Red state Blue state discussion forum

Obama is just not likeable

2008-07-29T13:48:00.002-06:00

The press can say what they will, I find Obama to be an irritating character. He isn't very sharp, he prances around like he is someone that he clearly isn't, and the people he chooses to hang around with are very unpleasant for different reasons.

All in all, I really wonder if folks will pull the lever/poke the chad for him on November 4, 2008.

Israel

2008-07-16T22:04:00.002-06:00

Is a lost cause. Its trade of 5 terrorists for 2 corpses defies logic.

Bring on Netanyahu and rattle some real estate over there.

What a MESS!

2008-07-16T10:30:00.003-06:00

The Netroots are mad at Obama and Conservatives can't stand the sight of McCain.

November is looking more and more like a bad joke.

The conventions might be entertaining.

Losing the war at home

2008-06-18T09:10:00.017-06:00

When John Murtha blathered (re: Haditha), "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood." and the MSM picked it up as the truth about our war against the savages, a new low for Congress was reached. I realize that confidence in Congress has fallen since then, but it was noteworthy for me because of the fact that such a horrible, defeating statement was not only uttered by a member of Congress but also excitedly printed and recounted by the press as the Truth.

And now charges have been dropped against yet another Marine (the 7th).

But I haven't seen any apologies (to the troops or the American public) by the MSM. What a joke they are.

America is probably winning the war on the battlefield but over here they are losing it; in the courts and with the public, as exuberantly reported by the MSM. The insane popularity of a very inexperienced Congressman who has no notable legislative achievements or policy pronouncements and who is more liberal than anyone we have taken seriously before, certainly for President, is good reason to worry.

The usual approach for an election year would be to try and convince another person that the reason(s) supporting their position is(are) not defensible. But that won't work now; it is a waste of time to try to reason with a liberal. It won't work because they don't come to a decison by reason or analysis; they exclusively use an emotional yardstick (which conservatives are told they don't have [which we know is bull, we just consider it with other factors that are given more weight, especially in a time of war]). I heard one voter exclaim, when asked why he likes Obama, "he's just so COOL!"

When someone believes their position is best because of how they "feel"; give it up - you've lost.

Peace in the MidEast!

;)

Obama for national talk show host

2008-06-16T08:57:00.007-06:00

He is "cool", a great talker, looks great, and is believable (comments by voters).

Since he is does not have credible or worthwhile economic or political ideas and can't judge character, what do you say we just convince NBC, CBS, or ABC to give him his own talk show? Advertisers will crawl all over themselves to buy time on his show and the country will remain safe.

Obama on children: " . . . any fool can have a child” . . . “That doesn’t make you a father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”".

He's telling sperm donor - boys that it takes bravery to raise a child. We know they aren't brave, they need to somehow grow up and be mature men. And the girls they impregnate need to exhibit some character and grow a semblance of a brain before they will even approach having the tools necessary to raise a child.

I can only hope that such Dims and their offspring don't vote.

SCOTUS rules on political question in ultimate political grab by 5 justices

2008-06-13T09:20:00.006-06:00

In Boumediene, the majority found the constitutionally guaranteed privilege of habeas corpus review to apply to persons held in Guantanamo, including enemy combatants. WHAT?!

The Supreme Court has not historically heard "political questions" out of respect for the legislative and executive branches of government. When the doctrine has been construed narrowly by more liberal jurists, it has been invoked only when the issue presented to the Court is one that "has been textually committed to another branch of government." When considered more broadly by conservative jurists, the political question doctrine has been used when there is a lack of judicially manageable standards to decide the case on the merits, when judicial intervention might show insufficient respect for other branches of government, or when a judicial decision might threaten the integrity of the judicial branch.

So much for SCOTUS' integrity (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito excepted). It hasn't been threatened by the Boumediene decision, it has been eviscerated. The Court is now a threat to the very country that it serves.

Aso, an Amicus Curiae brief submitted by the American Bar Assn. on behalf of the petitioners (enemy combatants in a time of war) shows the ABA to be the disgraceful organization that it is.

So, "people" who want to blow us up and cut our heads off have the same rights under the U.S. Constitution as school teachers and you do. And we all get to pay for this. What is going on and where will it end? This is a nightmare.

There should be a new rule of engagement - immediate adjudication on the battlefield.

Federalist Paper No. 69 and the Boumediene decision

2008-06-13T08:52:00.002-06:00

Boumediene vastly expands the wartime power of the federal courts and contracts the power of the elected branches of government to provide for the common defense.

With respect to the executive branch, Alexander Hamilton's comments in Federalist Paper #69 are important: "Of all the cares or concerns of government, the direction of war most peculiarly demands those qualities which distinguish the exercise of power by a single hand. The direction of war implies the direction of the common strength; and the power of directing and employing the common strength, forms a usual and essential part in the definition of the executive authority."

Boumedienne will be a blemish on the Court for decades.

The horrible shape we are in

2008-06-12T21:45:00.009-06:00

McCain the Inept and Obama the Fraud.

Other names could be used but those came to mind first. McCain could (unbelievably) be leading in the polls if he left his energy position for the waste that it is.

Drill in ANWR, drill offshore, mine the Rockies for oil shale, and tell the ROW (rest of the world) to pound sand - there is plenty where most of them live so that will keep them busy.

Tom Tancredo is calling for mandatory flex-fuel cars. At least he is using a brain.
Pelosi, Reid, and Dean (and the Dims in Congress) refuse to let us (TO LET US!) drill for oil or mine shale in our own country as we sit at the economic mercy of third world tyrants.

