February 12, 2011
— DrewM Much has been made about Mitch Daniels and his possible run for the presidency. Most of it has focused on his oft stated desire to focus exclusively on fiscal issues and the perilous state of the nation's finances.
Last night Daniels gave the keynote address at CPAC and there was much interest in whether or not he would expand his topics to include the normal range of issues candidates usually must address. Such a departure from his previous statements would have been seen as an indicator that he was going to bow to reality in his run.
Well, he didn't. Hot Air has the video and transcript of the speech and it was all fiscal issues, all the time. No foreign policy and no hot button social issues (in contrast to say Tim Pawlenty who made a not very subtle play to social cons in his speech by saying the country needs to, "turn towards God, not away from him." ).
Daniels is running on a technocratic platform as the serious, sober adult who will roll up his sleeves and work with anyone to get the nation's fiscal house back in order.
The problem is the reality of what he is proposing (and what the nation clearly has to confront) is anything but mild, non-controversial "common sense". Sure you can talk about how the federal government should balance its books the same way a family does but what that means in practice is a radical departure from how business has been done for generations.
But we, too, are relatively few in number, in a nation of 300 million. If freedom’s best friends cannot unify around a realistic, actionable program of fundamental change, one that attracts and persuades a broad majority of our fellow citizens, big change will not come. Or rather, big change will come, of the kind that the skeptics of all centuries have predicted for those naïve societies that believed that government of and by the people could long endure.We know what the basic elements must be. An affectionate thank you to the major social welfare programs of the last century, but their sunsetting when those currently or soon to be enrolled have passed off the scene. The creation of new Social Security and Medicare compacts with the young people who will pay for their elders and who deserve to have a backstop available to them in their own retirement.
These programs should reserve their funds for those most in need of them. They should be updated to catch up to AmericansÂ’ increasing longevity and good health. They should protect benefits against inflation but not overprotect them. Medicare 2.0 should restore to the next generation the dignity of making their own decisions, by delivering its dollars directly to the individual, based on financial and medical need, entrusting and empowering citizens to choose their own insurance and, inevitably, pay for more of their routine care like the discerning, autonomous consumers we know them to be.
Daniels is embracing, in broad terms,the concepts of the Ryan Roadmap and in the process is suggesting a complete scraping of the current entitlement system and replacing it with something entirely different.
And what of this idea, "These programs should reserve their funds for those most in need of them"? Is that a tentative stab at means testing? Would that apply to current programs like Medicare and Social Security only these Entitlement 2.0 programs?
Put aside the various pros and cons of such proposals for a moment and consider how radical they are. This is not the work of a wonkish, old school root canal Republican.
I know people dismiss talk off charisma and style but the fact is politics is about building coalitions, building pressure from one set of groups against another to make things happens. Charismatic leadership can play an important part in that. It's easy to point to an empty suit like Obama but he had a comparatively simply task...get people excited about getting all sorts of "free" stuff. Daniels' plan is going to require people step up and get excited about taking less (at least initially). It's smart policy but the politics of making it happen are tough.
Here's my question...can a rather uninspiring, mild-mannered candidate who is running on competence and boasts about the establishment endorsements on his letterhead really lead this kind of revolution?
Posted by: DrewM at
10:43 AM
| Comments (168)
Post contains 743 words, total size 5 kb.
Our coastal betters have spoken.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at February 12, 2011 10:50 AM (ElYV9)
Posted by: robtr nickless liberation front at February 12, 2011 10:51 AM (hVDig)
Posted by: Alex at February 12, 2011 10:52 AM (x40U+)
Posted by: ParisParamus at February 12, 2011 10:52 AM (bgSjf)
Posted by: thetcrazyjerseyguy at February 12, 2011 10:53 AM (xp9ed)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 10:55 AM (gZVTR)
federal government should balance its books the same way a family does but what that means in practice is a radical departure from how business has been done for generations.
Just because it has been done so long, doesn't make it right. Any coin Uncle Fed pulls from the populous is a coin we cannot invest either through the market or the grocery store.
Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at February 12, 2011 10:57 AM (08Pe8)
"...complete scraping of the current entitlement system and replacing it with something entirely different."
A sign at every boarded up Welfare Office that reads:
" Free Soup, Tomorrow"
Posted by: garrett at February 12, 2011 10:59 AM (4/6X4)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:00 AM (gZVTR)
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:01 AM (l3g1A)
Posted by: Charles at February 12, 2011 11:02 AM (y85Ph)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:03 AM (gZVTR)
Too bad we can't take Daniel's stance, put it in Scott Brown's body, and make the resulting cyborg from a state that doesn't make southerns grab their squirrel rifle.
I can have something like that ready for 2016...
Posted by: Sean Bielat at February 12, 2011 11:03 AM (4/6X4)
Posted by: Spike at February 12, 2011 11:06 AM (WLxeI)
Daniels wants to fix America using better, smarter government.
Ninja, please.
America needs smaller, weaker government.
Well if he came out and defined "Smarter Gov." as "Smaller Gov." he might have a chance.
But then he would also have to define VAT as "Vajay-jay, Ass and Titties".
Ladies and Gentleman - President Mitch Daniels!
Posted by: Roadking at February 12, 2011 11:06 AM (JzKy8)
Posted by: Mandy P. at February 12, 2011 11:06 AM (vGmv/)
And hell, I just like the idea of a Hoosier president.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at February 12, 2011 11:08 AM (A6Hyb)
What does the Moron Nation think of Haley "Boss Hogg" Barbour?
------------
You mean Foghorn Leghorn?
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 11:09 AM (Do528)
Mr. Daniels has some good ideas. As for the social safety net, I am usually for anything that keeps the elderly from dying in gutters on Opera opening night. Otherwise it reminds me too much of San Francisco.
