September 23, 2011
— DrewM Allow me to be charitable...it was awful.
Maet was kind enough to link a piece I wrote at my own little blog last night that laid out my concerns with Perry prior to the debate. Clearly nothing he did last night improved my opinion of Perry.
First let me say...I don't give a damn about how many shots he was able to land on Mitt or wasn't able to land. That's simply the game that these "debates" set up. Being President has nothing to do with scoring "debate" points. It has to do with the ability to layout a vision, build the necessary political coalitions to bring them to fruition and then implement the relevant polices. Candidates sparring over what was in the others book doesn't really tell you much about their ability to do any of that.
What really bothered me about Perry? Two things stood out.
First, immigration. Perry seemed defensive and thin skinned when he was challenged on his support for the Texas DREAM Act. As I've said before, there may well be a valid public policy basis for Texas' program. For some reason Perry chose not to make it but rather he fell back a cheap line of attack that would make Lindsey Graham proud.
“I supported Arizona’s immigration law by joining in that lawsuit to defend it. Every day I have Texans on that border that are doing their job. But if you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart. We need to be educating these children, because they will become a drag on our society. I think that’s what Texans wanted to do.”
Really? You can't have a good faith difference of opinion with Perry on this, you simply don't have a heart? Got it.
The second major problem with Perry was his answer to a question about what he would do if as President he got a 3am phone call saying terrorists had gotten control of Pakistan's nukes. His response was...baffling.
Well, obviously before you ever get to that point, you have to build a relationship in that region. ThatÂ’s one of the things that this administration has not done. Just yesterday, we found out through Admiral Mullen that Haqqani has been involved with, and thatÂ’s a terrorist group, directly associated with the Pakistani country. To have a relationship with India, to make sure that India knows that they are an ally of the United States. For instance, when we had the opportunity to sell India the upgraded F-16s, we chose not to do that. We did the same thing with Taiwan. The point is, our allies need to understand clearly that we are their friends, we will be standing by there with them. Today, we donÂ’t have those allies in that region that can assist us if that situation that you talked about were to become a reality.
"Haqqani has been involved with, and thatÂ’s a terrorist group, directly associated with the Pakistani country". Non-responsive and gibberish.
As for this idea the chose not to sell F-16's to India, that's simply wrong. They rejected our proposal.
FTR- I'm pretty sure the right answer here something along the lines of, "As President I'd make sure the military has contingency plans for just this scenario. In fact, I imagine they already do. In my administration, we will ensure that our military has the proper resources to deal with such a crisis and I will not hesitate to do whatever is necessary to prevent terrorists from getting nuclear weapons and failing that, make sure they do not have the chance to use them on us or our allies".
I've prefaced most everything I've written about Perry to this point by saying something like, I want to like him but have concerns about him. Well, after a month of watching him campaign I have to say I simply don't like him and have no faith that he has sufficient command of the issues or ability to build the necessary coalitions to be an effective candidate.
Maybe that will change. I hope so.
As for Mitt..he's Mitt. All his negatives are known and baked into the cake. I'd vote for either of these guys over Obama but as things stand now, I won't be happy about it.
In other news...please stop with this stuff. It's not happening. This is the field. Deal with it.
Rasmussen has a poll out confirming the Suffolk poll from earlier in the week. Perry is getting smoked in New Hampshire.
In Iowa, Perry still leads in the RCP average of polls.
All of this was before last night. It will be interesting to see if Perry's FNC performance has any impact.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:11 AM
| Comments (441)
Post contains 815 words, total size 6 kb.
Posted by: nevergiveup at September 23, 2011 06:15 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 06:18 AM (niZvt)
At this rate, Perry may be a junior member of that club.
Useless bastards.
Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 23, 2011 06:19 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: Drider at September 23, 2011 06:20 AM (HaJD9)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at September 23, 2011 06:20 AM (UlUS4)
Rasmussen has a poll out confirming the Suffolk poll from earlier in the week. Perry is getting smoked in New Hampshire.
I've said it before I'll say it again. I do not trust Rasmussen on Perry polls. Ras is a Republican Party pollster. His bread is buttered by the RNC leadership.That being said, I have always said Romney will take NH.
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 06:21 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Robber Baron at September 23, 2011 06:21 AM (xVqXC)
I'm with Drew on this one. Perry withered and died last night.
But imagine how badly his debate-prep coaches must have taken it. Or, maybe it is worse than that, in that his responses are exactly what he had been coached and prepped to do.
That is scary. Really.
Posted by: I'm in a New York state of mind at September 23, 2011 06:22 AM (4sQwu)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at September 23, 2011 06:22 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 06:23 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: jjshaka at September 23, 2011 06:24 AM (zs1y/)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at September 23, 2011 06:24 AM (UlUS4)
Seems a little tacky and juvenile to me. Is the summary, Drew, Perry lost, everyone else kinda won as a result, and now the show can certainly go on, right?
Let's not forget about Obungle. Whoever ends up running is my candidate. This should be about as simple an election as possible, unless you are a hard ideologue.
Posted by: tubal at September 23, 2011 06:24 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: Patrick at September 23, 2011 06:25 AM (9Ko/p)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 06:25 AM (hiMsy)
Posted by: Angela at September 23, 2011 06:26 AM (ZWRkT)
Posted by: taylork at September 23, 2011 06:26 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: nevergiveup at September 23, 2011 06:26 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Sock Puppet 2.0 at September 23, 2011 10:19 AM (cA6/i)
Actually no, Drew won't be getting that. What gets people 'on' you is swearing at them and RANDOMLY typing IN CAPS because you are a frothing loon.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 23, 2011 06:26 AM (FkKjr)
It is not.
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 06:26 AM (GTbGH)
Even among conservatives at large it seems too many are swayed by appearances and sales pitch.
This is little different than the left judging by the pitch of ones voice.
Posted by: Its all about the hair at September 23, 2011 06:27 AM (u1/lw)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 06:27 AM (OhYCU)
Points to him having a less than stellar team and that will extend to his Presidency.
See, that's a worry because you can already see that in Obama. He's less than stellar and he populated his staff and cabinet with hacks - and look at what's happening.
Any doubt Perry would do that same after seeing him last night?
Whoever prepped him for that debate should be shot at dawn.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:27 AM (sbV1u)
May g-d have mercy on us all if she does.
Posted by: taylork at September 23, 2011 06:27 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: JJStone at September 23, 2011 06:28 AM (wb8Bf)
Did not watch - how did Newt do? Perry and Romney are involved in a strange man - love - hate relationship that is unpleasant to watch. This creates an opportunity for Newt to steal a move. Until someone else announces this dynamic will remain constant.
Posted by: Sub-Tard at September 23, 2011 06:28 AM (0M3AQ)
My major quibble is that it is far too easy to confuse glibness with intelligence and grasp of the topic. Did Perry stumble in his answer about Pakistan? Sure. He threw out the bullet points from his briefing without proper grammar. Is he Laurence Olivier? No, obviously not.
But soaring rhetoric and beautiful sentences are the mark of what? Intelligence? No. George Bush was no rhetorician, but he is an intelligent man with a firm grasp of many issues, including geopolitics. Bill Clinton is as glib as they come, but he used his glibness as a cover for mendacity.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:28 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: nevergiveup at September 23, 2011 06:28 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: The Schwalbe : © at September 23, 2011 06:28 AM (UU0OF)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at September 23, 2011 06:29 AM (UlUS4)
But really, he seems like a dumb GWB. Whats your jobs plan, "I did good in Texas". Everything involving how he would turn America into Texas. You dont want to brag about how your state is better than everyones
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (UQXED)
Posted by: taylork at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (ZDUD4)
Republicans would love to have a solid conservative at the top of the ticket for 2012. Perry was our guy but just doesn't appear to possess the gray matter to get the job done (I guess college grades do matter after all?).
If we can't get our Reagan, we will gladly settle for the guy that can win. If current polling is any indication, Romney can win, especially if he picks Rubio as his running mate.
Posted by: Bill Mitchell at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (uVlA4)
Posted by: Jordan at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (4z6KA)
I really hope we don't eat our young here and let that prick obama waltz back into the White House
Aside from the odd knuckle-dragger and mouth-breather around here, I don't think that's going to happen.
Every snigle one of us will pull the lever for the Republican nominee because to do otherwise is to lock in Obamacare and tax increases for decades. The SCoaMF is that bad.
If that happens the Dem slogan for 2016 will be "If you like being Sweden you can keep being Sweden!"
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:30 AM (sbV1u)
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 10:21 AM (M9Ie6)
Don't quit your day job. That's an easy prediction. The real question is whether he can take Florida.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:31 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 06:31 AM (qFpRI)
and with a majority in the House and Senate repeal will come quick and easy.
The Senate does still have the filibuster and I doubt that we'll have 60 R's (though upper 50's is possible). That means we have to have enough Senators absolutely committed to repeal and willing to grind everything else to a halt until it happens. It will not be quick or easy.
Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 23, 2011 06:31 AM (7EV/g)
My hope now is that it is still early.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 06:31 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: no good deed at September 23, 2011 06:31 AM (mjR67)
But when asked to think on his feet, he feels more like an empty suit, especially compared to glib Romney.
Actually, Romney is saying all the right things, but his problem is conservatives just don't believe him.
I'm at a loss at this point to say who I would vote for. (And why I am more convinced than ever that Sarah will jump in)
And, to make things worse.. it looks like it's going to be a really long primary season.
http://tli.tl/N4682m
I've been trying to keep up on which primaries are going to be proportional. And it looks like the Republican National Committee is sticking to its guns that all primaries in March must be proportional. That article is about the mess just here in Illinois.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at September 23, 2011 06:32 AM (f9c2L)
I'm much more interested in how he performs in hostile interviews rather than cattle-call debates because I don't think Obama will be debating anyone.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:32 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: brak at September 23, 2011 06:32 AM (82bKx)
Posted by: Dex at September 23, 2011 06:32 AM (qPJBi)
Well, WTF do we want?
This is AoSHQ so the reference to the SCOTUS's definition of obsenity is intended.
"We don't know what we want but we'll know it when we see it."
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:33 AM (sbV1u)
Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 23, 2011 10:31 AM (7EV/g)
No we dont. If we're commited we can do the same crap they did.
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 06:33 AM (UQXED)
What is this? Content-free commenting? Go troll somewhere else.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:33 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: izoneguy at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (i6Neb)
. Seriously, I concur - last night debate sucked. This debate was a big step down for pretty much everyone on that stage, save for Newt (whom I begrudgingly respect, despite all his personal baggage) and Cain.
