Friday, June 27, 2008
|
|
Meet Barack "No Bounce" Obama
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
5:10 PM
|
From Time:
Illinois Senator Barack Obama enters the General Election with a tight lead, 43% to 38%, over Arizona Senator John McCain, according to a new TIME magazine poll of likely voters. The poll shows Obama gaining only a slight bounce from Hillary Clinton's departure from the campaign early this month.
Why has Obama failed to achieve the same sort of early lead that Kerry, Gore and even Dukakis established before fading in the fall?
The security issue, of course. You may like Obama a lot, but you know he is the Neville Chamnberlain of the South Side of Chicago, and you also know that it is a very dangerous time to be turning the keys of the Oval Office over to a rookie with an increasingly obvious knowledge and credibility gap to go with his experience gap.
A vote for Obama is a vote for the increased vulnerability of the United States to terror attacks at home and rising Islamist fanaticism abroad.
|
|
|
McCain does need to distinguish why we should vote for him over Obama. Sure McCain gains from the "anyone but Obama vote" but that will not be enough to win the election. |
|
The GOP, led by GWB, has succeeded in keeping the terrorists from attacking the American homeland.
Also, as you like to point out, despite the Democrats best efforts the U.S. GNP has continued to grow.
GWB is, as you like to point out, a great man and a great leader.
I hope you feel re-assured knowing that readers will be made doubly aware of GWB and the GOP's sucesses with me posting right behind you.
We can do it Kimberly. We can defeat Obama in November. |
|
|
|
I can't wait for the scales to fall from your eyes and for you to see the truth ...
You are being conned by Obama ...
Ok, so don't vote for McCain but please don't vote for the con job that Obama is pulling on you ...
|
|
|
Gotta love it. You've got Kimbergull dear pegged! |
|
Bush III over Carter II anyday. McCain is bad and Obama is way worse.
Maybe some one could hire Obama to run a chain of Taco Bells before he comes into the big time.
Be thankful that the RNC does not have as much as two brain cells they can rub together or Obama would cost the DNC any new seats in the House and Senate.
Obama does not have a clue what he is doing. |
|
|
I sense a hint of nervousness in your laughter. Obama supporters are in for a rude awakening if he takes it. |
|
|
|
"A vote for Obama is a vote for the increased vulnerability of the United States to terror attacks at home and rising Islamist fanaticism abroad."
Who was president when the towers came down? Where is OBL? How many soldiers have died in the Iraq quagmire. How much money have we wasted on the failed response to the attack on our homeland. How bad is our economy and our infrastructure since Bush's has been unable to attend to other things much less provide funding where it is needed. And tell me about our collapsing economy and how that makes us so "strong" under the supposed "experienced" republicans.
You've got nothing Mr Hewitt as the war on terror is mostly a ploy for power using fear for votes. And dispicably the war has mostly been about profiteering to a treasonous degree with Mr Bush asking , "The buck stops where?"
A vote for a Constitutional Law specialist like Barak Obama is a vote for rational thoughtful policy and returning strength to this great nation.
|
|
|
|
|
He's just upset there will only be one more football game OSU loses before Obama is elected and we're all blown to kingdom come. It's interesting the neo-cons had no problem supporting Bush despite his total lack of experience in foreign policy. I guess they thought all of his experienced advisors (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Kristol) would be able to lead him on the right path, but look at how that turned out. The day of reckoning for the Republicans is coming and not a day too soon. |
|
We'll bounce at the right time--near the election. This race is going to be like Reagan/Carter in 1980. In the end, Barack will allay the hysterics that clowns like Hugh are putting forward and there will be a massive break in his direction.
Hugh's little "bounce" talk just shows how emotive and pathological his politics has become. It is almost funny how shrill the guy is.. |
|
|
Again! Uh, huh. The WTC was atacked the first time, then not again on Clinton's watch. On whose watch did the terrorists finally succeed in knocking down the towers? Huh? |
|
|
More EXCELLENT NEWS FOR JOHN McCAIN and the REPUBLICANS. |
|
|
Muirego, hard to get rid of a bad, bad penny. Wizbang banned you, now you infect here. If the Jamie Gorelick had not prevented the investigating Moussowi's (?) laptop, which contained the names of all the 9/11 hijackers, during the Clinton adminstration, 9/11 could have been prevented. If after the first attack on the WTC had been treated as what it was rather than a criminal act, it would have been traced to al Qaeda and Bin Laudin. They are at war with us (by their declaration) and you want to treat it as a police matter. Winesh*thead, Bush had 8 years of Executive experience that Obama lacks. Why don't you produce something, no, anything written by Obama when he headed the Harvard Law Review? The list of legislation he has failed to vote on is staggering. He changes his position on issues as often as you change tampons. He is an empty suit. Nothing but blind Marxist ambition. |
|
The two winning issue in this election cycle are simple.
