Posted on 02/12/2011 9:51:50 AM PST by sjneuf
The bottom-line is that the left exploits hypocrisy like a squirrel exploits nuts. In a hypothetical Daniels campaign, any mention of the debt will bring a litany of fingers pointing back at Daniels for his own part in setting the current spending trend and financial catastrophe we find ourselves in today. And believe me, the Obama people most certainly have Mitch Daniels number. After all, the person who wrote that Time Magazine article I noted above, was James Carney. The same James Carney (aka “Jay” Carney) who replaced Robert Gibbs as Obama’s Press Secretary.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservatives4palin.com ...
He had a great “Red Menace” line, thats about it.
Where is the 21st Century Ronaldus Magnus?
CPAC is for RINOs, and so is Mitch Daniels.
Paging Jan Brewer, Chuck Grassley, or Darryl Issa.
We won’t have one of those until we emerge from both the worldwide depression and war - probably in about 20 years. So, we’re looking for someone who is about 25 years old right now, not a product of the public schools - the son of a missionary couple - someone who is what he appears to be as far as moral character. Such a person exists today.
A good dozen need to run for the nomination, and may the best Covervative man or woman win.
The fact is the Reps could run St. Paul, and the lamestream media would remind us of his early history of hunting down Christians...
Frankly I get totally turned off by those on the left (or Right) that insist “so and so” should not be allowed to run.
I agree. However, based on the references in the article, it appears Mitch Daniels has some significant baggage with respect to contributing to the unholy debt of the US during the Bush years. The left will shred him for his hipocrisy in this regard.
Daniels gave a good speech last night at CPAC. I was impressed.
As for what happened to the budget during the Bush administration, there is plenty of blame to go around. I start with the people in Congress who actually voted for all this debt.
Agree..it was a really good speech..Mitch is comfortable in his own skin..by contrast, Romney came off as an empty suit...
“I agree. However, based on the references in the article, it appears Mitch Daniels has some significant baggage with respect to contributing to the unholy debt of the US during the Bush years. The left will shred him for his hipocrisy in this regard.”
Not to mention essentially selling off his tollway to a foreign company (for what will become confiscatory tolling on the poor drivers), in exchange for a one-time cash infusion to make him look like he know how to “Balance the Budget”.
I have no patience at all for conservatives who act as though they can predict the relative amounts of calumny the left will heap upon our various potential standard-bearers, and who think that we should favor those candidates toward whom the left will presumably be less critical.
This is idiocy at best and, in practice, amounts to collusion with the leftist agenda.
We are conservatives. We have standards. We should examine all of our potential nominees according to our own standards and choose the one we think will be best able to articulate our principles and lead our nation.
The left will shriek ugly, psychotic lies about whoever we nominate. It is foolish (at best) to pretend we can avoid this.
Daniels left the Bush administration well before the massive hike in debt/deficits.
It was after Pelosi got in power that the debt skyrocketed; Daniels was long gone by then, having decided to become executive over Indiana's finances which, because of him, are now in healthy shape.
I have some tell me privately that the Indiana GOP is an old boys network and more hackery going on than we know and were rather jaundice about him and the state of the states conservative movement.
Tell me where this sentiment is off-base...
Does anyone know if this guy will encourage southbound migration?
One would think that an impending “new Red Menace” would rank near the top of the priority list, but it didn’t
The reason it didn't is because Bush had his hands more than full prevailing in Iraq.
The Red Menace came in with a vengeance not with TARP which is largely paid back but with the huge new entitlement called Obamacare, with more on the way under our current socialistic leadership.
Michelle Bachmann spoke at CPAC.
Remember that this is from another conservative group, part of the scorched earth strategy I’m hoping we can avoid this time around where supporters of each candidate tear down all the other candidates in a circular firing squad, leaving some McCain-like candidate as the last man/woman standing.
As the Greeks used to say: When times are at their worst the Giants will appear.
We have giants, they have jet to appear.
At this time in 1980 Carter led RR 49 to 40.
Those C4Pers are good—and quick!
Bush had his own new medical entitlement that had nothing to do with national security. Bush was a big spender, and the idea that his budget director is going to come in and save us all now is laughable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.