The American Spectator : Presidential Epic

Text Size

Presidential Epic

By Quin Hillyer on 3.11.11 @ 6:10AM

What a winning candidate needs.

It ordinarily would be way too early to be obsessing as much about the presidential field as many of us have been doing, but the urgency is based on reasonable concerns.

If Barack Obama gets four more years to spend us into oblivion, issue authoritarian executive orders, seed the bureaucracy with radical leftists who make administrative rulings inimical to the American tradition, use the Justice Department to abuse the law and bully his opponents, populate the federal courts with anti-constitutional power-trippers and trans-nationalists, undermine the military, and betray American alliances and interests, it is a serious question whether this nation as we know it can survive. Conservatives and Republicans therefore must, absolutely must, get their selection right. They must find a candidate of decent enough principles and leadership ability to govern in daunting times, and of sufficient -- meaning superb -- political skills to beat Obama, with his billion-dollar campaign and his worshippers in the establishment media, in the general election. This is a tall order, and it is one there is good reason to doubt will be filled by those currently expected to enter the race.

Hence the obsession.

It must be said upfront that I have become rather partial to Sen. Rick Santorum, whose record in 16 years in office was among the best in all of Congress, and whose tremendous political skills, especially as an underdog, are remarkably under-rated by too many political pros. Plus, he is personable, approachable, and seemingly without pretense, a man of sincerity and palpable decency.

Still, one worries, in a year where finding a winner is of especially paramount importance, if Santorum can convince Republican voters that he really is a winner despite his landslide loss for re-election in Pennsylvania in 2006. No matter how convincingly and reasonably he answers these concerns for those who will listen, there is some doubt whether he can convince enough people to listen in the first place. If he can, he could be the sleeper candidate to watch -- but if not, many conservatives still are without a clear choice.

Thus the disappointment that so many other people who ought to be running are staying out of the race, or at least making no moves at all to get in it. Among that number of apparent non-entrants who could, in their own unique ways, fill the last void in the race are Mike Pence of Indiana, Frank Keating of Oklahoma, Jon Kyl of Arizona, and Bob Riley of Alabama. (Of those four, only Riley has even left the door slightly ajar.) Another large number of rising stars could really make a good case in 2016, but it's too early for them in 2012. They include Pence (again), Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Chris Christie of New Jersey, Marco Rubio of Florida, both John Kasich and Rob Portman of Ohio, both Scott Walker and Paul Ryan (and maybe even Ron Johnson) of Wisconsin, both Bob McDonnell and Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, and of course a number of others who could emerge in the next five years.

Barring a surprise, then, what conservatives see, for both bad and good, is what we will need to work with. The task will be for one of the candidates to develop a compelling, positive narrative, with compelling, positive issue proposals, that can cut through the media fog and Obama's money, and overcome the Justice Department-encouraged election shenanigans, so that he (or she) can galvanize a winning electoral surge.

The narrative is important. It shouldn't be the candidate's own narrative, but the candidate's vision for (and version of) the nation's narrative. We don't need to hear how Tim Pawlenty was the first one in his family to go to college and therefore understands people who shop at Sam's Club, and we don't need to hear what Newt Gingrich learned from working on Nelson Rockefeller's behalf in New Orleans in 1968. (Then again, he probably doesn't want us to know he worked for Rockefeller.) What we need to know is how we as the American people are going to overcome daunting indebtedness and a hostile world to achieve the bright tomorrows Ronald Reagan said he always saw for us. We need the story to be both practical and romantic at the same time -- to make sense and also to make magic. The elder Bush belittled it as "the vision thing," but that's exactly what is needed: a sense that a candidate sees both where he wants us to go and how (with a certain specificity) we will get there.

As for the issue proposals, I've got 'em right here if any campaign wants to call me for them. Seriously. There are proposals available to solve not all but maybe half of the problems of the American political world, in a way a majority of the public will buy into. Good policy and good messaging can meet, creating really good politics and eventually good governance. The trick is to fit the proposals into the narrative, as part and parcel of the story; without the narrative, which must spring from a candidate's individual worldview, the proposals may not catch fire. (Hence my reticence to outline the proposals here and now, although past writings give a hint of earlier versions of them.)

Storytelling is an essential part of good politics -- non-fiction storytelling, that is. Yet after Reagan, it has become a lost art at the presidential campaign level. Bill Clinton had a smallish sense of it on his better days, but his real genius lay in faking empathy. Nobody else on the national scene has had even a smidgen of a bard's gift, and fewer still have the sincerity, knowledge and experience to weave real substance into their songs.

Most great leaders develop this ability. Lincoln had it. Churchill had it. Reagan had it. Jack Kemp had some of it, although he tended to overdo it like an over-eager thespian. Gingrich can do it well when he maintains enough discipline to keep the story from being all about himself. Pence has that ability in spades, but he's not running. The need is desperate for somebody else to develop it.

If nobody does, then Barack Obama, with all the advantages of incumbency, money and media, will indeed be re-elected. That occurrence would turn the American story into a tragedy -- a tragedy worth obsessing about how to stop.

About the Author

Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (158) | Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.11.11 @ 6:26AM

What the American public needs now is the truth.

The age of the political huckster is over.

The reason many of those candidates do not qualify is that they all have ghosts in their past.

What the nation is looking for now is political purity or someone who can bring honesty to the table.

The public is sick of the deceit in both parties and Obama is King of Deceit and Lies. The Obama stimulus has turned out to be the biggest money laundering scheme in U.S. history and any candidate who runs against him should pound him on that.

Any candidate who runs should have more then vision. They should have a specific plan about cutting federal agencies across the board and returning power to the states and therefore the people.

They should refuse to raise the debt ceiling and tell the public the government will live within it means and they should come up with all the specifics on how to make it happen.

Anyone who doesn't have that plan, including Obama, will not survive the next election cycle.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.11.11 @ 6:51AM

By the way, look at this and tell me the Republicans aren't in for another beating. Sen. Cornyn must be as dumb as a rock or clueless. He's trying to recruit Joe Scarborough, another professional Rino, to run for Ben Nelson's seat. When I see articles like that I think the Republicans are doomed. It's not the candidates. It's the idiots running the party. The decks should be cleared of all of them and now. They haven't gotten the message, yet.

http://thehill.com/homenews/ca.....oe-for-fla

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 11:49AM

Agreed. Cornyn has been a huge disappointment here in Texas.

You'd think he learned his lesson choosing Crist over Rubio last year.

Oh well, the clock is ticking on him as his term nears the end.

Occam's Tool| 3.11.11 @ 12:06PM

I ripped up my National Republican Senatorial Committee Donation request BEFORE I heard about Scarborough. Whether or not Clint believes this, I donated to DeMint's committee last election, and will do so again.