1st. Drill for energy and boot the Hippies out of the Energy Department.
2nd. Yes, take back America. Illegal Aliens are killing the middle class and American Laws need to be enforced.
When the Republicans had some power under Newt. They could have won elections for decades to come if they would have moved election day to the second or third Saturday following April 15th.
But as we have seen the RNC is not very smart.
The Folks running the DNC are smarter and have voters whom are un-informed or looking for the Free-be.
All you have to do to win elections for the DNC is tell people you will pay them to sit home eating Bonn-Bons looking forward to the Jerry Springer Show or, tell them you are going after the Rich guys to re-distribute the money to the DNC voter. The funny thing is the DNC voter can not figure out their guys are the richest in our Government. |
|
|
feel sorry for these neocons. The country is in shambles and they somehow feel they need to defend the bankrupt policies that have brought us to this point. How hard it must be to argue the merits of your position when you have less then nothing to back it up. Ideology bankrupt or otherwise is hard to part with. But maybe with time. I used to vote republican but finally saw the light of voting against mine and the countries interest in favor of a few selfish profiteers with nothing but personal gain on their minds. Sad the way they use their base playing on their fears and prejudices with no real intent on helping them. |
|
Do you hear about North Korea?
Do you give any credit to Bush?
Diplomacy without the threat of use of force is like an orchestra without instruments - Winston Churchill.
Have you heard of him?
No I didn't think so.
Non-cowboy style...yeah your right.
Obama is the clown in the room. |
|
|
|
Hugh,
With this kind of commentary, it's not wonder that your site visits are down 50% since January.
http://www.sitemeter.com/?a=stats&s=s26hewitt&r=33 |
|
....Kerry, at this point, had a smaller lead than Obama does now, in the low single digits.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/bush_vs_ke rry_historical.html
The electorate is split right now, so these national polls come as no surprise. However, a presidential election is not one big election but rather 50 smaller ones, and Obama is far better positioned there.
Source:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Note that Obama and McCain are tied in Florida and within the margin of error in Georgia and North Carolina. McCain is going to have to defend turf previous Republicans in the post-Reagan era have taken for granted. And if Obama wins these three states, it is going to be an electoral landslide. |
|
|
Georgia is where Bob Barr poses the biggest threat to McCain. I suspect he might make the difference in Florida too. A Republican cannot move to the center without first securing his base. McCain not only failed to do that but went out of his way to let us know we aren't welcome. It's like I've said before, he is more interested in winning a Nobel Prize for global warming than being president. |
|
|
Is it just me, or did Hugh only months ago attack McCain with the same reckless abandon he now attacks Obama? |
|
The notion that Sen. Obama even rises to the level of a Neville chamberlain is generous.
Each time Mr. Obama has cause to dialog on any geo-political or historical reference he demonstrates his intellectual deficit in those areas.
How does a man, a graduate of a law school, not know that Poland was not in the liberation sphere of the Allied Forces in W.W. II?
How does a Presidential aspirant not know that the translators we use in Iraq speak Arabic and that ones used in Afghanistan need to speak Pashtun and/or Farsi?
How does a Sen. that has an ethnicity that includes African ancestry not know that the march on Selma took place in 1965, not before he was born in 1961?
How does Barack Obama, having lived on the planet not view Iran as a threat and dare to say that Iran "doesn't pose a threat to us."
Really? Tell it to the family of U.S. Navy Diver Robert Stethem whose head was bashed into gray brain gobulets with an armrest from TWA Flight 847 and then shot and thrown out on the deck of Beirut Intl. Airport by Hezbollah.
Tell it to the maimed and killed Americans in Iraq, whose attackers are using explosives and tactics directly sent and guided by Iran.