And we are to believe that the Left is for the troops after the nauseating Supreme Court decision on Gitmo detainees. Some will die because of it! [McCain told reporters that he had not yet read the opinion, but expressed concerns about the rights it might (MIGHT!) impart to the people being held there. These are unlawful combatants, they are not American citizens and I think we should pay attention to Justice Roberts' opinion in this decision," McCain said, referring to the chief justice's dissent. But it is a decision that the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know I always favored closing Guantanamo Bay and I still think we ought to do that. (great.)

Obama issued a statement expressing support for the decision (what!?), saying that it strikes the proper balance between fighting terrorism and "protecting our core values." (I give up on him entirely) "The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo -- yet another failed policy supported by John McCain," Obama said. "This is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus."] OMG!

It is time for a revolution. Most Americans love their country and will stand up for it; the rest need to leave. Now.

Liberals hate this country so much they are willing to kill it, and fellow citizens, to get revenge for Bush's election in 2000. I hate them. They aren't mindless or stupid (SCOTUS justices are far from ignorant), they are hateful, destructive self-important progressives.

Pray and get ready.

Stinking bunch of lying morons

2008-05-16T13:14:00.011-06:00

Let me get this right, Pres. Bush mentions a statement made during WWII and the Dims jump and scream and yell that there is an unwritten rule that a President can't be criticized by one who is overseas.

So, Barack Obama (not specifically mentioned) who is not a President is offended.

PLEASE!

Rep. Pelosi went to Syria and ridiculed Pres. Bush, and former Pres. Carter has criticized Bush from points the world over. Other Congressional Dims have done the same thing while on taxpayer-funded junkets.

They will say and do anything to win; grow a backbone and stop being so nice!

America Alone by Mark Steyn

2008-05-16T08:13:00.003-06:00

This is a book that everyone who thinks they care about America and Western civilization HAS to read. Mr. Steyn isn't a doomsday, earth-ender nut; the facts speak for themselves.

We are facing a huge struggle and the numbers are against us, but complacency and fear of confrontation play right into the hands of the radicals.

Americans have historically risen to any challenge and this is the biggest. Global warming MAY spell the end game but radical Islamists ARE the end game. This is for keeps; the ultimate Inconvenient Truth.

I predict that in spite of his missteps and mistakes, President George W. Bush will be remembered and praised forever for having the foresight and courage to confront the spread of radical Islam. The war in Iraq hasn't been a tidy little scrum, nor will it be wherever we fight these people around the world. We love sports, beer, and sex; they love to kill.

Obama cannot be elected President in 2008. Too much is at stake to elect a man who believes his country is (always) wrong.

Can the GOP save itself?

2008-05-15T14:11:00.001-06:00

There is a sign of life after years of death and stench.

Check out this URL: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10370.html

McCain embraces global warming!

2008-05-13T12:40:00.002-06:00

McCain has embraced the Left and I predict chaos in Minneapolis. McCain won't lead a GOP ticket; how this will happen I don't know, but is he not a conservative.

* Open Gitmo
* Ban waterboarding
* Open the borders

No way is this going to fly. Traditional and large GOP donors are sitting it out. If McCain gets the GOP nod, the GOP is officially dead.

I'm hoping conservative Republicans are working to make something (good) happen in August. Forinstance, Romney only suspended his campaign. Maybe they can build off that.

Hillary

2008-05-08T21:41:00.002-06:00

I'm wondering if she and Bill think Obama is unelectable and are convinced that she must go to the rescue of the Dims; i.e., she'll stay in the race until he implodes.

The sun will shine again!

2008-05-07T15:00:00.002-06:00

Just kidding.

The Democrats have their own problems. The Republicans have one: the demise of conservatism.

I feel like the sun will/should never shine down again on this arrogant, stupid, dismal country.

Why won't people WAKE UP?

The Obamas make me ill

2008-04-14T14:21:00.003-06:00

I can't stand to look at them, hear them, or read about them anymore; I've had enough.

They are perfect for each other; it's not just Michelle who is left of Dukakis and Kerry.

The Dims have a "man" (I think he's a good example of one of todays feminized men; more later) who is left of left and a political idiot and a woman/human who half of us think flies on a broom - FOR PRESIDENT!

It is sad and at times disgusting and pathetic but it's also hilarious!

Stay away Bob Barr!

2008-04-03T14:59:00.001-06:00

Do you think this man will peel away the Far Right and hand the WH to a Dim?

How has it become this ugly?

2008-04-02T13:35:00.003-06:00

The political campaigns -- society -- public education -- PEOPLE are increasingly mean.

How interesting that all of the above coincide with the increasing strength of progressives in politics. Scary.

Pelosi (a/k/a moveon.org member)

2008-03-27T14:30:00.004-06:00

Our completely inept Speaker of the House has slumped to a new and (to me) shocking low.

Moveon.org, creator of the now famous full-page Betray Us ad in the NYT, has written a letter to the Clinton campaign to support Nancy's transparent attempt to support Obama all the way to the convention.

See: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/MoveOn_responds_to_Pelosi_letter.html

The state of the Republican Party saddens me. The Democrats sicken me.

Clinton will never ever ever give up

2008-03-26T09:56:00.007-06:00

I recently saw an interview with Pat Caddell, who looked extremely frustrated and concerned and today, the rarely ruffled Bob Beckel writes a piece pleading with Hillary to cease and desist (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/clinton_obama_need_to_cool_it.html). I can only imagine the heat inside the donkey den.

And then there is that pesky FL - MI donkey (doo) mess. Voices are getting rather shrill about it and why can't so and so - which depends on the pleading person's political preference of course - just give in and make it right (slang for "go away").

That "human", Hillary Clinton, regardless of the numbers of votes and delegates she and Obama have, will stop only whe she has won the nomination. She has been living for this day for too many years to give it up for the good of anyone or anything. They can all forget it.

Hillary Clinton has no character and no integrity and as incredible as it seems the Dims are just now realizing it.

