Monday, August 25, 2008
|
|
GOP VEEP CHOICE: RECONSIDERING KAY
|
|
Posted by:
Michael Medved at
2:28 AM
|
|
The selection of Joe Biden as Barack Obama’s running mate changes the whole dynamic of the Veep choice now facing John McCain.
Sure, Biden brings credibility and experience and reassuring familiarity to the Democratic ticket, but he hardly adds sizzle or novelty. The Democrats feel that they’ve got enough pizzaz with their standard bearer, so it doesn’t hurt that they take a Vice Presidential contender with all the excitement of boiled Brussels sprouts.
I hope that this choice now gives John McCain reason to reconsider the safe, reassuring possibilities of Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty—apparently, the two leading contenders for the running mate slot for the GOP. Both Romney and Pawlenty are fine men, with special appeal in swing states (Michigan and Minnesota, respectively), but neither candidate would contribute an explosive infusion of energy or electricity.
In the same way that the Dems assumed they got enough novelty and excitement from the top of the ticket so they could go with experience and gravitas for the second spot, so the Republicans should recognize that they’ve got plenty of experience and gravitas with McCain so with his running mate they can go with a “breath of fresh air” candidate—someone new, unexpected, thrilling in some way, in order to shake up the electoral dynamic and undermine the big bounce Obama expects from Denver.
I would suggest – strongly – that the campaign reconsider the Senior Senator from Texas, the Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Okay, she’s not a dynamo of fiery charisma; in fact, as I’ve noted before, she’s a bland and sometimes boring speaker, and a pleasant if unprepossessing television presence. Nevertheless, she is a she--- and that fact in itself would allow McCain’s choice to upstage Obama’s.
Current polls show that only half of Hillary’s voters currently back The One; a full 20% already support McCain. The remaining 30% of one-time Clinton true believers are undecided or thinking of staying home, and the idea of a first female in national office would, no doubt, appeal to some of them—perhaps even many of them.
Most importantly, in contrast to Obama’s choice – which looks safe, cautious, timid and boring –the selection of a female candidate as Vice President would seem bold, daring, audacious….at the very time that “Hope” looks less audacious than tired. If Johnny Mac took a woman as his running mate, the lesson would be that the Old Guy still possessed his maverick instincts and the ability to shock the world and defy expectations. The press and the commentariat would love the story, and coming out of the dueling conventions of the next two weeks that’s no small matter.
Meanwhile, Senator Hutchison herself – despite her limitations as an orator – is a formidable public servant with the elements of a great tale to tell.
Most importantly, her conservative credentials are solid – and far more consistent than either Romney’s or Pawlenty’s. The American Conservative Union gives her a lifetime rating of 90.27, and a 2007 rating of 88—placing her among the more conservative Republicans in the Senate.
On abortion, she’s always called herself “Pro Life” and NARAL Pro-Choice America—the leading pro-abortion lobbying group – has given her ratings of mostly 0% (like McCain) and never higher than 20%.
She’s a former cheerleader for the University of Texas Longhorns (no mean distinction in a state famous for its beautiful cheerleaders) and went on to get her law degree from U of T. She worked for a while as a legal correspondent for a top Houston TV station before winning election to the legislature in 1972. During a break from politics, she became a bank executive and won conspicuous success as a business woman – the kind of private sector experience that Obama, Biden and McCain all lack. Her executive and administrative expertise includes an acclaimed term as Texas State Treasurer before her election to the Senate.
Her margins of victory in all her Senate races testify to her enormous vote-getting ability in her home state --- she won with 67% in the special election of 1993, then drew 61%, 65%, and even 62% in the notorious Democratic year of 2006. She’s an effective campaigner with a proven gift for connecting with every voting bloc in Texas. Unlike Geraldine Ferraro, there’s no problem here of a thin resume’: in addition to her private sector experience, Ms. Hutchison served three terms in the state legislature, a term as state Treasurer, worked two years as Vice Chair of the National Transportation Safety Board, and won landslide victories in four different U.S. Senate elections. She’s moved up steadily in the Senate leadership – currently ranked number three among GOP members of the “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.”
Her drawbacks and weaknesses? It’s true that she suffered a 1993 indictment for allegedly illegal use of state resources in one of her campaigns, but the charges came from the infamous partisan prosecutor Ronnie Earle and were subsequently dropped with no conviction or admission of guilt or wrong-doing.
More recently, her adoption of two small children in 2001 makes a great (and unusual) human interest story – and would help call attention to John and Cindy McCain’s own adoption of a physically challenged baby girl at the direct behest of Mother Theresa. (now the McCains’ beloved teenaged daughter Bridget). In any event, following a youthful divorce, Senator Hutchison has been happily married for thirty years to a former Republican legislator and gubernatorial candidate.
Senator Hutchison has also written a couple of books – about women in the Senate, and largely unknown but deeply influential heroines of history. These aren’t literary masterpieces by any means (I tried to read one of ‘em to interview the Senator about it on my radio show) but they’re capably put together, and highlight her ability to inspire young women and girls to great achievements.
When it comes to debating Joe Biden, she should do very well – and draw big ratings for only the second candidate’s debate in national history (after Geraldine Ferraro vs. George H.W. Bush in 1984) featuring a female contender. Senator Hutchison’s friendly understated style will provide a winning alternative to Biden’s logorrhea.
In any event, the ho-hum Democratic choice gives McCain the chance to steal some excitement away from the Obama ticket, and the easiest way to accomplish that purpose would be the unexpected selection of a ground-breaking candidate --- either a woman (Senator Hutchison is the one viable female choice) or a person of color (Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is by far the best choice there).
The Obama-Biden combination gives McCain and opportunity to do what he loves to do most in politics – confound expectations, shake things up, and stun the world. He can do so at the same time that he reassures and rallies his all-important conservative base.
Kay Bailey Hutchison may not count as the most exciting individual in American politics, but her selection in the current campaign context could be electrifying. A McCain-Hutchison team might sore into the lead right after the euphoric surrounding the Republican convention, and could fight effectively to hold that lead (and to maintain the euphoria) all the way to November.
|
|
I don’t know why conservatives believe it’s a good idea that the GOP should somehow mollify the Hillary women voters’ wounds with a female candidate. A pandering salve like that will look like a cheap political trick.
Plus why transfer their anger from Obama’s treament of sexism/dislike/dissing towards Hillary (and Bill) to a pro-life woman VP on the GOP side? And it would transfer.
Maybe they've never seen a Hillary pro-choice feminist argue with a pro-life conservative woman. It can get “The View” ugly. There is something visceral that happens when these two types of women disagree on this issue.
No it’s much better that the GOP stays out of this and let Hillary’s women stew and ponder over the sexism of Obama.
I think it's a bad idea and won't produce results.
|
|
|
With Linda Chavez, McCain could get the female vote and the Latino vote in one fell swoop. A pick like that could benefit the Republican Party for years to come. |
|
|
With respect to Sheryl, it's not a political trick if he picks a proven self-made woman executive with real conservative credentials. I think that Sen. McCain would sway many moderate former Hillary supporter with such a pick and satisfy his shaky conservative base at the same time. Gov. Palin may even be a better pick, given how strong the energy issue is right now. |
|
I think the best choice for a woman VP would be someone outside the political arena - Carly or Meg. Either one would bring a new dimension to the white house - someone who actually understands what it is like in the business world. I'm tired of pure politiciams like Obama or Biden who have never worked a day in their life.
However, I still think Mitt would be the best choice. He has both business and political experience. |
|
|
|
What? We don't have a black female mormon with an evangalcial husband to run?
I like KBH. She's said she's not interested. not only that... FOUR senators running? Who is in the chambers to vote anymore? They would all be running for office.
Solid and only choice, Michael. Romney. |
|
I just don't think tricky guessing pics work, they are just compromising.
He has never been divorced. We love him in the west.