*sighs*. Still, I'd support anybody on that stage over the SCoaMF.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (9hSKh)
According to a witness who was there, it was one guy and it echoed.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (T0NGe)
I donÂ’t think you have a heart.We need to be educating these children, because they will become a drag on our society.
That first part is "compassionate conservatism", which I'm guessing we're all sick to death of.
The second part is simple logic.
Even if we as a nation decide to deport all illegals tomorrow, it will take another generation -- at least -- to find the majority of them.
Then, the question becomes "do you deport a second generation illegal?"
The guy would be 50 years old, and would only have known life in America. Kind of like my 93 year old neighbor, or her kids, and her grandkids.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (SB0V2)
Don't quit your day job. That's an easy prediction. The real question is whether he can take Florida.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 10:31 AM (LH6ir)
I wouldn't be surprised if he took Florida. The "I'm less scary than Perry" bit will go over well with the blue hairs.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:34 AM (sbV1u)
Excellent points. Those off-the-cuff comments from Perry, back before somebody neutered him were the things that made him interesting to me.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:36 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at September 23, 2011 06:36 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: Mike Al'Moor at September 23, 2011 06:36 AM (3/AoQ)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 06:36 AM (uIz80)
Posted by: Max Power official Perry Winkle Member at September 23, 2011 06:37 AM (+wxCD)
Perry still supports the Texas version of the DREAM act but so does his state. As long as he holds to his 10th Amendment principles and leaves education financing as a state matter then it doesn't matter when he is president. I don't think he supports round up and deporting the illegals who are here but neither do any of the others in the field so it's a moot point. He doesn't support a fence because he thinks that there are other options that will do a better job to stop the flow of illegals...that doesn't mean he doesn't want the stop the flow and stating otherwise is dishonest.
Perry has forced the Texas legislature to cut spending. Actual spending. That's more than anyone else in the field can say. He'll work to repeal Obamacare and that's more than Romney WILL say.
I'll vote for any of these people (even Ron Paul, GOD help us) over Obama but, for my money, Perry will make a better President than Romney even if, in some ways, he is an inferior candidate.
Posted by: Laughing in Texas at September 23, 2011 06:37 AM (dL9LY)
First let me say...I don't give a damn about how many shots he was able to land on Mitt or wasn't able to land. That's simply the game that these "debates" set up. Being President has nothing to do with scoring "debate" points.
While that may be true, Coulter for example supports Christie because she doesnt wanna sit through presidential debates in the general election again (like with dubya), cringing every 5 minutes. Im not a fan of Christie but I certainly know what she means and yesterday we were alle reminded of that.
Posted by: Elize Nayden at September 23, 2011 06:37 AM (v49dF)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at September 23, 2011 06:38 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Angela
So why do we have primaries? I get that the negatives of primaries and debates can far outweigh the positives, but we either have to reform primaries, or reduce them to coronations, like Dems often do. If we choose the latter, it'd be nice if we were honest about it. We sure as hell weren't during the Delaware Senate race. Then, the "only electable man" wasn't sufficiently appreciated by the peasants. Now, different factions are aghast that one or all of the candidates will be irreparably harmed by the process. And to some extent, that's just what the MFM wants to accomplish.
But what choices do we have? Are meaningful reforms possible? Or should we abandon the process so as to allow the candidates to concentrate surviving the very real trheat posed by the MFM and their Dem opponents?
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 23, 2011 06:38 AM (326rv)
Yeah well......all those who were turned off by Perry's "don't have a heart" remark, may have forgotten about how Perry welcomed in all those refugees from Katrina.
He's also sent assets and people to help out other States after they've suffered natural disasters.....more than just once, too.
The point I'm making is that the guy does have a big heart. ....He takes his faith very seriously and all that 'love your fellow man' stuff goes with it.
I'm not ready to toss him aside just because of his lackluster performance in these dumbass debates.
Could someone please point out an example of a master debater who was also a good leader? ....Even Reagan wasn't all that great at debating, after having years of acting experience and time in front of cameras.
There were a lot of good questions that were asked last night. ....But Perry seemed to get only 'gotcha questions'. ....Chris Wallace bringing up the gardasil thing in order to pit Bachmann vs Perry again was sickening. ....I am really glad that Perry didn't fall for it and attack Bachman back, even though she's been attacking his wife in her fundraiser propaganda.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 06:38 AM (gZO5m)
So then, not so quick or easy afterall.
Posted by: The Noble Filibuster, Defender of the Minority at September 23, 2011 06:39 AM (GTbGH)
I'll vote for any of these people (even Ron Paul, GOD help us) over Obama
^^ This.
But I'm telling you, if that happens I'm going to have to start buying tin foil by the pallet load.
Those hats wear out quick.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:39 AM (sbV1u)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 06:39 AM (qFpRI)
I'm not ready to throw him under the bus yet, but the bus's garage door is open. He needs to bring his A game to the next one.
If Romney is the nominee, I'm going to hurl.
Posted by: Willy at September 23, 2011 06:39 AM (Ja9VH)
After watching 2 of the 3 debates, I'd vote for a Gingrich/Cain ticket in a heartbeat. I'd run, not walk, to the voting booth.
Cain would keep Gingrich honest.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 06:40 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Dex at September 23, 2011 10:32 AM (qPJBi)
I think it takes Perry out of the "frontrunner" spotlight, which he doesn't need as he (a) learns foreign policy, (b) learns to debate and (c) introduces himself to the American people.
The way a primary season works is there is one attention-getter at a time. For a while it was Cain, then Pawlenty, then Bachmann, then Perry. Now it will be Romney, so things will get easier for Perry. He has 3 months until Iowa and the primary season, as pointed out above, is going to be long because early primaries are proportional.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:40 AM (T0NGe)
Bummer. I am a big fan of Perry- I think he's a good man with a good heart and would probably make a good president. With that said, I realized last night that he's just another 'compassionate conservative' and we can't afford another one of those right now. Plus, his debate skills suck ass.
Newt is giving me amnesia as to why I thought he was a douche.
Herman Cain is just awesome, especially since he's apologized and made amends for his Islam comments. I'd vote for any of them in a heartbeat over O but I have special love for Herman.
Posted by: Ms Choksondik at September 23, 2011 06:41 AM (nxptv)
Hey, Lady Liberty, make me a sammich. A shit sammich.
Some pretty shitty candidates we have this year.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 06:41 AM (epBek)
no way will I ever vote for the annointed one, Mr Mitt "Obamalite" Romney, I don't care how awful Perry does in a debate. Yes I want Obama out at all costs but Romney is the same old same song and dance. we are in the middle of a civil war in this country. we need a person of action, a person who will rock the boat and fight. not a guy who changes postions with the direction of the wind and who is fine with Obamacare.
Posted by: exceller at September 23, 2011 06:42 AM (jx2Td)
That sounds pretty good, actually.
Posted by: taylork at September 23, 2011 06:42 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Fritz at September 23, 2011 06:42 AM (/ZZCn)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 06:42 AM (GTbGH)
Some pretty shitty candidates we have this year.
So I take it you won't be voting for Rick Santorum.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:42 AM (sbV1u)
Allow me to be charitable...it was awful.
No it wasn't. See previous threads.
Who you gonna believe, Vic or your lying eyes?
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 06:43 AM (epBek)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 06:44 AM (GTbGH)
This x 1000.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 23, 2011 06:44 AM (FkKjr)
You don't have to deport all illegals for the same reason you don't have to pull over all speeders or audit all tax returns.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:44 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 06:45 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: Rich C at September 23, 2011 10:43 AM (aXpAb)
Pence is getting executive experience in Indiana before running for potus, as he should. That makes me ever more willing to vote for him and/or just more willing in general!
Posted by: Elize Nayden at September 23, 2011 06:45 AM (v49dF)
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 06:46 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 10:44 AM (GTbGH)
It's the butt plug. You have to go up in size gradually. Bachmann's husband should have told him this before the debate.
Posted by: Ms Choksondik at September 23, 2011 06:46 AM (nxptv)
It isn't?
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 06:47 AM (X6akg)
He threw out the bullet points from his briefing without proper grammar.
Yeah, if you think the problem was his grammar you need to rewatch the debate. His Pakistan answer and his Mitt-flop attack shared the same problem, which is that they made no fucking sense i've heard South Carolina beauty pageant contestants with more coherence seriously I think he had a stroke or something. Grammar, yeah right.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 06:47 AM (epBek)
If you don't like what Paul said about homosexuality, you will hate what Darwin implies.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:48 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 06:48 AM (GvYeG)
Posted by: berigan at September 23, 2011 06:49 AM (M68R2)
By the time Pence gets his executive experience, he may have his choice over umpteen Ameri-stans for which to run for president.
Posted by: Rich C at September 23, 2011 06:49 AM (aXpAb)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 06:49 AM (uIz80)
Perry is still the leading "Not Romney" candidate, but I would switch to one of the other Not Romney's in a heartbeat.
Posted by: Bob Saget at September 23, 2011 06:49 AM (F/4zf)
It's the driving force behind their agenda to get homosexuality accepted as a normal sexual preference like heterosexuality is.
Homosexuality is not normal. Period. End of conversation. This is a demonstrable fact.
If homsexuality were normal the human race would cease to exist. Why they cannot grasp this simple fact is beyond me. It must suck not to be normal. But everyone is not "normal" in some way.
I personally don't care who is fellating who on any given night (unleess it's Scarlett Johannson. Then I am deeply interested...) And since I am not interested, I would appreciate it if they would stop trying to get the rest of America interested in their sex lives.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (sbV1u)
Posted by: Ronin at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (mhOHX)
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 10:47 AM (X6akg)
Anyone who doesn't recognize the flab on Ann Coulter's legs is probably a bit light in the loafers.
Oh, and Sock Puppet 2.0 is gay also.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (LH6ir)
Drew, what makes you believe that Romney will actually govern even quasi-conservatively? I am not convinced that this is the case. I have to say I feel the same way about Newt.
Perry has pretty much lost my support due to his refusal to see that there are good faith differences with his approach to illegals. Sorry, but I'm not inclined to give my support to anyone who wants to call me a bigot.
Mandatory: Of course I'd vote for either one over the SCOAMF.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 06:50 AM (GvYeG)
I should just sell out and be done with it. Curse my personal integrity!
Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 23, 2011 06:51 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: sTevo at September 23, 2011 06:51 AM (q1Tbv)
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 10:21 AM (M9Ie6)
Don't quit your day job. That's an easy prediction. The real question is whether he can take Florida.
NO - the real question is whether he can take MA in a general. He has OWLGORE written all over him.