Sen. Obama needs to be forensically and microscopically examined in debate as to the level of his cognition and knowledge of the world and world affairs.
I suggest some very basic questions that start with the African continent and history. I'll wager that even with prep and 'preparation', he'll be unable to appear anything other than flat-footed when the tele-prompter isn't available.
Oh, yes there's a security concern swirling about Sen. Obama. The concern that attaches to one that is in over his head in areas that require being heads-up.
|
|
Anyone else notice that there are some strange bedfellows lining up on these threads lately? Most of them involve conservatives and liberals attacking RINOs for being liars, fear-mongers and race-baiters. I just found myself siding with brob, who is my diametrical political opposite, against OHM on these issues. It just isn't working for you RINOs because you of the futility of, figuratively speaking, trying to sell cancer to the dying.
The solution is to find a new GOP nominee whose TRUE story inspires confidence and enthusiasm. If we were discussing real issues, we wouldn't have so many strange bedfellows but since you RINOs are such liars, we never get to the meat of any matter. You just can't lie your way to virtue. But you keep trying and losing elections along the way. |
|
When I heard McCain's Hispanic Outreach guy was none other than Smiling Juan Hernandez, I knew John McCain has heard nothing we have had to say.
Smiling Juan Hernadez
We know who he is, we know his loyalties are to Mexico, we know he wants to erase our borders and immigration laws.
JOHN MCCAIN, YOU NEED A NEW HEARING AID
Smiling Juan Hernandez
In case you don't know him, he used to work for the Mexican govt., lately he has been shilling for "rights" for illegal aliens in this country. He has said he wants Mexicans to remain Mexicans even if they are living here. His loyalties are to Mexico, not U.S.
Questions for illegal alien apologists like John McCain:
Why does The National Council of the Race (la raza in spanish) and the Chamber of Commerce get to negotiate a "Comprehensive Shafting of The American Citizens" behind closed doors? Since when does an organization representing foreign nationals breaking our laws get to rewrite our immigration laws to suit the lawbreakers? Isn't this akin to allowing NAMBLA to rewrite our laws regarding child predators? Or allowing organized crime syndicates to rewrite racketeering, gambling, prostitution, and extortion laws?
We The People are being told by our representatives that we should sit down and shut up while they invite in the entire world. We The People should get some say in this matter. Another amnesty will set off a stampede like we have never seen before. There is not much time to save our country. All the power and money are on the side of shoving this amnesty down our throats. The RNC wants an amnesty candidate, don't vote for one. |
|
I disagree somewhat with the security fear factor. It think what is winning for Obama is what I call the "cost" factor.
Frankly most Americans barely know Iran exists until they shut down the straights of Hormuz.
What Americans are responding to are three things that ditrectly effect them. Oil, healthcare, and taxes.
Especially on oil McCain very shrewdly dumped his no drilling policy and added it to his nuclear approach. Most American have a basic understanding that oil and nuclear power are responsible for most of the power in America, and also understand the high price of corn caused by ethanol. Obama's response has just not been adequate.
On taxes it is hard to pay attention, but Obama proposed raising SS taxes on income above $102,000 oer year. While most Americans do not earn that much such a radical change to the tax structure does start the imagination realing, and this would be an effective 15% tax increase at those levels.
The healthcare there is not much discussion but Obama has used the word "mandates" and that has stuck. Most people who work view mandates for health insurance the same as they do mandates for car insurance, a understanding that they will have to pay something extra.
Except for the 20% of the population that is the chattering class most Americans don't hate W or probably barely knows he even exists lately. What they do know is prices and that is the fear of Obama. I am sure Obama fans already know that he is sensing this. Do not be surpised if you see some further about faces in his campaign including:
Allowing oil exploration
A "revision" to his earlier tax statements
A removal of the word "mandates" from his health plan.
Obama is enough of a politician to know that Bush hatred will be enough to carry him as long as the majority of people who could care less feel he won't sink them economically.
|
|
|
Hm. So with reference to NK, Bush is back to where Clinton was in 1999. Except that NK has a few nukes. All that saber-rattling and axis of evil stuff accomplished what again?? Basically Bush turned it around 360 degrees. Yeesh. Time to get the amateurs out. Time to put the grown-ups in. |
|
|
Is the enthusiasm component. It is clear on the Dem side. Where is the enthusiasm in the GOP for McCain? |
|
I think that people were waiting to see what Hillary was going to do. I work with some real hard core Hillary supporters and they still do not want to come around. They want Hillary to rise up at the convention and bump him off.