MICHAEL STEELE would be way better than any of the women whose names are being thrown around. |
|
I have done extensive research on Sarah Palin -- Governor of Alaska, and conclude that once the base gets to know her (which could only take about 2 weeks if they're paying attention), they'll LOOOOOVE her. She's young -- 44 I think, she's VERY pro-life -- 5 children- the youngest with downs-syndrome, she's beautiful -- I know - that may be shallow, but beautiful women (when they're nice people)are women that other women want to BE and men lust after, she's a HUNTER -- gun lovers would LOVE her, she's a Christian conservative -- and proud of it, she's a STAUNCH advocate of drilling in ANWR, and would be a HUGE force in getting John McCain in line on this subject.
In short, Sarah Palin would be the BEST choice. Redstate.com had a great, comprehensive article on this on Sunday morning, but I can't find it now. That article commented on how Mitt Romney would be a good choice (my original choice for Pres.), but comparing Mrs. Palin's qualities to Romney -- I see, at this time, that Sarah Palin would be a HOME RUN -- AND WOULD MAKE THIS MCCAIN VICTORY A SURPRISE BLOW-OUT FOR THE R'S.
Mom in Wisconsin |
|
disagreed with choosing KBH. I like her and she is a pretty solid conservative. If I were her, though, I wouldn't touch this election with a ten foot pole.
Obama doesn't like sharing the spotlight with anyone other than perhaps his wife, and then, not too much. His choice of Biden, who was also running against him speaks loudly about his opinion of Hillary who according to some actually won the popular vote during the primaries. Choosing Hillary as VEEP should have been a no-brainer. I think Barry thinks his own charisma is all he needs and doesn't want the first woman candidate for POTUS to upstage the first Black candidate in any way.
Back to Mac, I voted for Romney in the primaries even though Mac already had the nomination sewed up, but he was not my first choice and I think choosing Romney will look just about like Biden does.
I just hope that Mac stays on message and doesn't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. An Obama presidency will be the beginning of the end of America as we know it. |
|
not a lot of buzz for her being Veep. Personally I would have no problem with Romney or Pawlenty, prefering Romney.
Romney does have relatively high negatives. Some of it mistrust of his flip flopping which was made a big deal in the primaries. A few who are anti Mormon bigots. Fortunately the later are small and the larger amount might be persuaded by an emphasis on Romney assisting Team McCain on economic issues. Plus Romney helps in Nevada, Michigan and New Hampshire.
Pawlenty is safer in a way (less negatives), but cannot emphasize the economy the way Romney can. He is lesser known.
Kay has the advantage being a woman. But would it come off as pandering if she cannot hold her own (a token candidate)? Palin is young and dynamic. |
|
I originally voted for Mitt Romney in the primaries (I'm from Michigan) but since he did so poorly in the primaries, I think it would be a mistake for McCain to choose him. I would have liked to see him pick someone like J.C. Watts, but now KBH or Palin would absolutely be a winning combination. One of my concerns about Mitt as VP is that it reinforces the stereotype of the Republican Party as rich, white men and anti-woman (which is how the Dems sell their pro-choice agenda: pro-choice = pro-woman, pro-life = anti-woman.)
Plus, as much as I liked Romney, he and McCain are alike in deviating from conservative principles and we've already seen a lot of flipping on McCain's part with regard to what he says and what he does. I plan to hold my nose and vote for McCain this year. Selecting a good black candidate or female would be a winning combination and good for the party. Plus, I do believe it would help pull disenchanted Hillary supporters over to our side. I know a lot of women who only supported Hillary because she was a woman. They would absolutely cross over. They're mad at Obama, and they want to make a stand for women at the top. |
|
I keep talking about the lady from Alaska. I agree with rightminded mom. She brings a lot to the ticket. This would really put Hillary backers into a quandray and give the fence sitters justification for voting Republican. However, I am afraid Big Mac is going to go for the traditional choice. Very, very important decision. The election is NOW Big Mac's to lose. |
|
|
when you can have pallin or kay bailey? both bring lots more to the ticket than mitt with out mitts flip flop negatives . biden will look like an idiot in the debates if he tries to badger either one .remember rick whats his name that crossed the line with hillary,either pallin or hutchinson could make this election a slam dunk for mcain |
|
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/25/the-case-for-romney/
Interesting poll analysis. Worth a visit to Hot Air to look at. |
|
Kay Bailey Hutchinson??? Because we're SO worried about that liberal hive that is Texas? Are you serious man? A boring, long term senator - just like Joe Biden? This is your great idea?
Seriously Mike - admit that you hate Romney. You've pretty much emerged as the, "Anyone But Romney" advocate. Tooting your horn for KBH is so nutty it just clarifies your disdain for Mitt.
Romney locks up Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado. Probably Michigan as well. That ALONE should cement his pick. But he also brings formidable screen presence both on TV and at the debates. Do you really think KBH can look like she knows anything next to Loquiatious Joe in a debate? Seriously? Romney won every single debate in the primaries.
AND he brings in cash from the business sector, and unparalleled business acumen.
So let's call it like it is: You're so uncormfortable with his faith, that you can't stomach his nomination DESPITE ALL THAT.
Have a little faith in evangelicals Mike - they might not be as big of bigots as you assume them to be. |
|
Yes, I concur Michael. After hearing Obama's and Biden's Springfield speeches, it is clear that the Democrat's campaign is steering directly toward a populist, economic theme. McCain will be painted as an out of touch 7-home owner, and Romney, a wealthy billionaire (almost) who "looks like the guy who just laid you off."
Middle America and the rust belt states will not respond favorably to Romney. McCain has to change course, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson would be a solid, winning choice. |
|
kay is pro illegal immigration...a lot of baggage also from lotto dealings in texas... maybe he should choose michelle obama!!!! |
|
KBH is as boring as can be and has NO qualifications for Veep. She is also a closet liberal.
Romney is the best choice: he is vetted and brings a great business sense to the table. |
|
At this point, McCain could run with Richard Nixon's corpse and still win. Why can't the GOP electorate get what it wants, which is to have Romney?! Why should McCain pick KBH who has not campaigned for the presidency - unlike Romney? Romney immediately put aside his ego and has tirelessly supported McCain. Whoever is the VP is the heir apparent the next time around for the presidency. Why hand it to KBH? The GOP does not need to "change" to fit the insipid Democratic Party's gimick (i.e. the stupid idea that women vote for women). I am a woman and a politician's gender is a non-starter. BTW, all the liberals at work want Clinton not for Hillary but because they saw it as a backdoor to getting Bill back. If the GOP thinks that it has to use such gimicks then why not point out how we are running with the first MORMON because we are not religiously prejudiced?!
As a "typical" WASP, I see what I prayed for happening - that the Dems would eat their own and take out Clinton, that Obama runs with an idiot like Biden (makes no political sense), and that McCain (might) come around to realizing that his GOP electorate wants a CONSERVATIVE who knows business because he EARNED his wealth and it wants to see this country swing in the conservative direction that benefits everyone.
|
|
all of the negatives that come along with a Romney. |
|
|
|
supporter whose primary goal is to damage the conservative image. That is why he portrays conservatives as bigots. He hopes to persuade non-conservatives that all conservatives are racial and ethnic bigots. Of course, no one would want to be a conservative if all conservatives are bigots. I hope this helps to make VP's tactics and objectives clear to all. |
|
Her presence on the ticket firms up his credibility on oil drilling and his overall commitment to achieve energy independence. She draws a lot of votes from former Hillary Clinton supporters who want to see the first woman VP and are not happy that Obama has selected a white guy with foreign policy credentials to be his VP running mate. Palin’s relative youth and conservative views can win back many of the conservatives who had left the GOP reservation during the primaries. She could run with Jindall when McCain ends his first and only term in 2012. http://mymnmanifesto.blogtownhall.com/2008/07/22/gop_first_ woman__bi-racial_vp__president.thtml |
|
WINNERS STILL: Jindal, Thune, Petraeus, Huckabee, and Hutchinson ok too.
TOO LIBERAL - OFF THE TICKET: Ridge; Romney (vacillator-in-chief); Arlen Specter (a lot like Romney); Lieberman |
|
Sorry Mike, I usually agree with you on most issues, but this one, I have to disagree on. KBH is boring, a Senator, and has been in Washington for 20+ years.
Personally, I don't believe anyone should run for President if they don't have any Executive experience, that's one of the primary reasons that I supported Romney.