Posted by: Sub-Tard at September 23, 2011 06:52 AM (0M3AQ)
Posted by: berigan at September 23, 2011 10:49 AM (M68R2)
All of us hand-wringers complained about that speech, but the fact is that Jindal is good but doesn't have a lot of charisma to jump out and run for President before having completed a term. I think Jindal is an odds-on favorite for 2016 if we have a Romney in the WH. I hate to think of what will be left of us with a lame-duck Obama term.
Posted by: AmishDude at September 23, 2011 06:52 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Jean at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (WkuV6)
This is not complicated. Pass a simple law that mandates a $10,000 fine for each illegal found working in any business larger than 100 employees. After two years, decrease the minimum size to 50 employees, etc. And then open the gates to Mexico, because they will be rushing back.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (LH6ir)
If homsexuality were normal the human race would cease to exist. Why they cannot grasp this simple fact is beyond me. It must suck not to be normal. But everyone is not "normal" in some way
There's a reason I refer to myself as queer. This would be it.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Bob Saget at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (F/4zf)
It was an awful performance. There is no beating around the bush. I thought after the first two debates that he simply didn't prepare, but now I'm convinced that he simply isnly a good debater.
I'm still leaning towards him, but not enthusiatically so.
He really screwed the pooch last night.
Posted by: Ben at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (wuv1c)
You don't have to deport all illegals for the same reason you don't have to pull over all speeders or audit all tax returns.(116) THIS
... I agree to some extent.
It's the attitude the government (INS) currently implements, just like police/highway patrol implements speeding laws.
Same slippery slope, different subject.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (Qxe/p)
86 ....Newt is giving me amnesia as to why I thought he was a douche.
Like most professor types, he has shown really bad judgement in his personal life....so, lots of baggage there that is not being brought up right now. ....But you can be sure that it would be played 24/7 in the general.
Newt let the Dems force him to quit as Speaker and Congressman. ....This too, is not being brought up right now. ....But if he gets the nomination, we will get sick of hearing about it.
Newt bought into the Global Warming thing, back when it was fashionable. ....He is beltway through and through.
That said, I have always been a fan of Newt and hated it when he resigned. ....But I don't think that anyone who has quit a high elective office has ever been elected to an even higher one.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (gZO5m)
Newt comes across like dad and everyone else as squabbling sibblings. Except Paul, he comes across like the nutty uncle in the basement.
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (GvYeG)
Anyone who doesn't recognize the flab on Ann Coulter's legs is probably a bit light in the loafers.
Oh, and Sock Puppet 2.0 is gay also.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 10:50 AM (LH6ir)
Wait...can girls be 'light in the loafers'?
Alright, alright...she has some flab....but it's hardly Rosie O'Donnell like flab. She's skinny-fat.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 06:53 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Ms Choksondik at September 23, 2011 06:54 AM (nxptv)
There's a reason I refer to myself as queer. This would be it.
You're not queer. Piquant maybe - but not queer.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:54 AM (sbV1u)
The actions of the idiot(s) in that audience last night are the sort of thing we conservatives get caricatured for.
America was once a place where we didn't have to fight for the idea of liberty. Once someone in the audience would have kicked the booers ass, if they objected. Not so any more. America sits on their asses.
We sit on our collective asses and whine. We have a megalomaniac fascist in office. The job is to vote him out. Sorting out our futures and disagreements can come later.
This scoring of debating points is probably harmless as long as it's an activity for amusement. If anyone out there among us would truly do the insane thing and give BHO aid and comfort on election day because of hurt feelings or an intrusion on hard ideology, then there is a problem with this staged fratricide.
Posted by: tubal at September 23, 2011 06:54 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at September 23, 2011 06:55 AM (ZDUD4)
Alright, alright...she has some flab....but it's hardly Rosie O'Donnell like flab. She's skinny-fat.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 10:53 AM (X6akg)
Ha! That's my wife's term. It's the only other place I've ever heard it until now.
This being defined as "thin, with absolutely no muscle tone"
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:55 AM (sbV1u)
Posted by: Havedash at September 23, 2011 06:56 AM (JfvbF)
Let's be realistic, outside of hard core political junkies, very few people watch the debates. Perry is great with the stump speech and he's got a slick production team and that will be what draws voters to him.
Yes, he needs to abandon the "you're a heartless asshole" line pronto. He needs to explain that it's about establishing residency requirements and that the voters of Texas approved it. Then maybe throw some snark like "I know you're not used to having political leaders who actually listen to the will of the voters, but I have in Texas and I will as President."
He also needs to refuse to answer any more questions on Gardasil. "We've addressed this subject endlessly, it has nothing to do with the crisis facing our country today, let's move on."
The 3 a.m. phone call question was a gotcha question.We're going to ask a question with no prefacing information whatsoever, you have 30 seconds to formulate and articulate an answer....GO!
Posted by: mpurinTexas, Evil Conservanatrix, supports Rick Perry, bitch at September 23, 2011 06:57 AM (pY3GI)
Darklord -- order matters this time.
Cain needs 4 years of international experience, by his own admission.
In my fantasy, Gingrich serves 4 years learning practical economics from Cain while Cain gets to know the physical structure of the world and its leaders.
Then Gingrich steps down and lets Cain run the show.
Hey -- we're all allowed to dream!
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (Qxe/p)
I suspect that this is partly due to the fact that the only human phenomenon more predominant than heterosexuality is the pursuit of the chemicals that sustain life.
...
It's a suspicion I have.
Posted by: oblig. at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (xvZW9)
I've heard and seen Perry speak here in Texas and he's never been an oratory wonder, but he's trying a little too hard in the Prez debates to score on Mitt and to be the cutesy Texan.
Posted by: Sphynx at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (fEmj2)
Perry is great with the stump speech and he's got a slick production team and that will be what draws voters to him.
This is not a selling point.
I know someone else with a slick production team that drew voters to him.
And he's a SCoaMF.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (sbV1u)
"If homsexuality were normal the human race would
cease to exist."
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 10:50 AM (sbV1u)
That is absolutely false. Normal is a word that does not have any sense of number. Perhaps common is a better word, but even that is not correct.
Homosexuality may be normal in the sense you mean, but that doesn't require society to accept it. Malaria is normal. Small Pox is normal. Hell, any of the common pathologies in behavior are normal.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (LH6ir)
^This.
I'm stunned that more weight is being put on these non-debate debates than on records.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (5H6zj)
Unless they figure out how to reign in the Paulbots straw polls are meaningless. Maybe if they do like Gabe and refuse to put him on the ballot it would mean something.
While they are at it they can refuse to put any "unannounced candidates" on it as well.
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Ms Choksondik at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (nxptv)
I hold those things against both of them.
But I'll also vote for either of them should they win. I just hope they don't.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (jx2j9)
Newt comes across like dad and everyone else as squabbling sibblings. Except Paul, he comes across like the nutty uncle in the basement.
That is the single best description of the field I've read.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 06:58 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: berigan at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (M68R2)
The point I'm making is that the guy does have a big heart. ....He takes his faith very seriously and all that 'love your fellow man' stuff goes with it.
I'm not ready to toss him aside just because of his lackluster performance in these dumbass debates.
Perry is accusing us of having no heart, we didn't accuse him of such.
And sorry, but debates are important. They demonstrate mental agility and knowledge of the issues, which are crucial to the Presidency. Perry looks to be out of his depth in them.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (b68Df)
>>>Let's be realistic, outside of hard core political junkies, very few people watch the debates. Perry is great with the stump speech and he's got a slick production team and that will be what draws voters to him.
We call those people "Republican Primary Voters".
There's no spinning this. Perry has racked up 2 terrible debate performance. He made George Bush's debate performance seem coherent.
I like the guy, it kills me to write that, but it's a fact.
And if you look at the polls, you can see he's been losing steam with each passing debate.
I won't be surprised if Romney is the front runner in most polls sometime this week.
Posted by: Ben at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (+g/Xl)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (A4C5M)
Posted by: SquishyCynic at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (BO6kz)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at September 23, 2011 06:59 AM (Z6fyp)
Yeah, too bad she shit in the well and then followed that up with a dead hog.
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 07:00 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: JEA at September 23, 2011 07:00 AM (WujO7)
That is absolutely false. Normal is a word that does not have any sense of number. Perhaps common is a better word, but even that is not correct.
The common sense operational definition of "normal" is "that which the majority does."
Unless you're telling me that we're done with sexual reproduction and henceforth the human race must reproduce in test tubes.
Then you'll have a good point.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (sbV1u)
The couch thing with Nancy is where I parted ways with Newt.
Posted by: Sphynx at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (fEmj2)
141 Perry has yet to show me why he can't do the job.
That isn't how it works. This isn't a coronation (though it seems some would like it to be). Perry has to prove himself. That burden is on him.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (b68Df)
Ann Coulter has thunder thighs?
Come to think of it, I don't think I have ever seen a full shot of her.....only sitting behind a desk, or a head-and-shoulder shot.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (gZO5m)
Iran 'steals surface-to-air missiles from Libya
http://tinyurl.com/3je5ynq
Posted by: berigan at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (M68R2)
He has one main weakness -- the debates. How important is that to primary voters? It's not for me to say. Me personally? I like results and accomplishments - not slick talk. I don't place much emphasis on debates - never have. Mitt Romney looks the part. Maybe that's enough for some people.
I'm very interested to see what happens at the Straw Poll this weekend.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:01 AM (rJVPU)
Homosexuality may be normal in the sense you mean, but that doesn't require society to accept it. Malaria is normal. Small Pox is normal. Hell, any of the common pathologies in behavior are normal.
Yes, and I can fix that!
Posted by: Marcus Bachmann at September 23, 2011 07:02 AM (sbV1u)
Johnson was totally baked last night, and I think he shared some with Rick before the final round.
That said, this statement deserves a repeat:
"I supported ArizonaÂ’s immigration law by joining in that lawsuit to defend it."
That's true, our AG filed the brief last year, and I haven't heard jack shit about it.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at September 23, 2011 07:02 AM (WvXvd)
Posted by: Wm T Sherman at September 23, 2011 07:03 AM (SYrAh)
Perry was B-A-D.
And since there's no position on any issue that Mitt has never had, he was able to benefit.
It showed in the Luntz focus group, but I'm hoping most people just aren't paying attention to this crap.
Posted by: Andy at September 23, 2011 07:03 AM (5Rurq)
The difference between Obama and Cain when considering foreign relations is that Cain would make honest mistakes.
Neither of them have the "diplomacy" thing down.
That bothers me.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:03 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: berigan at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (M68R2)
There's a reason I refer to myself as queer. This would be it.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 10:53 AM (VtjlW)
I assume then that you are a homosexual. I didn't know. And didn't care. And still don't care.