Dai Alanye| 3.12.11 @ 10:48AM

The Scarborough story has been strongly denied.

I agree with Quint on Santorum. The man is likable, right on all almost every issue, and a strong debater. Further, he's clean-cut and good-looking, and like it or not those attributes count, especially with women.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 8:13AM

What are you worried about? everyone knows the GOP will elect another Bush-type in 2016, and if Rich Lowry has his way, another Bush.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:41AM

Well Alan, compared to the MORON-IN-CHIEF currently occupying the WH, Barney Fife would/could be a better choice. Also, as the billboard proclaims [about GWB], MISS ME YET?????????????????

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:54AM

"as the billboard proclaims [about GWB], MISS ME YET?????????????????"

That's like saying "Do you miss Nixon, Ford?"

The answer depends on how nostalgic one is.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:11AM

The answer depends on how bad the replacement was!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:08PM

There you go!

Isn't too good, is it?

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:26PM

Compared to Kennedy and Carter, most sane individuals miss Nixon and Ford quite a lot!!!!!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 4:04PM

"most sane individuals miss Nixon and Ford quite a lot!!!!!!!!"

You have something there, at least with Carter. BTW i don't ACTIVELY dislike the Bushes as I do LBJ, Nixon, and Carter, the latter were pernicious, while the Bushes are zero-sum: nothing gained, nothing lost... they tried but were in over their heads in bad times.
Bush 43 was tough so he predictably got re-elected. But I did not vote for him, nor did I ever vote for Clinton, having heard too many rumors about him.

Obama? I did not vote in '08 at all, but will definitely, absolutely ,vote for Obama next year unless he does something unbelievably bad. But he is very astute.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 4:07PM

... Obama would have to defecate on the White House lawn to cause me to not vote for him in '12.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 4:22PM

He's no doubt already DEFECATED ON THE WH LAWN ALREADY [That's why Michelle My Belle spends so much time in their WH garden........trying to COVER UP HIS EXCREMENT!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 4:20PM

Yeah, he's AS& TOOT alright.....for once I'll agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob K.| 3.11.11 @ 6:30PM

Would you compromise on something "believably bad?"

Mitch Angoop| 3.11.11 @ 1:34PM

Actually, Bush had a decent first term. It wasn't until the day after his second inauguration that he gave his gonads to his mother so she could lock them up in the same box she hid his father's. He then turned off his brain and his spine. His brain was turned off so he could go crazy buying affection from lying scum democrats by starting the process of spending us into bankruptcy. His spine was removed so he could turn his back on friends like Scooter Libby and American heroes like the border agents he let twist in the wind for doing their jobs. At the end of the day, it was his loss of backbone that lost my support. But, his stupidity was insignificant to that of his successor, the 'Evil One'. Regardless of G.W's cowardess and stupidity, his devotion to our Country was never in doubt. This president has been clear from day one that he despises everything about our Country.

Obama ia a criminal traitorous scum, which is a bad thing. But, it pales in comparison to the fact that a sufficient number of truly misguided Americans voted for him. THAT is the real tragedy.

Additionally, we must prepare now to hit the scum in the media with everything we can. Their biased coverage may not be technically criminal, but their complicity in the fraud in the White House now is criminal. We must find ways to make life so miserable for the liars and traitors in the media that they'll either tell the whole story, or get out of the deception business.

The tragedy of it all is that the electorate, the GOP, and average Americans really don't yet understand how close we really are to the end of our nation. This sense of urgency must be transmitted to everybody in the Country.

Mitch Angoop| 3.13.11 @ 6:40PM

I have a 60 year old box turtle who would make a better president than the criminal fraud currently occupying the White House. At least I can say with complete certainty that my turtle has never lied. And, she has also chosen to keep her origins to herself, no matter how many times I ask her where she came from. At least she has an excuse: turtles have no voicebox. I wish we could say the same about barry the fraud.

mames| 3.11.11 @ 8:37AM

YES! We need conservative leadership and gut level honesty - no more Romney or Boehner RINOS lacking even the most rudimentary of spines. If the GOP candidate is not elected with a mandate for spending cuts we will get absolutely nowhere. Make no mistake this is a watershed moment for our Constitutionally limited Republic.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:42AM

No, you will botch it up yet again.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:17AM

Not to write things can't be improved-- but not in this decade.
I guess the war(s) put a clog in it.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:44AM

True, the war[s] did botch it up, but Barry's activities/proclamations far outweigh both. All that will be required is a 24-7 viewing of his BEER SUMMIT for a GOP victory [even with Barney Fife as a candidate]!!!!!!

Mitch Angoop| 3.13.11 @ 6:44PM

I seem to remember the democraps whining about Iraq, calling it "Bush's War". Conceded. But what about all the dem whining about Afghanistan being where the "real causes and action was"? Like it or not, Afghanistan is barry's war. He owns it and he's responsible for whatever happens there. If he fights it the way he is, and the way Bush fought his, and the way Johnson fought his, chalk up another 'quagmire'.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:21AM

Why do you come here? just to be a negative little prick?

Tim the Enchanter| 3.11.11 @ 10:35AM

Phil- you're wrong. He comes here to be a negative BIG prick.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:38AM

LMAO!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:58AM

"He comes here to be a negative BIG prick."

Oh to be so well-endowed!
You flatterer, don't you know flattery comes from the textmessages of fools? says so in the Scripture.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:01AM

AGAIN, not in this decade; only a chump would think we could dig ourselves into such a hole and get out of it in nine years. There is no Abracadabra in economics, no presto change-o.
It took nine years to get into this mess, it will take nine years to get out of it.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:12AM

Your logic is feeble-minded. I guess the constitution was written in 2002?

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:29PM

Don't know what rock you obviously crawled out from under, but it took a hell of a lot longer than nine years to get where we are currently[hell the Democrats' CRA was enacted in 1977]!!!!!!

Occam's Tool| 3.11.11 @ 12:08PM

No, Phil's correct---the dimunitive is applicable. But, while we're on the subject, let's vote for the Republican cadidate with the biggest, steeliest, heaviest nads. That would be....BOLTON!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:10PM

you mean mustache, not nads.

Dave Williams| 3.11.11 @ 12:08PM

He WISHES....

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:12PM

Don't you think,

Gary Bauer is more than a bit 'faggy'?
Newt's voice is pretty wussy, too.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:13PM

PS,
Newt WILL be president, but only in his dreams.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:33PM

BTW, since the header photo shows Reagan, listen to the chilling audio of Hinckley's '81 attack released today by the Secret Service. Reagan's code name was "Rawhide"

Roll em roll em roll em... Rawhide..

Clint| 3.11.11 @ 6:50AM

"South Carolina U.S. Senator Jim DeMint is reportedly considering a run for president in 2012.