Posted by: navybrat at February 12, 2011 11:09 AM (wjxfd)
Posted by: B+rry Ob+owmao at February 12, 2011 11:10 AM (RlW7t)
What does the Moron Nation think of Haley "Boss Hogg" Barbour?
Well, they can't all be Sarah Palin™, but I like him too.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at February 12, 2011 11:10 AM (A6Hyb)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:10 AM (gZVTR)
...the serious, sober adult who will roll up his sleeves and work with anyone to get the nation's fiscal house back in order.
Say no more! You had me at anyone.
Posted by: Egyptian people at February 12, 2011 11:12 AM (uFokq)
I am not for death panels, but do people have to gorge themselves on "free" Dr. visits and prescriptions when perhaps a box of Kleenex and a bowl of chicken soup would do?
We tend to think its the illegals and those in poverty breaking this country. It's not.
It's the millions of retired people, most of whom are pretty well off financially.
I say this as an older person who will be retiring in the next few years.
Posted by: lan sing at February 12, 2011 11:13 AM (YHrQZ)
Given Ron Paul in the field, what's revolutionary let alone radical about Daniels? Is that to be his selling point? Heh, CPAC likely to straw poll for Ron Paul, so in the spirit of united alliance, join forces for the ticket, Daniels/Paul.
But the Hoosier said he has been heartened by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's blunt approach to his stateÂ’s fiscal difficulties and argued that such a take-your-medicine brand of governing shows that voters are further ahead of the political class in the difficult decisions theyÂ’ll swallow.
So long as the conservative campaign viciously attacks the status quo, exposing them as the snake oil salesmen that they are, there's massive momentum in America to vote out the corrupt thugs. That they've pose as compassionate conservatives or as compassionate liberal socialists only makes their incestuous rape of America that much more galling. Look at the suffering, rot and ruin that has resulted from such FALSE COMPASSION. GIVE US A BREAK!
Get the federal abusers of authority off our backs and out of the way for our Constitutional Renaissance to flourish through US citizens' productive pursuit of happiness.
Posted by: Plateau Plato at February 12, 2011 11:14 AM (H+LJc)
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at February 12, 2011 11:14 AM (mABIe)
Posted by: Mandy P. at February 12, 2011 11:15 AM (vGmv/)
------------
The answer is no.. not because he has no charisma, or that his ideas do not have some merit. It is because the revolution is dead on arrival.
There will be no Entitlements 2.0. Ever. The current systems need to be fixed in place.. and that can be done with minor tweaking, especially in the case of Medicare. SS might need more drastic reworking for 20 somethings just coming into the system.
So, talk of abolishing this crap is stupid and counterproductive.. and.. guarantees Captain Zero another 4 years of golfing at our expense.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 11:15 AM (Do528)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 03:10 PM (gZVTR)
Snap into a Smaller Centralized Government!!!
Posted by: Randy Savage / Jessica 2012 at February 12, 2011 11:15 AM (4/6X4)
SocialCon voters are motivated by style over substance.
Many don't know the difference or don't know they don't know the difference. I've seen them go after black republican mayoral candidates and demand to know to know their stance on abortion on the condition of their vote. They want to hear that the candidate is LIKE THEM.
Really, every candidate is a projection of one's self onto the stage. You vote for who most closely resembles you. If YOU grasp that the financial situation is more important than gay marriage or DADT then you vote for that candidate who thinks the same thing. HOWEVER, there are a lot of differnt interest groups who want their candidate to identify with whatever their main issue is and it could be anything. I'd normally never vote for a democrat but if one came out insisting on school vouchers and made that his main running platform, I would consider crossing over. It would save me lots and lots of money and wouldn't hurt the state.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:16 AM (l3g1A)
And hell, I just like the idea of a Hoosier president.
Yeah we really got kind of screwed with W.H. Harrison, didn't we?!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at February 12, 2011 11:17 AM (Dp9t7)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 12, 2011 11:17 AM (1fB+3)
1. Daniels was Bush's budget director. That's not as much of a blemish as, say, Paul Krugman being an adviser to Enron, but it doesn't add to his bona fides as a fiscal conservative, either.
2. As you say, Drew, he's laser-focused on fiscal matters and he'll work with anyone. Can he not do the job alone? Why does he need partners, and why does he need bipartisan partners?
I want a candidate who's a godammed leader, not a collaborator. Christie can do it without help. And I want a nominee who's priority is to defeat the Democrats and advance conservatism.
Is that too much to ask?
Posted by: Egyptian people at February 12, 2011 11:17 AM (uFokq)
I need to tell mom. She pays for hers and we can't figure a way around it. We can deduct it but not get it for free and she's still covered by the military if she wants to use them.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:19 AM (l3g1A)
Yeah we really got kind of screwed with W.H. Harrison, didn't we?!
Well, we did get his grandson for a full four years, but still, we can do better than that.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at February 12, 2011 11:19 AM (6eLhg)
I say this as an older person who will be retiring in the next few years.
Posted by: lan sing
--------
You are absolutely correct. And it is those types of reforms that can make Medicare work well for decades.
We need to put limits on numbers of visits per quarter or higher co-pays kick in.
ER visits must have much higher co-pays.. a lot of retirees use the ER like a primary care doctor's office.. at least as bad as the illegals.
We need to curtail end-of-life care that is pointless. Medicare won't pay for home hospice care, which most dying elderly want. They simply want to die at home, but we force them to die in expensive hospitals.
A little common sense would go a long way... as well as cost-sharing.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 11:19 AM (Do528)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:19 AM (gZVTR)
Just let Obama run unopposed, wait for the final and complete collapse, and then we can build a whole new world together ... shiny and new.
Posted by: Walt Gilbert at February 12, 2011 11:20 AM (OLomk)
Posted by: Mandy P. at February 12, 2011 11:20 AM (vGmv/)
Am I the only who doesn't choose their candidates based on how *others* will perceive them?