Romney, irregardless of politics, was the best qualified candidate running for President, hands down. He only lost in the Primaries because of the open GOP primary system. Many a Democrat and Independant voted for McCain. Aside from that, Romney and Huckaby split the more Conservative voters.
McCain definitely needs to pick Romney if he wants to win. I really can't think of any other option. Save Palin and Jindal for 2016.
As an aside, if the Bush name weren't so toxic right now ( thank you MSM ), then Jeb Bush would be high up there . . . though I still think Romney has more going for him.
ab |
|
|
mitts dannites ,of course they 'll be slandering as they always do any potential choice but the vacillator in chief, little mitty romney. |
|
Check out how Sarah Palin fields questions on utube - she is EXACTLY what the republican party needs. She how she handles the question on being pregnant while being a governor. She's smart, moral, beautiful, and she's got exactly what Hutchison is missing - as Mr. Medved pointed out.
And if you want lower oil prices - she's the chick that'll make it happen.
|
|
|
I agree on everyone else you listed, but he will not accept the post, so you should drop his name. |
|
First of all, I totally don't get the fascination with Plastic Man!
But of course Doug's "Keen Observation" is more to the point without being perjorative.
The Dems could sink a McCain-Romney ticket like the proverbial stone and I hate to think what our country will look like after 4 years of Obama w/a Dem. congress!!
McCain-Palin '08!! |
|
|
All I can say is, DITTO CARLOS! |
|
|
I've listened to her speak on a number of occassions. She is very articulate, very poised, and she exudes common sense and good will. She is able to firmly disagree without being disagreeable -- much like Ronald Reagan. |
|
Bobby Jindal is awesome, but has been Gov. of LA for a shorter duration than Palin has been of AK.
Also, he recently ran into trouble for not being able to fight his Dem. congress for a tax hike they were planting into a bill for their salaries. Not that that's a deal-breaker, just bad timing. He needs more seasoning and LA needs him more than DC!! |
|
|
I'm liking this idea of Palin-Jindall in 2012!! |
|
Palin needs to be older, have more time and be a mom to her kids. She has already said no. I would not respect one bit, if she put her family over having the veep slot - which she'll help Mac lose. I can't vote for someone who's faith preaches family first, then does exactly the opposite. Mrs. Palin needs to put her family first. There are others that can and will run the country. Her services are not required at this time.
I'd be more inclined to take a second look when her children are older, and her downs baby is settled into a set pattern. (usually about 10).
|
|
Please come to Denver in August. Nutroots will drive Fox into the mountains so far that it can not be found. And throw "I love you" posts on Daily Kos And then smoke weed all at night till they come back around. Please come to Denver. Hillary said, "No. Dems, would you come home to me?"
And Hillary said, "Hey, Democrats, Why don´t you settle down? Obama is just a silly clown. There aint no gold and There aint nobody like me. Hillary's even better than the Goracle from Tennessee.
|
|
Michael thanks for your thoughts on Kay. I think Kay adds no excitement to the ticket other than being a woman. As you pointed out, she has some baggage along with her positive assets. Kay is also another Senator.
I think McCain has an opportunity to be more creative by choosing Palin who appeals to woman and has executive experience, Jindal brings an impressive resume and the excitement factor, Pawlenty is fresh and has executive experience. All three have impressive backgrounds, and the more that is revealed about their accomplishments, I think the American people will quickly become interested to learn more about them.
Any of these three picks, I believe would offer a wow factor as compared to KBH or Romney. |
|
|
...some executive experience...somewhere...on some ticket? |
|
Report back to us about the Palin option. Palin's human life, NRA, and general conservative credentials seem solid. What religion is she (we need good soil)?
We do not want a vacillator-in-chief, Romney. Michael, please write or talk this one up if it's a real option. I'm interested in Palin if this is a genuine possibility.
Have I mentioned that I don't much care for Romney? |
|
What's happening with J. C. Watts?
I've seen, over the years, McCain, Dole, Arlen Spector and Olympia Snow block any real progress in the Senate (Contract With America). How will a McCain presidency be any different (except worse?)
Just curious what's happening with J. C. Watts. |
|
Romney. Too much bad blood between him and McCain during the primary. Choosing Romney would nullify the McCain campaign's first jab at Obama's choice and open the door to tit-for-tat ridicule. Romney offers more negative than positive charge for a number of reasons. (And no, I DO NOT mean his religion)
Palin is my choice. Rightmindedmom has laid it out as well as I could so I won't reiterate, but I'd urge everyone to visit http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/ to get the scoop. |
|
|
If you really want to shake things up, how about Michael Steele? |
|
I disagree with your comment about too much bad blood between McCain and Romney. Romney has been successful fund raising for McCain since he dropped out so I don't see much evidence that they can't work together. Whether or not Romney is the VP choice, he can be valuable as a fund raiser for the Republican party.
However, since McCain is already using negative statments Biden made about Obama in the primaries, I wonder what kind of ads the dems would run if he picks Romney? |
|
|
|
Just my humble opinion.... Here is a list of touted VP choices, but not in any order:
1. McCain / Romney 2008 = OK, Great on economy, good on other conservative issues, seen by some as a flip/flopper on issues like Abortion, some may not like his Mormon faith, although thats a small minority.
2. McCain / Huckabee 2008 = non-starter, great with evangelicals & Christians, has executive experience, very bad tax record as governor, & a gift to the Dems.
3. McCain / Thompson 2008 = Absolutely the BEST for America & Federalism, awesome on national security & foreign policy, but WON'T happen because Fred is not interested in a VP slot.
4. McCain / Rice 2008 = Strong choice, GREAT foriegn policy experience, could help with women vote & minority vote, but may turn "Anti-Bushies" away.
5. McCain / Michael Steele 2008 = Good ticket, some executive experience, might do well with minority voters.
6. McCain / Palin 2008 = Good ticket,Very popular with executive experience, could help with women vote....
7. McCain / Hunter 2008 = Good pick, Good conservative, maybe could help with California, Great on homeland Security, Border Security, & military,may be percieved too "hawkish" of a ticket for some.
8. McCain /Lieberman 2008 = BAD PICK, Great on National Security & War on Terror, has been liberal on most social & economical issues though, While exceptable to some Democrats & Independents, could likely cause a MAJOR rift with true Conservatives & Republicans.
9. McCain /Powell 2008 =Interesting ticket, VAST foreign policy, security & military experience plus apeal to minority voters, but is pro-abortion and could kill conservative votes.
What's your thoughts of this list of McCain VPs ?
|
|
|
|
"What's your thoughts of this list of McCain VPs ?"
-- 7 out of the 9 matchups on your list have ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER of happening. Zero. Romney and Palin are the only ones with a chance, and (as someone else already noted) Palin has already said that she doesn't want to be chosen. You didn't even list Pawlenty, even though the INFORMED opinion is that it is down to either him or Romney. Hutchison is a more likely pick than ANY of your also-rans, except maybe Thompson. Seems mostly like kind of a waste of typing. |
|
Michael Steele LOST his last election: NO CHANCE Condi Rice wouldn't say 'yes' even if they threatened to send her out hunting with Cheney: 1000% negative chance Huckabe TOOK HIMSELF OUT OF THE RUNNING with that 'Obama assasination threat' "joke" at the NRA: fill in the blank _________ Colin Powell wouldn't say 'yes' even if WWIII was starting: NO CHANCE Joe Lieberman has never, repeat NEVER, been in the running; did Zell Miller make the ticket? NO CHANCE J.C. Watts left politics to spend more time with his family; it helps to be IN office when running for a higher office: NO CHANCE Linda Chavez has never held elective office AND has a scandal on her record: NO CHANCE Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman are potential Executive Branch appointments, NOT veep candidates: NOT EVEN IF ROMNEY'S HAIR FALLS OUT |
|
Republicans never get brownie points from the Left for following democrat prescriptions for 'fairness'. Libs don't like or acknowledge Condi and they don't like Clarence Thomas. They don't even acknowledge when any minority is elevated in the administration. Race and gender promotions only count if they're libs.