The South Carolina Republican, who ruled out the possibility of a run, is said to be reconsidering his decision in light of Rep. Mike Pence’s official withdrawal from the race.

Additionally, news that Mr. DeMint will travel to Iowa on March 26 to address a conservative forum organized by Rep. Steve King is adding fuel to the fire over the possibility of a DeMint presidential run."

"It takes a lot of money to run for President and Sen. Jim DeMint has proven that he’s up to the challenge!

From today’s OpenSecrets.org: “Two Republicans vied for title of top cash generator, each pulling in more than $9 million in 2009 and 2010 to their respective leadership PACs: Senate Tea Party Caucus co-founder Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Mitt Romney, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts and 2008 presidential hopeful.

“At the end of 2010, DeMint held a slight financial advantage over Romney — and both towered over the rest.”

We Tea Party Patriots are urging Our Tea Party Kingmaker & Senate Point Man Jim DeMint to Run & Beat Obama in The 2012 Presidential Election.
Carpe Diem.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 8:18AM

"That occurrence would turn the American story into a tragedy"

But you have said before that it already is a tragedy, Hillyer. So you actually mean it is not a tragedy yet, but will be-- not the same thing.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:47AM

It IS and will CONTINUE TO BE a tradegy [and is the SAME THING], MORON!!!!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:04AM

"That occurrence would turn the American story into a tragedy"

"WOULD" -- future tense, you meatball.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:34PM

Whatever..........YOU FAG!!!!!!!!!

Have you considered| 3.11.11 @ 9:27AM

Clint, I agree with you. DeMint would be an acceptable candidate.

But, what I want is for any conservative to preface any statement, or any answer to a question, with "the Constitution says" or "founder @ federalist #xx says"

Mike Lee of Utah is Very Good at this. I would love to see him positioned to run.

I watched the first 16 minutes of Herman Cain's CPAC speech looking for any constitutional awareness, and not once was the Constitution mentioned....very disappointing to me.

scotchieguy| 3.11.11 @ 2:57PM

no one will ever become president w/ such a horrible first name as Herman. He should change his name to H.P. Cain, or whatever his initials are.

Butch| 3.11.11 @ 3:32PM

I think DeMint wins too, Clint, if he can just be convinced that now is the time. He has the perfect record to counter Obama (against TARP, stimulus, and Obamacare) for the Tea Party, is OK I suspect with traditional conservatives, and could convince enough independents to win. The others all have negatives.

catman | 3.11.11 @ 7:14AM

We Need a Outsider ..

Palin is that Person
Run Sarah Run

Vern Crisler| 3.11.11 @ 8:29AM

Yes, Sarah's the one we've been waiting for. A pox on RINOs.

mike daniels| 3.11.11 @ 10:07AM

What we need is a candidate who can speak elequently, clearly and forcefully. Palin is a whiney school marm. Give it up. She upsets too many people. Get real folks- compare McCain to Obama on ability to communicate- He couldn't do it- sounded like he is- and old fogey. Appearances do count- we are a sound bit nation. If Palin runs she'll lose big.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:14AM

"Palin is a whiney school marm"

She makes up for it with her looks- and she is as smart as most of 'em. I don't like her "we Alaskans love animals, they taste terrif, and just look at my new gun I bought via the Web!", but it is amusing.
But American men are v macho, they don't like women telling them to anything; so what makes you think they would vote en masse for her?

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:19AM

Maybe Sarah should just stick to the kitchen. Maybe tie a rope around her waist and attach it to the stove so she doesn't stray too far. Or maybe she should be the typical modern woman only concerned with material things.

Jesus, you would think men would get excited over a woman that not only likes to go fishing, but she likes to shoot guns too.

It's the 21st century, fellas.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:50AM

Because she has the GUTS/COURAGE to look Barry eyeball-to-eyeball and to tell him he's FULL OF EXCREMENT [which many males do not have, but which all males have admiration for]!!!!!!!

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:14AM

Very true. I admire it. But when Sarah does it, its a turn-on! lol

catman| 3.12.11 @ 3:10PM

SARAH

Right before Sarah’s debate with Biden, EVERYTHING seemed to be going against her (except for her extraordinary rallies)…and here in Georgia, the radio personalities spent that morning joking about what a DISASTER Sarah was going to be. They (and everyone else in the media) were relishing the idea of Sarah being destroyed by Biden.

And so…I prayed. I prayed very hard for her, and I knew that if God did not vindicate her during the debate, that it WAS NOT HIS WILL for her to go forward.

And she shined. She WAS vindicated. And God MOVED HER FORWARD.

And since then, she has been at the epicenter of her own earthquake… chunks of concrete thundering down around her, hurled from almost everyone in the Media…the Obama Machine… GOP insiders. It’s been everything from the silly, light-weight stuff (Palm-gate, Visor-gate, Bra-gate…) to the serious garbage (the rigged polling, the Tucson shooting accusations, slander from the “anonymous” sources, the bogus ethics complaints…)

And yet, through it all…GOD IS STILL MOVING HER FORWARD!

She SHOULD be buried deep under the rubble of all the plots, schemes, slander, lies, ridicule and degradation that she has endured. And yet, God always seems to find a way to clear the debris away from her.

And so…

Whenever I get tempted to get anxious about whether she is going to run or not, whether certain 2012 Republican candidates might stand in her way (Huckabee, Bachmann)…whether Karl Rove and his dishonest power-brokers in the GOP hierarchy will FINALLY hatch as scheme that will destroy her..whether the Obama Machine (and the Media that does his bidding) will be able to marginalize her with more anti-Palin propaganda….I just remember that GOD ALWAYS MOVES HER FORWARD!

He has seen her through the last few years. He has neutralized the attacks from her enemies. He has blessed her, by calling thousands of prayer warriors to work on her behalf…He is still MAKING A WAY FOR SARAH.

He has brought her through so many dangers, toils and snares…and He is GOING TO SEE HER THROUGH to whatever HIS will is for her life…AND NO FORCE WILL BE ABLE TO STOP HIM.

Of course, as her supporters, we must WORK AS IF EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON US, AND FAITHFULLY PRAY AS IF EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON GOD…but I also think we should, and can, take great, sweet comfort from knowing that, either way, God’s will is going to be done…and that no matter WHAT THAT WILL IS, it will be a great, mighty and joyful thing.

GOD IS MOVING HER FORWARD…HE IS MAKING A WAY FOR HER!

