-
Earth Day 2013: The Papal Edition
April 22, 2013 | 22 comments
-
Is God a Methodist?
April 15, 2013 | 57 comments
-
A Status Quo Budget at Best
April 11, 2013 | 9 comments
-
Marriage Issue Will Not Go Away
April 2, 2013 | 87 comments
-
Shakespeare’s Henry V Commands the Stage
March 11, 2013 | 10 comments
A Further Perspective
Kaleidoscopic GOP Primary Still Turning
Perry in. Ryan out. But what about Palin?
I have been flogging the kaleidoscope metaphor here and here on this site to describe the Republican presidential primary. Given all that is happening, or about to happen, in the pachyderm dust-up, I think it still works. Turning, turning, the GOP battle is making things very interesting in these early days of the endless campaign of 2012. Colorful and chaotic shapes, ever-changing…
The thinning of the herd (to mix metaphors) has begun in Iowa, where Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty’s bid has been derailed by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and retiring congressman Ron Paul (R-TX). They, in turn, are in the process of being displaced by Texas governor Rick Perry. But with former Alaska governor Sarah Palin itching to get into the race, do all these populist contenders undercut one another and open the way for Mitt Romney to consolidate an establishmentarian, center-right coalition and grab the prize? Clearly, the Bachmann-Paul-Palin candidacies splinter the populist Tea Party vote that Perry would love to capture.
Mitt Romney dodged another bullet with congressman Paul Ryan’s really, really, final, final decision not to jump into the fray, which is the right decision for many reasons having nothing to do with the former Massachusetts governor.
I am a huge fan of Ryan’s (as readers of this space well know), but there are not that many articulate, conservative congressmen who can clearly explain to Americans the budget crisis we face, much less the solution embodied in the Ryan plan. We need Paul Ryan right where he is, not out there trying to throw a Hail Mary pass in the big presidential sweepstakes.
Congress is going to be the dominant branch of government in the coming years, given the overriding importance of fiscal and budgetary matters, and we must have legislative craftsmen and women who know the rules of that game. The libertarian disdain for government (at high tide in the Republican Party right now) tends to underrate the importance of having truly skilled and experienced legislators in the House and Senate.
I think a similar analysis requires supporting New Jersey governor Chris Christie’s decision, still firm, to stay out of the presidential race. As attractive as he is a political leader, we also need him right there in Trenton, doing what the GOP governors of Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Florida and other states are doing: proving that fiscally responsible governance actually can work in the various state jurisdictions across the country. Their work has just begun. Let them finish the job.
Of course, the best argument for letting Christie be Christie in New Jersey is that he is one of the most entertaining, as well as effective, politicians to ever appear on YouTube. He and Ryan will both have their day on the national stage, but they have more important things to attend to right now.
With the race coalescing around a populist wing, led by Rick Perry, and an establishment wing, led by Mitt Romney, the time for choosing sides will be upon us very soon. Every Republican, smelling victory in 2012, will be looking at the cut of each candidate’s jib in terms of principle and potential electoral success.
Can I mix metaphors again?
Let the games begin.
About the Author
G. Tracy Mehan, III served at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the administrations of both Presidents Bush. He is a consultant in Arlington, Virginia, and an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (59) | Leave a comment
More Articles by G. Tracy Mehan, III
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/24/kaleidoscopic-gop-primary-stil
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- The End of the Castros?
- Hannah and Her Friends
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JohnC| 8.24.11 @ 6:48AM
Paul Ryan has a liberal fiscal voting record and is called a conservative. And Romney has a leftist voting record and is now called center right. And all the presidential hopefuls, including Palin & Perry, have a libertarian bent and are weak on immigration enforcement and are free-trade, Pro-China, economic globalists.
Being called a conservative has no meaning anymore; it is time for a pro-American, Third Party. Let’s give we-the-people a real choice in 2012.
Dai Alanye | 8.24.11 @ 8:46AM
Yeah, that worked real well in '92.