Why would we want to do something to manipulate a population when we can't predict how it will be received. Maybe Hillary's women would hate KBH. Not to mention you might lose a percentage of the white male vote if you pick a woman, especially if you're just doing it as a vote strategy. If there was a woman who really wanted the spot of VP we would've known by now. Getting a woman who's ambivalent might undo your attempt to gain votes by losing white males.
Pick the best candidate for the times. Pick the one the media is afraid of. Pick Romney. |
|
|
|
If McCain has so listened to evangelicals that he wouldn't dare pick a pro-choice running mate, then WHY IS WILLIAM KRISTOL STILL SHILLING FOR LIEBERMAN FOR VP, pointing out all his advantages and explaining why he wouldn't be bad at all?
Because he knows that McCain intends to pick him. He is just trying to soften the audience. They know that you evangelicals talk a loud game, but in the final analysis, they will have you over the end of a barrel and you will bend like a common prostitute.
And Medved, way to support affirmative action by suggesting McCain should pick a VP based on biological characteristics for political expediency. I am sure you have never had or ever will have anything negative to say about affirmative action in the future. |
|
If McCain picks a woman...he should pick Palin. A woman with a personality.
If he wants fresh and young and not woman...he should pick Jindal.
If he wants a solid and dynamic “can be president” on day one...he should pick Romney.
Kay is a great person...but there are better “fresh” choices and we don’t need dull competence.
Romney brings electoral votes, money for RNC, very good speaking and debate ability and immense executive experience and financial knowledge.
McCain - Romney is a tough ticket to beat. |
|
Too many Senators already.
Pick Sarah Palin the governor.
Governors work with BOTH sides of the aisle (and an ENTIRE state's constituency) to get things done.
Sarah for VEEP! |
|
|
For the millionth time, I do not support ANY amnesty candidate R or D. McCain and Obama have no intention of enforcing the laws of this country. I don't vote for anyone unwilling to uphold the oath of office. |
|
|
|
|
McCain is now in a position to lose big. McCain would get more votes if he picks Ted Stevens and makes him appear in drag. Kay Hutchinson has a lot of baggage which will be dragged out. Another senator is insane. |
|
MEDVED: you helped us get stuck with McCain
PLEASE: do NOT HELP this nation ELECT king obama
Where did you come up with this brainless suggestion:
PALIN ::: YES YES YES
HOWEVER: the only one who can put BIDEN in his place is ROMNEY: |
|
TO DO:::
SENATOR MCCAIN; should show up in ANWR, wave the FLAG explain the realities of the energy crisis
then announce his VEEP |
|
Hutchison? nah. Thompson is too old on a ticket with McCain. FYI< Condi has said unequivocally NO to elected office. Leave her alone.
Jindal would be a huge mistake, only because he's too young and too inexperienced, so that would neutralize one of the strong arguments you have against obama. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Let the boy grow up a bit before you elevate him. Y'all are actin' like democrats.
If you want a black man, select a MAN, a grownup. I think Y'all can forget JC and Colin--they've presumably turned liberal, and haven't they both said they're voting for Obama cuz he's black? I'll apologize in a heartbeat if I've misspoken about that, but I recall reading it. Personally I think Michael Steele would be a really good choice, and I'd like to see the attack dog Biden try to debate him. Romney's a good pick too.
|
|
Consideration of Hutchinson is neccessary whether McCain chooses her or not... the focus is who will be the next Vice President over who will make a better footnote in history. Everyone ought to be considered.
There are some interesting challenges and opportunities in selecting the next vp. And I agree with the last post that Michael Steele would be an excellent choice. But in making a choice McCain needs to take the position of leadeship rather than the appearance of making a reactionary one. In fact, as a Republican I am quite proud of the fact that there is African American leading a ticket for the presidency.... but picking Steele would be following Obamas lead which would give him the advantage this election though he certainly has openned the oportunity for such a choice in the future for either ticket. (Something Republicans ought to do in the future)
|
|
Now that we know Biden is the Dems veep... we have the vantage of being able to gage his strengths and weaknesses how he helps and hurts Obama, so our choice needs to be the perfect compliment to McCain without damaging the advantages built in with the Biden pick.
Biden has somewhat of a domineering personality that actually draws out some weakness in Obama. Just today I was thinking of pulling Old Fred off the bench. He would be reassuring to the base yet slow and methodical making McCain seem even more energized as an old guy... but he also has a commanding presence about him that would make a Fred v. Biden debate extremely interesting... fire vs. fire.
But then there is the Hutchinson option. In contrast with Fred, she would actually be able to undercut Bidens 'attack' strength in a debate with a more sensible even handed approach of answering and responding to questions causing him to look far too aggressive and therefore unattractive to voters. Water vs. Fire. This is why I assumed Obama was so subdued during his debates with Clinton because he could not afford to come across as condenscending. Her choice could even compliment McCain's strength (politically) on the security issue weakening the 'neocon' 'warmongering' accusations, bringing a balance there. She is worth considering... definately has more of a Margaret Thatcher presence about her especially compared to Clinton, which most Americans appropriately use as a model of a strong woman leader. Bt then again I like Steele too. |
|
Hutchison's pro-Life bonafides are a little tarnished---she would be excoriated by the press. She has identified herself as pro-choice too many times in the past. Her Texas colleague in the Senate---John Cornyn---now there's a thought.
But I like Sarah Palin or Michael Steele. |
|
no, let's let Mitt Romney go ahead and win a primary.
Romney would be a disaster for McCain's ticket.
His record in Mass. is abhorent to many conservatives.
Not less importantly, his supporters never have the accusing cry of of "bigotry!" far from their lips. The merciless smashing of Christians, Evangelical and otherwise, by his enthusiasts has been, and would be, extremely negative for the Republican base. The body politic would be attacking itself in a mortal fever.
And why would McCain choose a running mate who is a member of an institution which only renounced racial segregation against blacks 3 decades ago? Is that McCain's response to the first black candidate? That is political suicide! Racism would be front and center--not from the forgiving right, but from the left. In short, we would have two parties attacking Christians and racial bitterness spiraling out of control.
John McCain is a big boy, and he did not get the nomination with help from Rush and Sean and Romniacs. They were set on "slice & dice" against him, and he got it anyway. So I would say McCain should show leadership and dispatch in his choice, confirming his fiscal and social conservatism with anyone he d*rn well chooses.
|
|
McCAIN & ROMNEY: This is the team - and the only one on either side of the aisle -with the expertise and experience to hit on all cylinders: National Security, Economy, Health Care, Governance, and Family Values. Together, they bring it all to the table. Both are fully vetted, Romney's age is just right -not too young or too old to match McCain, he is seriously smart -- the only candidate recognized with global economy credentials in the entire race, and he is a believable candidate for the position a heartbeat away from the Presidency. They are alike, yet different; they both convey competence and leadership; and, yes, Romney helps a McCain presidency “look” better.
Finally, Romney can deliver Michigan and strengthens McCain in other key western states. As for the anti-Mormon Evangelicals who still refuse to believe Mormons are Christians, surveys showed that by the end of the primary season, Romney was carrying as many Evangelical votes as Huckabee. The majority of Evangelicals are driven by critical core values that will send them to the polls, if only to ensure that the next two Supreme Court Justices are not rabid pro-abortionists. Evangelicals understand that there's a lot at stake that will matter long after the next President or Vice President have come and gone.
McCain's major management experience in the military joined with Romney's economic and executive credentials makes a compelling team and begs the key question: What has Obama or Biden ever done to merit voters' confidence in their grasp of global economic issues?
America is starting to feel desperate for leaders who can rebuild this nation’s economic stability; a President who made his money writing books just doesn’t instill confidence in me. I want the guy who turned Staples into a global giant and managed to relight the torch of a dying Olympics. Give us our future. Give us McCain/Romney.
|
|
Michael Medved's thoughts here are brilliant! I love Sarah Palin and Michael Steele too! John Thune would be awesome too!
McCain has the most 'inside' information on the candidates and what they're thinking - so I trust he'll make the wise decision, but there are lots of great candidates to choose from!
|
|
Most important, John McCain should pick the candidate who's the most competent, complimentary to him, and FIRED UP to whup the other ticket!!!
Only McCain can know for sure which candidate's got the energy and the excitement to go put the whuppin on the other ticket, by actually talking to the candidates and picking the one who impresses.