RUN SARAH RUN

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:16AM

Pigs, both of you.

scotchieguy| 3.11.11 @ 3:01PM

As much as I think the dems are totally misguided, there is a big exception: they would LOVE to see Palin run cuz she would be crushed in 2012. The sad thing is the republican party is stupid enough to nominee the likes of her. Just bleepin amazing! It's not her views I detest--I agree w/ most of her views, but she reminds me of some bratty little snot from high school. She is just a joke. I wish she would become a gameshow host, and quit shooting that obnoxious voice of hers.

catman| 3.11.11 @ 5:14PM

Everyone seems to love to hate Sarah Palin; everyone, that is, except for the hardcore Republican base -- and yours truly. Her devoted following gives her a head start if she decides to run. And for political instincts, this woman makes Hillary look like she is standing still.

In some ways, Palin reminds me of female version of Ronald Reagan in 1980. The press dubbed him incompetent and unelectable. The people found him magnetic and about two tons smarter than he was given credit for.

Keep a watchful eye on Palin. She learned the ropes during her vice-presidential campaign as John McCain's running mate. My only advice to her would be to stop putting down every other Republican. Otherwise, she's good to go if she decides to run.

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 11:58AM

No to Sarah.

Although at times I cant' help myself cheering her on when she's giving a speech. But, ever notice how at times she'll suffer through speeches and interviews with incoherent ramblings with her Palin speechifying? She has this totally unique way of being completely incoherent.

This from someone with a communications degree!

She's definitely got her place but not on the ticket.

scotchieguy| 3.11.11 @ 3:04PM

She gives a great speech. But it doesn' t matter. She doesn' t have a chance in hell of winning. I like Kasich, but he probably is best for 2016.

mames| 3.11.11 @ 12:28PM

Sarah supported and supports the biggest RINO in office, McCain. Don't be fooled by her.

wodiej| 3.11.11 @ 9:01AM

Amen to that. Big long windy article and not one mention of Gov. Palin's name. People say she can't win-she can if people get behind her. The answer is right there in front of us and people still can't see it. Open your eyes.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:44AM

if only Palin were to be president- but she would become a puppet to her male handlers even if she were POTUS.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:00AM

You mean a puppet like Obama?

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:08AM

Well, if what you write is valid, then that doesn't bode well for Palin, does it?: what goes for a goose goes for a gander.

When it comes to business most of you are astute, hardnosed. When it comes to politics, you are easily misled by Nixons, Fords, Bushes, Doles, Mccains. You allow yourselves to be bamboozled.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:12AM

I think you misused, along with misquoted "what is GOOD for the goose is GOOD for the gander."

And it doesn't apply to what you are saying.

So what is your point?

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:14AM

(with a hint of sarcasm) NOBODY got fooled by Obama. He ran as a center-right guy and governs from the hard left. Don't tell me how republicans get fooled. Hell, the democrats don't even know who they are voting for. The democrats weren't fooled, they're just fools!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:36PM

Open wide.....BARNEY!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:52AM

Yeah, tell that to her husband, her former son-in-law, and to her former leutenant-governor [now governor], dimwit!!!!!!!!!

Steve| 3.12.11 @ 6:28PM

If you think Sarah Palin would be a puppet to male handlers if she were POTUS, you obviously don't know much about her. She is the ONLY potential candidate now with the b@lls (Politically speaking!) to take on Obama and call him out for who he truly is, a radical leftist whacko who has less executive experience than a typical hotdog stand vender and is in way over his head.

big bob| 3.11.11 @ 10:18AM

AMEN. I think the last voice is the one people remember. She will toss her hat in after everyone has spent their "ammo". She has has real life timing and rhetorical experience. I think the successful GOP candidate will be less of a bard and more of a stonewall because of the Main Stream media. They are truly the 5th column and need to be neutralized.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.11.11 @ 8:07AM

Quin
Just a stray thought. Sarah looks like a pincushion already with the communist, (pardon the shorthand), arrows sticking in her. She has weathered the biggest storm since Ronald Reagan's.
Goodness knows there is nothing NEW to shoot at her. Maybe all of the ammo has already been used and is old hat.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:47AM

This is a Man's world. Palin will dance like a marionette to a Man's tune all her life.
A conservative ought to know you cannot change thousands of years of inertia just Like THAT.
You cannot say to God:
"We demand that a Rightist woman be elected president-- and make it snappy!"

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 9:58AM

Wow, sexist AND masogonistic all wrapped up in one.

I know one thing about Sarah, she's a stand-up woman, and if my memory serves me correctly, she straight SCHOOLED the boys in the debates. The only reason people think she is stupid is because she stumbled on a couple of "gotcha" questions during interviews with the press. But she USED Joe Biden in the debates. She made the boys in Alaska look like fools, too.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 10:04AM

I do not think she is stupid, but I do think America is too macho to elect a woman this decade. The uK had a woman as PM: Thatcher, it goes without reminding. Germany has Merkel;
Germany, the same nation that had women acting as breeding machines 1933 to 1945.

But America is trapped in "masogonistic" traditions.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:08AM

No, Brooks, you are trapped in "masogonistic" traditions.

Thatcher was the last real leader the UK had, so you made my point for me. Thanks!

Mitch Angoop| 3.13.11 @ 6:55PM

The word is "MISOGYNISTIC" guys. Just wanted to keep it accurate.

Mitch Angoop| 3.13.11 @ 6:55PM

The word is "MISOGYNISTIC" guys. Just wanted to keep it accurate.

scotchieguy| 3.11.11 @ 3:12PM

True, but do you really think she reads anything deeper than People Magazine? How tough is it to state what you read, esp the daily newspapers? She got whupped by a lightweight like Couric?? Are you kidding? Refresh your memory and go back and Utube that interview. I did recently, and just cringed. She gives a great speech, but is Dan Quayle-like. Unelectable. She is good for one thing--guaranteeing BO a second term. I know the media tried to destroy Reagan, but he did his homework--he read more stuff about how communism was such a scourge, he was no dummy, he just played like one w/ that "aw shucks" demeaner, but he could pull it off. Palin just seems whiny.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:54AM

Yeah, guess Margaret Thacher proved that, huh????

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:08AM

"Thatcher was the last real leader the UK had"

Is that supposed to be encouraging for our Special Relationship with the Brits? people write I'm too negative, and then they write something like you did above.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:17AM

uhhhh... Am I the only one who can't find the part where I was negative??

Or was I just telling the truth?

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:18PM

"Or was I just telling the truth?"

Yes, but it's not good that since Thatcher and Reagan left office, things haven't gone well for your side.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:40PM

Oh, you mean the relationship that resulted in El Chosen One's returning the bronzed statue of Churchill to them [Is that supposed to be encouraging for our Special Relationship with the Brits?]??????????

Mitch Angoop| 3.11.11 @ 1:44PM

I guess any woman that ever got elected to run a country would have to be a timid puppet. Kinda like Margaret Thatcher; a timid puppet if there ever was one. Same with Golda Meier. Just another puppet.

