And not all of them were unfair.
Rudy did okay, and some of his answers were excellent, but it was tough sledding.
But I would much much much rather the GOP candidates get their grillings now. This is a good thing. The Democrat candidates fear the sunshine, the GOP candidates should be out getting a tan.
I am sure Russert will do a similar grilling on Mitt. I suspect Mitt is getting ready for it. Russert sometimes asks an unfair question (some of the questions posed to Rudy were just misleading and poor) but most of them were legitimate. Getting grilled by him is actually a good thing. |
|
Interesting insight Joe, well said...
I think Mr. Hewitt is correct, and suspect Russert is so eager to prove himself with the Democrats, after the Clintonites demeaned him as being unfair, blaming Russert for Hillary's disastrous FLOP at Drexel.
Huckabee's playing with the definition of 'quarantine' is simply comedic.
Not only does he have a tax record as poor as Clinton, he seems to have a problem with honesty and reality.
He seems to have a tougher stance, wanting to contain those infected with AIDS, than he is in keeping serious Criminals in Prison, or Terrorists in GITMO. |
|
|
It was over all a good program. I still question the issue of illegal aliens in the country. For some reason, every viable candidate is equivocating this MAJOR problem. Of all the candidates the only person will to really do something is Tancredo. He has an ice cube's chance in he!! of winning the nomination, but EVERYONE should be focusing on his position which is just comon sense. |
|
Unlike the convicted rapist parole flub, this will actually help Huck in the eyes of religious conservative voters, believe it or not. And his honesty on the subject will undoubtably help him with the rest of the electorate.
Just face it: Your man is falling in the polls and it has nothing to do with Mormonism. You lose. |
|
Hey Rudy why not try not cheating on your wife? A tip from one of our many readers
HP-Giuliani: If I Have A Presidential Mistress, She Will Get Security Too!
In a hypothetical Rudy Giuliani administration, the president’s mistress would receive Secret Service protection if “the people who assess it come to the conclusion that it is necessary to do this.”
Appearing on Meet the Press this morning, the Republican presidential candidate argued that high-profile figures receive high-profile threats, and as such, family and even extramarital associates are susceptible to the occasional danger.
Asked by host Tim Russert whether it would be “appropriate for a president to provide police protection for a mistress,” Giuliani said it would, provided “someone has threatened to do harm.”
“The reality is, it all came about because of my public position,” the ex-mayor remarked, “because of the fact the when people are public or celebrities these kinds of threats take place.”
WATCH VIDEO!
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/rudy-protects-mist ress
|
|
Rudy can handle the heat.
After all, he was tested every day for eight years by the Marxist New York press.
On the other hand, just a few weeks ago, Hillary was crying like Little Red Riding Hood that Big Bad Wolf Tim Russert was being "mean" to her by asking her...questions about her positions !
That is precisely why I'm praying for Hillary to be the Dhimmicrat nominee---she risks melting down from the intense scrutiny of a general election brouhaha.
She was 'shocked' that Russert asked her tough questions because most of the MSM have run cover for her & her husband thru the years.
If she can't handle questions from Tim Russert, how on earth will she react to general election debate questions from...Brit Hume...or Chris Wallace !!?
It will be difficult for her to convince the electorate next fall that she CAN handle negotiating with the misogynist regimes of the Arab-Muslim Middle East, all the while she's crying that questions from Tim Russert and Brit Hume are too much for her to handle.
As National Review recently wrote in their news & notes section, "If Hillary can't stand the heat, then maybe she should stay in the kitchen."
Ha, ha, ha.
|
|
|
Has chosen their GOP candidate.Everyone else is going to get trashed now just in case anybody has some wild idea about voting for someone else.Who would have dreamed that the left wing media would have teamed up with right wing evangelicals? The big unknown right now is how the immigration issue will play out.Supposedly it's either the number one or two issue for GOP voters,yet it's hardly on the radar right now. Iowa and NH are poor states to get a reading on this. I suspect in the Univision debate Huck and Mccain are going to pander to Hispanics and Mitt will stick to his guns.Mitt will take a hit on this in tomorrow's papers but it could rally a broader support for his candidacy. |
|
Granted Huck needs to get into the specifics of some of his stances, but seriously Hugh, do you really think that they are MORE skilled than Huckabee in communicating to the common, everyday man?