Now if only McCain will stop making his own misstatements; Iran (a Shiite country) training Al Qaeda (which is Sunni) and 0% interest rates for mortgages, I'll be able to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show.

DNC will nominate Obama

2008-03-18T14:17:00.002-06:00

Now that the DNC is in control of the Dim Party nomination process, they will follow what they perceive to be and hope is the will of the voters of their Party.

The Blacks and youth of the party will have been satisfied but the party elite will recognize that they have again LOST!

President McCain - who woulda thought?

Obama's speech on 3/18

2008-03-18T10:35:00.007-06:00

I've read the speech but I have no idea how people have taken it. Here is my opinion about it:

The man is a very good writer and a liberal.

If I didn't know why he gave the speech I would not have known after he gave it.

He did fess up to knowing about Wright's strong opinions, but there was no mention of which things he agrees and disagrees with and there was no mention of the Farrakhan connection.

Details were absent and that's what we needed. We know about his beginnings and his mother and grandfather - again - but we still don't know how angry and bitter he is (is he sympathetic with Rev. Wright even though he might make him cringe?). He recites history and waxes poetic about a divided America with a racist legacy, but tells us nothing of his current, personal beliefs. Then again, I guess we really do know.

I'll be curious to see how interested Americans are in living through another race war, as that seems to be what he has in mind. And, how interested the Dims are in nominating a candidate whose campaign is all about race.

I don't know what to think about the Democrats

2008-03-13T10:52:00.003-06:00

They seem to be enjoying all of the piling on and gnashing of teeth. In the process they won't tear apart their dearly beloved diversified party, but they are creating a spectacle for the ages.

With blacks and women spitting and spewing at each other and refusing to play nicely(voting for other members of their own party), the Republicans (the nondiverse white honky racist party)are beginning to smile.

No doubt Hillary will be happily playing the race card until the end, and in the process may save the Republicans.

Thank you M/M Clinton. ;)

For how long will the name Hillary conjure up one person?

2008-03-10T12:06:00.003-06:00

At least for the lifetime of everyone now alive.

She must love it.

The more I hear the more I like

2008-03-07T12:21:00.001-07:00

Hillary and Obama are tearing each other apart!

Now if they'll just leave the country intact and go away I'll be happy.

Will Obama stand up to Hillary and fight back?

2008-03-06T07:57:00.006-07:00

Naftagate? Why did he let her say one word about Nafta? She is ass deep in it. I'd say how dare she but I know better.

Hillary has barely begun to "throw the kitchen sink" at Obama. Does he have the intestinal fortitude to go to war with a Clinton? It has been suggested that the Clintons have something on him. If so, it's over unless he is willing to play for keeps.

Filegate. The Clintons have dirt on super delegates, opponents, the media, anyone and everyone that matters. They are evil and she is evil, mean, and has no character. None. Obama has stirred up Hell.

And just how hamstrung is he by the appearance of a black man attacking a white woman? Does that matter?

I think Michelle Obama will be willing to go to war with Her - she is one angry lady and she may see this as her time every bit as much as Hillary does.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/10/080310fa_fact_collins

Grab the popcorn.

Wherefor art the youth vote?

2008-03-05T11:59:00.003-07:00

All I heard before 3/4 was how great the youth vote would be for Obama but last night I never heard one word about it. Race; yes. Sex; yes. White men; yes. Older white women; yes. Hispanics/Latinos; yes.

Assuming the enthusiasm of the young is still evident; will it last until November and will it matter?

Will we see an Obama-Hillary ticket?

2008-03-05T11:54:00.003-07:00

Or a Hillary-Obama ticket?

No. Hillary won't give up her tax return(s) so Barack can see all the Clinton dirt. He has his eyes on someone else. Don't know who but she isn't it.

The Dims are going to be torn apart along race and sex lines. And maybe religion.

Sit back and enjoy!

"No One Dares To Tell Her It's Over"

2008-03-03T09:25:00.002-07:00

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02252008/news/columnists/no_one_dares_to_tell_her_its_over_99256.htm?page=2

If she wins Ohio this could be ugly for awhile longer. Just last night (2/3) I heard Dianne Feinstein argue that Hillary should keep running until the convention.

Democrats are disingenuous year after year

2008-02-29T14:51:00.008-07:00

They empathize, sympathize, want to share our pain, and they say are like us. That is pure hogwash.

Their programs don't help anyone climb out of poverty as they say they will. They pull out the same tired old notes and re-spin them every few years.

And people fall for it everytime by voting for a Democrat. They must like hogwash.

If Michelle Obama thinks she has been one of the downtrodden until now she has only the Democratic Party to blame - I'm sure she has never voted for a white, male, Republican. Those are the wrong classes of people and don't matter - yet.

When Barack wants to talk about policies then I'll listen.

But I'll hold my breath just in case; hogwash stinks.

An Obama egg - S.B. 2433

2008-02-27T11:33:00.010-07:00

S.B. 2433 is a nauseatingly liberal idea. It is sponsored by Barack Obama and has only 6 cosponsors (Senators Maria Cantwell, Dianne Feinstein, Richard Lugar, Richard Durbin, Chuck Hagel and Robert Menendez) and would create The Global Poverty Act. Think: UN, NATO, taxes, abomination.

Get this, the legislation:

Makes U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the U.N.

Would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7% of GNP on foreign aid or $845 billion over 13 years (in addition to what we spend now).

Requires the President “to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.” The term “Millennium Development Goals” is defined as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning “small arms and light weapons” and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as “the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development.”

This legislation certainly highlights Mr. Obama's view of our place in the world. He wants "the world" to tax us! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

McCain and the Right: T-R-O-U-B-L-E!

2008-02-27T11:18:00.005-07:00

The Bill Cunningham situation is problematic. It has become all too clear that Conservatives hate McCain, don't trust him, and are furious about his #1 position.