I do, however, admit that there aren't many out there. One thing I DO wonder about is the fact that Republicans shake their heads and tell themselves Sarah's not electable while the libs/democrats quiver in terror and foam at the mouth at the very mention of her name. What are they so afraid of? And, why don't the republicans ask that same question?

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 12:02PM

Ken,

They have a whole armory reserved for Sarah.

Brian Mc| 3.11.11 @ 8:10AM

Senators are not leaders. They are professional politicians who vote for a living.

Louis Jenkins| 3.11.11 @ 8:13AM

Yes, DeMint will make a good candidate. He has, so far, been upright, trustworthy, and honest. But the Democrat smear campaign, lead by the MSM, is fixing to kick into high gear. Who knows what lies and falsehoods those people will generate. We can only hope that the man will be able to withstand the accusations, which, I believe, he can.

R Martin| 3.11.11 @ 8:36AM

Mr. Hillyer has written a hugely important piece here. Unfortunately our government (at all levels) is populated and run by politicians. Politicians who legislated us right into the awful fiscal and social mess we face and yet now present themselves as the solution to those problems. Amazingly, they keep getting re-elected. What we need are patriots, not politicians, and that's the rub. Can the voters distinguish?

wodiej| 3.11.11 @ 9:02AM

PALIN 2012

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:59AM

If ONLY she could.
If only my Grandma were a guy, she'd a been my Grandfather.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:55AM

If ever you'd be smart, you wouldn't be so dumb!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:11AM

Makes two of us, we have alot in common- Phil called us 'two pigs' (even though he calls himself a capitalist pig). We ought to get married, when they make that legal in your state. Should we start printing up the wedding invites, Dear?

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:19AM

FICTION CAN BE FUN! But I prefer the non-fiction section of the bookstore. I called YOU and "Mike Daniels" pigs for your sexist comments regarding Sarah. And they were well deserved.

BTW, that's not negative. That's what you call "absolute truth"

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:20PM

Don't think of us as being sexist; think of us as not being politically correct. We're jus' a pair of good ol' boys.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:45PM

No thanks, but suggest you try some Muslim in the Middle East!!!!!!

scythe| 3.11.11 @ 9:16AM

Get ready folks. The Bush family is about to launch another son at the White House. There is too much noise coming from the Jeb Bush quarters for comfort. If he is allowed anywhere NEAR the primaries, we are lost. Kaput. Why is it I get the feeling the Bushes need to maintain close proximity to the White House every time they are out of office? Is it like the bank teller who doesn't want to take a vacation because her absence might be revealing? The problem America has for too long is that the same faces and policies have malingered for too long. We have people running the show who have been there for over a half a century, through one administration after another, and it's no wonder nothing has changed. They are mired in the politics of their youth and now they are long in the tooth. Tell Jeb Bush to keep the hell away from the White House. He is another RINO and his father and brother hastened the death of constitutionalism.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:57AM

Because men mostly want power. The Kennedys were just as bad, save for RFK.
Ted was worse than the Bushes; he would have been better off selling booze, marywanna, and running a boutique featuring Hotpants. Ted would have made the best Hotpants & lingerie salesman in the world.

Willis| 3.11.11 @ 10:08AM

RFK?! You must be joking. He was evil to his core and as phony as Obama.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:28AM

Yeah, at least JFK cut taxes! lol. And he was a hawk on National Defense after a few missteps.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:57AM

'Just as bad'? What do you equate murder, rape, drunken driving, immorality, traitorous actions, etc with???????????????

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:13AM

And that was just Papa Joe!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:49PM

Accoridng to history, it was mostly more so his sons than him [but you're correct in that he did TEACH them those activities]!!!!

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 12:04PM

This will probably be the only time I will quote Jessie Jackson in a positive light:

STAY OUT THE BUSHES!

JimP| 3.11.11 @ 9:23AM

I agree. It's not looking very good at this point, IMO, either. Here's my current list of people that I absolutely will NOT vote for in 2012: Huckabee; Trump; Jeb Bush (No More Bushes, ever).

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:52AM

Amen

George S| 3.11.11 @ 11:12AM

I noticed Obama is not on your list...

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:20AM

LOL

JimP| 3.11.11 @ 11:46AM

LOL I was referring to Repubs. Yes Obama is definitely on my list of NO VOTE FOR YOU, BARRY.

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 9:51AM

"Jeb Bush (No More Bushes, ever)."

You've convinced me, now tell it to Rich Lowry; he put Bush's face on the cover of an issue of NR just a few weeks ago-- since Lowry is the Editor you can be sure it was his doing.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 9:55AM

Don't you vote democrat anyway? What does it matter to you?

JimP| 3.11.11 @ 10:31AM

I'm aware of it. I concluded Lowry is a Bushite stooge. The GOP seems to be full of them. As others have said, we are being ruled by an 'incestuous' political elite and the Bushes are at the epicenter. They should be exiled to an island along with every person in the Democrat party along with those who vote Democrat. (We all have our fantasies. That is one of mine.)

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 10:59AM

Even Jeb [or for that matter, Zip the Chimp] would be preferable to the current office holder!!!!!!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:18AM

"Zip the Chimp"

Careful, Jimmuh Cawtah might call you a 'WACIST!"

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 11:21AM

Alan, you assume he's talking about a black person because he says he would vote for a chimpanzee? He was talking about actually voting for a chimpanzee, you RACIST!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 12:23PM

'Alan, you assume he's talking about a black person because he says he would vote for a chimpanzee? He was talking about actually voting for a chimpanzee, you RACIST!!"

It was a joke, take the iron poker out of your posterior exit.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 4:34PM

Uh oh, stop that Rachel/Anderson/Barney/Elton TEABAGGIN TALK [take the iron poker out of your posterior exit], ya hear!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 4:34PM

Uh oh, stop that Rachel/Anderson/Barney/Elton TEABAGGIN TALK [take the iron poker out of your posterior exit], ya hear!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:52PM

I was referring to THE ACTUAL ANIMAL/MONKEY NAMED 'ZIP', [that wore a white sweater containing the letters ZIP] not to any person!!!!!!!

JimP| 3.11.11 @ 11:52AM

Not for me. I've had it with the Bushes. They've had two shots and each one resulted in uber leftist Dem presidents. We just lucked out with Clinton that Newt had a plan and Clinton is a neurotic who wanted to be popular more than being a commited communist. The Bush family's governing philosophy is no good and numreous family members' recent statements have revealed the whole family to be out of touch elitists who view us as "nativists" (racists) who are prejudiced against Hispanics (among others) and that we are not "pleasant" (which is more important to the Bushes apparently than freedom and free markets). The Bushes have blown it- twice. No more chances for these folks, even if Obama gets in again. Jeb will eff things up somehow and allow the left to have a resurgence, once again, like his Bush predecessors. Better to have Congress in Obama be prez than another Bush, IMO.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 9:54AM

Quin, you say everything when you say: "a man of sincerity"

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:02AM

Like Don Rumsfeld said, "I wanna see em run around the track"

Can we please stop pre-excluding fine female candidates like sarah and michelle bachmann?

