Redstate

How funny would his speeches be given ala Ferris Bueller teacher?

Seriously, though, I don't care if someone has viability to actually win, we just need someone to start having the sorts of public conversations we need to start having to define the issues. I find it disheartening that no one currently in office is getting those conversations out there. I would welcome Newt.

And will someone please tell me what happened to Rick Santorum? I saw him before the election, and really liked him, but have seen hide nor hair since.

I've been an admitted Romney guy, but Rudy is looking much more attractive to me these days.

I just feel Romney fading already although he was my early preference. Although Rudy has his personal baggage, the stakes are just too high to not get someone who gets it on the war.

Rudy gets it when it comes to what this country's faces and he IS America's mayor. We have to have someone with the moral authority lead 60% of this country in the war and neutralize the left. Bush has lost is ability to do that and I'm not even sure Rudy can pull it off but he has the best shot in the lot. As long as 60% of the country remains bliss to or in denial of the threats we face we're doomed to a fate far worse than 9/11.

We really need someone who can flat out rally 55 - 60% of this country when the time comes again, and although Rudy can't rally me in my personal life he can certainly rally me in the defense of this country for all the right reasons.

Well put! 5+

Let's get one thing straight, the only reason you are conscious right now is because Jack Bauer does not feel like carrying you.

Crank, I'm pulling for Rudy too. I'm aware of many people's hang-ups with the man. But the fact remains he's a winner with strong executive experience who, if he can get a Newt or perhaps John Cornyn or (in my dream world) Jim DeMint to be his VP, would galvanize the base and win over many Reagan Democrats who sat out in 2006.

I simply believe that the 2008 election is too crucial to our country's future to leave it in the hands of Hillary or Barack.

I don't think Romney is a serious candidate (his melt-down against Kennedy in 1994 was enough for me, I don't care how many times he re-invents himself). And I believe a Brownback candidacy would go as well as Dole's in 1996.

Frankly, the prospect of a President Clinton or Obama scares me to death. That's why I'm supporting Rudy.

"I just disproved my own argument. Where's my degree from Paul Maguire University??" -- Bill Simmons

n/t

The American people have never knowingly elected an appeaser during war. Carter hid his views as Ford weirded out on Poland and the cold war was over when Perot elected Clinton. Nixon won in a landslide at the heighth of Vietnam. Bush won big in '04 despite 24/7 bushlied and all out MSM assault. 06 was year six grievance election and not relateable to a presidential election.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @
The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

whether you like his policies or not, the man barely got 40% in Ohio and thus absolutely could not win the general.

...to the national doesn't get you there, I think you're wrong in your assessment here.

Madhouse Thought and The Minority Report

matter, but we are talking about Ohio and 40%. Had it even been close, I would agree with you, but not in that blowout.

Is a red state he pulled 40% in. I don't see him faring any better in any of the blue states and below 50% in many of the close red states.

The Academy: researching the Illiberal Arts

Look, I really do like Ken Blackwell. I think he's a good guy, one of the best the Ohio GOP has to offer, and I think he's right about everything he says. But he has *major* problems, not least of which are ties to mega-churches and ties to a disaster of a state party (Ohio). Frankly, he's not a great politician--and even in good years for Ohio Republicans, he's run significantly behind them.

As I said, I like the guy, would have voted for him if I could have (too young) over the empty suit we just elected. But I agree with DeathOfTheDonkey that he doesn't have a chance until he proves otherwise, and I have NO idea how he does that.

The Petro camp will now line up the 2010 candidate for governor, probably Petro himself, eliminating Blackwell for another shot. Even Petro would have been defeated soundly in this cycle, but his camp can plausibly argue they would have done better than 40% which is why much of the party will return to that camp.

Blackwell could run for another one of the state wide offices again, but that's not a move up from where he's been for the past 12 years. Browne however may be very vulnerable in 6 years based on his extreme liberalism and his being elected in a "protest" cycle for Ohio. If Blackwell delivered and knocked him off, that would do the trick.

But again, six years is a long ways away and Browne is a political animal. I know, I'm originally from Mansfield where he was elected the youngest state rep in state history at the time (1976) after being dismissed as not legitimate. A friend of my family's mother ran his opponents campaign. It's a sore subject and I want him out in six! On the other hand, he did have to flee to the liberal bastion of Elyria/Lorain just to hold office somewhere after leaving the Sec of State's office in disgrace.

But I digress. Blackwell can only recover by slaying a big time Dem in Ohio. He won't get another shot at Strickland, which leaves only Browne. None of the lost House seats are in his Cincy area, so that eliminates them.

...you have to take that in context and in the sprit it was written...Tongue-in-cheek like the rest of the descriptions!