All this 'strategerie' and sociological manipulation is nice and everything - but voters will quickly recognize who's the MOST FIRED UP to spank the other ticket - which is what's most important!!!! |
|
John McCain's a giant on his own - he'll win this election without the help of some vaunted VP. He could well pick someone who no one expects, like President Bush picking Dick Cheney - and I think it would be the wise route.
Throw everyone off with the unconvential pick, then roll on his epic story and life, which is what he'll win the election on, regardless of who else is on the ticket.
It would just be fun to surprise everyone with the unpredictable pick out of nowhere, then go on to the inevitable election victory. |
|
|
Not sure what your yakking about. We (LDS faction of the Christian right) are NOT the ones crying Cultist! Abortionist! Non-Christian! etc. Yes, when that is done, it is Religious bigtory. |
|
|
Funny how that happens. When the balance and weight of the world could possibly be on your shoulders - she did the right thing and said no. Not me. We need strenght on this ticket, not stats. Steel would be fine. But maybe not this time. Maybe we need a strong personality. Face it. We need Romney. |
|
|
Michael, you will make Virginia Patriot's head explode. |
|
thinks Mitt is a bad idea, that is a sure thing he is an excellent choice!
Go Romney.
Queenmum8 is right.
Evangelicals and Mormons get along just fine! |
|
I had posted a list of 9 potential McCain VP choices with a brief critique from my humble personal point of view and asked for thoughts...
Many have said that a governor VP pick, particularly a "southern governor" would help McCain...
Here is another to be added to the list of 9 already listed here before:
10. McCain/Bob Riley = (current Republican Governor of the state of Alabama:
Quote: http://www.ontheissues.org
For his leadership in addressing the state’s fiscal crisis, Governor Riley was named the “Public Official of the Year” by Governing magazine in 2003, and Time magazine hailed him for being one of the nation’s “most courageous politicians.”
Riley has claimed credit for helping to spur economic development in Alabama. Riley points to the opening of an aeronautics engineering facility in Mobile by EADS, the parent company of Airbus, which may ripen into an aircraft assembly plant if EADS secures future contracts.
Under Riley's administration, unemployment in Alabama fell from 5.3% in January, 2003 when Riley took office to 3.3% in March, 2006. This rate was the lowest ever recorded since statistics began being tracked in 1976 and was among the nations lowest. In April 2007 the unemployment rate once again reached 3.3 percent.
end quote...
Thoughts ?
|
|
|
From what you posted, Governor Riley sounds like a solid guy. I think, however, that most of America would have a similar reaction to mine when I first read just the title of your post - "Who's Bob Riley?" |
|
|
Linda Chavez fits right in, another cheap labor importer. Whoever McCain picks will have to be an amnesty supporter. Anyone who supports retaining the sovereignty of this country and the rule of law will not be considered. |
|
another to think about & add to this list:
11. McCain / Haley Barbour 2008 = (current Governor of Mississippi:
Quote: "Barbour has been often considered as a potential vice presidential running mate.
"On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina slammed into Mississippi's coast, killing 231 people, devastating the state's $2.7 billion-a-year casino industry leaving tens of thousands homeless. Barbour's response was a concerted effort at evacuation, tough-minded talk on looters & an unwillingness to blame federal government. His response was compared, favorably, to Rudy Giuliani in the wake 9-11-01 attacks.
"Barbour credited the countless government workers who helped southern Mississippi cope with the hurricane." But Barbour was praised by the citizens as a strong leader who can communicate calm to the public & provide “a central decision-making point. Barbour says, “The goal is to build the coast back like it can be, rather than simply like it was.”
Barbour has been praised for his lobbying skills in winning over a legislature dominated by Democrats. He has called several special legislative sessions to force an issue.
When Barbour took office, Mississippi had a $709 million deficit for 2004 fiscal year. With bipartisan support, & without raising taxes, Barbour implemented a plan to cut the budget deficit in half. This continued in the state budget for 2006 fiscal year.
Building on a 2002 tort reform bill, Barbour introduced a new tort reform measure thats described as the strictest in the nation. Barbour then embarked on a "tort tour" to encourage other to follow Mississippi’s lead.
Under Barbour's leadership, Mississippi has enacted the most restrictive anti-abortion laws including ban (with exceptions of where the woman's life is threatened or raped) in event the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.
end quote. THOUGHTS ?
|
|
Basically, human beings are categorized as either "hedgehogs" or "foxes". Hedgehogs' lives are embodiment of a single, central vision of reality according to which they "feel", breathe, experience and think - "system addicts", in short. Examples include Plato, Dante, Proust and Nietzsche. Foxes live centrifugal than centripetal lives, pursuing many divergent ends and, generally, possess a sense of reality that prevents them from formulating a definite grand system of "everything", simply because they "know" that life is too complex to be squeezed into any Procrustean unitary scheme. Montaigne, Balzac, Goethe and Shakespeare are, in various degrees, foxes. http://www.kheper.net/topics/typology/Fox_and_Hedgehog.htm l
It is not a bad thing to be a hedgehog VP, embrace it. As for calling me Joe of many names and places, that is fine too. I am often in many places using different computers. Just don't pretend to be me and put words in my mouth.
|
|
As one who posts using many names and places you know that once a neame has been used, it is unavailable to anyone else. You are the only person who can post under that name, so whatever shows up under any of your various aliases is you, playing your stupid games.
I am proudly a one issue poster, that was my intent. If we repeat the mistake of amnesty, we will lose our country. McCain is stuck on stupid. Or more likely, in the pocket of the cheap labor express. |
|
Here is another governor you can add to the list:
12. McCain/Pawlenty 2008 = (current Governor of Minnesota:
Quote:
Pawlenty was elected on a platform of balancing the state's budget without raising taxes.
During his first year as governor, Pawlenty balanced a deficit of $4.3 billion without raising taxes. On November 30, 2005, a $701 million projected surplus for the 2006–7 biennium was announced, the first budget surplus for the Minnesota state government since 2001.
Pawlenty signed into law in May 2005 a bill that will raise the minimum mandated mixture to 20% in 2013. Pawlenty has also lobbied the Governors' Ethanol Coalition to mandate higher ethanol use nationwide.
Early in 2006, after issuing a study that estimated the cost of illegal immigration to the state as approximately $188 million, Pawlenty announced a program for reforming the way the state deals with persons who are in the United States without permission from the federal government. Pawlenty noted the economic benefit does not justify the illegal behavior. By mid-year he sent Minnesota National Guardsmen to the U.S.-Mexico border at the request of the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Pawlenty's first term coincided with the deployment of National Guardsmen from numerous states, connected with the War on Terror and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pawlenty made trips to Bosnia (2003), Kosovo (2004) and (2008), Poland, Iraq and the Czech Republic visiting Minnesota troops.
end quote:
THOUGHTS ?
|
|
QM8: 'Palin needs to be older, have more time and be a mom to her kids. She has already said no. I would not respect one bit, if she put her family over having the veep slot - which she'll help Mac lose. I can't vote for someone who's faith preaches family first, then does exactly the opposite. Mrs. Palin needs to put her family first. There are others that can and will run the country. Her services are not required at this time.
I'd be more inclined to take a second look when her children are older, and her downs baby is settled into a set pattern. (usually about 10).'
ME: Well said.
The only part I disagree with is not voting for McCain because of Palin's presence. Her accepting the position would diminish her in my eyes. It would say she is a craven politician more than an admirable person. (But, electing Obama is not the way to scold her, imo.)
Being a mother is much much greater calling than VP, Gov. or even POTUS. She will have other chances for other offices in the future.
If she finishes this term, and wins reelection that will only increase her political capital. She need not sieze this moment. Even if future POTUS candidates don't pick her she will likely be a U.S. Senator one day (and/or probably a cabinet officer). |
|
Virginia Patriot writes: 'McCain is stuck on stupid. Or more likely, in the pocket of the cheap labor express.'
ME: Possibly. But, it is also possible to be interested in an issue for more than one reason. For example, I eat nuts regularly (roasted almonds, peanuts, pistachios) BOTH because they taste good, AND because they are healthy for me.