Those two women have more courage and fight in the tip of their little finger than Mitt Romney.

Sharon | 3.11.11 @ 10:08AM

I don't think any an of our candidates captures the spirit of Reagan more than Lt. Col./Rep. Allen West. He is a true leader. He is inspirational. He believes in this country and in our Constitution. We the people need to get together and ask West to run. He is the only one I can see who will bring everyone together. I don't know a single conservative who isn't impressed by West. Everyone I know wants him to get into the race. His military experience qualifies him far more (to me anyway) than years upon years in the cesspool of D.C. He "gets" it. He is able to communicate it. And the people LOVE him. He is the only candidate that people seem to be universally behind. Please encourage everyone you know to contact West and ask him to step up to this challenge. He is the man who can win.

JimP| 3.11.11 @ 10:41AM

I agree!

David T| 3.11.11 @ 10:16AM

We are seeking Ronald Reagan and we will not find him. The best we can hope for in 2012 is to hold the House, seize the Senate, and establish a no-fly zone around Obama to try to keep him at bay until 2106.

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:23AM

HAHAHA! Love it! NO-FLY-ZONE!

Mitch Angoop| 3.11.11 @ 1:48PM

A "No Fly Zone" around obama is impossible since they are naturally attracted to all forms of sh*t!

Sharon | 3.11.11 @ 10:35AM

We can't afford four more years of Obama's foreign policy (or lack thereof). He has offended allies and appeased enemies. The republicans might be able to rein him in fiscally, but what about court appointments? Many on the Supreme Court are at an age that they would probably like to retire (or God forbid they could pass away). What about how weak the president is making our country? We HAVE to win. Allen West could win... Herman Cain might be able to win if people actually start acknowledging him instead of pretending he is not even in the race. Cain has an extremely successful business background, and he is a great speaker as well. We need a fresh face. The old retreads will not suffice in this election. And I, for one, am not going to give up almost two years before the election.

George S| 3.11.11 @ 11:10AM

The best we can do? If Obama gets to nominate a replacement for Anthony Kennedy, 2016 and beyond would be academic.

Mitch Angoop| 3.11.11 @ 1:59PM

Unless the GOP controlls the House and the Senate. If they actually get their collective heads out of their asses, they could tie up EVERY nomination until the end of any barry second term or the dems steal/buy enough votes to get back the majority. With all the disasters barry has enabled, any kind of decent GOP candidate can win, but the lying media MUST be neutralized by any means. I don't want anybody spouting "We can't sink to their level" comments at me. We'd better; because, if we don't we're finished.

The democrats have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are totally unemcumbered by any kind of morals or conscience. Get used to it and go after them with every possible weapon. This is not some debating society; it is total political war for the future of our Country.

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 12:07PM

Agreed. Nice use of "no fly zone" ++++

Maybe we could add some "economic sanctions"
for chuckles.

Yes We Can| 3.11.11 @ 1:44PM

No-Fly Zone, yes, we don't need to see Obama swatting any more innocent flies on TV.....

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.11.11 @ 10:35AM

"Bill Clinton had a smallish sense of it on his better days, but his real genius lay in faking empathy"

Quin, thanks for the visions of Bill Clinton biting his lip and giving his "I-give-a-shit" look. This has initially made me laugh, but if the visions continue it could ruin a perfectly nice day.

Dan D| 3.11.11 @ 10:44AM

Mr Hillyer, you weaken your case by your advocacy of Rick Santorum. I can think of few mentioned names who are less Presidential than Rick Santorum.

Face the facts, there will be no perfect movement conservative capable of winning nomination and especially election, and certainly no agent of radical change (such as Gingrich in his fleeting better moments).

Be content with someone who is prepared to be President of all the people (yes, including those who disagree with us), conduct himself in the office with restraint, and who can focus on the President's main powers over defense, foreign policy, and national security. Any Republican will be better on budget issues than President Obama.

It is in the Congress that we need to make gains, as spending, tax, and domestic policy belongs to and is shaped by Congress.

There are about three or possibly four candidates who could fulfill those requirements, though none of them are "perfect". But guess what, President Obama isn't "pefect" to our counterparts on the Left, either.

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 12:11PM

Santorum my not be electable but he does have a few positives that keep the door open. He was the co-author of probably the most successful bi-partisan legislation the past 40 years - Welfare Reform Act. He's very articulate and thinks fast on his feet (can't say that about many republicans, save Ron Paul), and his age.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.11.11 @ 10:45AM

David T.
I'm sorry. Obama will end-run Congress with his czars.
We gotta' yank him out of power soonest.
Folks,
I think we just saw the first shots in Wisconsin of the new Civil War.
Batten down the hatches, folks, and pray a lot that the Repubs grow the brass ones to limit Obama's damage in the mean time.
My dream ticket? Sarah and West or Bolton, or even DeMint. I think Sarah would flip a coin with any of them to see who gets VP.

David T| 3.11.11 @ 12:39PM

Ken--You make a good (and scary) point about the czars. And Sharon also mentioned the damage Obama will do to the courts with his Marxist appointees. What to do? I admit any combination of Palin-Bolton-West would get the juices flowing, but would it be enough to topple our community-organizing, leg-tingling, swoon-inducing, union-thug-of-a-president?

lawhite| 3.13.11 @ 4:55AM

Palin/West would be a perfect ticket. They would bring us back to sanity and the Constitution more than anyone else, and they'd have the balls to fight!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 11:10AM

Good one, Quin! Again, IMO Santorium is a good socially conservative possibility, BUT I don't agree that he's presidential material. SENATORS typically make lousy presidents [as mostly lawyers only, they don't usually possess any adequate managerial/administrative qualifications]. There are many more capable possibilities among those you name. Unnamed is Barbour who would bring his business-lobbying, lawyer-legal, and governor-administrative, and intelligence to the arena. What is definately/particularly needed is a candidate with professional/managerial/administrative/
legislative qualities to the table. I do care if Obama out-debates or out-BS's the Republican, so long as the Gop'er can demonstrate a credible track record of proven administrative capabilities which will be sorely needed to get this country out of the excrement pot that it is/has been in for the last several years, with proven ideas on policies necessary for accompolishing same!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 11:12AM

Typing error above....meant I DON'T care if Obama out-debates.....[sorry]!!!!

Alan Brooks| 3.11.11 @ 11:20AM

Ah hah, a Freudian slip! you work for Soros, you ol' devil, you. The mask has slipped, your cover has been blown.
Oldefarte, OUTED.