I don't think so. Not by a long shot. And Huck's rise since the YouTube debate showed that Huck can more than hold his own.
Whether you think Huck has the experience or competence of a Regan is one thing, but he certainly has every bit of skill as a communicator. |
|
|
I am a social conservative who has yet to fully make up his mind about who I am supporting. There are things I like about all the candidates. Even though I disagree with Rudy on most social issues, his in your face ability to bring the good fight right to the media is really something and could very well be the reason he wins the nomination. There is some baggage attached to him, sure. I recall in one debate he was asked a question and rather than answer the slanted question he challenged the ideological premise of the question. If Hillary wins the nod from the Dems, then a candidate like Rudy is very appealing. Soc-Cons will not stay home and allow Hillary to be elected. We need a tough candidate and Rudy just might be the guy. I still haven't made up my mind though. |
|
I think that Rudy will govern like Arnold out in California. He will allow the Democrats in Congress to run over him by allowing them to advance their gay agenda. The only thing he will veto in this area is if gay marriage is passed by the Congress. Also, he won't do anything to advance the pro life agenda. Most Republicans will experience a heavy dose of acid reflux by the end of his term.
Having said that, I will still vote for him if he is the nominee because I'd rather have him fighting the war on terror than a Hillary adminstration. |
|
It's becoming more and more clear that, barring some really amazing turn of events, Rudy is going to be running in a two man contest very shortly with *EVERYONE'S* favorite ex-AR governor.
The battle lines will be obvious:
Impeccable foreign policy and excellent fiscal conservatism
vs
Pitch-perfect social conservatism and values-voter credibility, with a compassionate approach to domestic issues.
It comes down to which area you find most important.
I, personally am for Huck, at least until I am faced with any new information.
Mitt, Thompson, McCain and Hunter aren't going anywhere.
In the general election, maybe Rudy and Huck (or preferably Huck and Rudy) go beat the snot out of the first woman/african-american team (with an-exPOTUS in tow.)
At least that's how *I* see it right now.
For more ridiculous and intellectually-lacking diatribe, please see the all-new PolitBurro Blog:
http://politburro.townhall.com/Default.aspx
|
|
I thought Dobson's comments really "moved the needle" for Mitt?
Per Rass. I believe Romney is +1 since 'The Speech'
|
|
The Demos in the MD IA poll are revealing.
There is minor difference between the fav/unfavs for Huck and Romney. Huck does have a halo effect.
Huck' strength is born agains who attend weekly church. Romneys strength at the moment is non born agains who do not attend weekly. Huck and Romney have good segments of the other group.
Huck stongests points are values and being perceived as a winner.
Romney's strength is leadership. Huck is only 5% on that compared to Romney's 44 %. Romney does okay in the other areas.
Huck, in decending order is perceived as strong on Moral/Family, Immigration, Terror and Taxes.
Romney Taxes and Terror. Why he would be weak on Immigration and especially Family is beyond me.
Huck is strongly supported by the hardline immigrationists. Romney less so.
Abortion is a big issue for Huck but not as big as some of the other issues. Further, it is not a litmus test for about 80% of the voters.
What this really looks like to me is that the majority of the IA voters do not know nor understand Huck's positions or past record very well. His support seems to be part of his overall boom which is media driven and also driven by his "Christian" positioning.
If Huck droops nationally his numbers should also drop in IA. He will not be perceived as a winner. Huck should be vulnerable on immigration and taxes and Fred, Rudy and Romney should hit his record in those area hard. Huck's weakness on telling the truth and ethics should also be hit.
Rudy is running direct mail. Do not underestimate Rudy's GOTV. Ditto for Romney. They know who their voters are and how to get them out.
The polls are soft and inaccurate predictors right now. They indicate preference which is different than voting. 2/3s of those responding to a poll will not vote. |
|
|
Without going into extensive detail McCain is in trouble. The independents are scattered across 3 Romney Rudy and McCain in that order. Further, his fav/unfav ratio is not that good. Romney is higher Rudy is about the same as McCain. |
|
Huck 32%
Mitt 20%
Thompson 11%
So, BG, however "soft" these polls are, they universally have Huck well ahead.