They are still very angry that she did not get the nomination.
Craig I do agree with you on some of the issues that you discussed. The immigration policy bothers me with the driver's licenses that he wants to give to illegals.
I can say I did not know that ethanol was so costly until recently. |
|
Craig: first, nice post.
I think national security and energy policy are tied very close together, and I don't see Obama prevailing there because he's tied to the nutty left--no drilling, no shale, no coal, no nuclear, only wind, solar, and ethanal.
I would like a straight answer from a reliable source about drilling on land currently subject to leases. The Dems are screaming that oil is there, but the oil companies seem to be saying that leases don't cover productive land. Anyway, I'm predisposed not to believe Democratic members of Congress. Heck, Dodd heads a banking committee and didn't know he was getting a sweetheart loan. All the same, I think McCain can bury Obama on energy--not just oil, the whole package. If we ain't got energy, little else matters.
Craig, on taxes, you wrote in part:
"On taxes it is hard to pay attention, but Obama proposed raising SS taxes on income above $102,000 [per] year."
Not to single you out, but I believe that Obama proposes to create a "doughnut" in which the tax increase won't apply until the wages/salaries exceed $250,000. So, there'd still be the lower cap (adjusted for inflation), then no added tax for those making $102+K to $250K, then the added tax kicks in. It's income distribution.
I think the increase in the capital gains tax is a bad idea. Stats seem to show that tax revenue actually increases when that rate is lower. Now, it's a canard to say that that rate affects people with IRAs, 401(k), or tax-deferred retirement vehicles in which they own stock or mutual funds. When distributed, they're taxed at ordinary income tax rates. So, that's a bogus point, but raising that rate still seems a bad idea. |
|
|
Regarding your 9:55 post: Spot on. |
|
...really a winning issue for McCain? The principal affected states are Florida and California. McCain has no chance in California either way- and drilling isn't happening here anyway, as any Republicans in this state- including Gov. Schwartzenegger- oppose it.
Florida is another question. Offshore drilling has long been hugely unpopular there. Jeb Bush was strongly opposed, and so was Crist until recently, when he's been wavering. Is $5.00 a gallon gas enough to swith Florida voters on the issue? Initially, the answer may be yes, but over several months, my guess is no. This is especially true as the voters learn the sobering facts about offshore drilling- the economically recoverable amonts are relatively insignificant, and even thenany measureable effect on gas prices could not be expected until approximately 2030.
Source:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html
Republicans in Florida are divided on the issue. "Our energy policy should not completely disregard the importance of protecting our natural resources and the environment," said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in a statement, noting that her district includes a marine sanctuary with one of the largest coral reefs in the world.
McCain may be betting that he will trade votes in stressed states such as Ohio for those he loses in Florida. It is a dangerous strategy. Personally, I don't think McCain can win without Florida, which recent polls show a dead heat.
|
|
|
...for a straight answer on drilling with respect to domestically leased land. I join you. If oil is there and can be gotten economically, let's go get it, and increase refinery capacity if needed. |
|
Hugh,
"A vote for Obama is a vote for the increased vulnerability of the United States to terror attacks at home and rising Islamist fanaticism abroad."
You don't seriously believe that do you? You have nothing to back up that statement, and you know it.
We will be safer with either McCain or Obama. The Bush White House was asleep at the wheel in September of 2001. Had they been paying attention to the intelligence reports, the World Trade Center might still be standing.
I doubt if either a McCain or an Obama administration could be as feckless as Bush.
And Hugh, I know you're rooting for McCain, but let's keep the debate to real differences the two men have on the issues. This is just fear mongering. |
|
Sam I did look more closely at Obama's plan and did notice the donut hole approach, but I think that it still reads to many Americans as "tax goes up."
I agreed with all your other comments, espcecially about energy policy related to foreign policy and the capital gains taxes.
One thing though that I am especially weirded out by and I would love to Obama people to respond to me about this is the pained attempts to avoid taxing anyone but the top 2% of the population.
