, with serious ideas about leading America out of the impending train wreck we are facing!

This rest of this nonsense about 3 legs, or Bush globalist, or RINO, is just that, nonsense!

HE SPOKE ABOUT THE CRISIS AMERICA FACES RIGHT NOW!

Americans today care most of all about joblessness, excessive government spending and run-away debt!

The other issues are important but can be filled in as the campaign unfolds. And should he choose to run, I have no doubt his ideas on 'foreign policy' and 'social policy' will be every bit as serious and thoughtful and well presented as those at CPAC were.

When you look at his record, it would be easy to make the case that he is the best governor in America today. That's the kind of leader we need in Washington in 2012.

Bob Acker| 2.14.11 @ 7:51PM

I like Mitch Daniels. I worry about his charisma deficit, but he's a stand-up guy--he has principles and he stands by them.

I half-agree with the article and half don't. Of course he'll have to make his foreign policy and defense positions explicit if he runs for President, that's a given. But as for the social issues, he'd be a fool to touch them. The correct posiition is that the President has no business opining about gay marriage, for example--it's just not in his job description. Barry Goldwater was right on the money about this, and I never hope to be a better conservative than he was.

Real American| 2.14.11 @ 8:10PM

He's running. He got Pence to bow out for that reason. Daniels isn't dismissive of those other issues, he just knows that if the country goes bankrupt, families will suffer and our military might will suffer. He's prioritizing. That's leadership.

Bruno Behrend| 2.14.11 @ 8:12PM

Social Issues - We are winning, and when asked his position he'll tell them. Pro life, pro-marriage.

Defense and National Security - 1. Much of the Pentagon is pork for contractors. We'll buy what we need and cut the fat and featherbedding. As for policy, Bush's Iraq policy is now starting to pay dividends, as dictators are falling. We will support democratization and kill terrorists and fight terrorist states.

Done.

Now, back to cutting spending, reforming Soc. Sec. and transforming Medicare.

This isn't rocket science! NO ONE is as good on the issues and track record as Daniels. And no, NO ONE is perfect, so quit pining for Reagan (who was great, but cut taxes once, spent like crazy, and raised taxes 3 times).

bigfoot9p6| 2.14.11 @ 10:42PM

The author points out that you can only make money (which the right thinks is the meaning of life) by serving people (and by "people" the right means themselves). It really astounds me that the right doesn't get along better with illegal drug traffickers. I mean, here you have a perfect pyramid scheme, with those on top the only beneficiaries of the business, there is no regulation (except self regulation if you know what I mean) and you get to sell people something that actually hurts them! What could be better for misanthropic sociopath like your average GOP voter?

Champion| 2.14.11 @ 11:11PM

Perhaps the problem is that we have been electing people who think that the government is a stool.

chris haynes| 2.15.11 @ 8:55AM

Serious ideas? The only specific one I've heard is this: "Let abortion continue"

He talks pretty about balancing the buidget, but wont say how. Serious ideas? here are your choices: To balance the budget, we need to do SEVERAL of these: Raise social security and medicare to age 74. Cut Defense 2/3rds. Default on interst payments. Raise the income tax 50% . Cut discretionary spending 2/3rd. "No-Nonsense" Mitch wont tel us which of the above he wants. That's serious?

Patsy| 2.15.11 @ 9:59AM

Good luck to low income Hoosiers with putting money into Health Savings Accounts instead of having national health care or affordable health insurance. Not so sure leasing public roads is such a good long term idea either.