Your choice is get on the Huckmobile and we'll have a shot at stopping Rudy and getting a true conservative values candidate...
or
Sink on the Mitt-tanic and watch:
Guliani
-vs-
Hill&Bill (2for1) or Barack Hussein Obama |
|
If I feel like it I will go into the SC details. However, the pattern here is different than in IA. That difference is most likely the months of retail campaigning that Huck has done in IA. Huck is very vulnerable to attack in SC.
Romney has the same Moral/Family weakness. I wish that MD had broken this into 2 categories instead of putting it into one.
Immigration and Taxes and Experience are big positives for Romney. Huck is very vulnerable on Experience. That can be worked effectively. I would hit Huck on flip flopping on Immigration Taxes etc.
Romney needs a better answer on the flip flop issue. If he fixes that he will soar.
I will look at it in more detail later, but there are plenty of way to go after Huck effectively. |
|
Took the high road about Mitt's untrue assertions about McCain in a NH mailer, but keyed in (much more diplomatically than I) about Romney's different positions on important issues (no references to Brokeback Mtn, etc.)
He stated unequivically that he would win in NH and that his internal polling was very encouraging.
What if Huck wins IA, McCain wins NH, Huck wins SC...
Will the wall-to-wall carpetbombing of Pro-Mitt propaganda slow down? |
|
|
Bottom Line: Dem allied MSM is pushing hard for Huck. They desparately want Huck in the General Election so they can surely win against someone who will be portrayed by them as a wing-nut -- knowing that Huck will lose virtually every swing state. |
|
I think I would test a couple of attack ads on Huck. I would hit him on taxes and also immigration. I would use his own video against him but I would also make it a two pronged attack. I would hit him as a flip flopper on both issues.
His strength in the MD polls is that he is perceived as Moral. You would expect that for a Minister. However, he has changed positions and has ethics violations. If you can break the idea that he is moral he is toast. I would go for his strength and turn it into a weakness. Culture of Corruption is very powerful against Reps.
There are other ways to go after him. He is incredibly weak on experience in all of the MD polls. I would compare him to Jimmy Carter. |
|
Saw through Mitt's Straw-Man speech and the disengenuousness of blaming his inability to rise in national and IA polls on anti-Mormon bigotry.
It's the flip-flops, stupid |
|
The more mud Hugh Romney throws at Huck the more he rises in the polls.
Nina Easton, whose husband works for the Romney campaign said on Foxnews Sunday that the Speech would not have a big impact. She did offer that it gave voters a chance to see the 'real Romney.'
So who is it we are seeing the rest of the time, if we only had a short glimpse of the real Mitt during the speech?
Voters are looking for authenticity, that's why Mitt is getting no traction.
|
|
..according to the Hugh litmus test. Per today's show on Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: But wasn't part of the argument that he was basically saying to the Christian evangelicals, "I'm as Christian as Mike Huckabee?"
KRISTOL: No. He was saying he respects -- well, that he is a believer in Jesus and that his faith is important to him, both of which I think are true and fair for him to say.
But I think there's an awful -- kind of a patronizing tone about the Christian evangelicals and about Mike Huckabee. Mike Huckabee is second in the national polls. He's not just popular in Iowa where there happen to be, according to people inside the Beltway, a lot of wacky Christian evangelicals.
Huckabee is rising everywhere. He has been a very good candidate. He's not particularly my favorite. But you've got to give credit where credit is due. He is running a heck of a campaign, and it's not just in Iowa.
He's second in every national poll since Thanksgiving. Romney's problem is that he hasn't been able to rise in the national polls, though spending about, what, 20 times more money than Mike Huckabee.
|
|
How many people were killed by advocating AID's quarantine?
How many babies were aborted while Mitt supported a woman's right to chose?
You do the math. |
|
is conservative? His utter cluelessness about WAR is conservative? His populism is conservative?
Uh-huh. |
|
Neo,
I'm with you---I'm really concerned about Huckabee's apparent lack of interest in fighting Islamic Jihad.
And I don't want him issuing any of those pardons to members of Al-Qaeda !
Ha, ha, ha.
P.S.
-----
I'll look forward to seeing you at the cabal meeting on Tuesday nite.
Have you been practicing the secret handshake ?
Apparently, on Tuesday, we'll be given instructions on how to discreetly wiretap the phones of Ron Paulbots.