The polls are showing that McCain can beat Obama, but not if half of the Republicans stay home. And I think a good number of them will (not half, but too many) since it appears McCain won't say what they want to hear; he can't if he wants to appeal to independents and remain true to himself.

I think he'll have to throw the Right a bone by selecting a true Conservative running mate. Immigration is too high a priority for the Right and McCain's position on it is too liberal for the Right to swallow.

Anyone agree?

Want change? Vote for McCain.

2008-02-21T14:21:00.011-07:00

If change includes fighting the status quo in your own party, then John McCain is up to the task. And he has years of experience.

For all Obama talks about change, one would think he invented the word. He uses it so often it's boring. It's written on posters, signs; everywhere that he goes. Yet we have no idea what he would change. Change probably includes everything that reminds him of Bush.

Wow! This guy is a freshman Senator. Can he be that good?

But wait, why would we want him to change everything that has led to peace and prosperity? The man is always speaking (in front of thousands) but the nature of his changes are still vague. The changes we do know about would hurl us into a black hole of debt.

What do his fans love about him? He speaks well (and long), he's "new" (so were those successful novelties New Coke and Jimmy Carter), and he believes in change and hope. And they seem to love his view of America as not yet (pre-Obama) good enough.

OK. He's an egotistical verbose empty suit who is hopeful and wants "change".

When compared to his more glaring deficiencies (won't wear a flag lapel pin and defends hateful anti-U.S. statements by moveon.org-mentality wife (and himself), won't answer questions in any meaningful way, and proposes massive spending programs), Obama is not worthy of a yes vote, let alone tears and fainting.

An insanely popular politician we know very little about except that he is farther Left than anyone else in the Senate. Chilling.

Just say no.

After 4/22, most delegates will have been chosen

2008-02-20T10:28:00.002-07:00

And Hill will be ready for some serious counseling. This could be very interesting. Maybe she'll join CNN and wax poetic on the general election.

Oh those Dims! Patriotism is just not their strong suit.

2008-02-20T10:07:00.005-07:00

While Michelle Obama has alerted any semi-alert person to the fact that she is either (1) left of Far Left, or (2) a loose cannon in spite of her Ivy league education who bears watching/recording closely, the Clinton camp even with its new aggressive pit bull personnel in place can't seem to find the words to call Obama on his campaign's (his wife IS part of his campaign) lack of patriotism, except when referring to its own rhetoric.

Oh say can you see, Hillary? Time is running out. Or will HRC create a hellish inferno for her Party in Denver?

A veep for McCain

2008-02-10T13:26:00.000-07:00

Should he turn to the right or the left?

I think he should look for a moderate to attract independents in November.

I believe Romney is the answer: very strong on the economy (McCain's weakness), winner of CPAC straw poll, and a strong believer in the war effort and tighter control of the border.

Turmoil on the left side of the aisle

2008-02-10T13:19:00.000-07:00

It's looking increasingly like Obama and Hillary are going to cruise into late Spring neck and neck. What will the DNC do?

An open convention won't (be allowed to) happen. Nor will a tie-breaking vote by Super Delegates.

FL and MI only add to the problem (Hillary would never agree to caucuses and Obama would never agree to open them up to primaries).

My oh my! ;)

McCain = maddening!

2008-02-06T13:35:00.000-07:00

Now he wants conservatives to "Calm down"!

If he spouts off one more time about how he'll "reach across the aisle" I think I'll get sick.

I won't vote for Hillary or that other guy but I will sit it out if McCain is the RINO nominee.

WHY is McCain getting a free ride from the GOP?

James Dobson's stand against McCain/RINOs

2008-02-05T14:47:00.000-07:00

The GOP "leaders" will have to sit up and pay attention to Dobson's letter (he will not vote in '08 if McCain is the Republican nominee).

Just how dead is the Republican Party without the Focus on The Family crowd out of Colorado Springs? D - E - A - D.

RINOS + Dims = 1-party

2008-02-05T14:41:00.000-07:00

We are becoming a single party country! And it's the weak kneed RINOs who are making it possible.

Need proof -- we are about to nominate McCain, the RINO in Chief!!!

The most distressing thing I've heard yet today is out of WV where the McCain and Huckabee forces joined ranks to beat Romney. I expect that out of the Dims but not the Republicans. Civility; nice while it lasted.

What will GOP leaders do if Romney is within 200 pts. of McCain after Feb. 5?

2008-02-05T09:06:00.000-07:00

On February 6 there will be a gnashing of teeth in Washington. Nice words by Bob Dole, Bill Bennett,and a few others will not make conservatives happy with/willing to vote for McCain.

Would an extremeley conservative running mate help?

Antonin Scalia? Mike Huckabee? Charlie Crist? Mitt Romney? Fred Thompson? Tim Pawlenty (MN Gov.)?

The results today will be interesting, but even if Romney doesn't run a close 2nd the issue will be the same; how to attract conservatives to a McCain ticket. The Republicans have zero chance in November without them.

For the Democrats, how do they merge the Clinton and Obama camps? That seems easier to me since policy matters don't get in the way. Speaking nice and getting along (and crying, if you are Hillary) are the only keys to getting the nomination.