Tom Johnson, LargoFL| 2.15.11 @ 10:23AM

1 Nov 2010
Folks,
Obama’s GAME (Great American Marxist Experiment) is over, a failure. Marxism goes against the basic human instincts that freedom is a natural, God-given right, that what you make (or earn) is yours to keep, that family, not government, is the basic social unit. Democrats have historically been the party to raise taxes and increase the size of government, but Obama, Reid, and Pelosi have taken these mistaken policies to the extreme. Republicans, Independents, and Tea Party members will now be forever vigilant of the Left and we will vote.
Tom Johnson, Largo, Florida

PS 19 Jan 2011
Obamacare is illegal. The original, very short, Commerce Clause is too loosely interpreted. Obamacare will NOT reduce total US health care costs by bringing an additional 30-50,000,000 people into the health care system, especially without tort reform. Democrats do NOT believe in the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land.
1. Federal health care is not one of the enumerated powers in the US Constitution, therefore, Obamacare is illegal. This only matters if you believe that the USA is a nation of laws and that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It is clear that Democrats do NOT believe in the US Constitution. Obama supposedly taught US Constitutional law for 12 years, so he must understand the US Constitution. Since health care, as he signed it into law, is illegal, the only conclusion left is that Obama, and the Democrats who voted for health care, do not believe in the US Constitution.
2. The commerce clause was never intended to have such broad scope. These powers have been made up by the Democrats out of thin air.

PS 29 Jan 2011
Obama’s soaring rhetoric has resulted in soaring deficits, soaring gov’t spending, and soaring unemployment.

PS 15 February 2011
My daughter just informed me and my wife that our granddaughter, who is 15, in high school and an excellent student, single and has no child, has just received 3 pieces of mail today: 1. an info pack from a college, 2. an AARP card (?), and 3. a form from the US Census Bureau asking for information on her baby (non-existent). Seems like everything is OK to me!

Stefan Stackhouse| 2.15.11 @ 11:11AM

I doubt that Daniels is actually going to make the run. Rather, I think he has seen a limited window of opportunity to speak up and actually be listened to. It is an opportunity he has been making the most of, and as a result has been performing a real and needed service for the nation. For this we can and should be appreciative. I expect that he will eventually announce that he isn't running, though. His family are all but vetoing it, and the fire doesn't really seem to be in his belly.

VP? Maybe, he would be a very good choice for that.

Jimmy Joe| 2.15.11 @ 8:47PM

Gov.Mitch Daniels Is a liberal on social issues.As is hayley barbour,.Anytime you hear a republican say;We need a bigger party,not,a purer party,.As both of these candidates have.That is political,spin,for;morals,family values,truth,honor,Personal responsibility,character,vision,and good judgement,doesn;t matter,and biblical judeo-christian principals.are not allowed.The fact is;because we have put social-conservative issues,on the back burner,for ove 50 years.It is the number one reason we are in the mess we are in on every other issue.Their are two kind of american's/politicians.Eye on the prize,based on self preservation,that their is no purpose higher than self..And duty to,and love of country.Based on self-sacrifice,for a higher purpose than self.Eye on the prize americans/politicians.Would boil children in wesson oil.Just to get the cannibal vote.Duty to,and love of country americans/politicians.See cannibals for who,and what,they are.Society,human,and child predators,And traffickers.Duty to,and love of country folks,like all of histories sacrificial lambs.Are willing to sacrifice all,to protect,defend,and deliver the innocent,vunerable,and law abiding,especially children from these evil predators.Even if the cannible tribe out numbers his chances to win.Bottom line is this;When anyone believes others should be denied their god endowed right to life,liberty,opportunity,or pursuits of happiness.Unless illegally,irresponsibly,unethically,or deceptively obtained.Based on their own greed,selfishness,lawlessness,perversion, inconvienienience,obstacles,or religious,political,or ideaological beliefs.The same are the least worthy of the same.Jimmy Joe.Wichita kansas.

Christian Louboutin| 6.23.11 @ 4:00AM

Is Indiana governor Mitch Daniels running for president? That was one question on the minds of some of the 11,000 people who attended the American Conservative Union's Conservative Political Action Conference last weekend.

Reebok| 8.11.11 @ 3:45AM

is good

العاب بنات| 4.11.12 @ 5:12PM

Christie and Rubio in their own right or others like them would be a good match. As Presidential; candidates they are new and have the right character.