I don't give a shit what other people think. I choose who I like the most.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:23 AM (uFokq)
---------
More like embezzlement than a Ponzi scheme.
We pay in, our Congress uses the money to buy missiles and give welfare and gives us an IOU in return.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 11:24 AM (Do528)
Barbour is a great example of what I mean.
Here's a guy who agrees with me and most of you on just about everything and is a great guy and good executive. But we can't nominate him because *others* won't like him.
Fuck that.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:27 AM (uFokq)
None of the other candidates are talking about fixing broken programs. and to me THAT is business as usual.
Romney sounds like a retread version of McCain 'My friends".
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at February 12, 2011 11:27 AM (0fzsA)
Posted by: The New Black Panthers at February 12, 2011 11:27 AM (6eLhg)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:28 AM (gZVTR)
Then Pawlenty comes along, weak on a few conservative issues, and some of you will get semi-erect because he might pull in some independents and Democrats.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:29 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at February 12, 2011 11:29 AM (dYKl3)
I would be fine to limit useless end of life care but I'm not convinced that the government can decide what that is. Whoops! You're 82, no antibiotics or kidney stent for you! Your parents had good quality of life till 98? Sorry 75 year old, WE don't want to pay for chemo.
Most "well off" elderly carry not only medigap insurance but also long term care insurance. They are not getting top care for free. And medicare will not pay for repeated visits to a doctor unless that doctor is good at the scam. I've beaten up plenty a few who pad the visit and make it obviously too expensive. The real criminals are there--doctors who prey on the elderly.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:31 AM (l3g1A)
Posted by: Mandy P. at February 12, 2011 11:32 AM (vGmv/)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 12, 2011 11:33 AM (8jQbF)
Posted by: Y-not at February 12, 2011 11:33 AM (pW2o8)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:34 AM (gZVTR)
Here's a guy who agrees with me and most of you on just about everything and is a great guy and good executive. But we can't nominate him because *others* won't like him.
Like the Palin haters, after the media got finished painting him as Jim Crow Boss Hog, the right would run away screaming: "I never liked him, he's stupid or has stupid kids or quit something or doesn't eat enough arugala."
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:35 AM (l3g1A)
Danny DeVito and Rhea Pearlman
Julia Roberts and Lyle Lovett
Christie Brinkley and Billy Joel
If it was sex appeal that enabled Obama's electoral success, consider that Barry's fucking America in gang style rape-rape10 and most people (including women) don't like getting it that way, certainly not perpetually that way from one potus to the next.
Posted by: Plateau Plato at February 12, 2011 11:35 AM (H+LJc)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 12, 2011 03:17 PM (1fB+3)
We need somebody to calmly explain to our fellow citizens that it doesn't fucking matter whether they want cuts or not, because THERE IS NO MORE FUCKING MONEY AND WE'RE 12 TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS IN DEBT, and that a large portion of that debt is owed to China, who can start dumping it which will collapse the dollar if there are any military incidents or trade issues.
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at February 12, 2011 11:37 AM (mABIe)
eman raises a good point.
McCain's candidacy shit the bed because after the convention all he did was chase the elusive "media" vote. He was always seeking the media's approval and stopped giving a shit about the base.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:37 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 12, 2011 11:38 AM (8jQbF)
Posted by: Y-not
----------
Hearing aids are not the problem. One fourth of all Medicare payments go to cover end-of-life treatments in the last year of life of the Medicare recipient. Some attention to how that is done, in a humane way that is as respectful of life as it can be, would be a good place to start looking at cutting Medicare outlays.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 11:39 AM (Do528)
Some attention to how that is done, in a humane way that is as respectful of life as it can be, would be a good place to start looking at cutting Medicare outlays.
ahh, you mean like Soylent Green? It will subsidize the food stamp program, too.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:41 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: LeBron Obama at February 12, 2011 11:42 AM (ySSbr)
Devito, Lovett, Joel=rich. They would get free stuff for putting out for shorty.
They may have seen through Barry and his giving sex to them in an uncomfortable way but presented with the media's version of Mr. Tall and Cool and Wonderful they are still going to pull the trigger for bad anal sex guy. The media will paint the short white guy as completely impotent and they do a great job of making women think, "Do you really want to be seen with THAT guy??? Really?? Aren't you going to be embarassed at your reunion??"
It's crap but we're talking about a demographic that watches TV reality shows, reads Glamour, and listens to FM radio.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:43 AM (l3g1A)
Daniels IS PROPOSING that we radically shrink the federal government. If you actually look at his record in Indiana, he is the ONLY candidate in the race who has ACTUALLY SHRUNK the size of government.
He moved about 70% of the state's employees into HSA's. That's smaller government.
He privatized a variety of state services. That's smaller government.
He cut thousands of state jobs while at the same time improving services.
He sold off toll roads, took the profits, and used them to fund infrastructure projects with NO FEDERAL STRINGS ATTACHED.
His state has the lowest property taxes in America. His state has been running fiscal surpluses while other states around the country have been begging the feds for survival funds.
He is proposing to make Indiana the first state to move toward a state-wide voucher program that allows parents to use funds for either a public, charter, or private schools.
All of those changes are incredibly conservative. I defy you to name a single Republican in the country with a better record on enacting conservative change.
Posted by: stickety at February 12, 2011 11:45 AM (FUDwf)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:45 AM (gZVTR)
Why is there not one decent looking actual conservative who is at least 5'10? WTF.
The democrat machine must find them first and destroy them early.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 11:46 AM (l3g1A)
Unfortunately he microchip implanted in Gov Sanford's head implanted by the Democrats was activated in 2009.
Who's next?
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:48 AM (uFokq)
We're worried about putting up a candidate that may be too.....
[ insert vapid reason here]
And yet the Dems have no problem putting up a woman that is in rehab not even speaking anything more than monosyllabic words for the US Senate.