Can't wait ! |
|
Hugh doesnt want any more posts supporting Huck or McCain or Paul or Thommo. Post here if its support for Romney or Guiliani.
Get it? Stop wasting everyone's time. This is not a place for debate. It is a place for unconditional servitude. |
|
is hilarious coming from Hunter and Romney and Thompson...
El Burro *wishes* you anti-immigrant haters could understand your boys as they wriggle and squirm and pander on Univision *right now*.
Check out you tube in a day or two and listen to how your super-tough guys are talking to the spanish speakers.
Classic stuff. |
|
|
About how to deal with Chavez and blaming central america and castro on the US... |
|
"Giuliani Partners has represented a pharmaceutical company mired in a lengthy investigation; a confessed drug smuggler who hired Giuliani to ensure his security company could do business with the federal government; and the horse racing industry, which was eager to recover public confidence after a betting scandal."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/09/giulian i_wont_release_client_n.html
And those are only the ones we know about. He still won't reveal the rest.
Just what America needs, a corrupt huckster as President. Well, maybe at least he understands the Constitutional separation of church and state. |
|
an idiotic pissant.
This is well known.
OHM...I will be at the Cabal meeting, as well, my good friend. We can sacrifice babies of Lefties, plan more Tower 7's, sabotage all internet links with anti-Bush purposes, burn libraries,etc. you know, the usual. ;-) |
|
Hey guys, time to face reality.
Mitt's over. Finito. Done.
As social conservatives, it is time to rally around a candidate who can win the nomination. That man is Huckabee.
Remember, at this point, a vote for Romney is a vote for Rudy.... |
|
|
How was that BJ from Ron Paul? |
|
Laborlawyer wrote;
--------------
"Giuliani Partners has represented a pharmaceutical company mired in a lengthy investigation; a confessed drug smuggler who hired Giuliani to ensure his security company could do business with the federal government; and the horse racing industry, which was eager to recover public confidence after a betting scandal."
--------------
A pharmaceutical company...mired in a lengthy investigation ?
But isn't EVERY pharmaceutical company being chased by the John Edwards trial lawyers of the world ?
Laborlawyer, if one is under 'investigation,' do you believe it implies 'guilt' ?
And regarding the 'confessed drug smuggler,'---I don't know much about the situation, has he ever been convicted of a crime ?
Do you believe that everyone should refrain from doing business with him on account of merely being a 'confessed drug smuggler' ?
For instance, should McDonald's NOT sell the fellow a Happy Meal if he walks into one of their restaurants ?
And the horse racing industry !?
Good heavens, no !
I sure wish we could get lefties to be as animated about prosecuting the war vs. Al Qaeda as they are about prosecuting people for drinking Mint Julep and placing their $5 bets on win-place-show at the Kentucky Derby.
Laborlawyer summarizes it all by remarking,
--------------
"And those are only the ones we know about. He still won't reveal the rest."
--------------
I can't wait to hear the rest---maybe Giuliani is also doing business with a crooked nine year old kid in Milwaukee who has a lemonade stand that isn't using fresh squeezed lemons.
At the very least, we really need to get the Department of Justice to shift some of their best prosecutors over to Santa Anita right away.
I hear that a couple of jockeys are planning to sneak into a Pasadena movie theatre for the child's price. |
|
Laborlawyer, by the way, I realize you did NOT actually 'author' that excerpt---I realize it actually appears at the Washington Post.
I ought not to have written, "Laborlawyer wrote," before the excerpt.
My bad.
I do realize you did write the summarizing remarks which followed.
Just wanted to clarify that.
|
|
I don't really have much of a problem with the press asking tough questions but do it equally and ask stuff that is actually relevant to what voters care about. The kind of drivel that Russert gets into is just a waste of time.
This is one instance where a poll of the public would help. What are the top concerns of voters in the upcoming election? I believe it's immigration, Iraq, health care, Iran, terrorism, taxes, the courts, energy costs, etc.
That's what the basis of the conversation should be for ALL the candidates. Instead we continue to get completely shallow reporting on all of the candidates and to actually figure out the differences between people we have to really do a lot of digging. Our country deserves a far better press than the one we have... |
|
one hot minute
CAN WE NOT DO BETTER?
Giuliani: If I Have A Presidential Mistress, She Will Get Security Too!