Drunken Sailor| 8.24.11 @ 9:44AM
Obama thanks you for your effort to re-elect him
Dan Hirsch| 8.24.11 @ 9:47AM
JohnC,
Third party insures re-election of Obama. No two ways about it. Obama wins in '12 if there are three parties vying for the office. Over and out.
Best thing to do, Tea Party types slowly subsume the GOP leaving it the Tea Party - we just need to get the statists, the RINO's, out.
You know who they are... John McCain, John Boehner, GW Bush, Olympia Snowe, those people who have accept deals with Democrats that gives them a dollar, and us a used toothpick...
NO THIRD PARTY. Don't do it, don't say it, don't think it. It is an absolute dead end!
Questions? There better not be...
Don't tread on me...
Michael Tomlinson| 8.24.11 @ 11:28AM
As a lifelong Republican I would appreciate it if non-Republicans would quit telling us how to run our Party. The primary process will select the candidate who best reflects the GOP or is deemed the most electable or is the lesser of evils. It is not a perfect process and sometimes the best candidate is not chosen (1976, 1996 and 2006) but it allows us to be involved in the process of choosing our candidate and that is a good thing.
As for third parties US history is replete with their “success” isn't it? It also looks like we'll be stuck one more election cycle with RINO Ron Paul.
Clint| 8.24.11 @ 2:49PM
Uh Oh !
Now, Little Micky RINO attempts to smear Dr.Ron Paul as his Fellow RINO-CINO.
Obama 39%, Paul 38%
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
The president and the maverick are running almost dead even in a hypothetical 2012 election matchup.
Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul earns 38% of the vote to President Obama’s 39% in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters. Fourteen percent (14%) like some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) remain undecided.
Purple Lips| 8.24.11 @ 4:44PM
Ron Paul is insane. He does have some good ideas. But so did Mussolini.
Wayne | 8.24.11 @ 11:44PM
So what ideas of Mussolini did you like?
Wayne | 8.24.11 @ 11:43PM
I agree with you as an independent. It is up to the GOP to pick someone worth voting for. If they don't I have no problem writing in a candidate or going to third party candidate.
You say you can't have it both ways. You can't tell us to stay out of your affairs, then expect to vote for your nominees.
Alan Brooks| 8.24.11 @ 8:26PM
The GOP is now the #1 enemy of America, not al Qaeda. I curse the GOP with my whole heart and hope to help destroy it someday--
the GOP must be cast into the lake of fire for all eternity so that the multitudes can say "the Republican Party has been cast down into fiery perdition and the smoke of its burning can be seen by all"
NVA Patriot| 8.24.11 @ 6:57AM
Can you say "Game On"
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.24.11 @ 6:58AM
The only candidate with cojones in his political past is Perry. His book Fed Up contains some simple and complex truths and plans but unfortunately his staff appears to be running from some of them. That will be tragic.
As far as Chris Christie he's another misinformed environmental nut job who believes in man made climate change with all his heart. No evidence supports climate change but the RINO's can't wait to run with the herd on the subject.
Supporting climate change theory is complete insanity and any candidate who supports it can go straight to Hell in my opinion because their idiotic and unfounded beliefs are destroying our economy and our freedoms. Here's Christie in all his glory:
" In the past I’ve always said that climate change is real and it’s impacting our state. There’s undeniable data that CO2 levels and other greenhouse gases in our atmosphere are increasing. This decade average temperatures have been rising, temperature changes are affecting weather patterns and our climate. In order to best deal with climate change we have to understand its causes. That was the root of the question that I was asking at the time of my town hall meetings and it’s gotten a lot of attention. So in the last number of months since that time I’ve taken some time to develop a better understanding of the role that humans play in global warming and what impact human activity has on our climate. The last few months I’ve sat down with experts both inside the government and outside the administration in academia and other places, to discuss the issue in depth. I’ve also done some reading on my own on the topic as well. I’m certainly not a scientist which is the first problem.
So, I can’t claim to fully understand all of this. Certainly not after just a few months of study. But when you have over 90% of the world’s scientists who have studied this stating that climate change is occurring and that humans play a contributing role it’s time to defer to the experts. Climate science is complex though and we’re just beginning to have a fuller understanding of humans’ role in all of this. But we know enough to know that we are at least a part of the problem. So looking forward, we need to work to put policies in place that act at reducing those contributing factors."
