The American Spectator

Casey Abell| 9.24.11 @ 10:01PM

If anybody thinks Christie will be deterred from entering the race by a Quin Hillyer post, I'd suggest a psychiatrist.

Dai Alanye| 9.25.11 @ 4:51AM

How about this, the: Christie is a RINO's RINO. Some conservatives fall for him because he's "a fighter." True, he'll pick a fight for any reason or no reason. But when it comes to issues like the 2nd Amendment or immigration he's fighting on the wrong side.

Mike W| 9.25.11 @ 9:16AM

Christie needs to be deterred by the fact that he wont get the nomination. He is a complete sell out RINO but since he was voted in as Republican in a failed (Democrat) state somehow Repubs see him as conservative.

Bill B| 9.26.11 @ 2:00PM

Mike W is oh so correct!

Grammer Police| 9.24.11 @ 10:09PM

Spell check, Quin. Spell check.

Observer| 9.25.11 @ 2:53PM

Um, "grammar" is spelled with an 'a'.

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:22AM

well if you are so concerned with grammar, then never begin a sentence with "um", its not cute.

Ningrim| 9.24.11 @ 10:10PM

Not good enough Mr Hillyer, you have to say who would be preferable.

This is a choice after all. Paul Ryan and Mitch Daniels aren't walking through that door.

Grant Johnson| 9.24.11 @ 10:19PM

Hillyer is right to say that we've not yet had time to digest fully whether Christie has all the right views and instincts. He is also right that if the man has said multiple times that he's not ready for the presidency, then we should respect that.
However, Hillyer is disasterously wrong in defining the conservative principle for selecting candidates. I believe we need someone championing the conservative cause who has good instincts, and who is courageous and articulate in advancing arguments for conservative ideas (Christie certainly has gained some points at least in the latter of these qualifications). However, Hillyer seems to think the defining qualification should be "experience" which he seems to equate to time in office. The trouble here is that someone who has literally spent their entire life seeking and holding political office and wielding the levers of power is not likely someone who can vigorously advance the conservative notion that there should be fewer levers of power available to politicians.
Picking our presidential candidate based on time in office and seniority gave us Dole and McCain.

Quin| 9.25.11 @ 9:02AM

I did not say that experience is the sole criterion, but relevant experience is a necessary criterion. In other words, necessary but not sufficient. It's also true that there are other ways of getting relevant experience -- for instance, military leadership, diplomatic leadership, leadership of a major business of a certain sort, etc. But somebody who has been merely a US Attorney and then a still-untested governor for just two years has not even had time to show us if he has the "right instincts," or if he is competent at governing (I have seen numerous governors look great for two or three years and then prove themselves not actually good at administration). The examples of McCain and Dole do not contradict my criteria at all; I wasn't for either one, because I never said that the MOST experience is the deciding factor. Again, solid experience is necessary but not sufficient.

vb| 9.26.11 @ 7:27AM

I think experience can also mean following issues and problems over a longer time, knowing the positions of potential advisors and recognizing what you've come to see as their blind spots, and meeting people who have observed the effects of policies from ground level.
I suspect that Christie's attention over many years has been the problems he has analyzed in NJ. And I also suspect that he knows his basis for dealing with Pakistan is not that firm. I admire him for recognizing this. It is a vast improvement over our current president. When he feels ready to move to another level, I will feel confident that he has done his homework.

Grant Johnson| 9.24.11 @ 10:23PM

Hillyer is right to say that we've not yet had time to digest fully whether Christie has all the right views and instincts. He is also right that if the man has said multiple times that he's not ready for the presidency, then we should respect that.
However, Hillyer is disasterously wrong in defining the conservative principle for selecting candidates. I believe we need someone championing the conservative cause who has good instincts, and who is courageous and articulate in advancing arguments for conservative ideas (Christie certainly has gained some points at least in the latter of these qualifications). However, Hillyer seems to think the defining qualification should be "experience" which he seems to equate to time in office. The trouble here is that someone who has literally spent their entire life seeking and holding political office and wielding the levers of power is not likely someone who can vigorously advance the conservative notion that there should be fewer levers of power available to politicians.
Picking our presidential candidate based on time in office and seniority gave us Dole and McCain.