First off even though this group pays a disproportionate share of taxes they still pay about 25% of total taxes. Even if you really soaked them, most economists believe you would only get about a 5% total revenue bump which would of course be more than offset by new social programs.
The reality is the only effective increase would be the top 10%. This group pays about 50% of total taxes. These people don't have the ability to avoid taxes the way the truly wealthy do. I believe that Obama is avoiding them though is because he truly needs them to win.
In the end I believe voters are rejecting Obama's tax plans because they are couched in income redistribution and anti-wealthy "pay their fair share" talk. If Obama just focused on a tax policy that brought in the most revenue (And yes a low capital gains tax has done that) I think that everything wouldn't sound like taxes going up for all.
|
|
cont.
One thing though that I think Obama has to get off of is that the tax rate for the middle class is too high. Bush cut the taxes for the middle class and poor to levels I didn't think possible. Except for ss and medicare the lowest 50% pay almost no federal tax and of course the social security money does mostly come back to them. Obama was talking about a $1000 tax credit for the middle class, which begins to beg the question. Why even bother having the poor and middle class pay taxes at all. It seems like a big waste of time nd effort. I am sure IRS agents wonder why they are going after this group just to squeeze out a few nickels. |
|
You appear to be criticizing Obama for saying tax rates on the middle class are too high.
What would conservatives be saying if Obama claimed middle class tax rates are too low, or even just about right? Something like this: "Obama supports taxing the middle class!!!" Right?
Honestly, when it comes to the right and Obama, it's heads I win, tails you lose. |
|
Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.
Obama's campaign, in a written response to Globe questions, affirmed the candidate's support of public-private partnerships as an alternative to public housing, saying that Obama has "consistently fought to make livable, affordable housing in mixed-income neighborhoods available to all."
The campaign did not respond to questions about whether Obama was aware of the problems with buildings in his district during his time as a state senator, nor did it comment on the roles played by people connected to the senator
Among those tied to Obama politically, personally, or professionally are:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_ proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/
|
|
McCain is very much the underdog in this election, and polls and analysis like this should not make them complacent.
PS HH has a terrible track record in predicting election outcomes. |
|
I meant to say that the polls and analysis should not make McCain supporters ("them") complacent.
My bad. |
|
"Obama is enough of a politician to know that Bush hatred will be enough to carry him as long as the majority of people who could care less feel he won't sink them economically.?
How much worse can he be than the Bush/RINO team? These faux-conservatives rode that horse to office but once in power, became every big government liberal's wet dream. The Bush hatred among them is envy for his having stolen their plan. Then these RINOs have the audacity to run AGAINST CONSERVATISM!!! Before we declare that conservatism doesn't work, let's give it a try! Promising conservatism worked in winning elections and those who actually followed through got re-elected. The problem is that we have a one-party system populated by an entrenched criminal class of weasels. It doesn't matter what ideas get them into office, all roads lead to bigger and bigger government while we waste our time arguing over Keynsian economics vs supply-side economics. It's all BS. |
|
I got a kick out of this.
When Time talks about Mccain's edge on national security it's narrow like it's not much. Even though you look at the poll Mccain's margin is bigger than the election poll or the one that almost shocked me to death was that Obama has a smaller margin on the economy.
Of course the shocker in this poll and I didn't hear anything about John Mccain having a heart attack was that Obama had a lopised lead on containing special interests. Of course if voters in other polls have this issue than it sounds like time to:
* Remind voters of the home mortage person
* Moveon.org wanting their antiwar.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN |
|
Pasadena Phil,
The last pure Conservative President was Coolidge. Reagan tried to be but his hands were tied by Tip O'Neil. It is Conservatives that are rebuilding Mississippi and Louisiana. The idea that 4 justices believe it's ok for cities to ban guns is alarming. What do you think? |
|
See lot's of Obama supporters here so I'll ask:
What has Obama done to make us more secure?
What has he done to increase our energy independence?
What has he done that shows he is trustworthy under pressure?
What has he done as a legislator to show he's willing to do the right, difficult things when the decision comes to him and it must made?
What has he done that will ensure we can trust him with the funds we provide him in the way of taxes?
For each of those questions, I can give examples for John McCain. I'm not thrilled with all those examples, but I believe McCain does what he thinks is best for our country.