That is not genius. That is complete and unfounded absurdity. If he stated it in my presence I would have to point out to him there is no such thing as scientific consensus. Science is not consensus. Science is fact.
More on Perry:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html
“When it comes to Social Security today,” Perry believes there should be “a robust debate about entitlements, a debate about extending the retirement age for younger people and for other changes that will make Social Security and Medicare more stable and financially sound going forward,” the Times quoted Sullivan as saying. “We need to protect benefits for those who are at or near retirement, so they don’t have anything to worry about.”
To further bat away complaints, Sullivan has said the book “is a look back, not a path forward.” It was written “as a review and critique of 50 years of federal excesses, not in any way as a 2012 campaign blueprint or manifesto.”
Here is non-candidate Perry writing about Social Security in “Fed Up!”:
“This unsustainable fiscal insanity is the true legacy of Social Security and the New Deal. Deceptive accounting has hoodwinked the American public into thinking that Social Security is a retirement system and financially sound, when clearly it is not….Now if you say Social Security is a failure, as I have just done, you will inherit the wind of political scorn. Seniors will think you want to cut the benefits they have paid for…We are told that no politician has the courage to raise these issues, even if avoiding them puts us on the fast track to financial ruin. But by remaining quiet, politicians are really saying they think the American people won’t understand it if we share the grim details of our financial future…Is that how we should respect our fellow citizens? By underestimating their intelligence, their desire to retire with greater stability or their commitment to the next generation?”
Lawrence Boccardi| 8.24.11 @ 7:17AM
You guys are nuts. You keep focusing on the warts on all of the Repub candidates. You had better wake up to the realization, that unless we coalesce behind ANY of them, that traitor in the WH, will remain, and there won't even be a 2016 election!
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.24.11 @ 9:01AM
What's the difference between government agent Obama and government agent RINO'S?
Lawrence Boccardi| 8.24.11 @ 10:29AM
Well, we never had union-owned autos companies, a runaway EPA, Obamacare, etc., under a RINO. Now, don't paint me as a RINO supporter. This third party crap is nonsense, so I'm thinking the answer is in the middle of those two ideologies.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.24.11 @ 11:05AM
The EPA was started under a RINO. Republican presidents have consistently messed in the private markets. At that point it's only a question of degree.
JayDick| 8.24.11 @ 11:06AM
That's true, but that degree is important.
Butch | 8.24.11 @ 3:30PM
Part of that problem is "administrative law." Laws passed expressing a broad objective ("clean air and water") and establishing a bureau to administer the law. These all incorporate the roles of sheriff, judge, jury, and executioner, and quickly become infested with leftists. They all need to be repealed, and congress is just going to have to work harder writing specific laws.
The Big E| 8.24.11 @ 7:39PM
The problem with assuming the answer lies in the middle is that no Republican moderate has ever had, or will ever have, the cajones to undo the damage that's been done. They'll "reach across the aisle" (which, if you notice, Democrats never do, it's always Republicans reaching across the aisle to them, never the other way around), and come to some "compromise" with the devil that's destroying us all, since in their world, "compromise" is a virtue in and of itself, a virtue which is more highly valued than, "doing the right thing."
The end result will be that 90% of what Obama has done will remain, and the country will still die, just at a 10% slower rate.
The fact is that if we elect a moderate (or RINO, or whatever you want to call them), and he wusses out like every moderate in history has done, then the blame for the country's demise will rest on US, since we had the opportunity to undo the damage, and chose not to.
And if we elect a moderate, he WILL wuss out. Guaranteed. That's what moderates ALWAYS do, it's why they're called MODERATES - they lack the courage of their convictions because in truth, they have no convictions. That road ALWAYS leads to failure, and if we go down it in 2012, whether Obama is defeated or not, we will have failed and the USA as we know it and have known it will pass from this earth.