Keith| 9.24.11 @ 10:34PM

I have to disagree with you, Quin. I feel that you are operating under the assumption that we have a wider range of options than we actually do. The fact of the matter is that Perry has imploded, and the Florida straw poll results today demonstrate as much. That means that the race is down to one viable candidate: Mitt Romney. If no one else gets in, Romney is the nominee.

And given how late it is, no one else is getting in. We're not going to be treated to some ideal candidate, who is conservative on all the issues and loved by independents and with two full terms of experience under his belt. This is it. It's either Mitt Romney, or we draft Chris Christie. That's the choice. Not one between Romney, Christie, and Quin's Perfect Candidate. But one between Romney and Christie.

Since both have won elections in a blue state, I think it's fair to say that both could beat Obama in the general. So then the question becomes, who is more conservative, Romney or Christie? So far, Christie seems to be doing quite well as a conservative, and where he has tacked left a bit, maybe on climate change or whatever, Romney has as well. We can argue about this for weeks, and probably will, but I see no reason to write off Christie out of hand as you are doing given that the only other viable candidate at this point is Mitt Romney. It's time to accept the choice that's actually in front of us, and not the one where Ronald Reagan magically appears to save the day.

Winghunter| 9.25.11 @ 2:38AM

Trust this: We, The People, will NOT suffer Romney!

The Romney Scorecard: RINO http://bit.ly/706p7k

9th ID| 9.25.11 @ 5:26PM

Roger that! I believe Christie has similar issues...

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 8:27AM

Kieth...This is NOT over...The race is getting great to watch with the UPS & DOWNS ! The media is paying attention...at every debate we are educating the PEOPLE in Conservative values.
Providence is providing all circumstances and has been for some time. We all much watch it with a smile and have confidence...the Country will win in the END....FAITH !

Quin| 9.25.11 @ 9:03AM

No, those aren't the only choices. Why not Cain? hy not Santorum? Or, if drafting is still allowable, why not Jon Kyl or Frank Keating?

Observer| 9.25.11 @ 2:59PM

Agreed! Why we are allowing the media and the Democrats to choose our front-runners is beyond me. We have eight choices as of the most recent debate, all of whom have placed themselves up for scrutiny. They deserve to be seriously considered.

Keith| 9.25.11 @ 3:37PM

Okay Quin, fair enough. If you decide to support Herman Cain, I will respect that. I like Cain; he's not my first choice, but he's someone who I've been impressed with overall. I see what you mean when you say that we shouldn't let the conventional wisdom box us in.

That said, if my state's primary comes around, and the choice is between Romney, Christie, and Perry, either because all the other candidates have dropped out by then, or because all the other candidates are only polling in single-digits, there's no way I'm going to throw my vote away on a candidate who's polling at 5 percent when it will be clear by then that the only choices are the 2 or 3 candidates at the top of the pack. So at that point, I'll have to make a choice between what probably will end up being 2 or 3 candidates with imperfect conservative records, and in that case I'll go with the candidate who I believe will make the best president and who can also beat Obama. To me, that candidate is Christie when the alternatives are Romney and Perry.

Teaghan| 9.27.11 @ 8:54AM

Keith, Clinton didn't enter his first campain until October and Reagan, I believe it was November. We haven't seen all of the candidates yet.

Thank God.

sjccoach| 9.24.11 @ 10:36PM

Mr. Hillyer,

The problem is that the two current leaders Governor Perry and Governor Romney are not conservatives. Governor Romney is Obama lite. Elect Governor Romney and we have four more years of what we have now. Governor Romney will reach across the aisle to Harry Reid. Governor Perry is Arlen Specter in cowboy boots. He sings the Democrat line when he tells conservatives we don't a have heart if we don't agree with him on immigration. I for one will not hold my nose and vote for a RINO anymore. The conservative base is still searching for a true conservative to run for president. Look at what the RINOs Boehner and McConnell have done. Faux cuts and more spending of money we don't have.

Margaret| 9.25.11 @ 1:00AM

Thit true conservative is Gov, Sarah Palin.
She is the real deal.
Even knowing so well that her decision to step down as the Governor may end her political carrier Gov. Palin have chosen to do the wise, noble and unselfish act to save her beloved state of Alaska from the frivolous lawsuits.