Oldefarte| 3.11.11 @ 1:55PM

Shazam, gadzooks, YOU [IN YOUR INFINITE WISDOM]GOT ME!!!!!!!!!

Occam's Tool| 3.11.11 @ 12:12PM

BOL---TON,BOL---TON. (Just trying out the chant.)

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 12:35PM

Maybe, but first he'll have to ditch the Mario Brothers 'stache.

Michael L. Hauschild| 3.11.11 @ 12:54PM

Bolton fer sure, but I only hope that all of you are watching Palin and Coulter as the Congressional garbage disposal puree’s the current crop’s campaign promises about controlling the debt. The next election is coming soon and you had better pay attention to those who are seeking office. We do not need another Guardian of the Democracy Grail ominously intoning “You have chosen poorly.”

Who Knows?| 3.11.11 @ 1:47PM

“Absence makes the heart grow fonder” is fighting with “Familiarity breeds contempt.”

I venture the guess that a little less than 20 months from now, when Americans vote in November 2012, it will be the latter saying that wins.

Does ANYONE really think that Americans will NOT grow to be existentially contemptuous of Obama?

I take it as a given that he and his union thugs will ONLY turn off more and more citizens, so that the GOP will draw enough awake people to deny him a long four more years, because they will have seen what he will have done by then---and hate it!

Bob Grant| 3.11.11 @ 2:25PM

I think it's a 3 way fight including the "known quantity".

If there is a glimpse, or more likely, a false impression that the economy is tracking positively, or the middle east stabilizes, then the floaters (15 percent of the voting population who are perpetually confused and politically ignorant) might not want to upset the apple cart with an unknown quantity and vote for BO. In this scenario a candidate like Sarah Palin would lose badly because of her lack of experience on a national level.

As the days ensure I'm beginning to think the republicans best shot is a current governor, preferably with multiple terms and at least a 55% approval rating in the state, who is winning the budget battle with the feds.

If only Haley Barbour had a mid western accent and not so connected to lobbyists, you'd be looking at the future 45th president of the United States.

David T| 3.11.11 @ 4:25PM

His name is John Kasich, but you'll have to wait until 2016.

somnolence| 3.11.11 @ 4:39PM

Most everyone, including the author is wasting their breath. ANY GOP candidate running right now can beat Obama. ANY ONE! What are the achievements Obama is going to run on without me laughing? I rest my case. You can't name one.

I Survived Arlen Specter| 3.11.11 @ 6:10PM

Somnolence, Mr. Hillyer & other conservatives here, never underestimate the ability of The Stupid Party to pull defeat from the jaws of victory. If they nominate a typical McCain style RINO they will be defeated & rightfully so. A lot will stay home & not vote at all & those like myself will opt for the write-in vote & vote for a conservative (social & fiscal) deserving of the highest office in the land. Voting for a RINO is suicidal & stupid & I have ample faith in GOD to point out to me the best possible candidate for the position before casting my vote. This country will not reverse the current course it is on without the involvement of GOD & if the right person is elected to the Presidency they will understand this & not be afraid to acknowledge this fact. Ask for God's guidance before pulling that lever & don't buy into the idea of "anybody is better than Obama". There are plenty of big government RINOs salivating after the Presidency who will continue the out of control spending of Barack Obama. Just voting for any of RINOs The Stupid Party will offer up is not good enough to stop the bleeding. Trust God's judgement, not that of The Stupid Party. Sorry for the sermon, but I don't trust the "geniuses" running The Stupid Party in the least. The advice of The Stupid Party "leadership", "conservative" pundits (Krauthammer, Will, Lowry, Smerconish, Noonan, Brooks, Kristol, Barnes, etc.), & even some of the talk radio hosts (Bennett, Gallagher, Medved, Smerconish, Hannity, etc.) are very suspect as well. I have reached the point where only GOD is to be trusted in important areas of life like choosing national leaders. Better late than never.

PCP Smoker| 3.11.11 @ 7:41PM

As for the issue proposals, I've got 'em right here if any campaign wants to call me for them. Seriously."

We don't need to argue issues as Barack will flip the issue for you and leave you holding your willy. Philosophical differences. It worked for Nixon in 72, Reagan in 80, and the Tea Party in 010. Argue issues and you will be another John Scumbag McCain looking boring and stupid.
Quin, figure out why Sarah was more popular than McLame and then go back to standing by the phone.

Dee See| 3.11.11 @ 9:25PM

---What makes a winner?

I don't know. WHY didn't anyone ask
the Tavistock Institute? They've basically
created our last 4 interchangable Globalist
front administrations.

"-------Sue? ---get me London!"

YOU KNOW IT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW

John Carnal| 3.11.11 @ 11:19PM

The first candidate that goes for Obama's jugular relentlessly is our man/woman. His lack of character. His encyclopedia of lies. He must be 90% of the campaign. Pussyfooting is for pussies.