JayDick| 8.24.11 @ 11:05AM
RINOs are not nearly as bad. Moreover, some of the candidates often referred to as RINOs are pretty far right of most Democrats and would make much better Presidents than Obama. Romney, for example, is a statist at heart, witness Romneycare. Would I prefer him to Obama? Of course, wouldn't you? Now, would I prefer a President further to the right? You bet, but the first priority is to get rid of Obama.
Trinacria12| 8.24.11 @ 6:02PM
RINO: $560 billion deficit, 7% unemployment, Medicare Part D
BHO: $1.6 trillion deficit, 9% unemployment, Obamacare
Take your choice: prostate cancer or pancreatic cancer - same outcome, different timeline...
Michael Tomlinson| 8.24.11 @ 11:32AM
Lawrence the primary process is generally good for the party and candidate. Our biggest problem as Republicans is the "heir apparent" (Sarah Palin) or "my turn" (Mitt Romney) syndrome. This year we can break that cycle by nominating Rick Perry. The only Governor of a major state that has survived the Obamanation.
After the primary season is concluded and we have a nominee real Republicans will rally round our candidate and Obama will be history.
Margie| 8.24.11 @ 5:01PM
How is Sarah the heir apparent? You mean because she's like family and we love her?? :^).
Michael, other than that I like what you say. If Sarah doesn't run, Perry takes it.
Trinacria12| 8.24.11 @ 6:10PM
No, Margie; I believe Michael is referring to the fact that she was on the ticket last time and has spent the last 3 years pseudo-campaigning for the job.
With respect to your familial embrace of Ms. Palin - my golden retriever is like family to me and I love him; I trust you'll agree, however, that this is hardly a sufficient reason to elect him President (though I concede my argument is weakened by the Bona fides of the current president).
Margie| 8.24.11 @ 6:21PM
Yes but we love her for all the right reasons.
The Big E| 8.24.11 @ 7:45PM
With all due respect, Margie, I'll take Sarah Palin seriously as a candidate for President if, and only if, she actually becomes a candidate for President. Until then, she's no more serious a candidate than the other 150,000,000 or so Americans who are Constitutionally eligible to hold the job but who are not running for it.
Margie| 8.24.11 @ 8:28PM
I know, Big E, of course you're right, she isn't yet a candidate.
And I admit, I was having just a little bit of fun there, but in all seriousness, I do really love Sarah for who she is and what she stands for. She really isn't just a bunch of hot air (not that you guys were saying that, or were you?).
I'm just putting in a good word for her, okay?
Margie| 8.24.11 @ 8:31PM
Oh, and I hope I don't have to choose between her and Rick Perry, and thus I am probably proving Michael's original point??
martin j smith| 8.24.11 @ 8:03AM
There is a big difference between a preference and OK s/he will do. Very big. The only two right now who I think woud be for me no better than Obama would be Ron Paul --foreign policy and lack of national security and John Huntsman who may as well be a Socialists--he is so phoney even a Neanderthal can spot it. I will add this I would vote for Romney or Christie with my hands on my nose very hard but I do not trust them very much
at all. As for the others, they too have they issues--there is no perfect candidate by ANY MEANS. But, the crucial thing is to rid of Obama and the socialist power first. . As in first things first. Then we go on.
JohnC| 8.24.11 @ 8:25AM
A liberal Republican Trojan Horse is much more dangerous than a known liberal. Rockefeller Republican George W. Bush, along with talk radio who carried his liberal water for 6 years, distorted the meaning of conservatism and paved the way for Obama. We need to win the Senate with real conservatives (Hatch must go for example) -- at least then, at a minimum, we will have gridlock.
We desperately need an America-First President in 2012 and I do not hear that in any of the candidates, especially well known, proven globalists Perry and Romney. This is why Trump needs to run -- at least he will force the hapless GOP field to the patriotic right and make them discuss their views on economic globalism / international socialism.