10 Reasons Conservatives cannot tolerate 8 years of Hillary or Barack

2008-01-30T13:54:00.000-07:00

1. There will be several (at least) new liberal SCOTUS appointments;

2. The economy will be in shambles, featuring an interest rate in the teens;

3. There will be tens of millions of new illegals, with drivers' licenses and voting rights;

4. Political Correctness and the opinions of other countries (how to be measured?) will be required considerations;

5. Alleged terrorists will have all the rights of U.S. citizens;

6. Guantanamo Bay will be closed;

7. FISA will not be extended; intelligence capabilities will be greatly restricted;

8. The Homeland Security Administration will be larger than the State of Nevada (in size) because it will be important to feel safe;

9. Tax receipts will plummet because tax rates on the top 1% (who provide 80% of receipts) will sky rocket; and

10. Funding for the UN will be increased.

Hill is in a crack. :)

2008-01-28T12:28:00.000-07:00

"Through Barack, I believe we will move beyond the politics of fear and personal destruction and unite our country with the politics of common purpose." (Ted Kennedy)

Something is up with Rudy :(

2008-01-25T10:45:00.000-07:00

At the debate last night he didn't seem very interested (like Fred). He didn't aggressively question McCain and his answers were mush (bland and boring).

I wonder if his wife has put the brakes on or if the success in Iraq has finally stolen his thunder.

In any event, Romney was the clear winner. On economic matters no one can touch him, and they all seem to know it. HIs quip about Bill Clinton was great.

Kudos to all candidates for finally referring to Hillary as Hillary Clinton and putting her ignominious past up front where it belongs.

Rudy can do it!

2008-01-23T14:01:00.000-07:00

I hope he shocks the **** out of everyone. Well, all of the pundits.

Actually, I hope he and Romney are within about 2% of each other so they can't call a clear winner. But the clear loser will be Johnny Mac!

What to do?!

2008-01-23T09:55:00.000-07:00

I'm a Fredhead without a Fred.

McCain is a patriot but a liberal = out!
Huckabee is a liberal evangelical = out!
Rudy is a big question to me = ?
Paul is unacceptable due to his foreign policy position = out!
Romney is a pandering financial genius = ?
Obama and Clinton = double out!
So I've whittled the list down to Romney and Giuliani.

Romney - He bothers me with his throwing of financial incentives to entice voters; i.e., in MI he proposed a $20 billion energy research/auto industry bailout plan, and then he proposed a $233 billion stimulus package. None of this is good, but I have heard many refer to him as a brilliant businessman and I know he's scrambling to get votes as he did in MA) so I'm still considering giving him my support. I love the fact that he's rich enough to battle this thing out and that he would be able to capably debate any economic issues with the Dim nominee. Also, his married life seems to be squeaky clean so there wouldn't be any dirt thrown there.

He apparently had some very liberal positions in MA with respect to gay rights, balancing the MA budget (with $500M in new fees), and handling healthcare reform (by creating socialized healthcare). On one hand this could be viewed as his having delivered on what he promised to get elected in one of the most liberal States in the country. And the fact that he's pandering now is pretty much more of his modus operandi. Apparently he will be true to his word if he gets elected (please let me know if this is not true), which is why he's still on my list.

Giuliani - I like the fact that Steve Forbes supports him and his latest tax pkg. proposal is excellent. But I don't trust him with respect to how he would fight illegal aliens and his 2nd amendment support is questionable to me.

The illegal alien isssue is a dealbreaker for me, so although I want to believe what Rudy says about a wall on the border and ID cards, part of me is still skeptical.

I think one of these 2 will get the nomination and I could happily vote for either if they would select a true conservative as a running mate and throw a bone to the investor class and small businesses. Those are our bread and butter and there has been not one word! Come on guys - it's the primaries; WOW us!

Senator Clinton vs. Mitt Romney

2008-01-20T13:36:00.001-07:00

Will be alot of nose holding in November.

The One-Day-At-A-Time races

2008-01-16T10:20:00.000-07:00

This is incredible!

I agree with Newt Gingrich that the GOP is undergoing a much needed self analysis and reappraisal; at least it sounds serious and responsible. I have no idea what the Democrats are doing.

Heard this AM - Newt Gingrich will seriously consider any VP inquiries. Good to know.

Dems in race battle

2008-01-14T09:50:00.000-07:00

How well-deserved is it that the wife of the lst self-described black President, Bill Clinton, finds herself in the midst of a war of words with a real black candidate for President?

I'm enjoying this, but the possibility has occurred to me that Hillary is behind this to generate more interest in the Democrat race.

Huckabee will be left out

2008-01-11T09:59:00.000-07:00

I think it's going to be a down-to-the-wire Romney-Thompson v. Giuliani-McCain battle.

Romney is getting no traction but is widely viewed as extremely smart and a great businessman. He needs the conservatives Thompson would bring. Thompson needs cash and a partnership with Romney wouldn't chase away most of his supporters.

Giuliani will need McCain's popular support and their emphasis on foreign affairs would be credible and very desirable. Neither man is a conservative but supporters will view them as as unbeatable ticket.

Huckabee is desirable as a running mate only because he is quick with the quips, but that alone isn't enough.

The winner will face a Hillary-Obama ticket. Get the popcorn and beer ready.

Thank you South Carolina for a great debate!

2008-01-11T08:38:00.000-07:00

I just wish "illegal immigration" had been discussed more.

Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani were both fantastic. Conservatives will win out!

Obama - NO!

2008-01-10T11:03:00.000-07:00

For the sake of this country the Democrats in SC need to vote for Hillary!

I would quote from the Obama For America website, but it won't open. The level of enthusiasm for this man by such libs as Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas is all I need to know ("I don't want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats. We've done that in 2004, 2000."). And on the blogosphere, liberals are complaining that Obama isn't tough (read: liberal) enough.

The economy will be fine if the pundits would only shut up!

2008-01-10T09:42:00.000-07:00

The stock market is anxious enough without the regular and unwelcome remarks made by Federal Reserve members and investment management firm analysts.

Their talk is cheap unless you are an investor. And the mere thought of Barack Obama in the White House with his all-together-now talk is positively scary.