The GOP has done some study of longterm demographics and they have discovered that they can't survive as an all lilly-white party. Can't. It's impossible; (too many white liberals).
There are two types of identity politics. There is the obvious, vote for me cause I'm a woman, black, whatever. But, the other side is vote for me cause I'm opposing an undesirable identity.
Because of suspicions from past experiences blacks are leery of the GOP. Why shouldn't hispanics (primarily Mexicans) be suspicious that there is racial motivation in the anti_immigrant movement? |
|
frossca writes: 'Could we please have... ...some executive experience...somewhere...on some ticket?'
ME: As this MM post pointed out, KBH has executive experience. This advice is roughly like picking Liddy Dole.
In fact, if Mac is considering KBH he should be considering Elizabeth Dole.
Dole has more executive experience than any three possible choices and she is better public speaker than KBH. (But, she's not known as especially conservative.)
Heck, if Mac wants to spice it up with some identity politics why not go for Elaine Chao?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elaine_Chao
That way he gets executive experience and identity politics galore. Plus, she's youngish. |
|
"The GOP has done some study of longterm demographics and they have discovered that they can't survive as an all lilly-white party. Can't. It's impossible; (too many white liberals)."
So maybe the GOP should make an effort to appeal to non-white LEGAL citizens! Are you saying that the GOP should embrace gangster rap values to appeal to blacks too? The reason the GOP is so white is because it is exclusively a top-down party beholden completely to special interests. The Dems are entrenched in local politics which is why they are more diverse but chaotic. Republicans need to get out of their exclusive country clubs (and not just the Senate) more often. That won't happen so how about trying what works: seal the border! |
|
|
That is rich. Here you spreading your incoherent lies under who knows how many obnoxious names and after accusing me of posting under one of your names yesterday, today you accuse Virginia Pat of the same. You are either a group of trolls who can't keep their act together or a truly strange and deranged person who is losing track of his postings. Why don't you just make things easy: use Joe and say something interesting and/or constructive for a change. |
|
Do you need a nap time Phil. You seem so upset. These temper tantrums really are too much.
I hope you did not post under my name. I will accept your word on it. I note that Virginia Patriot kept quiet about it, which is why I asked.
But you can keep hoping Barack Obama wins. Because you support victory by defeat. Winning by losing. Hence the reason you are called Defeatocons. Your tantrums did not work in the primaries so now you are trying the same thing in the general. But since you want me to say something interesting and/or constructive for a change--how about you stop being in the bag for Obama. Real conservatives do not help elect Barack Obama. |
|
PasPhl: 'The reason the GOP is so white is because it is exclusively a top-down party beholden completely to special interests. The Dems are entrenched in local politics which is why they are more diverse but chaotic.'
ME: Excellant analysis! I concur.
Romney is terribly wrong for this role. Huckabee is the best the GOP has had in years in this regard (maybe since Lincoln). If you don't like Huck, do you see anybody with the skills and ideas to do what you suggest?
|
|
|
Now I see where you are coming from. You are a Huckabot. That's all anyone needs to know. Billy Sunday politics. Yeah, that's the ticket. |
|
Phil, on TH, only advocates two things. First, defeat JSM. Second, destroy the GOP.
If you want to engage him, recognize that these are the only two objectives he has and he is unwilling to discuss either reasonably. His typical post to anyone who disagrees with him is to call them names. Just as he did to you in his last post. |
|
But your devisive backslap to Pro says a lot. You want to Balkanize the GOP. Unfortunately (or fortunately if you want to win) you get candidates who can articulate a position and assemble a group of people to win. Reagan had to do it. McCain has to do it. I am not suggesting McCain is Reagan, but he is a darn sight better than Barack Obama (or any of the Dems). Why you are so eager to go down the road of Losertarianism is beyond me.
And yes I understand your reform argument. But isn't that just a form of Billy Sunday secularism on your part too? Let's get gripped by the spirit of conservative reform. Maybe Virginia Patriot can toss some snakes too and rail about the threat of the Mexican immigrant. |
|
You are a lunatic. How much does the McCain campaign pay you? Why don't you post a list of exactly how many names you post under? Is Pro one of your many names? This entire incident has given me several ideas about how to deal with idiots like you. Don't tempt me. I have many friends here.
And what's with the name-dropping of philosophers like Neitsche? You're coming off like Professor Erwin Corey. |
|
Joe, read your post [I wrote it, but okay I have read it].
You are a lunatic. [Because I disagree with you? Really how I am supposed to respond to your constant name calling?]
How much does the McCain campaign pay you? [Not a dime. I have donated to McCain.]
Why don't you post a list of exactly how many names you post under? [I am Joe. I never hide I am Joe, although I occasionally post under names to annoy you. It seems to work.]
Is Pro one of your many names? [Absolutely not. I do not know who Pro is. I did not write his pro Huckabee post, but I do agree with his sentiments about you and your reaction to any dissent.]
This entire incident has given me several ideas about how to deal with idiots like you. [Is that a threat?]
Don't tempt me. [Is that annother threat?]
I have many friends here. [Okay. I get that you have friends who believe that voting against McCain is more important than Barack Obama getting elected or not. I disagree with it, but I understand the position. MaineConservative and Scarlet do that in a rational way and I try to respond rationally back. Virginia Patriot is a one issue guy, and I disagree with his myopia about the issues, but that is what it is. You get downright nasty anytime anyone disagrees with you. Seriously, go to a doctor and get your psychotropic medication adjusted.]
And what's with the name-dropping of philosophers like Neitsche? [I am not sure. I think I may have copied a link that may have mentioned Neitsche. While he's got a few legitimate points, Neitsche is not my favorite philosopher. I am more a Marcus Aurelius fan myself].
You're coming off like Professor Erwin Corey. [You are entitled to your opinion. You are coming off like a Lefist Nutroot with your strict adherence to dogma and rejection of free speech from any dissenters. But hey, that's my opinion.]
|
|
Pasadena Phil writes: 'Pro I see where you are coming from. You are a Huckabot. That's all anyone needs to know. Billy Sunday politics. Yeah, that's the ticket.'
ME: Ok, that was an intelligent response. Not! Care to try again?
|
|
Pasadena Phil writes: 'Is Pro one of your many names?'
ME: Ok, now your getting paranoid. Why not take a poll and see how may posters think Pro is Joe.
Better yet, to ease your mind, email the Townhall mods and ask them check the IPs of all. If they are your friends they will confirm "PRO", for sure, is the only TH name coming from this IP.
My wife is too busy to post. My autistic son too timid. My daughter in college lives across town and doesn't stop by the house long enough to get involved in townhall, and my two terriers haven't learned to type (that I know of).
Can we get back to the issues? |
|
would both be excellent choices , like huckabee both are successful southern governors with strong conservitive social and fiscal values . barbour is nationally known and respected and neither brings much negative baggage. baggage like, romney's record on flip flops ,endorsement of roe v wade and gay rights ,he still gets hit with these issues although he is a newcomer to his pro life stance . huckabee brings some baggage as well ,the mormons hate him and he's not a member of the republican country club branch. |
|
|
ever tire of pushing exclusively LGBT candidates? sen. Hutchison brings nothing to the ticket except a lukewarm response to illegal immigation like Sen. John Mc Cain. Secondly, I would hope that she has never supported feminist misandristic legislation as has Sen. Biden throughout his career, absent Senator Bill Bradley. Nominate Jindal or Palin, preferrably Palin at this time as a signal that the United States was serious about its energy independence and the possibility of tapping its internal resources. And please stop beating the dead horse for the three LGBT Republican attorneys turned away by the electorate (Romney, Thompson, and Giuliani)due to the Republican electorate's concerns regarding collusion amongst the three branches of government to normalize neurotic behavior and its associated paraphilias using gay marriage and civil unions as a means to knowingly place children in "borderline" caretaker environments, regardless of the gender or socioeconomic status of the caretaker environment. |
|
I think John McCain would be well served to pick a VP who emphasizes an issue that is near and dear to conservatives' hearts: education.