Madhouse Thought and The Minority Report

I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

adulterous deal in his past. Wasn't he "dating" someone much younger while he wife was in the hospital or something? The media kept it pretty quiet, and Clinton was sucking the air out of that story for everyone else at the time.

I'm thinking excited is an understatement.

I would have been excited about Jim Traficant as president...

Yes, in Ron Paul we have someone who is great on almost everything except:

1. The Most Important Issue of Our Time - the Global War On Terror v. Islamofascism (which Milton Friedman identified as the greatest threat to our economy,) and

2. Free Trade - One of The Most Important Componants of Our Future Economic Prosperity

And then there's his crazy notion of returning the dollar to the gold standard and wanting to do away with the Federal Reserve Bank. He is also against being able to use our Social Security taxes to fund private accounts. Sometimes, I think he's only a libertarian when it is convenient for him to be.

You're kidding when you're asking if I'm kidding about free trade, right?

I'm all for free trade. Ron Paul is the one who votes against all the free trade bills.

against just about EVERYTHING...
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

But there are some things that he should vote for, like free trade, that he does not. His anti-free market position on private accounts for social security is vexing as well, for a libertarian.

If you do a google search on "Free Trade" and "Ron Paul" you'll quickly find he is one of the best free trader in congress, he voted against NAFTA and CAFTA on the grounds that they were too restrictive and beaurocratic, or simply they're weren't free.

I actually don't think he was in Congress when NAFTA was passed (I think he wasn't re-elected to Congress until 1994 or 1996), although I'm sure he's on record as being against it.

He claims to have voted against CAFTA because he takes the incredibly insane, legally untenable position that free trade agreements are an unconstitutional delegation of congressional trade authority.

Yes...you read that correctly. Free trade agreements are actually unconstitutional in his mind. That's our Ron Paul. LOL.

I'd love to see where he got THAT legal opinion so, if he did become president we could defeat that idiot should he/she be nominated to the Supreme Court.

NAFTA and CAFTA are free trade. Completely free? Perhaps not. But Ron Paul did not make the argument that he was voting against CAFTA because it wasn't "free" enough. And increasing the level of free trade is ALWAYS a good thing, so voting against it because you don't get the whole enchilada would be stupid, and in this case disingenuous.

here is his exact words from a weekly column he writes. In part he does say that yes CAFTA does strip powers away from congress given in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. Additionally he says that We don’t need government agreements to have free trade. We merely need to lower or eliminate taxes on the American people, without regard to what other nations do. Remember, tariffs are simply taxes on consumers.

He is very much in favor of free trade.

he'd make Bush look REALLY good.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

I'm thinking of Reagan's position on immigration.

Personally, I think we have at least two candidates who are great on the issues (Brownback, Hunter) and two who are great candidates, but not so great on all of my issues (Rudy, McCain). But I'm realistic - when you have rock stars heading the field, you gotta live with the fact that you won't always agree with them.

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill

You are deeply confused about what you think to be Reagans position on immigration. Ed Meese, Reagans close friend and a member of his inner circle for forty years, has spoken on what Reagans position was. "Ronald Reagan - libertarian" is a figment of the modern GOP's imagination. The man was a law-and-order Republican of the old school who would have had little time for the modern "its like a traffic ticket" mentality which is the current parties response to all law breaking. But thats a subject for a different thread.

The point is that both Reagan and Goldwater had things in their record which purists could point to as reasosn to reject them. As Governor of California Reagan signed the largest tax increase in CA history up to that time, as well as an abortion law which went on to be the model for Roe. Nobody with that record could get the nomination today. I see people objecting to this or that Governor because he signed off on a hike in the fishing license.

The sad and funny thing is that it is the lower-taxes and smaller government types who will get crushed by the very immigration policies they are demanding. Stupidity is a self-terminating condition.

-----------
Even those who learn from history are surrounded by those doomed to repeat it.

I guessing there is a point hiding there somewhere, or trying to.

The fact that Reagan signed an amnesty bill, in order to get secure borders, when the opposition party had Congress, is proof of Reagans open-borders stance in the same way that his signing of the largest tax increase in California history is proof of his tax and spend stance, or his signing of a liberal abortion law is proof of his pro-choice stance.

What part of this are you not getting?

Better be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident security. --Edmund Burke

My Blog: The Movement You Need

in some regards. In launching his successful campaign for the White House, the soon-to-be president famously called for the free movement of labor within North America. I'm pretty sure this would qualify him in Lou Dobbs's eyes as an advocate of, er, "open borders".

http://www.issues2002.org/Celeb/Ronald_Reagan_Immigration.htm

Reagan was too conservative, too old, too dangerous, too divorced. Goldwater was, well, Goldwater. People forget.

http://www.myelectionanalysis.com

When Reagan ran in 1980 there were Republicans that described him in unflattering terms. Does anyone else recall the origins of the slander “Voodoo Economics?”
 