Funny, that.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at February 12, 2011 11:48 AM (Dp9t7)
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 11:49 AM (KzKTg)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:49 AM (gZVTR)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 11:50 AM (gZVTR)
As a former Indianapolis resident, I saw first hand the changes Daniels made there. He actually lowered taxes AND ran a budget with a surplus even during the economic downturn. If he runs, he has my vote and my active support.
Posted by: Steve at February 12, 2011 11:51 AM (ENygh)
For those worried about a bald guy, or Haley Barbour, or whoever...
Just remember this: Only 7 years after 9/11, the Democrats won the White House with a neophyte nobody with the middle name 'Hussein' and with close ties to anti-American terrorists.
Posted by: dolphin-safe soothsayer at February 12, 2011 11:51 AM (uFokq)
You OWE ME!!! Now, go and find a second or third job so you can afford to scrape by.
P.S. Tell the grandkids they won't be getting shit for their birthdays. Grandma and Grandpa are taking a trip to Barbados.
Posted by: another worthless baby boomer at February 12, 2011 11:52 AM (FUDwf)
Why should Republicans talk about social issues? I don't get it. Why does that influence social cons? How can the President have any effect on such issues, other than eliminating programs that subsidize bad behavior and nominating strict constructionists to the Supreme Court? SocialCon voters are motivated by style over substance.
Posted by: Spike at February 12, 2011 03:06 PM (WLxeI)
Hola!
Posted by: Mexico City Policy at February 12, 2011 11:54 AM (urYpw)
Romney witnessed how McCain got re-elected, studying the rhetoric for how things work or fail, which heart strings to pull.
I abhor revisionism. It fabricates and markets whole cloth deception as if the lie is a legitimate evolutionary experience readily seen from open and available public records that can be authenticated by scholarly research for content consistency and integrity in "meaning". Romney and Obama share too much alike for any conservative to support either politically. McCain is a particularly sad excuse for a senator who has used up whatever honor he deserved when he chose to be on the "winning side" with the authoritarians who have conspired to ignore the Constitution and sabotage America.
Posted by: Plateau Plato at February 12, 2011 11:57 AM (H+LJc)
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 03:49 PM (KzKTg)
A nice rack can cancel out a lot of negatives.
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof
A nice pair of legs cancels out any left over negatives.
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 12:00 PM (KzKTg)
You fail to note that Social Security is coerced withheld earnings taken by the Feds to be returned to the person whose earnings were forcibly withheld.
That some people have had their wages withheld throughout their life want to see their withheld earnings returned shouldn't offend a capitalist or a conservative.
Not all baby boomers are as you describe, btw.
Posted by: Plateau Plato at February 12, 2011 12:02 PM (H+LJc)
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 12:03 PM (KzKTg)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 12:09 PM (gZVTR)
Not all baby boomers are as you describe, btw.
Posted by: Plateau Plato at February 12, 2011 04:02 PM (H+LJc)
Good comment. I was going to comment myself. Some of these ranters should look into what the deal is before they rant. I'm as right-wing as any right-winger can be, not a troll. I'm one year too old to be considered a baby boomer. I'm on SS and Medicare. They take $110.00 a month out of your SS for Medicare. I pay another $156.00 a month for a Medicare Advantage plan. I haven't used any of it yet. So in the last year I paid over $3,000. It ain't free.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 12:10 PM (ySSbr)
STAH THAH. IH AMEHIHCAH ANEHWUH CAH OVEHCOHM A HAHNICAH TO BECOH WHAHEVEH THEH WAH TO BEH.
Posted by: Marlee Matlin at February 12, 2011 12:11 PM (6eLhg)
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 12, 2011 12:14 PM (l3g1A)
It is a scheme, a lie, theft, welfare in disguise.
Get rid of it. Posted by: eman:
--------
eman, you're an idiot. As PoconoJoe mentioned, try learning WTF it is you are ranting about. Come back when you get some facts.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 12, 2011 12:17 PM (Do528)
Posted by: nerdy weird guy at February 12, 2011 12:19 PM (z2Vr1)
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 12:20 PM (KzKTg)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 12:21 PM (gZVTR)
Posted by: SurferDoc at February 12, 2011 12:23 PM (KzKTg)
Daniels needs a 2-part strategy.
1) Project an air of calm, mature, intelligent competence.
2) Hair club for men and lifts.
Posted by: pep at February 12, 2011 12:25 PM (P18+/)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 12:26 PM (gZVTR)
Oh, that'll work - getting rid of the dinosaurs and then cloning them.
Posted by: Chuckit at February 12, 2011 12:26 PM (G5cOg)
Ohio State basketball team just took a lesson from their football team. When you find yourself in a tough game, let the other team set the tempo.
Ugh.
They were so much fun to watch for about 4 minutes into the second half.
Posted by: momma at February 12, 2011 12:29 PM (penCf)
Ugh.
They were so much fun to watch for about 4 minutes into the second half.
Posted by: momma at February 12, 2011 04:29 PM (penCf)
And sports "journalists" all across America are masturbating furiously and writing up their column about the Wisconsin Hex or whatever the fuck they're gonna call it.
Posted by: ErikW at February 12, 2011 12:33 PM (lXI/m)
Posted by: er at February 12, 2011 12:33 PM (z2Vr1)
And sports "journalists" all across America are masturbating furiously and writing up their column about the Wisconsin Hex or whatever the fuck they're gonna call it.
Posted by: ErikW at February 12, 2011 04:33 PM (lXI/m)
No doubt. Hope they mention the asshole that guarded Sullinger today. Didn't know we were playing 'elbow lock'.
Posted by: momma at February 12, 2011 12:37 PM (penCf)
Posted by: er at February 12, 2011 12:38 PM (z2Vr1)
Posted by: er at February 12, 2011 12:40 PM (z2Vr1)
eman's telling the truth, there isn't any question about it.