So I'm asking, and I want what he's done, not what you think he'll do. |
|
I don't know about Coolidge, his administration was a disaster but he was operating within the flawed economic theory of his time. Reagan was also ham-strung by being surrounded by big-government Bushites who fought most of his famous decision (Reykjavík, Berlin Wall speech, etc..).
I'm far from being competent at interpreting constitutional decisions but it does seem to me that this new Roberts Supreme Court has a reluctance in issuing conclusive opinions. Roberts seems to prefer issuing narrow opinions that leave too many loose ends. That's how they dealt with the McCain-Feingold opinion and that seems to me what they just did with the 2nd amendment opinion. Why didn't they just make it clear that INDIVIDUALS have an uncontested right to own guns subject only to having that right revoked for the reasons all rights can be revoked: criminality or mental incompetence. I guarantee that this issue will be back. The DC police chief has already issued a statement that most of the old law is still valid and will continue to harass gun owners. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to signal that INDIVIDUALS were reserving certain rights as sacrosanct and untouchable by GOVERNMENT. This ruling, in my certainly questionable judgment, failed to make that clear. I think Roberts/Alito might turn out to be very disappointing to strict constructionists. Bust should have appointed Scalia as Chief Justice.
Makes McCain's promise to appoint justices like Roberts and Alito pointless. |
|
Pasadena Phil wrote;
-------------
"Most of them involve conservatives and liberals attacking RINOs for being liars, fear-mongers and race-baiters. I just found myself siding with brob, who is my diametrical political opposite, against OHM on these issues."
-------------
Pasadena Phil,
I've never been involved in race-baiting against Obama, as you suggest.
My opposition to Obama is explicitly due to his radical left wing positions.
In my book, there are only two races of people; the decent & the indecent. (Nod to Dennis Prager and Victor Frankl for that nugget of wisdom.)
Pasadena Phil, I know you get angry that conservatives such as myself are supporting McCain against Obama, but that does not give you the right to stain our reputations on Townhall with false charges of racism.
It's bad enough that you run around calling people "child molester" or telling folks that they have a small p*nis, or that they must be "gay" simply due to political differences on the Townhall boards.
Ironically, in recent months, I have defended both you and Virginia Patriot from false charges of bigotry and racism.
That anti-Mormon bigot JoeB131 (not to be confused with long-time commenter, "Joe") called you guys "racists," "Nazis," and "bigots" in regards to the illegal immigration debate.
He even began calling you "PasadenaNazi."
I defended you guys by saying that I've never seen you write anything which can be fairly characterized as "bigoted" or "racist."
In appreciation for defending him against false charges, Virginia Patriot even left a "thank you" comment in my blog, and told me that despite our differences in politics, he finds me to be "a stand-up guy."
Phil, you're about the same age as my father---you're a 50-something year old gentleman---I expect better from you, Sir, than to play the race card where it is not applicable. |
|
|
Oh get out with that Coolidge nonsense. Not only Reagan, but the current dilettante in office is the very embodiment of conservatism--albeit of the Boomer variety. No, you "conservatives" are saddled with years and decades of failed policy prescriptions. They come from failed principles--principles that have been given a free run of things and which have, on the main, undercut our country. |
|
|
Look at where our country was in 1981 and then look at 1989. Unemployment went from 7.5% to 5.5%, Inflation went from 13% to 6% and Interest rates went from 21% to 13%. We also won the Cold War. Bush is a failed President no question. Before Reagan we had failed Presidents for 17 years. We will have another failed Presidency with either Obama or Mccain. |
|
|
accustomed Torture of Facts is folly, Boyo. |
|
|
When you say thinks like "...but the current dilettante in office is the very embodiment of conservatism", you make just as much sense as the fear-mongering RINOs when they shriek about Obama being a Marxist, which is nonsense. There is a good reason why the GOP is in trouble among us conservatives, they are NOT conservatives. Big government is NOT conservative. That liberals insist on saying he is convinces me that liberals don't stand for anything either. |
|
|
becoming President of these United States is more than enough of a "selling" point to defeat a Castro, Chavez, Morales, Odinga clone. |
|
Do you think so?
I have my doubts.
People, do know their history. |
|
|
|