Jeanette| 3.11.11 @ 11:46PM

Democrats at this time, of course, hold the Senate, but The House needs to look into implementing impeachment proceedings. This is the only way this country can survive the next two years. Obama needs to be brought out into the light, and his liberal Socialist agenda needs to be exposed in open hearings. It seems to me, the daily headlines are proof of how this man and his appointed czars seem to be destroying this country. It is unacceptable. I can only have one opinion, he is incapable of leading this nation. His foreign policy is non-existent, his domestic policy is in shambles, he goes the way the wind blows. He changes his mind and opinions (when it suits him--gay marriage, and Guantanamo as examples.) As a nation, why are we not staying on the phones, email, and mounting a campaign to demand The House investigate the possibility of impeachment? The Republicans have to know there are reasons to do it. He has declared portions of the population enemies for disagreeing with his policy. He instigates chaos when he can, supporting certain groups, not others, firing up demonstrators with inflammatory rhetoric..(union protesters) trying to turn groups of people against each other. He says Wisconsin is vilifying the unions. He did nothing to try to bring civility to this issue. He is putting us in jeopardy with his lack of experience. We are, I believe, in danger from his lack of understanding of what his job requires of him, or his lack of interest to care. Our porous borders are a serious threat to our nation, yet we are told by Rep. King, Eric Holder stays awake at night worrying about radicalization of America by radical Muslims. Has anyone asked why Holder feels this way about this issue? Meanwhile, radicals from any terrorist group can simply walk across the Mexican border, or Canadian border, for that matter. This president should be thoroughly investigated, questioned, and made to answer questions about the policies he has embraced----spend spend spend, and spend some more. Why? His lack of respect for our Constitution, using it only when it suits him. His refusal to enforce laws he does not agree with is acceptable? He has a basic lack of respect for the people of this nation, our culture, and our laws. Congress owes it to our nation to have this man explain his ideology and his association with radicals. (Van Jones, Ayers, Mao admiring Anita Dunn, appointed czars, and others.) The 2012 election---Republicans, theoretically, should not have a problem winning the presidency if his poll numbers stay like they are now, (if) ----The nation should be thankful for the election of anyone who does not embrace liberal Socialist ideology, as Obama does. Unfortunately, there are so many now who are demanding entitlements, this may be difficult. These voters will most likely continue to support the "Socialist Entitlement Democratic candidates" no matter how anti-American they are. Republicans may not have another Reagan to run for the presidency, but we have some good American patriots in this party who could defeat this man. They must be willing to forcefully take this man to task, publicly force him to explain what his real motives are, and why he is intent on destroying our country. They cannot be complacent like McCain was in the last election. No teleprompters, no coddling, take off the gloves, and go after him in debates. How did he get here, how did he go to college on foreign student loans, social security numbers in doubt, God forbid I mention he took foreign trips to the Pakistan, did he have a passport? Was he working, did he pay for the Pakistan trip, if not who did, the timing, was travel allowed there at that time? He forces his agenda through Congress, refuses to listen to the voices of the people, considers himself an elite, and wants to turn America into a Socialist liberal nanny state. Waivers are being issued to entities who are refusing Obamacare at will, and I do mean his will....WHY are we sitting back and allowing it? Our phones should be jamming the offices of our representatives, our senators, and anyone else who will listen..It is time for all good Americans to step up and intervene to stop the destruction of our American values. Republicans, Independents, Democrats, and all those who know in their hearts something is not right in this country. Pick up the phones, get on your email, write your letters, and do not give up. I feel there is enough evidence to show that he is the wrong man, at the wrong time, doing all the wrong things for America. The sad thing is, I think there are good people all over this country, regardless of political party affiliations, who know this, and as of yet, have not realized they have the power do something about it. It is called democracy at work, the voice of the people-----After all America has done for us, it is the least we can do to try to protect it from within. We do have to take these liberals seriously. It would be a mistake not to take them seriously. I believe they are as much of a threat to American values as any other domestic or foreign threat. All you have to do is look at Wisconsin, the death threats and the violence against the elected officials. This is not how we do things in America, third-world countries, perhaps, but not here. I am confident a conservative American patriot will step up and take on the task of defeating Obama. Americans always step up when there is a need.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.12.11 @ 7:44PM

Jeanette,
some good thoughts buried in a VERY long paragraph. Break it up, lady, OKay?

Mimi| 3.13.11 @ 5:09PM

Jeanette....thanks for a beautiful post ! You said what was on the mind of all of us...mainly.." Something is wrong" !
Quinn wrote an important piece. His 2nd paragraph...with all the reasons we cannot have another 4 yrs. of Barrack Obama is bold and includes all our concerns.
We need a fired-up, energetic, white-shirt rolled up sleeve to the biceps kind of guy, hair a bit ruffed up and shouting from SEA TO SHINING SEA...with an urgent message to the people in this country of how this election is the most IMPORTANT in history. Also how and WHY !!!!!

Harry Flashman| 3.12.11 @ 3:30AM

It is certainly true that the 2012 Republican presidential nominee must develop a compelling, positive narrative.

It is equally true that this nominee, and perhaps more importantly, this nominee's surrogates, must emphasize the issue of personal truth and transparency.

Astute observers in corridors of power and other quarters understand that the fact that Barack Obama continues to conceal virtually the entire paper trail of his existence in a tight shroud of secrecy is perhaps his greatest long term political liability.

If used properly, this issue may become Obama's greatest obstacle to re-election.

The key to the proper use of this issue is not to fall into the "birther" trap.

Elements of the mainstream media and various other Obama apologists and supporters have for the past several years been quick to focus on the so-called "birthers" whenever any mention is made of the astounding totality of secrecy that guards practically every original record and document from Obama's entire life.

By portraying the "birthers" as irrational or deranged individuals obsessed with the belief that Obama was born in Kenya or elsewhere outside of the United States, they continually seek to avoid any emphasis on the unprecedented comprehensive concealment of Obama's past.

The very term "birther" was originally coined and spread around by David Axelrod, the pernicious racebaiter and premier Chicago machine political consultant for hire. Axelrod knew that it would serve to denigrate anyone who dared to question The Chosen One's false promises of transparency.

David Axelrod has always specialized in racial politics, selling black candidates to white voters and whipping up black support against white opponents, as the situation requires. Reference his successful 2003 work that inflicted another term of the awful Mayor John Street upon the unfortunate citizens of Philadelphia if you would care to study a classic example of Axelrod's egregious racebaiting.

Therefore, the controversy of "birthers" and birth certificates and place of birth are essentially distractions that the Obama forces use to attack their opponents and obscure the real issue, which is the deception of the American voters about the true nature of the miscreant in the White House.

The infamous original typewritten long form birth certificate, the most widely discussed item from Obama's extensive hidden paper trail, is actually the least relevant of all of his concealed records and documents.

It has not ever been proven that it actually exists anywhere, and may in fact have never existed.

Perhaps it is what mystery writers would call a "MacGuffin."

The truth about the place of birth of Barack Hussein Obama and the actual identities of his biological father and birth mother are less important to the future of the United States than the truth about what makes him tick and who is pulling his strings, so to speak.

Whether the current president's biological father was in fact the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." or the late CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis or the late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate - see cashill.com among many other sources) or some other man is not as significant as the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that postwar modern American voters had become accustomed to having the mainstream media provide for them, up until 2008 when Obama received an amazing special exception from the traditional expectation that such candidates should allow for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials.

American voters of all political persuasions can recall the Obama 2008 campaign repeatedly promising that their administration would uphold the highest ethical standards with a particular emphasis on transparency.

A vast majority of these voters believe that the process of running for President of the United States should be the toughest public job interview on the planet.

The sad fact remains that the current president, according to longstanding government clearance protocols, could not be hired as a janitor in a federal building with the amount of verifiable personal background information that he has provided.

Quite apart from the issue of birth certificates, Obama's school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and scholarship paperwork and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, passport history, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a substantial sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been their primary provider of these services.

Barack Hussein Obama and his handlers were able to successfully hide his past and explain away and minimize his associations with highly controversial individuals and groups during their 2008 campaign.

Will they be able to effectively repeat this deception between now and 6 November 2012?

Only if you let them.

What is being hidden and why are they hiding it?

Mimi| 3.13.11 @ 5:24PM

We must insist on a strong , virtuous, moral leader for a strong, independent, moral people. Enough with the "WEAK LEADER" who wants a weak and dependent, needy people...lacking in VIRTUE ! That my dear folks is the monumental 2012 Presidential Election in a " nutshell" !!!!