But this proves the point. Most people don't give a shit until it is thrown in their faces.
Society is overtly heterosexual because 95% of it IS heterosexual.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (LH6ir)
SCoaMF may have something to do with her reasoning.
Posted by: The Hammer at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (u7B3b)
Most primaries are open primaries now. That is set by the State legislatures and the courts.
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Red Shirt at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (FIDMq)
If a future Republican House and Senate send President Romney a straight Obamacare repeal bill, will he sign it or not?
He'd sign it or he'd be primaried in 2016 - and he'd lose.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (sbV1u)
You are incorrect. Normal has several different meanings which are close to each other:
nor·mal [ náwrm'l ]
1) usual: conforming to the usual standard, type, or custom
2) healthy: physically, mentally, and emotionally healthy
3) occurring naturally: maintained or occurring in a natural state
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at September 23, 2011 07:04 AM (FkKjr)
I've been wondering this exact question. Mitt always says that he'll grant 50 state waivers, but that isn't the same thing as saying he'll vote for repeal. I wish someone would ask him for a yes or no answer on that question.
However, he did seem to signal that he will sign a repeal last night. He said that it was a bad bill, and unconstitutional. Seems like he boxed himself in if that isn't his intent.
Posted by: pep at September 23, 2011 07:05 AM (YXmuI)
Are you saying that being the governor of Texas doesn't require mental agility and knowledge of issues?
It seems to me that in these three performances we are seeing the difference between someone who has been running for POTUS as a full-time job for years, versus someone who was pretty darned close to drafted to run for the job. On top of that, whenever Romney's positions are questioned, we're referred to his books or asked to extrapolate from a four year stint as governor of a much less consequential state and what he did even further back in business (under a very different economic climate). And, when there's an apparent flip-flop we're told that was because of the evil legislature.
The length of Perry's public record and the weakness of the issues on which he's being attacked (both in terms of number and severity) gives me confidence that I know this man. I really can't say the same about Romney.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:05 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:05 AM (deaac)
Posted by: Sphynx at September 23, 2011 07:06 AM (fEmj2)
........
Yeah, I noticed you didn't post the link to her 2008 debate with Joe Biden.. cuz she sucked ass.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at September 23, 2011 07:06 AM (f9c2L)
More like: "grind off that thick layer of crusted-on scum." Gingrich is a standard D.C. sleaze with a few more points on the IQ.
The Newt may be the smartest guy in the room, but when it counted -- back in his congressional days -- he popped like a friggin' soap bubble. Big, big talk -- that ol' Contract With America -- but he needed to deliver, and did an el fold-O in response.
Yeah, yeah, but the Democrats and Bubba Clinton.... I think in retrospect The Newt was the Bitch McConnell or Boner of his day, too willing to play nice with the liberals.
Hannity loves him some Newt, though. Next up, the coveted "Poppin' Fresh" endorsement?
Posted by: MrScribbler at September 23, 2011 07:06 AM (YjjrR)
Yes, and I can fix that!
Posted by: Marcus Bachmann at September 23, 2011 11:02 AM (sbV1u)
No! It's impossible! It's immutable like your sense of style and taste for food! HATE CRIME!
Posted by: Popular Culture at September 23, 2011 07:06 AM (FkKjr)
SCoaMF may have something to do with her reasoning.
Posted by: The Hammer at September 23, 2011 11:04 AM (u7B3b)
She'll endorse romney even if Palin is in I bet.
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 07:06 AM (UQXED)
The problem I saw with Perry is that he doesn't seem to be taking these debates seriously.
On immigration when santoram said he was showing preference for illegals he could have just said No we're not. If an american citizen wants to move here for 1 year before getting in state tuition they can. Illegals need to live here for 3 years.
He needs to explain his policies instead of respond with some soundbite. He seems to want to dismiss these questions instead of answer them.
Posted by: robtr at September 23, 2011 07:07 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 07:07 AM (A4C5M)
<i>I switched the channel after an hour and a half. Y'all can fill me in if anything substantive happened in the last 30 minutes. I couldn't stomach anymore after the assholes in the audience booed the gay soldier. No offense to anyone here, but SoCons are pissing me off. Didn't we learn after the CNN debate not to give the media more ammo. Even if the candidate has a substantive point, the only thing reported is "look how crazy Republicans are."</i>
They are only going to do that *anyway*. Remember the Rule of Anyway....
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 07:08 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:08 AM (rJVPU)
He has one main weakness -- the debates. How important is that to primary voters? It's not for me to say. Me personally? I like results and accomplishments
----
^
And this.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:08 AM (5H6zj)
No! It's impossible! It's immutable like your sense of style and taste for food! HATE CRIME!
Posted by: Popular Culture at September 23, 2011 11:06 AM (FkKjr)
Science has proven that a taste for mauve and puce are not genetically determined - however faaaabulous they may be.
Please, let me help you. Together we can pray the gay away.
Posted by: Marcus Bachmann at September 23, 2011 07:08 AM (sbV1u)
The moderators let everyone get away with not answering questions. The candidate would go back to some talking point about jobs and then then give some half ass answer related to the question. This includes the omnipotent Romney. They should start calling these people on this and quit being so deferential.
Romney is a much smoother speaker than Perry, and I'd vote for him easily over Obama. He's OK. But today's Romgasm is ridiculous. He had some very sucky answers too, he just makes them sound better than Perry.
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 07:08 AM (GvYeG)
30 second rebuttals are not well suited for that.
I think it's why he's got great stump speeches and crowd presence, and sucks at debating.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:09 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 07:09 AM (uIz80)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:09 AM (niZvt)
As it stands, I'm not convinced that Romney is anything other than Obama Lite. I really, really hope this gets better, because if Romney grabs the nomination, God only knows what I'm doing next November.
Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 23, 2011 07:09 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at September 23, 2011 11:06 AM (f9c2L)
SHe was not bad in the vp debate. This is just simply when not holding that heavy RINOs water
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 07:10 AM (UQXED)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 07:11 AM (cbyrC)
Yeah, I can't suffer thru another 4/8 years with a guy who can't complete a thought. Say what you will about Obama, but he's at least capable of explaining himself. I can't, right now, imagine Perry doing much more than rambling something incoherent.
Posted by: Rick Perry at September 23, 2011 07:11 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:11 AM (niZvt)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:12 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 07:12 AM (qFpRI)
Today, I was contemplating another scenario. Romney beats SCOAMF in 2012, but his timidity and unwillingness to change the status quo render his presidency ineffectual. So, in 2016, he gets unelected, and we get ... I don't know... Andrew Cuomo... who is something less of a SCOAMF than Obama, but still can't cope with the scale of challenges faced by the country. Then, finally, in 2020, we get a Marco Rubio or a Bobby Jindal who can really fix things.
It's a pretty depressing scenario, but it's not too unlikely.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 23, 2011 07:12 AM (PLvLS)
Eff you Perry.
Posted by: uncivil & right at September 23, 2011 07:13 AM (RVwRR)
1. Much better than Obama
2. Not very good at all.
Neither Perry nor Romney really wants to control the southern border. Perry wants an open border and is just fine with those who cross illegally. sS there any issue of more importance to Texas right now than control of the border? If he is not good for Texas as governor will he really be good for the US as President?
Recent job growth in Texas has been primarily to the benefit of illegal aliens. JOb growth is Perry's great success in his own mind.
Romney believes in Romney. Unfortunately, not enough others do. He will be weak on rolling back the clock on federal health care and government spending if elected.
Other candidates lack executive experience. (Maybe the business experience of Cain is good.?)
It is time to despair now.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 07:13 AM (eEfYn)
I think it's why he's got great stump speeches and crowd presence, and sucks at debating.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 11:09 AM (Qxe/p)
Then he just needs to take charge and tell the moderators that this is a serious question and I am going to need a little bit more than 30 seconds. If they refuse put it on them and say I would love to answer but 30 seconds just isn't going to do something this important justice.
The crowd will make the moderators give him time.
Posted by: robtr at September 23, 2011 07:13 AM (MtwBb)
That's simply not true.
How many times has Obama debated since he took office? Seriously? How many hostile or even neutrally pointed interviews has he had?
More importantly, the guy gets rolled in office virtually every day. We may bitch and moan about Boehner, but he rolled him, not to mention Putin and Dinnerjacket and the rest of those foreign jackasses.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (5H6zj)
People have insanely ridiculous expectations. Really they do. The first one was neutral at best. He didn't knock anything out of the park but he was apparently expected to do just that because he came barreling out of the gate and catapulted over Romney in the polls. The second debate was marginally better than the first. But we still saw the collective meltdown because he DIDN'T GET ANY BETTER!!!1!ELEVENTY!!
Whatever last night was - I do hope it was a outlier as it was the worst performance to date. But for reasons I set forth above I'm just not worried.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (pLTLS)
We're on the same wavelength.
If that happens, I'll probably tell the wife I'm voting for Romney, tell the neighbor I'm voting for Obama, ask the poll person if I could vote for both of them, and then, like the last election, actually vote for Romney's running mate.
I think that attitude and behavior would match the candidate's.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (niZvt)
1. yeah Perry sucked last night. didn't implode but he probably lost some support. I'm still having that anyone but Mitt unless he's the nom attitude w/ Romney as his lies get bigger and the Romnebots become bigger douchebags.
2. Perry still leads but Romney is hot on the trail and frankly at this rate might end up winning anyways. as for Ras confirming the Suffolk poll, er yes and no. Ras shows Romney is winning - wow what a suprise/s. However it also refuted the BS that Perry is in 4th place in NH. And even at 2nd place, Perry will get delegates.
3. Bachmann and especially Santorum really pissed me off last night. They came off as bitch 1 and bitch 2.
4. Palin ain't running so stop masturbating to this fantasy.
5. Too late to draft Chris Christie?
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being A Neutral That Pisses Everyone off) at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: Dave in Texas at September 23, 2011 07:14 AM (WvXvd)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:15 AM (rJVPU)
<i> "*If* Perry is GW lite what does that make Romney?
Pro Choice before he was Pro Life.
Pro Obama Care before Obama even thought of it.
Pro guncontrol and forget it even I trip over the flip flops while typing them...." </i>
In fairness, he *was* trying to govern Commiechussetts. By their standards he was hardcore right-wing.
I think will do the right thing if there are enough real Republicans in Congress to push him that way.