Timothy L. Pennell| 8.24.11 @ 8:50AM
First of all, the Democrats don't have to "Kill Romney", anymore. He's already dead. Rick Perry took care of that. Between his Obamney Care, and his Global Warming drivel? He was toast, anyway. Besides, do we really want to run another guy who's TURN it is, again? (Dole/McCain)
Herman Cain can't win the nomination. Obama Saturation has seen to that. Is it the Colour of his skin? Yeah. That's what it is. It's unfortunate, but, people are gonna be leery of another black candidate. They will say: HEY. This guy we've got in their, now, is Playing the race Card, every time he's challenged. He's shown that he can't separate his Colour from Himself. One need only look at the Black Panther Case, and how this Black President, and his Black Attorney General, threw out this case because they were "MY PEOPLE".
Fool me once.
John Huntsman.
Who?
Michelle Bachmann is a strong candidate, but she seems to lack an ability to just talk like a regular person. Stop, with the prepared, memorized text. Just talk to us like you would, a neighbor.
Santorum is just not really ready, in my opinion. He's the Man on the Stair who wasn't there.
Look. Obama is not gonna be hard to beat. I have a pile, outside on the lawn, that the Dog made, who could beat this Punk. But we need more than that. We need someone to be ready to go, on the first day.
Rick Perry is my pick to lead this country out of the Darkness, that is Obama. He has a Record of Success. Especially, where jobs are concerned.
I believe that Michelle Bachmann would round out the ticket, perfectly. (Nobody from the House has ever won the Presidency, as far as I know)
That's my analyses. Those are my picks. As they say: That and a coupla bucks, will get you a Cup a Coffee.
JP| 8.24.11 @ 10:28AM
I do agree with you concerning Mitt. But, the thought of another Texan in the White House makes me ill. You should remember Dukakis. From 1983-1988, Massetchussets had fantastic economic growth, near balanced budgets, and Govenor Dukakis was the toast of the New England Correigdor. I bring this up only to highlight that being a successfull govenor doesn't make a good President. Perry governs a fairly conservative state with deep libertairan and independent streaks. However, he was once a Democrat. But, he wasn't just any old Dem. He was an ALGORE operative. He switched sides for career reasons. He could obviously smell the coffee. But what concerns me about Perry is his cynicism. Like many southern pols, he wears his religion on his sleeve. And like all professional politicians, every movement he makes, as well as every public utterance has been poll tested. He is as slick as they come. And I seriously question his conservative bonofides.
The GOP field of contenders is filled with operatives, Progressives, and the insane.
Trinacria12| 8.24.11 @ 6:18PM
JP,
You're correct; being an effective governor doesn't guarantee that one will be an effective president. Statistically speaking, however, I'd rather like my odds if you took the guy who was a community organizer and I took the guy with executive experience.
Louis Jenkins| 8.24.11 @ 9:45AM
"Congress is going to be the dominant branch of government in the coming years, given the overriding importance of fiscal and budgetary matters..."
Dear Mr. Mehan:
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Obama has swung the government into his court through fiat rules and regulations. Now all he has to do is keep the presidential office in 2012. I'm sure he has some tricks up his sleeve, afterall, you can't trust the man.
Mimi| 8.24.11 @ 10:20AM
Heh Tim...Your picks sound LOGICAL for NOW,
this day! .......But , my take?
It's early...a lot can still happen..like Sarah, John Bolton, Chris Christie or who knows can still get in! Newt , may surprise with some fabulous ideas and shake up the race. Perry is it for NOW,
and saying the right things...I'll say this he getting more likable every day. Unless Mitt starts getting his numbers up near 50%...he's not going to make it...We have had a look and it's so-so.
The only given NOW it's fluid...we all have to keep an open mind . We will know...who and there will not be any doubt about our choice....we will ALL be on the same page.
TrueBlue| 8.24.11 @ 1:11PM
Newt is great at spouting ideas, but I wouldn't want him any closer to being President than he is right now.
What I'm hoping with Perry is that he forces Romney out by driving his numbers low, and getting rid of the "my turn" candidate. Perry has several questionable acts in his past (the Gardisal thing still makes me shudder), and the Texas thing will sadly probably work against him on the national scale, but I'd still vote for him in the end. Especially if we can get enough actual conservatives in the Senate and a few more in the House in the same election. Perry is very good at going along with what the ruling body wants, which could go both ways if the GOP doesn't get control of the Senate.