I love these threads, where I get to read just how deluded and spoiled some of our own folks are.
Your money is gone. I suggest Friskies, though some of the house brand pet products are nearly as good.
Posted by: spongeworthy at February 12, 2011 12:42 PM (rplL3)
Posted by: er at February 12, 2011 12:44 PM (z2Vr1)
BareNakedIslam:
- Despite a recent constitutional amendment in Oklahoma that bans courts from considering Sharia in court rulings, courts have appeared to ignore the ban and are actually increasing the use of Islamic law in their interpretations and decisions.
“Before the ban, we’d see maybe 10-15 rulings a month that used Sharia law,” said one Oklahoma constitutional law scholar. “Just last week, however, I counted 25 rulings in just five days. It’s gone nuts.”
Posted by: momma at February 12, 2011 12:44 PM (penCf)
Posted by: your carnivore housecat at February 12, 2011 12:46 PM (z2Vr1)
Don't care about SS, it doesn't factor into our retirement. We won our personal war on poverty a while ago, we aren't rich, just nice and comfortable. WE (wife and I) saw to retirement on our own. I was assigned, as was she, an SS # without any consultation on our parts, and money was extorted from us for years.
I really would like a refund of JUST my portion of that tax extorted--the matching amount is of no concern to me. When that amount is reached, then leave me the hell out of the system. Oh, and the assholes who insist I withdraw a portion of MY FUCKING MONEY under threat of a penalty can go somewhere far away and dark.
Posted by: irongrampa at February 12, 2011 12:54 PM (ud5dN)
Oh, and the assholes who insist I withdraw a portion of MY FUCKING MONEY under threat of a penalty can go somewhere far away and dark.
Posted by: irongrampa at February 12, 2011 04:54 PM (ud5dN)
You can't spend your whole life worrying about your mistakes! You fucked up... you trusted us! Hey, make the best of it!
Posted by: Your Friends At The Social Security Administration at February 12, 2011 12:56 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: Nemo from Erewhon at February 12, 2011 12:59 PM (9/96A)
Posted by: RushBabe at February 12, 2011 04:59 PM (urYpw)
Ha Ha. Oh what a picture. Yeah she's a real credible candidate.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 01:02 PM (ySSbr)
Ha Ha. Oh what a picture. Yeah she's a real credible candidate.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 05:02 PM (ySSbr)
What's even more terrifying is the position she has now...
Posted by: RushBabe at February 12, 2011 01:04 PM (urYpw)
Posted by: RushBabe at February 12, 2011 01:07 PM (urYpw)
What's even more terrifying is the position she has now...
Posted by: RushBabe at February 12, 2011 05:04 PM (urYpw)
No shit, it's beyond comprehension.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 01:07 PM (ySSbr)
That's right, the only man who can save America-- Ron Paul!!1!!11!!!!!
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 12, 2011 01:14 PM (iMgAa)
1. Daniels was Bush's budget director. That's not as much of a blemish as, say, Paul Krugman being an adviser to Enron, but it doesn't add to his bona fides as a fiscal conservative, either.
2. As you say, Drew, he's laser-focused on fiscal matters and he'll work with anyone. Can he not do the job alone? Why does he need partners, and why does he need bipartisan partners?
I want a candidate who's a godammed leader, not a collaborator. Christie can do it without help. And I want a nominee who's priority is to defeat the Democrats and advance conservatism.
Is that too much to ask?
Posted by: Egyptian people at February 12, 2011 03:17 PM (uFokq)
You, obviously, have not seen Daniels record.
Seriously.. look at Indiana before Daniels and now. Its very eye opening.
And he did it without a majority in the Indiana house. He has it now in both chambers...Thank God.
Indiana has the LOWEST property taxes in the nation. He made the Indiana government local. Wanna raise taxes here? It has to be voted on town by town.
Indiana is building a major highway half the length of the state.. with NO tax increases. No help from the fed either. A task NO other Governor in our history could do.
Daniels is the best Governor in the country. His record is impressive.
He has my vote. If he can do half as much for the nation as he has done here.. we will be just fine.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 01:29 PM (ph9vn)
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 01:35 PM (gZVTR)
Posted by: stickety at February 12, 2011 03:45 PM (FUDwf)
Amen. He is the greatest Governor in America. Best conservative in America. Hands down.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 01:36 PM (ph9vn)
That's right, the only man who can save America-- Ron Paul!!1!!11!!!!!
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 12, 2011 05:14 PM (iMgAa)
You realize they're going to be back here, right? It's not a question of if but when.
There's nothing we can do.
You still don't get it, do you?
They'll find us! That's what they do! It's ALL they do! You can't stop them! They'll wade through these threads and spam every single poll on the internet! They'll reach down our ears until the only thing you can remember is the Federal Reserve and fiat currency!!!!eleventy!
Posted by: Kyle Reese at February 12, 2011 01:37 PM (9r1ux)
Am I missing something?
1%?
faaaaack
it's time from grown ups and he's only adult in the room.
Posted by: icemike at February 12, 2011 01:39 PM (3Mqot)
He does sound like a good choice. I just wish he was a radical nutcase like me. Then I could relax.
Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 05:35 PM (gZVTR)
ahaha.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 01:47 PM (ph9vn)
Q: The Tea Party is taking aim at the man you first started in politics with, Sen. Richard Lugar. What do you think of that and would you discourage State Treasurer Richard Mourdock or State Sen. Mike Delph from running against him?
A: I've never made it my business to try to tell anybody not to run for office. But I'll be voting for Dick Lugar a year from May.
Q: What do you say to those who say he is not a conservative?
A: I don't think that's a fair reading at all of his record.
Sums it up, right there. Daniels is the lost Bush brother.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 01:49 PM (b9iP+)
You have to sell the American people on the kind of change that will restore America to greatness. Some pain may be involved, but look at the pain we are facing now?