That said, I still prefer Perry, but this debate shows he needs work. And sadly, like another Texan Governor before him, he needs to get over delusions of Hispandering.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 07:15 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: dogfish at September 23, 2011 07:15 AM (NuPNl)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 23, 2011 07:16 AM (PLvLS)
And Lord only knows what will have filled the vacuum left by our decline.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 23, 2011 07:16 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 07:16 AM (GvYeG)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 07:16 AM (UQXED)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at September 23, 2011 11:15 AM (OWjjx)
Perry should ask Newt to leave the race to become his debate coach
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being A Neutral That Pisses Everyone off) at September 23, 2011 07:17 AM (yAor6)
He's not an option because he's a gun-grabber so we'll take the gun-grabber from Massachusetts instead because he's thinner or something.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:17 AM (5H6zj)
Perry also had the high expectations. We need a con standard bearer who is not the savior of the earth.
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 11:16 AM (UQXED)
considering your choice i'd say this post is drenched in irony
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being A Neutral That Pisses Everyone off) at September 23, 2011 07:17 AM (yAor6)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:17 AM (niZvt)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:18 AM (rJVPU)
Why wait that long?
Posted by: SCOTUS at September 23, 2011 07:18 AM (BkQvr)
<i>Neither Perry nor Romney really wants to control the southern border.</i>
And yet, Tom Tancredo--the Platinum standard for border control--endorsed Romney in 2008. Romney has many RINO tendencies, but I think immigration is not one of them.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 07:18 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 11:17 AM (5H6zj)
yeah I know about his gun-grabber tendacies but i'll take a fiscal conservative over a guy who wont back down fucking up the halthcare system of his state any day.
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being A Neutral That Pisses Everyone off) at September 23, 2011 07:18 AM (yAor6)
H. Ross Perot: "I'm all ears"
9) John McCain stalking the stage like Yosemite Sam as Obama spoke
10) Jimmy Carter, interrupted by 30 minutes due to a technical problem, continuing the sentence he began a half-hour ago grammatically perfect, a harbinger of the dickhead president he was to become
I'll think of more later
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:18 AM (deaac)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at September 23, 2011 07:19 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:19 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Your Inner Voice at September 23, 2011 07:19 AM (ApXjP)
Posted by: elliot m at September 23, 2011 07:19 AM (zPich)
Allow me to be charitable...it was awful.
Ya know who this helps?
Posted by: Mitt Romney at September 23, 2011 07:20 AM (263hv)
Put yourself in Palin's shoes. Who really thinks she was watching that last night and thinking, "Nah, I really shouldn't get in this thing. I'll let these guys handle it."
Posted by: A Liberal AoS Reader, Really! at September 23, 2011 07:20 AM (3b74a)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (deaac)
Posted by: Scott J at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (/bVuS)
Frank Lutz is....creepy.
Do we know for sure that he is not a Democrat? .....Can't put my finger on it, but there is something not quite right about that guy.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (gZO5m)
Remembering all the way back to LBJ, the answer is:
NOT IF THEY HAIL FROM TEXAS
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (rJVPU)
Newt is also a political pro who can work the coalitions--he has the best shot of anybody of getting conservative legislation passed, including Romney, who will just cave to the Dems to get stuff done.
And, yeah, he has baggage, but are the Dems seriously going to run on the three wives thing? The Dems? Give me a break.
Newt will wipe the floor with Obama in debates. The Pelosi thing is just optics for the independents/moderates. He led the conservative revolt in the House in '94 for gawd's sake.
Newt is the Churchill of our time. Time for him to come back from the wilderness. We need his ideas, even the crazy ones.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:21 AM (hW3KZ)
It isn't?
I'm a pizzasexual myself.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 07:22 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:22 AM (niZvt)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:22 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Kevin in ABQ at September 23, 2011 07:23 AM (BvTwT)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 07:23 AM (qFpRI)
1. A governor that has been in office for less than two years
2. A governor that is essentially a glorified talk show host that quit her job
Sweet!
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 07:24 AM (pLTLS)
Granted.
I should've been more clear, I guess.
Even when Obama sounds like a retard up there and his point isn't good or its a totally flawed strawman, the delivery is usually pretty smooth. That's what I mean by "explaining himself well".
W's problem was always that he was a bumbler and a stumbler. You didn't have any confidence in what he said, even when he was 100% right. Perry's problem is identical.
Is it too much to ask that our guy be the one who doesn't sound like a functional retard for a change?
Posted by: Rick Perry at September 23, 2011 07:24 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:24 AM (niZvt)
All of a sudden people might start to notice a few things
----
The wealthy Romney donors I've spoken with are bracing themselves (and preparing both themselves and their family/professional circles for) a shit storm to be released on his campaign financing. That's the first phase of the Destroy Romney plan that the media/libs are going to roll out.
Now, look, with all the crap that Obama pulled, I would find it hysterically bizarre to have Romney (or any of our candidates) be knocked out over campaign financing, but I'm just saying that these folks who are really savvy business people types are really worried about the angle the media is going to play. It's affecting their financial decisions.
So I don't know how to interpret that. Do they know there is something fishy there or are they just ultra-careful? I would think that they, already being careful types, would not worry if there was no fire under that smoke because they'd have all the advisors (financial, legal) in place to insulate themselves from charges.
I agree with someone who said yesterday that the main argument "for" Mitt seems to be an electability argument. I'm just less convinced of his electability now than I was earlier this year.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:24 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: elliot m at September 23, 2011 11:19 AM (zPich)
Yes he is. He complemented Obama and said it took courage to fire GMs CEO. Mitt is a SCOAMF and Obama lite
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 07:24 AM (UQXED)
Posted by: Z as in Jersey at September 23, 2011 07:25 AM (ggIyQ)
"Frank Lutz is...Can't put my finger on it, but there is something not quite right about that guy."
Is that your gheydar going off?
Hey, he's a statistics guy. Don't you remember those types in school? You have to be a bit odd to begin with.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:25 AM (hW3KZ)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 07:25 AM (jx2j9)
I'm not holding out for a virgin, but that doesn't mean that thirty-year vet of the red light district is on the 'Top Prospects' list, either.
Posted by: DarkLord© sez Obama is a stuttering clusterf--- of a miserable failure
Oh, and F--- Nevada! at September 23, 2011 07:25 AM (GBXon)
I was really pulling for Perry, but damn.
My boss has met him about a dozen times, and as I was talking about him this morning, he mentioned he came off slick and a little to sterotypical "Aggie," which if you know the jokes you'll get that.
Frankly, what disturbed me most about Mitt was his interview with Hannity in which he said Perry was unelectable because of his stance on Social Security. Not, Perry was wrong mind you, but his stance. Does that mean Romney agrees it won't work but its too politically costly so screw it?
This is tough for me, I'm having to really consider Newt! here.
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:27 AM (NCw5u)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:27 AM (rJVPU)
Michelle "the girl who sits in the front row and answers all the teacher's questions" Bachman
9) Newt "the alto tenor" Gingerich
10) Gary "the retard" Johnson
11) Jon "the Breck Boy" Huntsman
12) Eric "the National Honor Society student who is ratting to the principal" Cantor
I could go on. You know, you can make a case that all these guys are good speakers, too, you know. Just like you can make a case that Obama is both a good speaker and a bad one.Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:27 AM (deaac)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (qFpRI)
Right now, I'm voting Newt in the florida primary. I love Newt. I'd like to believe that he can win in the general; but he can't. Media will be all over him from the 90's and it'd be a mess. Newt would be better served as a mentor to someone up on stage. Newt/Cain is by far the best combination up there.
I've always felt that him on the couch with Nancy was the way for him to get the AGW bug off the conservative shoulders. With the idea that you can believe in AGW, but still support market solutions to the problem; rather than the entire AGW fix being about bigger government.
Posted by: lorien1973 at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: Rich at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (ldOlo)
<i>Neither Perry nor Romney really wants to control the southern border.</i>
And
yet, Tom Tancredo--the Platinum standard for border control--endorsed
Romney in 2008. Romney has many RINO tendencies, but I think immigration
is not one of them.
For example, from 'On the Issues':
Q: Should illegal immigrants be sent home?
A: They should go home eventually. They should have a set period during which they sign up for permanent residency or for citizenship. But thereÂ’s a set period where upon they should return home. And if theyÂ’ve been approved for citizenship or for a permanent residency, well, it would be a different matter. But for the great majority, theyÂ’ll be going home.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series Dec 16, 2007That seems to mean exactly nothing...
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (eEfYn)
1) Chris Cristie
2) Marco Rubio (I think)
3) ...
Hm, list is quite small. Somebody help me here.
(3) Paul Ryan
(4) Rand Paul
(6) Allen West
(7) Mick Mulvaney
I can keep going but we have a number of good speakers in Congress.
Posted by: Miss80sBaby at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (o2lIv)
I would vote for Christie in a heartbeat. Which makes me a RINO, I guess, except that I don't find Romney acceptable. And I still prefer Perry over Christie (even if the Fat Man was running) even though I feel more natural affinity for Christie, I suppose because I grew up in the mid-Atlantic region.
But Christie is not an option. He's just not acceptable to an active minority of people in the party.
What confuses me is that Romney is acceptable to many of those people.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:28 AM (rJVPU)
I've prefaced most everything I've written about Perry to this point by saying something like, I want to like him but have concerns about him. Well, after a month of watching him campaign I have to say I simply don't like him and have no faith that he has sufficient command of the issues or ability to build the necessary coalitions to be an effective candidate.
Maybe that will change. I hope so.
As for Mitt..he's Mitt. All his negatives are known and baked into the cake. I'd vote for either of these guys over Obama but as things stand now, I won't be happy about it.
For once, I completely agree with you.
Posted by: Mystery Meat at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (OlN4e)
As long as the batteries in the teleprompter are fresh. Otherwise, he's a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.
I...I... I... am a warrior for the m...m...middle class.
SCOAMF! Warrior of Merde!
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (jx2j9)
Michelle "Hermione" Bachman
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (136wp)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (niZvt)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 07:29 AM (UQXED)
1. A governor that has been in office for less than two years
2. A governor that is essentially a glorified talk show host that quit her job
Sweet!
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 11:24 AM (pLTLS)
You forgot the part where 1) was way more liberal than anyone else up there last night on most positions and 2) has similar debating problems as Perry as she can hand out rehearsed red meat, with the same great cronyism and waaaaay less experience.
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:31 AM (NCw5u)
First of all, the story is a myth, and second of all, the voters won't give a s**t with hugely bigger fish to fry, i.e. DOOM.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:31 AM (hW3KZ)
She has the conservative chops, the local Dem PR rags hate her, and Will Folks will be back out claiming to have screwed her in every venue there is.
Anyway, I am tired of all this bickering. I think I'll go get drunk. Its Friday.
Posted by: Vic at September 23, 2011 07:31 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:31 AM (rJVPU)
Oh, for fuck's sake. Even his reflection in the mirror doesn't know what the hell is going on in that head.