The unfortunate truth about political parties is that intra-party power struggles do sometimes leak out into the general electorate. The only way that I can conceive of minimizing the damage done by internal party or movement disputes is to try to keep such disagreements civil.  Polite disagreements within a party or movement are much less likely to provide ammunition for rival parties and movements when they become known to the general public.

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

Back in 1980, the debt was about 914 billion dollars.

Now it is some 8,600 billion.

Looks like Reagan's critics were right.

The Academy: researching the Illiberal Arts

so cut spending. Only we just had 6 years of Republican control I don't recall seeing any real spending cuts. The problem is that the tax cuts happen before the spending cuts. It should be the other way around. Cut spending and after successfully doing that, cut taxes. Of course, that makes too much sense.

The government isn't in the business of making money, plus revenue to the federal treasury is at an all time high. Truth be told, without the tax cuts, no five year economic expansion and with no five year economic expansion no record federal revenues.

Without the tax cuts, the deficit would be even higher as slightly less spending would be out paced by larger declines in federal tax revenue.

It's call a price point in marketing.

isn't making money son. That borrowin' and spendin'

As for your so called five year plan... you can't compare what coulda happened with what did. Econ doesn't work like that...sadly.

However, I point out the expansion in the 90's exceeds the current "boom"

wiping out several trillion dollars in market capitalization, starting in April 2000. Poof, just erased it, like it never existed.

And what did we get for that investment?

Well, the collapse of the Soviet Union for one. That seems like a pretty good return to me.

We got an economy that has grown for all but 10 (or so) of the last 107 quarters with teeny-tiny unemployment, resulting in a near constant 60-65 percent debt-to-GDP ratio, about the middle of the western world. That's a pretty good return too.

We also got a bunch of new roads, and highways, bridges, and neat stuff like that. Those are pretty useful - look it up.

Sure, we got a fair amount of stupid stuff in there too. Funny you seem to think that's a partisan phenom, though.

Funny, indeed.

-------------
So libs, how's that Congressional Resolution to end The War™ coming along?

Back in 1980, the debt was about 914 billion dollars.

Now it is some 8,600 billion.

Back in 1980, the GDP was $2.8 trillion. Now it's $13.5.

1. People here are not stupid.
2. Lying with statistics is a frowned-upon endeavor.
3. Hit-and-run smart aleks who lie get bounced.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

Tom Coburn would be an awesome president.

___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

Look, Coburn's in the "not gonna run so why bother" pile, and there are other reasons to doubt him, but if anybody has a claim to shaking up the Senate from within it's Tom Coburn.

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill

I think you take the 'Senators never win' thing way too seriously. What evidence is there that being a Senator is itself a hindrance, versus just there being bad candidates running?

Could Kerry the medal thrower have won had he been Governor like his former running-mate Dukakis? Was Dole held back by a long voting record, or just by being devoid of philosophy and ideas, and weighted by a party riddled with CDS? Was Goldwater's current position his undoing, or was his unapologetic conservatism just ahead of his time?

Our field is too patheticaly bad to worry about false historical trends.

Run like Reagan!

the concept of "vision for the Nation" and US Senator seem pretty well mutually exclusive. You are absolutely right about Dole, and the same lesson certainly applies in spades to the potential candidates who are serving Senators.

I also am making a snap judgment about Coburn that I would happily retract should he decide to run and should he then actually show that he has a vision for where the Nation should be heading.

This has little to do with "historical trends", it has to do with the viral infection that seems to attack people when they are sworn in as Senators. They care more for the history of Senate and comity among it's members than they do about the fate of the country.

I don't find any announced candidate or potential candidate with a committee from either party, who's currently in the Senate to any more qualified to be POTUS than a recently released felon who just needs a job so he can make his parole conditions. I'm not, BTW, accusing any of them of felonies, just being totally devoid of ideas, leadership on important matters and a vision of what the Nation should be.

Again, I would be willing to give Coburn the benefit of the doubt and a fair hearing.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

Madhouse Thought and The Minority Report

I'd rather have a just out of the closet and married in Mass. president who's third wife prior to coming out had a dozen abortions, but who was tough on Islamic Fascists/Terrorism, than a social conservative recently thawed out of a 1950's cryogenic capsule, but that was willing to compromise on terror.

what is his position on the War on Islamic Fascism? And how is it different from or better than anyone elses?

to lead a nation, particularly during a time of war. That's the difference, not the position in itself on the war which millions share, but the moral authority to lead 60% of this nation in that battle. Rudy has it as America's mayor with proven results on the ground, while the others have merely words to their credit. The political reality is that means a lot to a lot of people.