Remember the story of Solomon's audacious verdict . He declared that there was only one fair solution, namely, that the live child should be split in two, each woman receiving half of the child. Upon hearing this terrible verdict, the baby's true mother cried out in horror and anguish, "Please, My Lord, give her the live child - do not kill him!" However, the liar, in her bitter jealousy, exclaimed, "It shall be neither mine nor yours - divide it!" Realizing that a true mother's instincts are to protect her child, Solomon instantly gave the baby to the real mother, who was willing to relinquish her baby in order to save its life.

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 8:29AM

Margaret...You are on to something!

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:27AM

Yes Margaret you are certainly onto something. Sarah always said if there is an open door, she would walk through it. Well, Sarah, the door is wide open.........

Teaghan| 9.27.11 @ 8:57AM

Sarah is who I was referring to up above.
Sarah, step through the door. Please.

vb| 9.26.11 @ 7:36AM

Why do you assume that Harry Reid will be leading the Senate? A more conservative Senate would have stopped even Obama on quite a few issues. We definitely need more bottom-up thinking and stronger candidates for offices below the rank of president.

KLSmith| 9.25.11 @ 4:35AM

Agree w/ Mr Hillyer and will add that, no offense, but Christie looks like a heart attack waiting to happen. Have you seen the picture of him on the tarmac in NJ standing next to our anorexic Prez? Remember how concerned people were about McCain's skin cancer? This is worse.

Pecos Pete| 9.25.11 @ 7:18AM

I'm no fan of Christie, or any career politician. I am a believer in no holds barred conservatism, the free enterprise systems and strict interpretation of the constitution. Herman Cain suits me just fine.

Occam's Tool| 9.25.11 @ 5:07PM

I think the next President should be a Black Guy---Black on both sides. So should the VEEP. Cain/West.

Teaghan| 9.27.11 @ 8:59AM

If it isn't Sarah Palin, I'm for Cain/Rubio

Get on the Cain Train!
New bumber sticker- Honkys for Herman!

martin j smith| 9.25.11 @ 7:41AM

Hillyer, Hillyer,Hillyer,Hillyer the people who want Christie to run ARE NOT CONSERVATIVES. They are RINOS or The Republican E-S-T-A-B-L-I-S--H-M-E-N-T. I KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON AND OTHERS DO TOO. Christie is at best a MODERATE
NOT A CONSERVATIVE--in my view.

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 8:30AM

In mine too!

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:28AM

Bingo!

Bob| 9.25.11 @ 8:13AM

No to Chris Christie! Come on now, he's the perfect GOP candidate, the cartoons, the lampooning, the jokes will be endless, a boon to the economy. Shariah Chris will be the before and after, before of course photo in fitness and weight loss ads. Do you know that the hefty governor appointed a muslim to the state court why not the Supreme Court as well.

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 8:32AM

The GUY is great for New Jersey but PRESIDENT ??....He's a NO-GO !

Occam's Tool| 9.25.11 @ 5:06PM

Christie will be supported by Ron Paul.

9th ID| 9.25.11 @ 5:30PM

I was hoping Ron Paul would run with Nader on the Liber-tarian ticket. Sure would draw a heck of a lot of votes away from Obama...

Clint| 9.25.11 @ 9:33PM

Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

Clint| 9.25.11 @ 9:31PM

The Screwball Israel Firster Troll, Tool Job was the propaganda clown,who told us,that Pawlenty would kick Dr.Ron Paul's ass.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

Mike W| 9.25.11 @ 9:18AM

Christie is an advocate of open borders. On immigration he is even worse than Perry.

Martin Hutchinson| 9.25.11 @ 9:41AM

The problem is these silly debates. If Reagan had been forced to debate 15 times in 1979 he'd have had Bush and the others (John Connolly, etc.) nit-picking his record as Governor of California, which had far more holes in it than Perry's in Texas. No doubt the media and the RINOS would have declared Reagan disqualified and given us the less qualified Bush.

Perry is a damn good candidate, highly qualified for the office. My ideal would be Ron Paul (and it was Phil Crane in 1980) but Perry, like Reagan, will do fine.