To be honest, as much as I disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, and as tired as I am hearing the Paulites spewing the "Israel-firster" crud, I'd still vote for Paul over Obama. That said, I still can't really see him as President though.
Palin, as much as I agree with a lot of stuff she says, is a much better idea person and flag carrier than a Presidential candidate.
Bachmann I can't see winning the nomination because of her lack of experience, or presenting actual legislation beyond speeches, both of which were (and still are) issues that Obama had. On the other hand, she actually votes instead of just saying "Present." I also agree that she needs to stop with the prepared speeches and talk to everyone like a normal person. I'm tired of hearing the political talking points that are the equivalent of a Powerpoint presentation. She'd make a good VP candidate though. Also, she was a lawyer before she went into politics, and I'm getting tired of lawyers being in charge.
Cain sadly has even less political experience than Bachmann, which is to say he has none. He's run a business, which I think lines him up for a Cabinet position or the White House budget office, but not President, or even VP. He has the right talking points, and he can talk to people like a human being, both are good, but that lack of dealing with politicals wouldn't be good in the WH.
JayDick| 8.24.11 @ 3:30PM
First criterion is ability to beat Obama. Right now based on less than complete information, it looks like Perry places first in that department, polls notwithstanding. Romney would be very strong if it weren't for Romneycare; to me that makes it very difficult for him to argue logically against Obamacare. Any of the candidates would be better than Obama, but right now, Perry is my favorite.
Cain has no political experience, but he has rich experience in life in general and business in particular. That's a lot more than Obama had.
My first choice for VP would be Rubio. He will make a fine President some day and being VP would position him well for a Presidential run in 2020.
Purple Lips| 8.24.11 @ 4:42PM
I'd vote for Perry only to vote against The Anointed One. Negative voting is all we conservatives do anymore. Either the GOP is filled with slick Statist Operators or just plain goofy politicians. I suppose our motto should be Anyone But Obama.
Pat| 8.24.11 @ 7:00PM
JayDick: Agree on Perry but only because Republicans seem to be learning a few tricks from the Democrats. The Democrats know beauty beats integrity in the modern world – you have to be half actor, half hunk to run as a Democrat, not so much for past Republican candidates.
Media presence is where it’s at in a world of massive electronic communication, press conferences, photo ops, campaign commercials, et al. And women, particularly women voting Independent as well as those voting Democrat, prefer a well-built, broad shouldered guy who seems smart but, at the same time, compassionate. 3 out of 5 modern era Democratic presidents filled that bill to perfection.
President Johnson, who, in reality, was a long-term party hack and a holdover from FDR days, shouldn’t even count within the modern electronic era of visual as well as sound. When the media published that picture of him holding his basset hound up by the ears, it was necessary to identify Lyndon as the one on the left. And it’s true Carter looked like an alien visitor from a strange planet, but then again he only served that one term. Kennedy, Clinton and Obama, brains and looks. And for Kennedy and Clinton, marital infidelity never seemed to bother women voters as much as Hillary bothered them – what woman wants to vote for another woman?
So does photogenic trump integrity and experience? It shouldn’t but things have changed in modern politics and perhaps a handsome face, presidential class dimples and a warm smile can swing a majority of women voters to the Republican side.
TrueBlue| 8.24.11 @ 12:56PM
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if after the 2012 elections, when Obama loses (which I really think is a no-brainer), there are a bunch of "flash mobs" and riots across the country that are used as an excuse to declare martial law to prevent the next guy from taking office.
Bo| 8.24.11 @ 1:49PM
There'll be a lot of caterwauling about how America is racist again but the people will be too lazy to flash mob.
TrueBlue| 8.24.11 @ 6:21PM
Not too lazy right now, and most of them are still getting their government checks. You think they won't do it again if they think for even a half second that they're going to lose even a miniscule portion of their welfare checks?
David| 8.24.11 @ 10:42AM
Bill Hussein, thanks for the info on Christie, but I don't understand why you think what Perry said about social security is a negative. He was speaking the plain truth. The governement has stolen our money these many years and we have not guarantee we will ever be repaid.