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at February 12, 2011 01:50 PM (0fzsA)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 01:52 PM (b9iP+)
Paul took 30 percent while former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) placed second with 23 percent. No other candidate received double digit support.
A total of 3,742 people -- roughly a third of total CPAC attendees -- cast votes.
Paul/Romney 2012: We Won't Even Win Texas
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 01:56 PM (b9iP+)
You have to sell the American people on the kind of change that will restore America to greatness. Some pain may be involved, but look at the pain we are facing now?
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at February 12, 2011 05:50 PM (0fzsA)
And isn't it funny how you can trace it all back to too much liberalism, BIG Government.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 01:56 PM (ySSbr)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 05:52 PM (b9iP+)
Pro tax? Dude... Indiana has the LOWEST property taxes in the country.
He is right now, with his new majority.. lowering business taxes.
again... LOOK at his record. To say he is pro tax is ridiculous.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 02:00 PM (ph9vn)
Laurie - Paul will not even win a single state primary. I would be shocked if he gets even double digits in any state.
CPAC attendees are not prevented from voting multiple times. Don't know about this year but last year I had attendees tell me that Paul had people there voting and then going to the end of the line and voting again basically all day.
The straw poll is meant for entertainment and not particularly good entertainment. Only Ron Paul and his myrmmidons would take it seriously.
Posted by: Have Blue at February 12, 2011 02:02 PM (mV+es)
Posted by: Timbo
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels opened the door Thursday to supporting both a value added tax and a tariff on imported oil, bold proposals that could cause trouble for him with conservatives as he flirts with a long-shot bid for the presidency.
Daniels also suggested support for increasing gasoline taxes.
These comments come on the heels of a September profile in Newsweek, in which Daniels said tax increases might be necessary to tackle the federal deficit. "At some stage, there could well be a tax increase", Daniels told the magazine. "They say we can't have grown-up conversations. I think we can."
Politico
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 02:05 PM (b9iP+)
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 02:12 PM (ySSbr)
SS seems the least evil of the entitlements to me. You pay a tax, you get a check. Millions of bureaucrats picking winners and losers not needed, as in Medicare. So Give us a voucher if not privatize it. To think that we can roll back this huge system, tho, IMHO, is a pipe dream. It will implode first.
Also, we all talk about how AFDC has ruined the black family. Don't SS and Medicare divide families too? The elders don't move in with kids anymore--the guvmint takes over.
Posted by: PJ at February 12, 2011 02:26 PM (QdxaI)
Alaska: 8.1%, trending down
Indiana: 9.5%, trending up
National: 9.0% trending down
Just data points.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood, RN at February 12, 2011 02:28 PM (UL/HQ)
Having said that, SS deductions have been extorted from me and my employers for decades, and I think I am at least due the return of that extortion (preferably with interest). If the return stopped after that, I could accept that. But I worked my butt off to get a few dollars stashed away, and now the welfare generation, the illegals, the unions, and the chronically unemployed are working to steal that as well. On top of that a corrupt kleptocratic ruling class (of Rs and Ds) is bailing out big corporations that should have gone bankrupt, changing established black-letter contract law, deliberately devaluing our dollar, and letting bankers and financiers steal from, lie to, and flat out cheat their customers in contradiction of SEC rules (with no criminal penalties even though they are clearly defined in the laws we no longer follow).
By the way, for those of us that worked and contributed to the "system", Medicare is means tested and believe me it ain't free, although the death panels will probably earn their keep.
Posted by: Hrothgar-bankrupt and on the dole at February 12, 2011 02:31 PM (DCpHZ)
Posted by: Hrothgar-bankrupt and on the dole at February 12, 2011 06:31 PM (DCpHZ)
Did you see what I posted at 89 ?
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 02:44 PM (ySSbr)
I may not be back later today. I love this place, but when ANYONE on the right gets a chance to backstab or take an untenable position, it will happen and instantly turn into a grenade party, and when that happens y'all don't behave any better than democrats - everyone gets their own set of facts.
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at February 12, 2011 02:46 PM (bxiXv)
The GOP nominee is going to be whoever the MSM tells us it's going to be, and 48 percent of the population will play along. 97 percent of the black community will come out in the Indonesian Imbecile's hour of need, and the evangelicals and libertarians will stay home.
Fuck this shit.
Posted by: SGT Dan at February 12, 2011 02:47 PM (HBTr7)
Did you see what I posted at 89 ?
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 06:44 PM (ySSbr)
Sorry that I did not reference your post as the starting point for my rant. H
Posted by: Hrothgar-bankrupt and on the dole at February 12, 2011 02:58 PM (DCpHZ)
My best boss in the "real world" was about 5'8, a little less than average, with a soft voice, but he got results.
Charisma works for the fools, competence works for those who want to get shit done. I think after 8 years of "charisma" under Obama (he was being pushed on the stage from 2004, don't lie, he was) people wouldn't mind a ross perot type standing there talking good sense (minus the crazy)
Not to mention Daniels has a proven record, knows the machinations of Washington and though he doesn't present a powerful image, he presents a clear cut competence. If imagery were so important, IKE would never have been president.
Posted by: Douglas at February 12, 2011 03:02 PM (YKOnu)
BEST PRESIDENT EVER!!!
What exactly did he screw up? Tell me that? That makes him AWESOME!
Posted by: Douglas at February 12, 2011 03:04 PM (YKOnu)
Based on some of the comments I've read over the past few days, I'm starting to wonder what the hell type of candidate some people expect to get. Daniels has been 100% pro-life his entire career. He's opposed to gay marriage. He is sure as hell going to appoint strict constructionist judges.
Plus, he has the most conservative fiscal record of any candidate the GOP might possibly put forward.
Still, I've read dozens of comments on Hot Air and here that insinuate that Daniels is some sort of RINO..