Martin Hutchinson| 9.25.11 @ 9:54AM

Having said that, I've no objection to Christie running, because I think he takes more votes from Romney than anyone else.

Chuck| 9.25.11 @ 9:59AM

Quite a dilemma, the Tea Party has control of the Republican Party at the grass roots level hence a significant impact on primary vote totals. Christine O'Donnell proves my point. Perry doesn't pass the smell test over immigration and Romney flunks out over Romneycare. So who then? They better pick someone who will crackdown on illegal immigrants, obliterate Obamacare and more importantly dismantle the federal bureaucracy and Federal Reserve and put the clamps on the federal courts. They better or third party, remember the Bull Moose? Perhaps the Whigs

JimH| 9.25.11 @ 10:04AM

The patron saint of modern conservatism has pointed out that Conservatism is not an ideology. It is not doctrinaire. Rather it is an enduring set of principles and values. http://www.kirkcenter.org/inde.....rinciples/
He has also pointed out that a conservative in one country may be different and support some different things than one in another country. I believe he was correct in this and that what he said about countries may also be true for the states. What is conservative in New Jersey may not be quite the same thing as in Texas. Christie is not ideological. He does recognize that the state has gotten to large. He is trying to make it smaller, give people back some of their money and make New Jersey a better place to live and do business. As for his comments as to not being ready, who truly is or was. I appreciate his attitude better those who are so sure of themselves that they have the true way. I don't think the Gov. would be my first choice though he is far superior to the current occupant of the White House. I agree he has a bright future and much to offer the country. Finally Mr. Hillyer, I hope the 'pig in a poke' was not in any way a reference to Gov. Christi's waistline. Such comments would be beneath you and the American Spectator.

PCC| 9.26.11 @ 4:03PM

I see the politically correct thought police are now monitoring closely AmSpec blog, on the lookout for any possible offense, intended or otherwise.

JimH| 9.26.11 @ 4:37PM

Point being people ought to be less concerned about fat on the waist and more about whats between the ears.

Clint| 9.25.11 @ 10:09AM

Wall Street & The Ruling Elite & Their Media Flunkie Stooges Are Setting Us Up For Their Frontman, Mittems Romney.

Rise Up In Rebellion.

Robbie| 9.25.11 @ 10:58AM

I've emailed back and forth with Quin since last November on the quality of the presidential field. It was my belief, borne out today, the field was shaping up to be the worst in modern times. Given the opportunities available with Obama's weaknessess, it's even worse.

At this point, we need to pull the fire alarm, yell mayday, and hit the panic button. The current crowd just ain't going to cut it. No one likes Romney, but he may be the only realistic candidate we have. It's for certain Perry is in near collapse. So the question is why not someone else?

Maybe Christie would prove to be a weak candidate and a RINO, but let the process bear that out. It's done that quite adequately with Perry in just five weeks time so it can work with Christie. Why be afraid if it's so obvious the process will expose him.

I understand Quin not wanting to see us swoon again, but his view supposes there is someone out there who is both conservative to the bone and electable on a national scale. Sadly, there's not one. Santorum lost his own reelection by 18 points to a dullard and he has next to no money. Cain is great, but he has no campaign structure to support him.

As I see it, there are only two people who could still get in, form a good campaign, and have a realistic chance. One is Christie and the other is Jeb. Of course the real conservtives who supported Angle and O'Donnell would rather be burned at the stake than support Jeb because of immigration. There's no way John Kyl or Frank Keating could matter at this point. Their national profiles are just too low this late in the process.

I'm for Christie getting into the race because I want to make sure we exhaust all of our options before we settle for Mr. Fallback, Mitt Romney.

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 11:24AM

Look....we are all waiting for ...SARAH !
She will ELECTRIFY this nation with massive crowds from Maine to the western shore of the PACIFIC.
In all likelyhood we are NOW interviewing the CABINET!
Only one thing worry's me...WHY THE LONG WAIT !!? Is it strategy ? Personal problems to clear up ? JUST TELL US SARAH...The SHOW is on the road...The Boys and Michele are getting out the message and doing a GREAT JOB .....We are out here waiting !