BUT, Bernanke spoke again today and says the Fed "stands ready" to cut interest rates. The market shot up, so maybe that will silence the recession-hungry pundits. Great statement by Larry Kudlow: "the market has predicted 20 out of the last 8 recessions" (not his original statement, but still great).

John Turncoat McCain

2008-01-10T08:56:00.000-07:00

McCain-Feingold, amnesty for illegals, and back door deals with Democrats.

McCain's military service is beyond reproach, but when you add an arrogant and abrasive personality to the above "accomplishments", the man is completely unacceptable as a Republican Presidential candidate. The nanny state-loving MSM loves him for a reason.

Giuliani, Romney, and Thompson are FAR SUPERIOR Republican candidates.

Let's get serious about this America!

Bring on the rest of the country!

2008-01-09T14:24:00.000-07:00

Iowa and New Hampshire. Now those are 2 heavy hitting states - best known for corn silos and snow. Whoop.

Seriously, let's not get all in knots before NY, CA, or TX. Better yet, let's just let this all play out. No one is "in" or "out" because nothing is "over".

Comprendez?

It cannot be acceptable for one candidate to say that another candidate is dropping out of the race.

2008-01-03T14:16:00.000-07:00

Whichever candidate is responsible for saying Thompson would drop out and give his support to McCain should be required to quit.

This penalty would require that we have adequate measures in place to require that candidates have a minimum level of maturity to be President.

Throw out the polls - it's time for action.

2008-01-01T13:58:00.000-07:00

The last Des Moines Register poll shows Obama ahead of Clinton.

When caucuses begin in 2 days I think voters will increasingly back the perceived frontrunners and those with momentum - Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Romney, and McCain.

I hope I'm wrong, but human nature seems to win out in these situations.

Fred Thompson's message to Iowa voters

2007-12-30T14:22:00.000-07:00

http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/video-freds-message-to-iowa-voters/ (copy and paste in browser window)

This is an excellent video for those who don't know much about Fred Thompson's positions on the issues.

Ticket predictions

2007-12-29T14:03:00.000-07:00

Democrats: Senator Clinton and Barack Obama
Obama would make the ticket more appealing/personable and the call for change would be met. Also, the experience would season Obama for a stronger run in 8 years. The ticket would attract the most Democratic voters.

Republicans: Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson
Thompson would please conservatives who are not quite sure of Giuliani but would like him to see him in the WH and his demeanor would make the ticket formidable. Giuliani knows Thompson would have no interest in competing for the Presidency years later.

The tickets would maximize the Parties' strengths and would position them well for 3+ months of incredibly fierce campaigning.

The Moral Majority is far from dead

2007-12-29T14:01:00.000-07:00

It just fell asleep at the wheel. But it's awake now!

Blogbursting for Fred!

2007-12-27T15:15:00.000-07:00

I'm in it for Fred!

And participating in the Blogburst for Fred is the least I can do. Please contribute anything you can.

As I've said before, Fred Thompson is an adult and has the gravitas befitting a President of the United States of America. And he is a fiscal conservative!

Be still my heart.

Who will show up at the Iowa caucuses?

2007-12-26T22:04:00.000-07:00

Young men for Barack Obama or elderly women for Senator Clinton?

I wouldn't count on young men showing up, but I think elderly women will show up or else.

Having said that, I think John Edwards will have a good chance to win if he has the support of experienced caucus-goers (as I've read about).

Attendance at the caucuses by dedicated supporters is all that matters - what fun!

Where will Ron Paul devotees go after S. C.?

2007-12-26T15:32:00.000-07:00

To the Thompson camp.

A true conservative will provide them with their only alternative.

A Hillary-Bloomberg 3rd party ticket?!

2007-12-14T12:52:00.000-07:00

So speculates Rush Limbaugh (12/14).

I definitely think there will be a 3rd party ticket if the nominees next winter are Huckebee and Obama but I don't think it will be a Hillary-Bloomberg ticket.

The desperate 60s-forever Left would draft Al Gore to run with Hillary.

But the Republican nominee won't be Huckebee, so . . .

Neither of the traditional Parties is in this race!

2007-12-11T14:15:00.000-07:00

The traditional Republican and Democrat Parties do not have viable candidates in this race so far, and the NYT/CBS poll showing that most Republicans haven't yet made up their minds is confirmation of this fact for that Party.

Huckabee, in earlier years, would have been considered a Far Right (fringe) candidate and 2 of the 3 Democrat candidates would have been considered fringe candidates.

Interestingly; the recent NYT/CBS poll shows that most Democrats think Hillary would be the best candidate to bring the country together, while at the same time, Black voters are increasingly switching to Obama in S.C.

It seems to me that a majority of Democrat voters must be as nauseous as most Republicans are with their slate of choices.

Thompson goes after Huckabee - Misc. campaign thoughts.

2007-12-08T13:26:00.000-07:00

So Fred Thompson has moved to IA and will make an all-out effort to finish in the top 3. It's about time.

Since Huckabee's recent gain has been at Thompson's expense (at an almost 1-for-1 clip) Thompson will have to keep snarping at Huckabee's record on gays, taxes, immigration, and his lack of interest/knowledge in the recent NIE report on Iran. Thompson's recent appearances on Fox News have been good; he needs to camp out there.

Thompson and Romney have a gravitas about them that I like. The adults have finally shown up. Since I fear for our nation's economy and soul, I am only considering Republican candidates.

The Democrats have lost their way and need to go through the same analytical process as the Republicans are now doing: for instance, they could ask - how have we come to the impossible situation that our only 3 possible nominees are a rich empty suit, a Clinton without any credibility and impossible negatives/unelectable, and a former state legislator with no meaningful federal experience?