Posted by: Andy at September 23, 2011 07:31 AM (5Rurq)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (niZvt)
Why does she wear make up that makes her look like a drag queen?
Posted by: lorien1973 at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (usXZy)
Y-not
I agree with everything you've said.
And no one is bringing up how the MFM will zero in on the 'Mormons are crazy' thing.......which is a given.
By the time the Obama media gets through with Mitt, I'm not sure that he would even carry very many red states. ....He may be considered a conservative in the Northeast, but out here in the Midwest we've got Democrats who are more conservative than Mitt.
The gun-grabber thing is a deal killer too.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (gZO5m)
Posted by: Heartless Truman North, SOB at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at September 23, 2011 07:32 AM (Z6fyp)
The Ryan budget = "Right Wing Social Engineering"
Posted by: Andy at September 23, 2011 07:33 AM (5Rurq)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:33 AM (niZvt)
Michelle "Hermione" Bachman
She and Christine O'Donnell could turn Obama into a toad.
Posted by: Will at September 23, 2011 07:33 AM (Hx5uv)
Here is the deal: the test is does the candidate get better over time. If by December Perry is still stumbling around --- then you have a problem. If by December Romney is still miles ahead of Perry in debate presentation, then maybe you have an issue.
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at September 23, 2011 11:30 AM (OWjjx)
This is true. Mitts not bad in the debates, but this is all the man has been doing. For the last. six. years.
Maybe the question should be why isn't Mitt better?
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:33 AM (NCw5u)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 07:33 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 07:34 AM (niZvt)
Posted by: Dave in Texas at September 23, 2011 07:34 AM (WvXvd)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:34 AM (rJVPU)
I wanted a candidate whose governing instincts were right.
I wanted a candidate who could be trusted off the Congressional leash.
Perhaps most of all, I wanted a candidate utterly and completely free of the taint of Harvard.
But...
The real problem here is that the more we see of Perry the more he reminds us of the things we didn't like about W.
My mind is still open, but I will now need to be convinced that Rick Perry is the answer to the Mitt Romney conundrum.
That said, I don't think we need anyone else jumping in from the sidelines at this point.
There's way too much RINO in Chris Christie to sell him nationally. He's a warmist, which drops him to the Huntsman tier of my personal list anyway.
I believe Sarah Palin could be a very good President, but I'm not convinced she's electable. We live in a country where, for good or bad, Joe McGinniss still has his kneecaps.
Posted by: JEM at September 23, 2011 07:34 AM (o+SC1)
Posted by: Rich at September 23, 2011 07:34 AM (ldOlo)
Posted by: Cricket at September 23, 2011 07:35 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:35 AM (rJVPU)
Lincoln. But he was a former member of the House when he ran. Like Newt. Only Newt was Speaker.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (hW3KZ)
As for Mitt..he's Mitt.
The thing about Mitt is that he looks like a president. If he could get the job through casting instead of an election, he'd win hands down.
I guess the words I'm looking for are piss and vinegar. Regardless what the country needs, Mitt's apparent lack of piss and vinegar is what will probably win it for him.
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (F5OMl)
On Perry's diction and concienceness.
I remember all the Sarah Palin interviews in 09. She looked like a dolt.Don't forget Palin worked in and has a degree in broadcasting. She is faring well on Fox now only after a full year of working at her craft. On the other hand in the eight years Bush was in front of the cameras he could be counted on to produce cringe worthy sound bites.
On Perry's content
Regarding Perry's immigration 'Have a heart' answer I think Perry truely relates to the hardships and struggles of the working class having come from a cotton farm in the desert of Texas thet his parents didn't even own.
In a right to work state illegals are truely an economic boon in that it allows very small businessmen to run a business ie: lawn care,landscaping ect. When all is said and done equals the hourly pay for a northern union tradesmen, that is for the businessman not the illegal. So I can see Perry's point of view of seeing dollar signs instead of illegals. Don't forget Texas being on the Mexican border has a much longer relationship with Mexicans than the rest of the country. Some of these illegals could easilly be into the 3rd or 4th generation here in this country. College would be the natural progression for immigrants going up the socioeconomic ladder in this country. Thats why its called the American dream. Theoretically the former established citizens are moved up that socioeconomic ladder by the new residents. I know they are ILLEGAL but Texas was once Mexico and probably has reflected that in its population before there even was a United States. excuse the spelling tks
Posted by: sonnyspats at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (I/MzF)
Posted by: Spike at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (pAR1m)
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (qFpRI)
Posted by: CoolCzech at September 23, 2011 11:22 AM (niZvt)
---
You're right.
I think for each of us as individuals we need to set a list of priorities of what we'd like to see accomplished in the first two years of the next administration and then weigh which of the candidates we think can accomplish those goals.
My view is that we maybe have two years. Maybe (I hope) we get both houses of Congress in that time, but I think with the dynamics of the country, that's all we can "count" on. After that, we may lose the Senate again. (I think certain POTUS candidates in the pool, if elected, would increase the risk of that happening -- and, yes, I do mean Romney because he has the McCain get along flavor that blurs the boundaries between the parties.)
So in my case looking at what my top priority is, Perry wins my vote. My top priority is to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. I do not think that the other candidates either want to do that or have the balls to do it or have the capability to do it.
There are many other things I like about Perry's positions and record. There are some things I don't like, but most of those fall into things so specific to being governor of a state that they don't concern me.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:36 AM (5H6zj)
Every press conference he had. Every TV interview he had.
Even after 9/11, there were actual stories out that Bush had aids coaching him on how not to sound like an idiot. There were times I actually had to change the channel cuz he was just painful to listen to. He couldn't explain himself. That's why he was always on defense.
Remember the stories where aids had to tell him not to say "uh... um... " and instead simply pause if you needed to think of what to say next?
He had good moments, no doubt. Everyone does. But take off the rose colored glasses; he was a terrible speaker. I bet he'd be the first to admit it, too.
Posted by: lorien1973 at September 23, 2011 07:37 AM (usXZy)
By the way, as for a repeal of ObamaCare --
Can't the Supreme Court find a repeal unconstitutional?
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 07:37 AM (F5OMl)
Maybe the question should be why isn't Mitt better?
His hair interrupts him too much. It's become sentient.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:37 AM (136wp)
Here's Perry's glass jaw. He cannot handle attacks from the right. It just does not compute for him.
THe early parts of the debate, solid. Why, he was at the right. Later, not so much. He can't understand being hit from the right.
On immigration, he's not great. But the wall is rediculous. I also don't think any of the other contenders up there is seriously more right than he is, he's just actually had to deal with the political reality whereas the others can say whatever they want to.
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:37 AM (NCw5u)
It's the halo.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (Qxe/p)
Mitt showed he can become flustered under pressure and he made some gaffes of his own last night, but people will more readily forget them because Perry was worse.
Posted by: Miss80sBaby at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (o2lIv)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (hiMsy)
By the way, as for a repeal of ObamaCare --
Can't the Supreme Court find a repeal unconstitutional?
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 11:37 AM (F5OMl)
No, the legislature can repeal, UNLESS SCOTUS finds a right to free health care somewhere in there next to no quartering of soldiers
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (NCw5u)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (cbyrC)
Posted by: Navycopjoe aka uber palinista at September 23, 2011 07:39 AM (iGzDt)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:40 AM (deaac)
Yes, plus Mormons hate gheys. And now on top of that if you bring that up or point out that really that's Mitt's "base" (as opposed to a more natural base of regional affiliations or say military service or whathaveyou) you are accused (as I was yesterday) of being Mike Huckabee 2.0. So now in the primary, as we've experienced when dealing with Palin or Bachmann, we cannot even broach a subject that is a major factor.
We're just supposed to accept that because Romney is a great fundraiser and well networked with powerful business types, he's the electable candidate.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:40 AM (5H6zj)
I think you've fallen victim to the "perfection or death" scenario. Perry is not perfect. I'm not a Perry adherent, but you're tearing down someone with whom you probably agree 90% of the time.
Plus, if you're going to accuse someone of responding in a baffling way, clean up your act first:
"....the ability to layout a vision...."
"....what was in the others book...."
"....defensive and thin skinned when...."
"....but rather he fell back a cheap line of attack that...."
"As for this idea the chose not to sell F-16's...."
Resist we much. That's the chose we have. Don't fell back!
Cheers,
Brennan
Posted by: Brennan at September 23, 2011 07:40 AM (ntN6Q)
The Ryan budget = "Right Wing Social Engineering"
Yes, and he was rightly bitch-slapped by the base for it, and apologized. Like a previous commenter said: he learns. Sometimes in trying to appeal to moderates he'll say something dumb, but people forget he's the guys that actually makes arguments for conservatism...unlike the usual suspects who spout Bromides and never defend the Cause.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:40 AM (hW3KZ)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 11:39 AM (hiMsy)
So is 9+% unemployment, 15 trillion and debt, and by that time a world ecomomy in freefall. As Biden would say, its a big, effin deal.
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 07:41 AM (NCw5u)
Posted by: tasker at September 23, 2011 07:41 AM (rJVPU)
If she flames out, good. If she can put together support, good.
Either way, she's like the sword of damacles. She's sucking the air out of the room for everyone else - in the race or not.
Posted by: lorien1973 at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (usXZy)
It has happened in the past (I don't remember if it was the US Supreme Court or not). A law was passed banning discrimination when selling real estate. The ban was later repealed and the court found that the repeal was unconstitutional. This is from perhaps forty years ago.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (Hx5uv)
If they are 3rd or 4th generation they would not be illegal !!!!!!
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (eEfYn)
Some of these illegals could easilly be into the 3rd or 4th generation here in this country.
Umm, you do get that if you are speaking of the third or fourth, hell, second, generation that is here in this country, then, presuming that those children were born in Texas, then they are US citizens and not illegal immigrants.
You also do get that you are taking the side of a business person breaking the law in order to be competitive. Yeah, I'm not actually down with that.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (VtjlW)
re: oratorical skills
Bush sounded bad, whereas Obama sounds very good. But if you read texts of President Bush's press conferences, he is brilliant and sharp.
If you read texts of Obama speeches and press conferences, he's incoherent and bumbling on paper.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (sqkOB)
And it will reveal the true nature of the Obama supporter. As long as my guy wins - it's great. Otherwise, burn the mother down. It started when the libtards pushed their "social justice" crap and will end with tons of Black neighborhoods being burned down.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:42 AM (136wp)
Well, maybe that or maybe just simply having their businesses and families destroyed. The context I'm learning this from has to do with their philanthropic activities. They don't want the charities they support dragged down by the smears that they fully expect to be unleashed when Mitt retakes the lead.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 07:43 AM (5H6zj)
<i>So it's two debates in a row where Teh Sarah!!! won </i>
Because it is so easy to seem brilliant when you aren't there up on stage making your own gaffes....