Who's more conservative than him: Palin? Mittens? The Huckster? Newt? Pawlenty? Haley Barbour?
Posted by: stickety at February 12, 2011 03:09 PM (FUDwf)
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 03:16 PM (ySSbr)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 12, 2011 03:27 PM (eh+ki)
"SS, Medicare are designed to make people dependent on government programs..."
This is incorrect. Liberals and fauxConservatives don't design fuck-all. They think like dogs and decode/sniff one moment to another.
Posted by: ron dorque at February 12, 2011 03:32 PM (dRkvm)
A man who considers Richard Lugar to be a conservative isn't one himself.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 12, 2011 06:01 PM (b9iP+)
Lugar has been so popular here the Democrats dont even run anyone against him. Its only the last few years he has raised eyebrows. Lugar has been a conservative.. but, he has become arrogant in the last few years.
Daniels worked for him when he was in his 20's.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 03:34 PM (ph9vn)
Alaska: 8.1%, trending down
Indiana: 9.5%, trending up
National: 9.0% trending down
Just data points.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood, RN at February 12, 2011 06:28 PM (UL/HQ)
Indianapolis has more people than the entire state of Alaska.
National unemployment trending down? Uh.. I dont believe that at all.
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 03:36 PM (ph9vn)
Posted by: Timbo at February 12, 2011 07:34 PM (ph9vn)
Lugar and Hatch have been among the only few mildly Conservative pols in D.C. Over the years they have mellowed too much and have been there too long.
Posted by: PoconoJoe at February 12, 2011 03:38 PM (ySSbr)
in electing a President we are electing the leader of the free world, as the recent events in Egypt so amply demonstrated, you might not wish to deal with foreign issues or domestic social issues but they do have a habit of intruding and demanding your attention.
mitch danials is a small biege man who will be perfectly happy running some nameless department in the vast federal bureaucracy, nothing more.
Posted by: canuk at February 12, 2011 04:09 PM (XnGFh)
"Here's my question..."
Not so much. I consider myself a centrist, a borderline egghead, raised in mainline churches, schooled at quasi-elite and state colleges and Mitch doesn't connect with me.
Yeah, I understand his lingo but its like "go out and do the work and give me a centerpiece job".
Not feeling him.
Posted by: gary gulrud at February 12, 2011 04:25 PM (/g2vP)
Posted by: RushBabe
Allan West is probably the first Republican I have seen in years that speaks with the voice of Ronald Reagan. He has a lot of TR in him, too. He needs some more time on the political stage before he should consider running for President, though. But I would walkover broken glass for him.
Mitch Daniels could be an effective President. He understands the task at hand probably better than anyone else running. Mitch Daniels = Calvin Coolidge
Mitt Romney = Wendell Wilkie. He can't win
Donald Trump = Donald Duck. Much sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Sarah Palin = Peter Pan. I really don't think that she will ever grow up.
Ron Paul = Jerry Lewis. The French thought Jerry was a comedic genius. The Paul loyalists think Ron is.......
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes... at February 12, 2011 04:49 PM (sJTmU)
GOP nominee will be. Wait ... how about an election in each state.
We could call them primaries. Then, whoever wins the most elections can be the nominee.
Just a thought. Probably not the best idea. Would probably be better if it were left to bloggers. After all, they know everything and are never wrong.
I blog, therefore I know.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at February 12, 2011 04:58 PM (UL/HQ)
No coalition, no reins of power. It's tough math, but it's unavoidable.
Any putative candidate has to lead an effort to build a winning coalition. The three main constituencies of the right are still the SoCons, the Fiscal Hawks, and the National Security Hawks. Use your own names if you want. The good news is that those same interest groups have "members" who are Democrats. You peel off some of those folks, and you can win elections. The proven way to do that is to follow the Reagan example: be strong in all three areas, without being a dick about it.
The hardcore Ronulans and the more Paleo SoCons don't get that last bit at all. Their obnoxiousness is self-limiting. The socially-soft fiscal hawks don't get it either. They appear too squishy. You have to be strong in all three areas.
Daniels is trying to get in front of the Fiscal Hawk parade, and hope the larger parade is fooled into thinking it's theirs, too. It's the same exact mistake Romney made in 2008, so he's got that goin' for him.
It's also the mistake the Republicans made in 2008, by letting the media choose their candidates for them, and so they ended up with one-of-each:
1st National Bank of Romney, The Huckster, and McCain 'o War as the thee "viable" candidates. Clearly the Reagan example was lost on all of the above.
The candidate that appeals broadly to all three of those interest groups, without (overtly) tossing other, smaller groups under the bus, or alienating the regular working guy is the one that wins.
A Republican that can't get coal miners to vote against their union leadership ain't goin' nowhere.
Posted by: Bill Clinton at February 12, 2011 05:02 PM (Jut/Y)
"Beige" is much too bold of a descriptor for Mitch Daniels. This guy doesn't even approach Vanilla.
Posted by: sartana at February 12, 2011 06:13 PM (+fNcw)
Ya gotta love those Sarah Palin supporters. In recognizing that she doesn't have any positives which they can promote, they viciously trash her competition with sleazy lies and innuendo, trying to bring her competition down to her level, instead of elevating her.
Reason #163 why she doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a primary - decent people don't want to be associated with her sleazy supporters, the white trash wing of the Republican Party..
Posted by: Brian at February 13, 2011 01:47 AM (sYrWB)
Something tells me he's been running for president since 2004. What has he ever done that put his political standing at risk? Didn't the Indiana house kill his tax increase proposals?
A couple of years at Eli Lilly and he's a multi millionaire - how is that possible? Are they offering him another multi million $$ no show job if he does right by them in the future? How are we supposed to trust anything he says about Medicare or health care reform? How much government money do you think is spent on Eli Lilly products?