Miscellaneous campaign thoughts:
* Giuliani has alot of personal garbage that I don't want to hear about (ala Clinton);
* McCain's turn toward the environment seals the deal shut - No!;
* Thompson I like (see above) but he needs to move up in the polls, NOW;
* Romney has won me over. I have heard him referred to as a financial genius (by Orrin Hatch (on Bill Bennett's radio program)) and the best businssman in America (by Jim Cramer, as reported by Bill Bennett), which cure any problems I had with his candidacy. His speech was spectacular (naysayers are on the fringe (of something or other) and I can't worry about them).
See Charles Krauthammer's excellent writing on Huckabee's disgraceful posturing on Mormonism: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Nzk4MmY2N2I5NGEzOTk4ZWNkYzU2ZWY0Njk5NWRkNjI=;
* Duncan Hunter is very attractive, but lacks the funds to launch a credible campaign to make his positions known;
* Tom Tancredo, like Duncan Hunter, simply doesn't have the backing to launch a credible campaign; and
* Ron Paul is out of consideration as long as he holds the irrational belief that we should pull out of Iraq.
* Debates: They have been a complete waste of time and money. The questions and formats (there is no debating allowed) did not allow viewers to glean any valuable information from the candidates. I have watched all of them.

Secretary Paulson on a bailout

2007-12-03T15:47:00.000-07:00

"We are working aggressively and quickly, utilizing available tools and creating new ones, to help financially responsible but struggling homeowners," Paulson said in a speech to a national housing conference sponsored by the Office of Thrift Supervision.

1. Where were the Feds in 2002 when I needed saving from my own idiotic moves in the stock market? I was "financially responsible but struggling" and no one offered to buy any tech stocks from me or freeze them at high prices.

2. What in tarnation is the "Office of Thrift Supervision"? Whatever it is it didn't do its job. I would hate to see its budget. :(

The economy

2007-12-03T15:33:00.000-07:00

While there is alot to hate about a Fed. bailout of greedy/selfish subprime mortgage holders, banks, and financial service firms, I think we can rest assured that the Democrats would craft a bailout plan that would be even worse ("save" everyone and everything).
I admit I'm selfish, I just want the stock market to feel better/head higher.

A V.P. selection for the Republican nominee

2007-12-03T15:03:00.000-07:00

The National Review is recommending that the Republican nominee (whoever he is) name Bill Bennett as his V.P. - for "name recognition and respect".
Bill Bennett would bring both of those attributes to any campaign but he does zilch to help with a geographic selection unless the nominee is Huckabee (God forbid!), McCain (ditto), or Thompson. The more I think about this idea the more I like it. Bennett is a straight shooter.

Thoughts?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjI1ZjBhZWVkZjYwNDA4MTA3N2Q2ZTY4YmU0NmQ5OWI=

Fred Thompson - the un-YouTube candidate

2007-11-29T14:32:00.000-07:00

Fred Thompson doesn't care who says he is bland and unexcited; he has a tax plan and a plan for making Social Security solvent and he acts in a manner befitting a President.

In my mind, he is a rising star.

Engage Your Brain!

2007-11-29T11:25:00.000-07:00

So this is where we are: YouTube and the nanny State - in other words, lost.

Republican candidates for President are subjected to unimportant questions planted by activists for Democratic candidates (CNN?) and Democratic candidates answer ridiculous questions (do you like diamonds or pearls?). The attempts at humor are sad and misplaced. Are adults in charge?

Why are we letting the ridiculously nutty radical PC left do this? They are pathetic and yet we are granting them strength way beyond their number (few) and substance (none). A start would be for the Republicans to find a spine and tell CNN and MSNBC to take a long walk off a short pier.

Not one question about healthcare, but we had to endure a nonsensical rant about the Confederate flag.

Hillary Clinton is a bizarre (she married Bill Clinton), lying, manipulative candidate who is not worthy of the United States Presidency, notwithstanding her years of experience as Bill Clinton's wife and travel companion, and her fellow Democratic candidates are equally unworthy (for different reasons).

ANY Republican candidate, except Ron the Pacifist Paul, would be a better choice. They are far from perfect, but they have ideas and they aren't disgusting.

Think before you vote!

If Hillary is elected

2007-11-29T10:48:00.000-07:00

Do you think she'll demand the replacement of everything she and Bill took when they left?

Australian election

2007-11-24T10:21:00.000-07:00

Howard loses in a landslide to Labor. Great.

Now the Aussies have gone for a liberal who talks about the need for diversity, workplace reforms (?), environmental protections, and pulling out of Iraq (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071124/D8T42OMG0.html). One of his first priorities is reversing the country's position against the Kyoto Protocol.

We are becoming the last hope for maintaining a civilized nation.

Rep. Murtha (D. PA)

2007-11-21T14:51:00.000-07:00

Does anyone still think Tom Murtha is a patriot after all he has said about our troops? The man won't shut up.

Will someone in PA please run against this man?

The second Civil War?

2007-11-20T11:08:00.000-07:00

I don't think many Americans feel comfortable with either Party. The difference is that some Democrats are so offended by Republicans' positions that they take them as personal affronts and think conservatives are truly bad people (i.e., "they don't care if children go to bed hungry"). On the other hand, some Republicans think Democrats are dangerously foolish.

So I'm wondering if we're heading toward a 3rd (and 4th) Party(ies) or modified Republican and Democrat parties. I'm thinking it will be the latter and that we'll get there by the end of the '08 election.

BTW, does anyone know if this is a good read: The Second Civil War by Ronald Goldstein?

The electorate is fearful

2007-11-20T10:50:00.000-07:00

The electorate is fearful of the Republicans going into Iran, of the economy, of global warming, of Congress' impotence . . . Take your pick.