McCain believes that parents should have many choices in the education of their own children, and that we have to stop stuffing our kids and all our taxes into failing public schools. I cannot say who would fit that role, but it would elevate the issue, and--conveniently--drive the Teacher's Unions and the NEA bezerk. :) |
|
|
|
|
|
Sarah Palin could ignite the base (which now is now planning to vote for McCain primarily because he's not as bad as Obama). Kay Baily Hutchison would put the base to sleep.
The more you learn about Sarah Palin, the more you discover she is a woman of strong conviction. She does what she believes is right. She has always done what's for Alaska; special interests be damned.
Palin is down to earth and cost-conscious. One of the first things she did was put the state jet up for sale. In fact, she typically flies tourist class. She can make conservatives excited about going to the polls this November.
|
|
|
He'll just pick another Moderate TRAITOROUS Corporate whore like himself and his entire GOP that will continue to leave the nation unprotected to appease their corporate masters. Knowing his ego, he will likely pick someone who will not upstage him whatsoever - someone considerably younger that will make him look like a wise old maverick teaching a new maverick his old tricks. Whoever wins this election will have Hell to face from the neglect both of these partues have shown toward securing our southern border. FBI agents have already positively identified from dead al Qaeda leaders on the battlefield a plan to launch sequential nuclear attacks in many major American cities. The plan that was intercepted is known as "The American Hiroshima". It has been stated that it is to be carried out by al Qaeda cells already in this country that have made their way into our country via the southern border. These TREASONOUS men, their TREASONOUS parties, and ALL who vote for these men and their corporate masters in the CFR who own them and seek to form the Security and Prosperity Partnership with the North American Union will have the blood of millions of innocent Americans all over their guilty consciences for falling for the same ol' Chicken Little "The Sky is Falling" quadrennial electioneering tactics and abandoning TRUE CONSERVATIVISM. |
|
|
In their support of McCain, talk radio belies the fact that there is nothing remotely CONSERVATIVE about any of them. Sean Insanity, Rush Bimbo, Michael Rubbage, Michael Gag-Me, and even Laura Ingraham have now caved completely on Conservatism. It's hilarious listening to them BEG McCain on their radio shows to pick someone "cConservative" for VP, as if the GOP even knows what is Conservative anymore. People, true Conservatives don't have to gamble on Conservatism. There is a Conservative on the ticket; it's Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party! If Talk radio really were CONSERVATIVE, they would long ago have abandoned the GOP and started supporting the Constitution Party. Even Jerome Corsi, author of "Obama Nation" and a Constitution Party member, NOT A REPUBLICAN WHATSOEVER, has endorsed Chuck Baldwin, NOT JOHN MCSHAMNESTY, for President because he knows that both parties in DC are out to destroy American Sovereignty. Corsi played so-called "Conservative" Talk Radio like a flute when he went on air promoting his book, which clearly endorses Chuck Baldwin. Corsi is an American patriot unlike the lion-share of CINO's who will vote for McCain and the death and betrayal of America. |
|
Seriously, Baldwin is a complete nut job. "Take Back The Government," you need to adjust that tin hat of yours before you get another dose of gamma radition.
Or is "Take Back The Government" someone else? |
|
|
|
Feeling paranoid again?
Take Back The Government has been posting almost as long as I have. Most people do not need aliases, the message speaks for itself.
|
|
|
So, Joey, why is Chuck Baldwin a "complete nut job" in your case? Can you share your illustrious thoughts with us? You do have thoughts, don't you? You can illuminate us with your insightful analysis, can't you? |
|
|
You are wasting your time with Joe. He loves, loves, loves McCain... just because. To Joe and his fellow nose holders, the only good Republican is a Democrat and the only good conservative is a liberal. If he had anything logical to contribute, he wouldn't resort to multiple identities and paranoid exchanges with himself. There is something truly odd about the guy. |
|
|
Joe of many names and places posts under a bunch of different names and on threads that identify locations he shows up as being from all over the country. I think he is a Townhall employee. He has been in the tank for McCain since before the primaries. Anyone who does not want to give amnesty to illegal aliens and tax ourselves into poverty to control the weather is a nutcase to Joe of many names and places. |
|
He is a truther who thinks the U.S. Government planed and staged 9/11, intentionally killing thousands of its citizens. Sorry, but this is not conservatism. If you support this, you are not a conservative, you are a nut job.
Virginia Patriot are you a truther?
Pasadena Phil are you a truther?
You guys are so blinded with your McCain hatred that you will believe and support anyone. It is pathetic and wrong. |
|
http://reason.tv/roughcut/show/436.html
This is why.
And Pasadena Phil, since you again attack let me turn your own words against you:
You are wasting your time with Pasadena Phil. He loves, loves, loves himself... just because. To Phil and his fellow Defeatocons, the only good Republican is a RINO and the only good conservative supports Obama. Victory through Defeat. Winning by Losing. If he had anything logical to contribute, he wouldn't resort to continual attacks with anyone he disagrees with his theory. There is something truly odd about the guy. |
|
|
Are you against free speech Joe? |
|
|
We know Joe is for amnesty, abandoning the rule of law and the sovereignty of the U.S. |
|
|
Joe also supports taxing CO2 to save the planet. How much is each exhale going to cost us? |
|
I do not like Campaign Finance Reform and while I believe there is a man made component to global warming, also believe the harm of that is far less than being portrayed and the only real solution is new energy technology. And I also predict President McCain never signs a cap and trade bill.
And you know that.
But you will help elect Obama and his ilk who are for the Fairness Doctrine and far more draconian plans for Global Warming. Are you against Free Speech? |
|
I think you're onto something with "Joe" posting from different parts of the country and under different names. I am coming around to believing that Joe is really a bunch of people working for the McCain campaign. His explanation that he works from different computers is nonsense. I have three computers available to me and I can log on to all of them at the same time with Pasadena Phil. It sure would explain why "he" cuts and pastes the same things over and over and the various identities. It is very very hard for a group of people so far apart to develop nuanced positions. It also explains why "he" is commenting all day, every day. I check in from time to time during the day and "he" is always there, often attacking you and me. It took me a while to figure out what he was complaining about yesterday. I have a feeling the various "Joes" got their schedules confused or one of them is not happy about something.
Now "he" is citing Nietsche. What a load! I have a feeling he is a permutation of this:
http://www.pakin.org/complaint/
|
|
McCain/Kennedy McCain/Lieberman
You do. |
|
|
I think he's a Townhall employee, maybe Matt Lewis. He was the one that has been McCain all the way. It seems like the same person even under all the various names and places. His claims of others using his aliases is bunk, once used that name is unavailable on TH to any others. |
|
You are like a pair of PUMAs. Actually that is exactly what you are. A pair of biddies bitter that you did not get your way. So now I am a collection of McCain supporters and Matt Lewis? I am a regular Uberman. Meanwhile, you two are mind melding with Olberman.
Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.
Now that is not my quote (I'm Joe, not Joe Biden). I wonder who wrote that? |
|
At least you're coming around to understanding that there will be no party unity so long as there is a Trojan Horse Democrat leading the GOP ticket. Now if you could accept that we don't plan on voting for Obama either, maybe you could grasp the concept of voting for "none of the above".
Uh-oh, Warning! Warning! Does not compute! Insufficient brain cells! Too many variables to coordinate! Stuck on stupid! |
|
|
They're out to get you too! Everyone is! It's all just one big global anti-Joe conspiracy! You are the only sane person left on the planet! |
|
I know who I am and I know who Phil is, I am in VA, Phil is in CA. You have many names and places and can't seem to keep them straight. Don't blame us for anything your multiple personalities write again. |
|
I remember Pasadena PUMA saying Hillary was the best candidate. You will support truther Chuck Baldwin so long as he is not McCain. Bob Barr is at least conservative (although a conservative who could not get re-elected), but when he adopted an immigration plan about the same as McCain's (except he did not want to build a border fence)--you both pretended that was not the case. Facts can be inconvienent.