Agreed that he probably won't run, but he was talked into running for Senate, so why not President? An appeal to his sense of duty and country may be effective. Probably just wishful thinking...

couple of years.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

Although I’m not as warm on Giuliani largely because he’s an unknown on most of the important domestic issues and I’m wondering if he might be a one-trick pony by simply being Mayor of NYC on 9/11. I’m open to persuasion and don’t have any reason not to support him if he’s the nominee but I haven’t seen anything that excites me.

Let's get one thing straight, the only reason you are conscious right now is because Jack Bauer does not feel like carrying you.

His economic and crime rate turn around for NYC was a one trick pony too? I think you need to look at NYC before Rudy took office and what he made of it up until the day before 9/11.

As far as Giuliani’s “economic record,” someone who supported Mario Cuomo for governor in the hopes of having the State bail out NYC and Al D’Amato for Senate because of his ability to bring home the pork isn’t exactly endearing himself to fiscal conservatives.

Let's get one thing straight, the only reason you are conscious right now is because Jack Bauer does not feel like carrying you.

is the same concept as national security at the federal level. Take a look at who's soft on crime and whos' tough on crime. There is a one-to-one correlation with tough on national security.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

Former Va. Gov. Gilmore sets up exploratory presidential campaign

Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore has set up an exploratory presidential campaign for 2008. Gilmore's aide, Matt Williams, says the Republican filed papers today with the Federal Election Commission in Washington to form the Jim Gilmore for President Exploratory Committee. Williams said Gilmore was in a meeting and not immediately available for comment.

Gilmore, who's 57, said in interviews last month that he didn't see a true conservative running for president, and said he would assess his own chances for a presidential run. Gilmore was elected governor in 1997 by promising to cut Virginia's property tax that local governments levy on personal cars and pickup trucks.

Problem is he's got a long road ahead of him to reach the right level of name recognition that would put him in contention.

Madhouse Thought and The Minority Report

I just don't know if he has the star power to run for president. I think that Dick Armey stands a better chance than Jim Gilmore.

I doubt he'd do well with the base or in Iowa & NH.

Although if the field were narrowed down to Ward and McCain, he'd have a good shot.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

Though. The first candidate among our field that earns the endorsement of the NRA is going to have a huge advantage in my book. It's too early to tell who that will be, but it's going to be pivotal.

Have you listened to interviews with the guy? Take away the social conservatism and the man is basically a nanny-state New Democrat. He lists physical fitness as one of his top three priorities, and the other two are national service and a balanced budget (note that he references the Clintonian mantra about underfunded state governments and doesn't frame it in terms of reduced spending).

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill

I'm not going to vote for anyone who Time thinks is a good governor. Weren't they all excited that Bob Taft discovered the art of raising taxes in Ohio, or something?

Club for Growth will torpedo Huckabee and/or Hunter if necessary.

Hello people...no more Big Government Republicans!

Huckabee can run for the senate. I at least won't actively oppose him if he is running against Mark Pryor. At least there he can vote to confirm good judges, and a conservative president can veto any of the big spending bills he helps send up.

Is he a Republican?

Madhouse Thought and The Minority Report

...would also cause a certain electricity. Look at all of the "two African-Americans coaching the Super Bowl" talk. I think the nation -- justified or no -- has been looking for an outlet for our collective guilt over the accululated failure of African-Americans to escape the rut that they, as a group, seem stuck in.

To make a statement about all of that via an individual who has impeccable credentials would be exciting -- for me anyway.

If we assume that Obama's lack of qualifications catch up to him, then we can assume it might be Hillary seh'd be running against. Condi against Hillary sets up nicely for the GOP -- on many, many levels.

--
We would also like to know your advice for somebody like my daughter, who's going to graduate in two years, advice that you would give a young person.

SEC. RUMSFELD: Advice for a young person. Study history.

No one else even comes close.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

--
We would also like to know your advice for somebody like my daughter, who's going to graduate in two years, advice that you would give a young person.

SEC. RUMSFELD: Advice for a young person. Study history.

n/t

n/t.

If a GOP rock star were possible, we wouldn't have been listening to Jim Webb last night.

--
We would also like to know your advice for somebody like my daughter, who's going to graduate in two years, advice that you would give a young person.

SEC. RUMSFELD: Advice for a young person. Study history.

In theory, the MSM could have made the same "breath of fresh air", good looking, and charismatic puff pieces about Romney but with all the proven experience. That is never going to happen.

I've seen Powerpoint presentations that were more inspiring than the roster of candidates. On either side.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

with John Steele - the current crop of candidates are less exciting that a film strip production.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

Or are you so distraught you're willing to support a draft movement for one of the Clampetts?
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer

No, I meant Jed. As in Babbin.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10806

"I'm kind of old-fashioned. I like to engage my brain before my mouth." Donald Rumsfeld