I'm hearing alot of this. Obviously, the fear-baiting Democrats are successfully working their messages. Here are my takes on all this -

1. Iran - No one, not even talk radio, is talking about putting troops on the ground in Iran.

2. Iran - If Ahmadinejad's nuclear plans aren't blown up, Israel is a goner (I'm not Jewish; Israel is a trusted democratic ally in a part of the world where fanaticism rules. And, not insignificantly, in October there was a major oil find in Israel).

3. The economy - it is fine; there is no recession. That is a fact.

4. Global warming - be more fearful of the 2008 election.

5. Congress - Pelosi couldn't manage a 1-car funeral. She has accomplished zero and if that is the reason for fear, you're right, I don't get it.

18-34 year old voters

2007-11-20T10:20:00.000-07:00

A Rock The Vote poll* shows there is much more support among 18 - 34 year old voters for Giuliani (8%) than other Republicans - apparently, he is viewed by such voters as both a "hard-nosed pragmatist and a social moderate" (Politico.com).
[*Not sure what organization sponsors this.]

I think Giuliani will attract older moderates as well, especially females (with his more pro choice stance than other Republicans). This may not be showing up in other polls yet since this group may consist largely of first-time voters who are not on their radar (which would also help Hillary's numbers).

I also find it interesting that 32-42% identified themselves as Republican or Republican-leaning and 37-49% identified themselves as Democratic or Democratic-leaning. I was surprised to see the percentage of Republican voters (larger than expected).

Impact of intl. events on the '08 election

2007-11-19T12:09:00.000-07:00

We know the situation in Iraq is improving. That seems to be indisputable by all but the Harry and Nancy fanatics/defenders.

I'm wondering about Iran (Israel, Lebanon, Syria; heck, the entire Middle East if things really get out of hand), an attack on U.S. soil, or a completely unforeseen attack. Who benefits?

For example, if there is an attack on U.S. soil, I can see that being a + or - for the Administration and Republicans.

Predictions.

2007-11-19T11:58:00.000-07:00

Iowa - Obama and Huckabee
NH - Mitt and Hill.

Finally! The races are heating up.

2007-11-19T11:56:00.000-07:00

Good old American politics: Hill-bashing, push-polling, negative advertising heaven!

See: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6951.html

Another GOP retirement

2007-11-19T11:49:00.000-07:00

Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-N J.), 37, wants to spend time with his young family.

My bet is that this is yet another GOP-tard who is getting out before all of his lousy votes and un-GOP activities are exposed.

The Dims head out West

2007-11-15T12:38:00.000-07:00

With a CNN blowhard moderating the debate in Vegas I don't see much hope for hard questions.

I just hope the union forces make it a show.

Harry the Weak-Kneed Reid

2007-11-13T14:17:00.000-07:00

Our Senate Majority Leader said Tuesday (11/13) that Democrats won't approve more money for the Iraq war this year unless President Bush agrees to begin bringing troops home.,

Oh, that'll work.

Whatever is Congress doing?

2007-11-13T13:28:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday (11/13), Beijing dismissed a bill introduced in Congress that backs Taiwan's entry into the United Nations, reiterating its long-held view that the island territory is part of China.

I'm sure the Administration is going nuts over this. Doesn't Congress have enough to do (read: budget) without minding the business of other countries, or centuries?

Don't "pull a Russert"!

2007-11-13T10:59:00.000-07:00

Wolf Blitzer has been warned not to gang up on Hillary at the next debate in Las Vegas.

Drudge Report - "CNN's Wolf Blitzer has been warned not to focus Thursday's Dem debate on Hillary. 'This campaign is about issues, not on who we can bring down and destroy,' top Clinton insider explains. 'Blitzer should not go down to the levels of character attack and pull 'a Russert.'' Blitzer is set to moderate debate from Vegas, with questions also being posed by Suzanne Malveaux... "

I'm sure HRH knows nothing about this directive. Please.

Thompson's campaign

2007-11-13T09:30:00.001-07:00

I can't figure out where Thompson's campaign is headed. Mary Matalin is still there I think, but I'm not sure. What do you think?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111202007.html?sid=ST2007111202148

Mrs. Clinton (a/k/a Hillary)

2007-11-12T21:05:00.000-07:00

I can't abide by that woman's abhorrence of and refusal to use the name that is the only reason she is where she is today.

What is a "Progressive"?

2007-11-12T13:38:00.000-07:00

Only the liberal candidates know because it's a concept that exists only in their heads.

The Democrats in Congress.

2007-11-11T18:30:00.000-07:00

Nancy Pelosi is worse than Dennis Hastert could have ever been. What is the point of voting endlessly on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq except to appease the far Left?

With every veto, all the Dems are doing is repeatedly pouring salt in their wounds by reminding themselves that George W. Bush is still the President.

we are tearing the country apart - will it survive?

2007-11-11T14:12:00.000-07:00

Political discussions have always generated heat, but the hatred that is expressed by Conservatives and Progressives toward one another is at a whole new level.

Will the USA survive?
Yes. There are so many of us who will work to ensure that it does that failure is not an option. ;)

our political parties

2007-11-11T13:27:00.000-07:00

Both of the U.S. political parties are in a pseudo-state of transformation, but it seems that the Republicans are more intent on doing so than the Democrats (or the former are more aggressive in their pursuit of change due to the recent border legislation proposal and the growing budget deficit). However, neither Party has embraced a substantive change in its views.

The Republicans seek to return to long-established positions on major issues such as defense, taxation, and the economy, and the Democrats insist on a mere label change: being called "Progressives" instead of "Liberals" or "Democrats", all the while adhering to traditional Democrat Party positions. It is amusing that such positions are always given with a healthy dose of lingering disgust/contempt/hate for President Bush and his election 7 years ago, but such rhetoric is neither healthy for the Democrat Party or political discourse in general.

So where are we and will meaningful change result? With not one vote having been cast, its simply too early to tell. In the meantime, does anyone care to venture a guess?