Observer| 9.25.11 @ 3:08PM

I supported Sarah too, and having been in local government for many years, I understand exactly how the staff must be pulled from their actual job duties to pull and copy mountains of paper for frivolous lawsuits that go nowhere. However, Sarah has been teasing for too long and this voter, for one, does not appreciate being teased. Yes, she gets more cruel shots than anyone else, but the others have been brave enough to put themselves out there for everyone to chew on. Sarah, if she wanted the job, should have done the same a long time ago. Just sayin'

Margaret| 9.26.11 @ 5:58PM

So sad that so many peoples do not know how Gov. Palin cleaned the clocks of corruption and establishment Republicans in Alaska but know all the unsubstantiated gossip about her.
There is a great article about Gov. Sarah Palin
http://us4palin.com/the-virtue-of-quitting/

Margaret| 9.25.11 @ 3:36PM

Gov. Sarah Palin is the only declared or potential candidate whose record truly matches their rhetoric

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:30AM

She will announce soon, I just know it! Can't wait. She's the real deal.

Diana| 9.25.11 @ 2:14PM

Governor Christie again? Women won't vote for him because he is too fat. Women will vote for a candidate who looked like Robert Redford in the movie "The Candidate" young, virile, athletic and handsome, not blubbery.

Kingofthenet| 9.25.11 @ 10:38PM

Ok you won't VOTE for him, but is a handjob out of the question?

ml| 9.25.11 @ 2:18PM

Not Chris Christie and Mitt Romney. I am going to stick with Gov. Rick Perry.

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:31AM

why? all three are the same

William| 9.25.11 @ 2:29PM

I'm a long time independent who always thought I was a small "c", conservative. And I thought that term substantially overlapped with those who called themselves "Conservative." I don't think that's any longer true: While I still consider myself conservative I have a hard time identifying with those who today call themselves "Conservatives."

I am certainly not a liberal and am disgusted with Obama's "liberal" economics (not to mention his lack of leadership). People who agree with Hillyer seem to believe that, perhaps apart from Romney, the Republicans have a good slate of candidates. Romney they reject as "conservative" and many probably even believe he is a RINO. These people want to redefine the Republican party as an extreme version of conservatism. Maybe the more moderate, sensible Republicans should start speaking out.

J.C.Eaton| 9.25.11 @ 3:31PM

That's rich: a moderate independent pontificating on the propriety of redefinition of something you don't approve of. What the hell does the world look like through your eyes. Moderation of what bucko?! A soft-serve frappe of weak, pusillanimous, double-talking, double-dealing Republicanism that has led exactly to political perdition? Geez.

Mimi| 9.25.11 @ 5:32PM

Rinos= about 40%....Conservative=60%...do the math...moderate candidates running =40% support...Conservative ie Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich , ! my analysis!
How come a Mod/RINO always get the nomination...we are told to wait....we are now way ahead and its time they WAIT this time....A Conservative is needed ....a tough one!

Teflon93| 9.26.11 @ 12:12PM

The so-called "moderate, sensible Republicans"---people like Peggy Noonan, Colin Powell, and Christopher Buckley---all pushed to nominate "moderate maverick" McCain last time around and then promptly turned tail and voted for Obama.

So no, we've heard quite enough from you "moderate, sensible Republicans". Go back to the country club and we'll tell you who your next president will be.

William| 9.26.11 @ 2:26PM

I don't know how you folks define "moderate," but I think a substantial majority of the voting public shares my "moderation" or something further to the left. Your own math shows the problem: If 40% of "moderate" Republicans are to be disregarded for a candidate further to the right, how do you plan to win the election. Independents are not likely to share the views of the far right in the Republican party, otherwise they likely would not be Independents. So your suggesting that 60% of an already minority party (Republicans), will pick a candidate that will alienate many of the more moderate Republicans, that will galvanize the Democrat opposition and that will attract few Independents -- yet somehow your candidate will win the election. I think your are suffering from the same ideological blindness of the left-liberals you hate so much.

Teflon93| 9.26.11 @ 5:05PM

How do you win elections when you disregard your party's base? Conservatives outnumber liberals 2:1 in this country going back a half century. How are you going to win alienating the people who ARE your party?

And if your narrative had any truth to it, McCain would have beat the inexperienced left wing demagogue he faced in 2008. Instead, he got his hindquarters handed to him.