I did support McCain from the start. I am proud of that. But if McCain lost I would have supported Mitt Romney just as enthusiastically. Not out of blind GOP loyality, but because I know the GOP candidates are better than the Dems. You are so blinded by your hurt feelings that you have become emotional women.
|
|
I remember Pasadena PUMA saying Hillary was the best candidate. You will support truther Chuck Baldwin so long as he is not McCain. Bob Barr is at least conservative (although a conservative who could not get re-elected), but when he adopted an immigration plan about the same as McCain's (except he did not want to build a border fence)--you both pretended that was not the case. Facts can be inconvienent.
I did support McCain from the start. I am proud of that. But if McCain lost I would have supported Mitt Romney just as enthusiastically. Not out of blind GOP loyality, but because I know the GOP candidates are better than the Dems. You are so blinded by your hurt feelings that you have become emotional women.
|
|
|
The GOP does not deserve the votes of anyone who values their citizenship or the sovereignty of this country. |
|
|
Virginia Patriot, we all know you won't go changin'. But what about the taxes Obama, in all his World Poverty Socialist glory, would cripple us with? Have a little mercy on people who are still raising their kids, will you? Have a little compassion for your own billfold. It doesn't need to loose all those inches! |
|
|
Seriously, you have more in common with Giselle-Kimbecile than any conservatives I know. I am surprised you are not in Denver. |
|
VPat writes: 'The GOP does not deserve the votes of anyone who values their citizenship or the sovereignty of this country.'
ME: The GOP is just citizens. Everyone knew the rules going in. And, McCain, ya gotta hand it to him, he snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. I commend him.
Romney had like a gazillion dollars, and the rightwing chattering classes hysterically shilling for him night and day (after SC), and he still couldn't pull it off.
I didn't vote for McCain, and wasn't all that interested in him. He was like 3rd or 4th of my preference list.
Ya know, most of us were taught in school that if an opponant wins a contest you shake their hand. You don't flip them the bird.
Ruffini noticed that McCain had a floor (pretty much) of 30-40%. So, I ask myself why is that? --given that McCain is obviously a moderate.
And, the reason is, NO ONE on the GOP side could match McCain on the WOT issue. He had, by far, the most street cred.
Heck, of the top tier Mac was the only one with ANY military service.
That counts for a lot with vets. If the veteren community hadn't come through for McCain in South Carolina, Huck woulda won that in a landslide. |
|
|
V.P. for V.P.! If nothing else (and there would be nothing else) it would never be boring. |
|
"And please stop beating the dead horse for the three LGBT Republican attorneys turned away by the electorate (Romney, Thompson, and Giuliani)due to the Republican electorate's concerns regarding collusion amongst the three branches of government to normalize neurotic behavior and its associated paraphilias using gay marriage and civil unions as a means to knowingly place children in "borderline" caretaker environments, regardless of the gender or socioeconomic status of the caretaker environment."
-- Preach on, Brother Beavis! [BTW, Romney - not an attorney] |
|
The following list is of nationally known 2008 candidates, and some of the almost candidates:
John McCain, U.S. Navy '54-'81 Mike Huckabee, -- No military service Mitt Romney, -- No military service Rudy Giuliani, -- No military service Fred Thompson, -- No military service Ron Paul, USAF/ANG '63-'68? Duncan Hunter, U.S. Army '69-'71? Sam Brownback, -- No military service Tom Tancredo, -- No military service Tommy Thompson, -- WI Army Reserve & WI NG, years? Alan Keyes, -- No military service Jim Gilmore, U.S. Army '71-'74? Dick Cheney, -- No military service Jeb Bush, -- No military service George Allen, -- No military service Bill Frist, -- No military service Newt Gingrich, -- No military service Chuck Hagel, U.S. Army '67–'68 |
|
Romney is an attorney. He graduated with his JD at the same time he received his masters at Harvard. He has never practiced as an attorney, but he is one.
His undergrad is from BYU. His graduate work is from Harvard which he managed to do two at once. Talk about Multi tasking! |
|
|
mcain camp has not talked to mitty for 3 days |
|
Michael has loved McCain from the Beginning.... I have not. I find him to be boring and whimpy. Granted I could never withstand the torture he went through in Hanoi, but that was long ago. I thank him for his service and he will get my vote because I can't stand Obama.
Having said that, what would get me excited about the McCain ticket is if we had someone with a backbone. Someone who could stand up to the liberal media, liberal congress and liberal judges that we are not here to cave into their wants and desires. that we will fight for what we believe are true conservative values. McCain has been doing well with that lately. However, if he picks Kay just because she is a woman ---- we are going to see President Obama.
Pick someone who knows economy, pick someone who understands the international threats, pick someone who will be able to carry the torch once McCain is out of office. Kay is not that person Michael. She's good --- but she's not VP material.
Romeny is the key to winning.
|
|
conservativelibrarian writes: '...pick someone who will be able to carry the torch once McCain is out of office.'
ME: Why does McCain care about that? He's not a movement politician. This is about his own vision of America, not any shared effort with ideological "conservatism".
What conservatives get from McCain will be those things where we happen to intersect -- i.e. tough line on pork barrel spending. And, those things he feels he must do in order to keep us pacified --i.e. nominating a John Roberts type for the SCOTUS to replace a John Paul Stevens. |
|
If there is a fundamental shift of opinion. For example, if the GOP abandoned being Pro Life, a large contingent of Pro Life people would bolt, that is a deal breaker for them. The GOP was formed over disputes on the slavery issue.
Now for some people, any compromise on illegal immigration is a deal breaker. Pasadena PUMA and Virginia Patriot are perfect examples. They have openly left the GOP and will support third party candidates. Illegal immigration is an important issue, but it is not the same as being Pro Life or the older Slavery issue. But these strong views on that one issue are a tiny minority (hence the reason Duncan Hunter, who is a good man, went no wheres in the primaries and nutjobs like Tancredo completely cratered).
But for most of us, even if we disagree with the GOP and McCain on immigration issues, we recognize the Dems are even worse on those issues, and worse on a whole lot more issues (national security, defense, engergy, taxes, pro life, judges, etc.). For most of us, it is not worth trying to back a failed former GOP congressman's bid in the Libertarian Party when that will only help elect Barack Obama. This is what those Green Party supporters found out when they managed to elect George Bush by supporting Ralph Nader.
So if you want to join spoilers Virgina Patriot and Pasadena PUMA and help elect Barack Obama--at least be honest on what you are doing. You think the best way to reform the GOP is to throw an election. The dream of an uber conservative third party is a pipe dream too, because if one existed it would just be a Balkanized minority, unable to beat the Democrats. What you would have acheived is Democratic Majorities for ever.
That is why the plan is flawed. If you want to reform the GOP, do it at the grass roots level with local, state and national politicians. |
|
McCain should blindside the Dems with his pick, by choosing someone (not a big name) who is a walking, talking embodiment of an issue.
He should assure the base of his social and fiscal conservatism, and at the same time bring an issue to the forefront that has broad appeal to all Americans. Americans want to drill, and also want educational choice for their children, given any time to think.
He should use the VP to elevate an issue that the Dems are totally vulnerable on, and wish to ignore. He should surprises us all and show he is able to lead, and to contrast with liberals at every opportunity. |
|
"Romney is an attorney. He graduated with his JD at the same time he received his masters at Harvard. He has never practiced as an attorney, but he is one."
-- Definition from the Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008 edition: Attorney - A person admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction and authorized to perform criminal and civil legal functions on behalf of clients. In order to become an attorney, a person must obtain a Juris Doctor degree from an accredited law school. A person must pass the bar examination of that state in order to be admitted to practice law there.
A law degree, by itself, does not an attorney make. One ALSO has to pass the bar exam. Romney has never taken the bar in any state. Until he does so, he is a man with a law degree. |
|
Huckabee is not a preacher, since he never finished his theology degree.
And here's someththing to whet the whistle
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/28/america/28repubs.php
|
|
"By your definintion Huckabee is not a preacher, since he never finished his theology degree."
-- Apple meet rock. There are no state laws that require the licensing of preachers. The comparable profession would be medicine, where someone with a medical degree can crow, "Hey, lookitme; I'm a doctor!" all they want, but if they aren't licensed to practice anywhere all they have is a nice piece of paper. Anyway, forget the analogies and try to focus on the one issue at hand, and the facts that apply to it.
So, are you an ex-pat or just an interested observer? |
|
|
|
|
|