Giuliani’s Answer Was ‘Flimsy,’ Says ‘Tough-Talking New Yorker’
Giuliani Defends, Employs Priest Accused of Molesting Teens
Hillary’s Hsu indicted
Weapons Industry Dumps Republicans, Backs Hillary
Hillary, Bush For Open Borders!
WATCH
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/rudy-vs-hillary
|
|
Other than his "Social Conservative"(a term which I'm growing increasingly tired of, as it becomes mo'&mo'meaningless)Credentials, where's Huckster's Conservatism?? THAT'S why I'm not figuring this guy for much but a temporary flatulance. Where is his toughness on the border? Where's the Fire in his Belly to kill Jihadists and stay on the Offense against Radical Islam? I think it's nice that Huck is a Baptist preacher, but what, pray tell, does that have to do with being Commander-in-Chief of the world's Hyper Power & its armed forces? Any particular indication that He's even aware that we are at WAR? Ya know, with Dark Age Butchers who wish our civilization DEAD?
Any comments on the wimpy Marxists, Frank Rich of the NYTimes & Cornel West, having the warm & fuzzies for Huck? |
|
NeoConScum,
You're spot on, brother.
Huckabee just isn't animated about the war.
And neither are some of our "social conservative" brethren who run around hyperventillating about Rudy having had a mistress.
Of course, on the other side of the aisle, we have fellows such as Laborlawyer who don't want to go after Al-Qaeda...they want to go after Seabiscuit !
(you gotta read his post above in this thread where he highlights a Washington Post excerpt---it's classic.)
|
|
I really do get a kick out of your constant efforts to ridicule (not well) guys like PL and myself. Of course, you do always miss the point- which in this case is Rudy's corruption and obfuscation. Why won't he release his client list? What's he hiding?
Cute line about Seabiscuit. We should apply it elsewhere, don't you think? As in, "Republicans are more interested in attacking Hillary's pantsuits than Al Qaeda". Because, of course, mentioning anything other Al Qaeda means you're not SERIOUS about Al Qaeda.
Anyway, everybody knows Seabiscuit was in the bag:) |
|
Laborlawyer,
My good man, if you can't handle people challenging your comments, then perhaps this isn't the website for you.
Anyhow, you missed my point---which is that Rudy's clients haven't been proven to be "bad" guys, and thus, Rudy is not proven to be "corrupt" as you claim.
And you know it---that's why you didn't respond to those particular points.
But I really do wish you were as animated about fighting Al Qaeda as you are about fighting...the horse racing industry ! |
|
Did anyone but me pick up on Rudy's tactic of laughing at the premise of several of Russert's questions. I have never seen it done before. It unnerved Russert and made me laugh as well. I hope he continues to use this tactic. It was effective.
Dan From Denver |
|
Durned Lefties around here. LL is ok in a Lib sorta way. ;-) I've even begun to cut PL+LP a tad bit of slack, because, I suppose, the Pauley & Huckster loonies are alarming me. Now, if PL+LP would only take some serious writing lessons from LL, so I don't have to twist myself into a Student Council WONK to comprehend what the hell he's saying most of the time...! But, when compared to Marxist Moonbats like Brobster & some others, LL & PL are bloody moderates indeed.
OHM, I'm with you, Pal. Fire in the Belly for staying on the offense aggressively with Radical Islam. Rudy's got it. And, so does Mitt, in his cooler way. I'm all for Mitt's comment re-let's DOUBLE Gitmo. I also think it makes alot of sense to require Federal ID's for Employment and severe penalties for employers who hire those without them. It would cause, in fairly short order, a Southern migration back across the border. Here's a concept mexicano Illegals: Remake your country in our image. Duhhh. |
|
...you don't have a problem with Rudy's clients. Hmmm. Not even the people in Qatar who shielded Khalid Sheikh Muhammed?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/giulianis-ties. html
I guess capitalism trumps security. I mean, what's wrong with making a few mil off of a bunch of gazillionaires with ties to Islamic terror groups anyway?
Not to mention all of the shady stock deals and shadowy characters he helped make "respectale" by lending his name:
http://members.forbes.com/forbes/2006/1113/138.html
Anyway, I love the horse racing industry. Lots of good union jobs. It's the rest of this that makes me think. Then again, he'll be a nice juicy target for the Clinton machine...... |
|
|
|