Mind you, Barack Obama surely didn't neglect HIS base.

And McLame had previously whipped Romney.

Under no practical scenario does the guy who lost to the guy who was The Great Moderate Hope last time around win this time around against a more experienced incumbent.

Especially since not even the Left Wing Media loves HelMitt.

William| 9.26.11 @ 8:16PM

I don't think it's a matter of disregarding the parties base. I assume by "base" you mean those who occupy the farther right on the Conservative/Republican spectrum; just like the Democrat "base" is often referred to as the Pelosi liberals.

The problem, as history has proven for candidates both from the liberal-left and the far right, is that the numbers don't add up. Those you call "moderate" Republicans, like McCain or Romney, share a lot of views in common with the farther right, especially including the economy, and often are at least sympathetic to other of their views, like abortion and gay marriage, and also share a general skepticism towards large government. This view also appeals to a lot of Independents (like me) and blue collar Democrats. On the other hand, those on the far right often have very rigid views that are in conflict with virtually all of the voters to the left of them, including moderate Republicans and Independents. These views reflect a simplistic view of the global world in which America can be run, economically, pretty much like it was run 200 years ago. Further, while professing to be against big government, and to be in favor of individual liberty, they are nevertheless prepared to have the federal government IMPOSE certain norms of behavior on the entire populace, PROVIDING it is behavior THEY approve of -- e.g., a blanket prohibition of abortion or federal law against gay marriages.

A substantial majority of the voting public will not vote for a candidate with such doctrinaire or controversial views, even if they tend to agree with the candidate on economic issues. I believe I am a good bell-weather of this. A share the instinct of the Tea-Party towards large, oppressive government that intrudes on personal lives and tries to run the economy -- and that does all this with a high level of incompetence. But I do not hate people with different lifestyles from my own and I believe that government has a role to play in providing economic security for the more needy among us. Obama is too liberal for my taste, he doesn't know up from down about business or the economy, and he is a weak leader. At this point I am eager to find someone else to vote for. But, as of now, I don't believe I could bring myself to vote for any of the Republican candidates except Romney and, maybe, Cain. Not the I would therefore vote for Obama; but I would choose not to vote at all than vote for someone I believe undeserving of the presidency.

BD57| 9.25.11 @ 4:44PM

"Political experience" in this day & age is a double-edged sword.

On the one hand, it's good to know how things work.

On the other, "the way we do things around here" is truly screwed up - we're not in this jam because we've had a shortage of "experienced" politicians.

We're looking for someone who knows how the system works & is going to use that knowledge to change "the way we do things around here."

There aren't many like that around.

Robbie| 9.25.11 @ 5:54PM

Sarah Palin may be many things, but she is not a serious or credible presidential candidate. The fact she quit the governorship after just two and a half years shows she's not up for the fight and it disqualified her with many, many conservatives.

Palin could have competed had she returned to Alaska, governed competently, gotten re-elected, and immersed herself on the issues of national and global importance. Instead, she did none of the leg work and decided to become a celebrity. That's all she is, a celebrity.

I'm not interested in someone who prefers to issue policy statements on Facebook. I'm not interested on someone who publicly endorses a lunatic like Christine O'Donnell. I'm certainly not interested in someone who just toys with people when it comes to a potential race.

She can run and more power to her if she does, but she won't win. All her entry will do is drive people to Mitt Romney. Great, just great.

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:34AM

Get the Undefeated dvd, its all about Sarah Palin's political life and will explain her resignation. It will be available for sale at Walmart beginning Oct 4. People need to get educated about her. By the way, Sarah did not do this movie, Steve Bannon did.

Teaghan| 9.27.11 @ 9:03AM

Thanks mcr. I will be looking for the DVD.

PattyMor| 9.25.11 @ 6:17PM

Well do you honestly believe that someone could run for the Presidency while being the Governor of a State far removed from the mainland? Surely you jest. The distance alone is too great and the flight times just too long.

Sarah is waiting, and waiting because the minute she jumps in, she becomes the punching bag for every liberal commentator, politican, think tank, and comedian. And, that's before the Republican machine throws its cold water. Remember how Rove and others disparaged both Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle? Quadruple that for Sarah.