Daniels spent his whole life as a political operative. Yet, right out of the blue, with no previous business experience, Eli Lilly makes him President of North American Operations and then Senior VP for Corporate Strategy and Policy? You gotta love that: corporate strategy and policy. For those of you in Kokomo, that means chief lobbyist.
This is exactly how politicians get bribed. Multi million $$ no show jobs and the "remember who your friends are / you'll always have a home here" wink and nod when they go back through the revolving door to government.
He told Politico that he would have no trouble raising the kind of money needed to run for president. WTF? How exactly? From who? He says the "thought leaders" all want him to run. WTF? Aren't these the same bright guys that got us into this mess in the first place?
Up until a year ago, Palin lived off her governor's salary (which she refused to increase), her husband's wages as an oil field worker, and the family fishing business. All her wealth has come from selling books no one was obliged to buy and giving speeches no one was obliged to listen to. She doesn't wear flannel shirts and ride expensive Harleys so us plebians think she's a "real" person.
I trust her. Why should I trust Daniels? When has he willingly surrendered power? He looks to me like another GOP suit telling me to get in line because he knows what's best.
Why is the GOP Establishment so afraid of Gov. Palin? Why are they running around with their hair on fire trying to find somebody, anybody, to take her on? If she is the loser they say she is, why are they so afraid of her?
Never entrust power to anyone not willing to surrender it.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at February 13, 2011 03:22 AM (UL/HQ)
12 Daniels wants to fix America using better, smarter government.
Yup. Smarter socialism. In this regard he mirrors the GOP establishment. He and Romney are nearly interchangeable.
Posted by: some dope at February 13, 2011 05:13 AM (BZEkR)
That's a far cry from his CPAC speech where the debt is suddenly the "Red Menace" and an iceberg and a shark! In a hypothetical Daniels campaign, any mention of the debt will bring a litany of fingers pointing back at Daniels for his own part in setting the current spending trend and financial catastrophe we find ourselves in today. Just like during the healthcare bill debate when critics called it "socialism," Democrats yelled, "Medicare D!!eleventy!!" Which was enacted during the tail end of Mitch Daniels' tenure. Interesting timing, given Daniels' work with Eli Lilly, then PHARMA's one of the biggest budget-busting beneficiaries the GOP's Medicare Part D bailout of an industry that needed no bailing out.
Mitch Daniels says too many things that set off my bullshit meter. First, his dumb "truce" comment. Then his support for a VAT. Finally, his supporting Medicare-subsidized end-of-life counseling. He is as bad as Romney.
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 13, 2011 09:20 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: Jaynie59 at February 13, 2011 10:09 AM (/f9MS)
Posted by: Emil at February 13, 2011 01:52 PM (FZt5Y)
I would vote for him in a minute. The question is, will OTHERS do so?
I said several months ago that what we needed in Congress were warriors. I think the same thing is true for the presidential candidate.
It has to be someone with the heart of a warrior. Someone who will fight the media, the democrats, and various and sundry special interest groups. And someone who inspires people to follow him.
It disheartens me that the only person who fits this template is Allen West, who will be deemed to have little experience compared to someone like Romney.
Dang it, I want a warrior!
Posted by: Miss Marple at February 13, 2011 02:07 PM (Fo83G)
Allen West rode a Republican wave into a House seat after losing an earlier election. He is not nearly ready for a presidential campaign.
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 14, 2011 07:48 AM (mHQ7T)
As a citizen of the State of Indiana, I can assure you Governor Daniels is a fiscal conservative and has done some great things for the State in that area. Indiana has no budget deficit. Compare this to Illinois, who's state troopers can't buy gas on a state credit card, or Michigan, which is so much of a train wreck. Indiana citizens pay a 3.4% marginal tax rate with 7% income tax.
Governor Daniels has privatized just about everything he can get through over the howls of the unions. Indiana was one of the first state's to privatize the State toll road system giving the State billions of dollars to dedicate to improvement of infrastucture. There have also been several new car factories built in the State because of he and Lieutenant Governor Skillman's personal efforts at working with local officials concerning incentives. Indiana is still actractive to new business because of the low tax rates. How many new car plants have been built in Michigan in the past eight years? He has also rooted out the corruption that existed in the Family and Social Services Administration during the Bayh Administration.
That all being said, his proposed moritorium on social issues is absolute BS. The liberals in Congress use moritoriums to steam roll things like gay marriage, abortion, healthcare, environmentalism, and everything else under the sun. If the Governor truely believes in this moritorium, he's kidding himself or he's using it for political spin to look like a moderate.
Would Governor Daniels be good for the country as far a fiscal policy? Definitely. Of course, he would still have to do business with a committee of 535 people who have their own agendas. Would he be good for domestic policy? a beige candidate would be better than the red we have now. The jury is still out.
He's not a very charismatic person like Romney, but he did run the entire North American operations for Eli Lilly and Company. He's no slouch on the business front. If you had a chance to speak to him one on one, you would find him to be a very likeable person. Don't count him out.
Posted by: CMouse at February 14, 2011 08:43 AM (PrGr4)
So what will be his campaign slogan on his swell letterhead;
VAT and Death Panels - Perfect Together?
Posted by: D. at February 15, 2011 01:59 AM (plSrP)
Posted by: Vic
Mitch Daniels, from his December interview:
Q: The Tea Party is taking aim at the man you first started in politics with, Sen. Richard Lugar. What do you think of that and would you discourage State Treasurer Richard Mourdock or State Sen. Mike Delph from running against him?
A: I've never made it my business to try to tell anybody not to run for office. But I'll be voting for Dick Lugar a year from May.
Q: What do you say to those who say he is not a conservative?
A: I don't think that's a fair reading at all of his record.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at April 22, 2011 05:28 AM (UB58p)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3181 seconds, 296 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: eman:The People's Front of Logprof at February 12, 2011 10:49 AM (gZVTR)