Where does this Sarah fetish come from? At this point she is the female Ferd Thompson.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 07:43 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 07:43 AM (Hx5uv)
No, the legislature can repeal, UNLESS SCOTUS finds a right to free health care somewhere in there next to no quartering of soldiers
That's what I'm saying. If Congress repeals ObamaCare and the president signs it, what's to stop five justices from ruling that the Lobster Clause of the Thirty-twelfth Amendment precludes such a repeal?
I'm not asking if it can be justified -- just if it's possible.
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 07:44 AM (F5OMl)
Technically, if they're first generation (born on U.S. soil), they're not illegal.
This is due to a mis-interpretation of the 14th amendment.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:45 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 07:45 AM (A4C5M)
Nah, it's the great rack.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:45 AM (136wp)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:45 AM (deaac)
Posted by: lorien1973 at September 23, 2011 11:37 AM
Okay, Dubya made me cringe, too. And some of his policies and decisions made me damn angry. There were too many instances when he was a dolt.
But....
The man was the greatest president in history compared to the stuttering clusterf*** of a miserable failure. Every president was better than Osama Obama, if for no other reason than all were (or at least seemed to be) patriotic Americans, not vengeance-driven America-haters.
So if Perry makes calls I don't like, I'll be thinking "he's a dumb shit," not "he's trying to destroy the nation." I suppose the same can be said of any of the current Repub candidates -- dunno about RuPaul -- and that makes the choice a bit clearer.
I want someone much better. But a lump of putrefying road kill will be a better president than the Chicago Jesus.
Posted by: MrScribbler at September 23, 2011 07:45 AM (YjjrR)
Prick.
I can't start drinking for several hours.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 07:46 AM (LH6ir)
I don't wanna bust Drew's balls...too much, but...
look, guys like Drew, JeffBeAnnoying, and even Ace would welcome any excuse to jettison Rick Perry for someone more electable, if you will.
I don't want to say that Gov Perry's poor performances in the debates come as a relief to Drew, but it does.
Sorry, bro.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 07:47 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: Jean at September 23, 2011 07:47 AM (WkuV6)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 07:47 AM (A4C5M)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:47 AM (deaac)
Posted by: SurferDoc at September 23, 2011 07:48 AM (STdkO)
Posted by: jjshaka at September 23, 2011 10:24 AM (zs1y/)
And a guy who has yet to win anything nationally. Hmmmm.....
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 07:48 AM (LD21B)
He apologized but still uses the same general argument, albeit euphemistically.
Posted by: Miss80sBaby at September 23, 2011 07:48 AM (o2lIv)
Posted by: MrScribbler at September 23, 2011 11:45 AM (YjjrR)
I have been touting a hemorrhoid I saw on a porn actress a while ago. But road kill sounds fine.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 07:48 AM (LH6ir)
That leaves
Herman Cain
Newt
Santorum
I am leaning Cain at this point, but Romney pissed me off so much by not answering to the changes in his book that I will vote for any of those 3 or Perry if it comes to it if they are top competition to Romney.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at September 23, 2011 07:49 AM (0q2P7)
Quick on their feet? Uh, yeah. Prepared statements and zingers aren't really high on my list of priorities.
My employer has often hired folks who "interviewed well" only to learn that interviewing is the only thing they do well.
I'm not ruling any of the top few out at this point.
Posted by: As If! at September 23, 2011 07:49 AM (piMMO)
JeffB has yet to chime in but we all know what he'll say. And in this case, just as Drew is right, Jeff'll be right.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 07:49 AM (sqkOB)
Or maybe just enforce the laws on the books.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:50 AM (136wp)
I'm not asking if it can be justified -- just if it's possible.
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 11:44 AM (F5OMl)
Definition of a Right is somthing granted by God, the Creator, or Nature, depending on your religious view...
Thus... if it is a Right, than Congress should not have to spend ANY money so you can have it.
Thus, Congress does not appropriate any money for your Healthcare... even if it 'IS' some right.
If Congress MUST appropriate money for Healthcare, than it is NOT a Right, but a Privelege...
Posted by: Romeo13 at September 23, 2011 07:50 AM (NtXW4)
First off, he said 90%. Get it right.
I was pontificating about this while arguing to a judge one time and used the 90% figure. The judge corrected me saying it was 85%. And I know the judge was right because he is like my wife. He is right because he wears the dress.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 07:50 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 07:51 AM (cbyrC)
Posted by: scottythrust at September 23, 2011 07:51 AM (VTeUD)
You also do get that you are taking the side of a business person breaking the law in order to be competitive. Yeah, I'm not actually down with that.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 11:42 AM (VtjlW)
Not actually taking sides I'm just trying to understand what makes Perry tick.
Posted by: sonnyspats at September 23, 2011 07:52 AM (I/MzF)
Posted by: Jean at September 23, 2011 11:47 AM (WkuV6)
One thing I would do as a Conservative Candidate... because Staff IS Policiy, and we've seen how bad Obama's STAFF is...
I'd get people like Bolton onboard, and announce they were part of my Team, AND that if elected I want him to be my Sec State.
Run as a Team when you have limited experience in that areas expertise....
Posted by: Romeo13 at September 23, 2011 07:52 AM (NtXW4)
The whole back and forth between Perry and Romney is getting tiresome. Tell me what you are going to do; if you want to compare it to the current admin, that's fine. I am plenty smart enough to discern the differences between the two of you.
Posted by: Honey Badger at September 23, 2011 07:52 AM (GvYeG)
Definition of a Right is something granted by God, the Creator, or Nature, depending on your religious view...
But, if you don't believe any external moral influence then "Rights" are whatever you want to pull out of thin air, e.g., Healthcare, Affirmative Action, Abortion, Privacy
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:52 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 07:53 AM (X6akg)
The whole back and forth between Perry and Romney is getting tiresome. Tell me what you are going to do; if you want to compare it to the current admin, that's fine. I am plenty smart enough to discern the differences between the two of you.
Posted by: Honey BadgerWhy do you give a sh*t?
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:53 AM (136wp)
Won't make any difference if Romney is elected or not. The ratchet is one-way only and the frog will continue to boil.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at September 23, 2011 07:53 AM (hW3KZ)
Um, yeah. So? Is this a bad thing?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 07:53 AM (LH6ir)
Oy vey - yes! Sadly, yes *giggle*
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 07:55 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:55 AM (deaac)
OK, understood. Outer Whitelandia can be easily scared. Living there now and having grown up in the Bronx, I don't scare easy when it comes to threats of riots.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 07:56 AM (136wp)
Don't forget the mortgage and gas for my car.
Hey, and how about the car, too? I've already got the big-screen TV and microwave
Posted by: Typical Obama Voter at September 23, 2011 07:56 AM (hW3KZ)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 07:56 AM (deaac)
340..... is this the year a Reagan could get elected?
People keep forgetting.....or ignoring.......that Reagan was the guy who raised taxes and gave Amnesty to all the illegals at that time, which was around 3 million.
So, no. I guess Reagan coundn't get elected these days.
At least Perry is the guy who has repeatedly said that he is against Amnesty, and I seriously doubt that there would be anything that would ever compel him to raise taxes.
But then Perry sucks at debating his fellow Republicans......so let's crucify him.
The real irony about Reagan is that in his day, he actually was a RINO....because he was more conservative than most of the Republicans back then.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 07:56 AM (gZO5m)
I'd bring up the 14th Amendment, call for a discussion by the class on what the Citizenship Clause actually means vs how it's implemented. I would, of course, have no opinion on the matter, except that that's the legal heart of the "in state tuition" issue for Texas.
The last time immigration (amnesty) came up (G.W Bush), that aspect threw a wrench into the whole argument.
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 07:56 AM (Qxe/p)
Isn't the crushed-outta-the-park answer to this question: So radical Islamists with avowed hostile intentions to the US takes control of nuclear weaponry? Sounds less a hypothetical than it does a question of reality -- what on earth will America do when Iran commands nuclear material & nuclear missiles? And can threaten our allies through either a direct missile strike or through putting this material in the hands of their agents on the black market? While their leader stands in New York City, four miles from where the World Trade Center once stood accusing America of the 9/11 attacks and denying the Holocaust? Great question. Here's what you do...
[Nearly any Iran policy other than Ron Paul's "What threat?" policy inserted into the next 25 seconds is irrelevant because the question's already destroyed with that lead-in]
It's easy to armchair quarterback this but I almost threw a beer at the TV that none of these guys could put 2 & 2 together here when I could be half in the bag at home doing it. F it. I'm voting for Herm.
Posted by: Beer Wolf at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (9pgfx)
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (X6akg)
Thanks for the heads-up, Tami.
Here's the linky for all those interested -
Palestinians prepare to submit UN statehood bid
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (9hSKh)
"This is the field. Deal with it."
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I don't see Christie or Ryan jumping in, but Palin is the wildcard here, and anyone who says they know what she's going to do is wrong. Has she lost me with her cock-tease act to this point? Yup. But Perry has lost me with piss poor performance so far, so Palin would definitely get a second look from me if she entered the race. Short of that, I like Newt better than the rest of the field, which sucks for me, I guess.
Posted by: holygoat at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (XnwWl)
Posted by: Rick Perry at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (usXZy)
The typical Obama voter can be pretty formidable. Keep your powder dry.
Posted by: jrg at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (BkQvr)
Posted by: Jehu at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (YRK0I)
Herman Cain is just awesome, especially since he's apologized and made amends for his Islam comments. I'd vote for any of them in a heartbeat over O but I have special love for Herman.
Posted by: Ms Choksondik at September 23, 2011 10:41 AM (nxptv)
Cain's apology was worse than his actual comments, and has pretty much killed his chances.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (LD21B)
What are they going to do...take the bus here to riot?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (LH6ir)
From everything I had heard from and about Perry before these debates, he sounded as if he'd be a straight-talking, blunt and maybe even borderline abrasive guy who would give you straight answers on stuff even if you didn't like some of the answers, but the Perry we've seen so far sounds like he has no answers to give, blunt or otherwise. It's almost like he's getting coached on how to be warmer/fuzzier, and all that's done is make him sound muddled and confused. I guess...I have no idea where the Perry that I thought was entering the race has gotten off to, but he better show up soon.
Jeez, Mitt sucks, but damned if he isn't gonna be the nominee. For all you folks who keep insisting anyone can beat Obama this time around, I keep saying, yeah, that'd be true IF the GOP wasn't who was in charge of nominating his opponent. They WILL pick a loser if there is one to be had.