Sarah has given several substantial speeches lately. The latest was on crony capitalism. While we can certainly fault Obama for throwing money at his cronies, the Rats do the same thing (maybe not at such obviously lousy businesses).

The country is in dire shape. Its hemmoraging money and RINO's are not the guys who will stop the bleeding. They are go along, to get alongs. We need an honest, clear thinking conservative. The person for the job is Sarah. She has a history of reform, even going after members of her own party for corruption. This is why the Rat Establishment doesn't like her. As Rush says, you always know who the Dems fear by who they spend time trying to destroy (notice, not defeat, but destroy).

rightasrain| 9.25.11 @ 6:34PM

Your point is well taken, Quin. Having to listen to Christie constantly spin his self-described unpreparedness would be torture. Plus, we would have to endure that torture for someone who isn't all that conservative or all that principled. During the NJ gubernatorial primary in 2009, Christie promised over and over again to lower the state income tax but never once presented so much as a bare bones plan. His opponent, the true conservative in the race, had a detailed flat tax plan that had a slightly lower rate than the flat tax in Pennsylvania, which was where many New Jerseyans were fleeing. Christie ran constant "scare the seniors" ads against this flat tax proposal. Of course, since the election, Christie has neither lowered taxes in NJ nor produced his long-awaited plan. But he has had the temerity to praise Pennsylvania's flat tax plan.

PCP Smoker| 9.25.11 @ 9:31PM

Similar to TAS writers who fall for the bs emanating from Speaker Boehner's office. Whoa, thats Quinn.

AVCurmudgeon| 9.25.11 @ 9:45PM

Christie is charismatic, but New Jersey to the core and not someone who will travel well. Perhaps in 4 to 8 years, but not now. I get why Ann Coulter is enamored of the guy: among other things he would be fearsome in a face-to-face with the Big O. But he has serious gaps and have no doubt Obama could easily exploit them. Right now the three who stand out are Cain, Gingrich and Paul. A Cain/Rubio ticket is increasingly attractive to me.

Kingofthenet| 9.25.11 @ 10:10PM

I predict just like a White Castle 'Crave' Case in front of the Governor, His competition for the nomination will not stand a chance.

mcr| 9.26.11 @ 6:21AM

Quin
First of all, conservatives are not trying to get Christie in the race, RINOs are.
Second of all, please use spell check.

JP| 9.26.11 @ 7:28AM

So, here we have a sitting president floundering; but, the opposition party is floundering even more. The problem with the GOP is simple; it cannot find a conservative who is a)actually conservative; b)not overly strident; c) not trying to overcome personal neurosis while on the campagin trail.

It is obvious that the conservative wing is unhappy with the current crop of political misfits. Mitt Romney may be the front runner by virture of his liberalism, money, and steadiness (he hasn't made any serious goof-ups, yet); but, he will lose come November 2012. It would take a cataclysmic event to unseat the Anointed One.

Govenor Christy has several problems (none of which concern his weight). The biggest being his politics. He is an East Coast Liberal, for one. And Quin is correct in pointing out the obvious: he is a neophyte govenor who has yet to prove himself. And I don't put much stock in gruffiness. So, he can growl. Big deal.

Teflon93| 9.26.11 @ 8:33AM

Christie would be to Romney's right and at least fight public sector unions, a useful fight which must be had soon. Christie is also better on healthcare than Romney, having withdrawn New Jersey from a socialized medicine compact.

From left to right, the GOP field as I see it:

Jon Hunstman, Mitt Romney, Gary Johnson, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann.

If Christie got in, he'd probably be between Johnson and Gingrich.

Either way, he'd be an improvement over Romney.

Unfortunately running the fat white guy against the skinny black guy won't win identity politics voters (who made up most independents last time around) and Christie propably wouldn't even carry his home state.

elmo| 9.26.11 @ 11:26AM

Christie would lose a number of states in the South. One is too many.

Mary Mayes| 9.26.11 @ 1:14PM

Yeah, he may have a future if he doesn't drop dead of a heart attack first. He's a ticking time bomb.

yisong| 10.26.11 @ 10:07PM

There are many types of bearings, each used for different purposes. These include slewing bearings, precision bearings,track roller bearings and roller, thrust bearings. http://www.1stbearing.com