Look to Santorum or Perry, and Rubio for VP. I heard Rubio this morning and he sure does know the issues and is extremely likeable, and "very articulate" FOR A HISPANIC GUY - Ha Ha.
martin j smith| 8.24.11 @ 11:58AM
Lets watch how the primary and nomination process pans out. My first thought is to watch the MSM ESPOCIALLY FOX NEWS AND FBN. Why them ? Because they are supposed to be " the enemy" of Obama. Yet, as I have mentioned before--I have serious doubts of their "enemy status". I woull say as of right now Fox is supporting a RINO to run --probably Romney and is interviewing such notables beside Karl Rove,Jeb Bush etc for the RINO type of campaign-lets just be civil don't you know. Lets tell them with our votes N0!!!!!!!!
martin j smith| 8.24.11 @ 11:58AM
Lets watch how the primary and nomination process pans out. My first thought is to watch the MSM ESPOCIALLY FOX NEWS AND FBN. Why them ? Because they are supposed to be " the enemy" of Obama. Yet, as I have mentioned before--I have serious doubts of their "enemy status". I woull say as of right now Fox is supporting a RINO to run --probably Romney and is interviewing such notables beside Karl Rove,Jeb Bush etc for the RINO type of campaign-lets just be civil don't you know. Lets tell them with our votes N0!!!!!!!!
Bo| 8.24.11 @ 1:51PM
I wish Paul Ryan was going to run. If it's Palin, Perry, Bachmann, or somebody like that then the media will be implying that they are stupid the whole time. With Ryan that card won't play. Just one less rock we have to roll up hill.
Clint| 8.24.11 @ 2:21PM
Doctor Ron Paul is the only man who can save America.
Clint| 8.24.11 @ 3:08PM
Apparently, The Poseur Punk Poster Is In The Building.
Use Your Own Name , Gutless Joisey Buffoon
The Big E| 8.24.11 @ 8:03PM
Save us from what? Sanity?
Let's get serious here, Clint, every time anyone on this site criticizes Paul's stances on anything, you go ballistic on them (though I must admit, when it comes to insulting someone, you're pretty creative).
Now, I would assume you're just loony, but the fact is that your particular brand of looniness seems to be a common condition among the Paulistas, and it reminds me very, very much of a similar brand of looniness on display during the last Presidential election cycle by the Obamistas.
It's like a repeat, a smooth talking candidate who tells a certain segment of the electorate what they want to hear, being supported by a bunch of scary, half-crazy lunatics who respond to every perceived criticism with insults and ridicule. I just don't like the thought of going down that road again simply because the smooth talking candidate is now trying to tell me what he thinks I want to hear (economically, anyway).
Like I said in a comment to another article, a choice between Barack Obama and Ron Paul is like a choice between death by hanging and death by firing squad. Either way, the end result is the same.
OK, Clint. Now you can go ahead and call me whatever stupid (but creative) name you wish. Insulting me (even creatively) will only prove my point, so have at it.
Freedom Lobby| 8.25.11 @ 5:59PM
John Adams said that Debt and the Sword are the primary ruins of a republic. I give Clint credit for understanding John Adams. Don't you understand we have too much debt and we're putting our nose in too many conflicts.
Fly| 8.24.11 @ 2:25PM
It also looks like we'll be stuck one more election cycle with RINO Ron Paul.
http://www.wholesalesunglassesbrands.com
Clint| 8.24.11 @ 3:09PM
Same Gutless Joisey Buffoon.
Robert Ellis| 8.24.11 @ 3:35PM
Sounds reasonable. Ryan has a bright future in the House, maybe he'll be Speaker some day. He's young enough to run for President within the next 20 years, if he wants to. Christie would be a good candidate, because he has populist appeal, and he might help the GOP gain votes in the northeast. Perry seems to have everything going for him -- he is pro-business like Romney, but he doesn't share Romney's liabilities. He will appeal to Tea Partiers, fundamentalists, social and fiscal conservatives. Looks like a winner. He will sweep the South, and do well elsewhere. Also, I think it's hard to get elected President if you've been out of elective office for a long time (although Reagan pulled it off, but he's a one of a kind). Romney has been out of office for a number of years, and seems to have spent the interval perpetually running for President. Palin is a non-factor, she will make a splash but I think a lot of people have qualms about her. Bachmann will make a good VP, she is a rising star with serious credentials.