And, hell no, Sarah "Reality TV" Palin is not the answer either. Unless you want to see Obama re-elected, carrying 30something states again.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (ED4oz)
395 .....How the hell do you do italics on this comments thing, anyway? I'm a moron.
Click....drag....highlight, the part that you want in italics. ....Then hit the little 'i' up on the toolbar.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (gZO5m)
Posted by: someone at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (o2lIv)
is this the year a Reagan could get elected?
People keep forgetting.....or ignoring.......that Reagan was the guy who raised taxes and gave Amnesty to all the illegals at that time, which was around 3 million.
-------
OK, then.. Let's keep making the same policy mistake over and over again. Some people learn form mistakes. Others decide to endorse them.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:00 AM (eEfYn)
- The law was immediately appealed
- The law has not been fully implemented
- The law was hastily passed using procedural sleight of hand
The effect of a repeal is simply a return to status quo ante of 3 years ago without much having happened in between. I'd be shocked if a single justice voted to grant cert to an Obamacare repeal challenge.
Of course, anything's possible, but I put this one in the highly improbable bucket.
Posted by: Andy at September 23, 2011 08:01 AM (5Rurq)
What are they going to do...take the bus here to riot?
Or the train. The secret is to shoot the Alpha male leading the riot, in the head. Every street fight I was ever in between two groups, you always hit the biggest dude with the baseball bat first..
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (136wp)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (cbyrC)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (deaac)
You have two options:
1. Apply the html tags manually by placing a < and i and > at the beginning of the words you want to italicize and a < and / and i and > at the end of the words you want to italicize.
2. Use the very simply tool bar along the top of the comments box.
Posted by: As If! at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: SurferDoc at September 23, 2011 08:03 AM (STdkO)
Posted by: Jehu at September 23, 2011 11:57 AM (YRK0I)
And isn't that the issue? I know exactly how I would react to most situations. I know exactly my stance on every policy.
We can't know that about the candidates we have, so we extrapolate from tiny bits of data, and are usually wrong.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 08:03 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (deaac)
How the hell do you do italics on this comments thing, anyway? I'm a moron.
Right above the box I'm typing in, there a toolbar with B, i, U, U, etc., but you may not see that because you use a different browser. You can always use *asterisks* but that's not as cool.
Posted by: FireHorse at September 23, 2011 08:05 AM (F5OMl)
Screw you, prick. I am not juvenile. I'm going to kick your ass for that.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 08:05 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (deaac)
Now, ask yourself: Who has the better general election position, who can appeal to the mushy middle that we must have to win? The guy who thinks Romneycare is swell and can be attacked by Obama for any criticism of Obamacare? Or the guy who is (perceived) as soft on illegal immigration?
The first is hated by independents, the second is a position only hated by conservatives.
Now you know why the media and the left want Mittens Mood Ring Romney so badly. The base will hold their nose, but the independents will see him as a GOP Obama.
Posted by: Jimmuy at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (ibeMV)
It'll be interesting to see if Romney takes the lead in polls, will he start getting hit with the hard questions regarding his record or will the pile-on continue with Perry. My guess is they'll (FOX, MBM, all elite commentary whores who sit around on their asses, all comfy, making a fine living off of their masterbatory opinions) continue to hit Perry.
Note to Perry: PLEASE PUT YOUR COWBOY BOOTS BACK ON AND KICK SOME ASS. Oh, and please fire whoever has been telling you to pull back so as not to "offend." If people don't like a kick-ass attitude, fuck 'em, it's the American way, always has been and always will be. And when Mittens attacks you in the press (or wherever) go back to referring to him with amusement and indifference. It's okay to use the word "lie" when referring to Mitten's SS scare tactics and pretty much anything else that comes out of his mouth. He is lying, and he deserves it. Thank you.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (8DdAv)
A little confused here, didn't the Rodney King riots happen in LA?
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (136wp)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (deaac)
Threadwinner on the first comment. First time I've seen it done.
Jesus tap-dancing Christ. What is this obsession with picking the "winner" this freakin' early? Let 'em all argue and debate and win and lose in multiple states so that everyone gets input as opposed to a couple of early states determining the "next in line." The debates have exposed pretty little about the candidates other than style so far which is the easy, superficial facade. Actual policies? Damn near nothing other than a few hot points chosen by moderators whose aim is to take down the frontrunner.
Let the process evolve and screw the polls. Who thinks it a good idea to have the field winnowed down to two or three choices at this point? Not a single, usable vote has been cast and the GOP activists are panicking. Ridiculous.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at September 23, 2011 08:09 AM (r4t7/)
Perry's still my dude. One debate does not a successful candidate make. If that were true, then Neut's performance in the first debate would've made his poll numbers rise.
Teh Rickster needs some serious practice, that's for sure. IMHO, he needs to stay on message, namely that we have a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure in the Oaffal Orifice. Then he needs to start laying out his plan to reverse every single thing that has been done during the SCOAMF's reign of terror.
And then lay out his plan for the following four years.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Tea Party SOB at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (d0Tfm)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (cbyrC)
The writer begins by acknowledging Perry's awful performance and closes with a discussion about how Romney "comes across as false". I will still vote for Romney in the general if it comes to it but if he is elected, I will be worried about his insincerity, at least until his actions start matching the rhetoric.
Posted by: someone at September 23, 2011 08:13 AM (o2lIv)
Posted by: The terrorist Hobbit formerly known as Donna at September 23, 2011 08:13 AM (5Wl/f)
Why are there so many debates so early? Is it a plan to annoy people? Turn them off politics completely?
I can't believe that it is considered too late for other candidates to enter the race.
What is a typical lead time required to get on the primary ballot? 90 days before the primary?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 08:17 AM (cbyrC)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 08:20 AM (A4C5M)
Gambling sidebar -- OVER/UNDER on the number phone calls going like this by 11 pm: 4
"Yes, hello, I was impressed with Governer Perry last night, I'd like to know how I can contribute to the campaign?"
Posted by: Beer Wolf at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (9pgfx)
ll after mittens lied about the changes between the HC and PB versions of his book I can't even consider him anymore.
And you were considering him before? That's like losing interest in Mae West because she was a little bit flirty with some guy.
That wasn't Romney's first little lie, nor his hundredth either.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 08:26 AM (epBek)
That did it.
The same process applies to bolding (use b) and underlining (use u)
Posted by: As If! at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (piMMO)
Because elections never end now and campaigns want to be the next "frontrunner" to get the early money/build momentum. Also, proportionally, very few people are paying attention to this stuff. Sure, the politically active are gnashing teeth, but most Americans are still disengaged. We'll need many debates to really vet the candidates.
"I can't believe that it is considered too late for other candidates to enter the race..."
It isn't. It's more a matter of the logistics of trying to build grassroots activists for the regional primaries. Frankly, in this digital, internet age, it's not nearly as important as it was years ago. The limiting factor is getting your name on primary ballots which varies state to state. That time factor is real. This is where a small core of supporters is vital so that they can help a candidate navigate local laws and do promotion. But really, as candidates, they can pick and choose where they want to try and get primary votes.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at September 23, 2011 08:37 AM (r4t7/)
Posted by: Bosk at September 23, 2011 08:42 AM (n2K+4)
Posted by: lowfibass at September 23, 2011 08:46 AM (T1ZAZ)
Easy. Sarah Palin is the only (un) announced candidate who has correctly identified and reconned the 2012 political battlefield. Her Iowa speech made earlier this month targeted the Political Ruling Class and delivered a TOT barrage that still reverberates in the political commentary today.
The winning theme for the 2012 presidential election will be "Free Market Capitalism Vs. The Ruling Class' Crony Capitalism (aka 'fascism')". Perry and Romney are members of the Political Establisment - they don't have the credibility to make the case. By waiting out her announcement, the debates have more clearly identified the issues and MO of the announced candidates and their capabilities as "revolutionary" leaders. Because overthrowing the established political class at the ballot box will require someone who has the proven bona fides needed to make the case for Free Markets and Free Peoples and the ability to inspire voters with messages of hope for a better and more prosperous America.
And that person is Sarah Palin.
Posted by: mrp at September 23, 2011 08:55 AM (HjPtV)
I wish Herman "We need a leader, not a reader" Cain were viable. Love him.
Posted by: elliot m at September 23, 2011 09:10 AM (zPich)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 09:30 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 09:31 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 09:32 AM (SB0V2)
Read his book. It's a deliberate act of national political suicide that he now has to walk back
He's bored with the national/international bullshit. He'd probably drop the potato with relief if a strong alternative candidate appeared.
Posted by: Wallfar at September 23, 2011 09:39 AM (RTVhI)
Sarah Palin is the only (un) announced candidate who has correctly identified and reconned the 2012 political battlefield. Her Iowa speech made earlier this month targeted the Political Ruling Class and delivered a TOT barrage that still reverberates in the political commentary today.
She made a speech earlier this month? I guess the reverbrations were so loud they made me deaf, because I sure didn't hear them.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 09:47 AM (epBek)
It is quite amusing to read this -- as a Texan who has put up with Rick Perry for years. Up close and personal. Do you not understand that this man is as dumb as a box of rocks? Simple as that. There is no "there" there. That's the problem. He is so clueless, he has no inkling that he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. The only reason he was repeatedly re-elected here is that he has very high, wealthy connections, and Texas is not the smartest electorate. This is not the East Coast. I am so happy the rest of the country gets to see this man for what he is. George Bush is a genius compared to Rick Perry, and George Bush is way more honest because he was born into money and doesn't need anymore, and not impressed by it. Rick Perry is still trying to kick the S***T off his boots. Sorry -- but I would take Mitt Romney or Santorum any day over Perry, and it is a relief to see Perry revealed. Yeah -- we finally get to have a new governor after this is over.
Posted by: Ms. Texas at September 23, 2011 10:58 AM (TQJgV)
Posted by: Pdiddy Perry at September 23, 2011 11:03 AM (r1MR0)
Posted by: conservative/moronette constituancy identifying advisoryy at September 23, 2011 02:37 PM (bRKhy)
You will have to replace him when he goes to the White House, so you have that going for you.
Posted by: toby928© at September 23, 2011 05:13 PM (GTbGH)
I denounce myself.
Posted by: Mandy P. refuses to watch the SCOAMF at September 23, 2011 10:31 AM (qFpRI)
burn the witch!
;-)
Posted by: shoey at September 23, 2011 05:46 PM (m6OUa)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3159 seconds, 569 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: insane voter posse at September 23, 2011 06:13 AM (GTbGH)