Pat| 8.24.11 @ 5:19PM
Gathered around a New York bar, the collective opinion expressed by mainstream media happy hour types is that the GOP doesn’t really have a candidate. Why? Because the Democrats don’t have a presidential candidate either. Wait, what about Mr. Obama – nah, he’s toast according to the Fuzzy Navel drinking media crowd. But the Apple Martini guzzlers beg to disagree – Obama is a viable candidate and should be the Democrats’ main man. And just think, America has to listen to this inane debate for the next 9 months. Since the mainstream media defines our national supper table talking points, we’ll be forced to listen as the Fuzzy Navel drinkers attempt to not so gently ease Obama out of the picture to make way for a Democratic candidate “who can win”.
Conservatives won’t be asked our opinions on the matter, but mostly we side with the Apple Martini slurpers – keep Obama, move Hillary to Vice-President and give Joe Biden the keys to the Secretary of State’s private bathroom. Better the devils we know, so to speak. Obama has taken billions from us hard working taxpayers and cheerfully given it to deserving friends among the Democrats – so how much more can they ask of us after the next election?
Should an “anyone but Obama” Democratic candidate actually succeed in capturing the White House, we’ll be in for a entirely new series of “bailouts”, Stimulus Plans, National Health Care revisions and sundry other clever swindles – the so-called “voters’ mandate” will be the excuse the newly elected Democratic president needs for a fresh dose of “borrow and spend”.
But the Dems will need our help in the end and will probably welcome it in their attempt to discredit Mr. Obama. Because that’s their strategy. The 2012 Democratic presidential candidate will blame Obama, the lame duck, and swear to undo all the damage he has done. That might seem underhanded, ungrateful and a downright scuzzy thing to do to a man every fawning Democrat once hailed as their redeemer, but remember we are talking about the Democrats here. And who can provide more talking points slamming Obama and listing his failures than us Conservatives? We’re good at it, we know the right things to say and will probably fall for the Democrats’ flattery and hand over our witty criticisms free of charge.
David| 8.24.11 @ 5:58PM
They are not going to get rid of Obama. If by some chance someone did get the nomination in his place, that would ensure a repub victory in the general election. While the blacks won't vote for a repub, many of them will stay home on election day, and that will be mean big repub gains at every level of government all over the country.
So, no, they won't turn him out after one term. I do think he could make Hilly his VP pick and move Biden to Sec of State. I have said for more than a year that is a very likely tactical move he will make.
Pat| 8.24.11 @ 7:25PM
David: good point and you could very well be right. I’m only reiterating what the Democrats’ personal publicists within the mainstream media are pondering at this time. Dismal poll numbers and the very real fear of losing potentially hundreds of billions in government handouts can do funny things to a mainstream media mind.
Over the next few months, Obama really needs an unexpected chance to shine, a fortunate turn of events showcasing him as the nation’s hero and a glorious leader in the face of cruel adversity – so some Democrats are quietly asking each other: How do you start a massive hurricane?
Bob| 8.24.11 @ 9:05PM
The President leads Romney by 20 points in Romney's "home" state. I assume the pollster means Mass. but I don't know. Where is Romney's official residence? Does anybody know? Does Romney know?
POST American| 8.24.11 @ 11:29PM
--------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------
"Understand folks, whoever you're interested in,
one and ALLLL have to give FULL disclosure of ALL their occult associations, of ALL the secret oaths they've taken, ALL the funds they've accepted. You are putting your life in the hands
of these people. You MUST know where they're
coming from, who they worked for and what
agendas they're about. You MUST --or you're screwed."
-ALAN WATT
(essential online coverage)
----------------------------------ANY QUESTIONS?
Wayne | 8.24.11 @ 11:49PM
I just want to see the candidate win, that Rove doesn't like.