Posted on 11/24/2010 12:54:47 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
“if the establishment continues to attack Tea Party Americans (and her), it would mean the destruction of the GOP.”
I am betting, Al, that the country will have decided to fire Obama in 2012. The GOP nominee will be the favorite. And the Establishment won’t be able to do anything about it. I could be wrong, but I think that is how it is shaping up.
They can destroy a novice candidate in a liberal state (DE)or a corrupt state (AK).
The United States is a whole different kettle of fish. Trying to do that in Florida, Michigan, Ohio or Wisconsin is not nearly as easy. They simply don’t have the ideological of organizational grip on those states.
And anyone who thinks Sarah Palin is a “novice candidate”, who can be rolled this way, is a fool. She is a politician of the first order. If she is running a campaign herself (not just endorsing, but making the decisions), I would never count it out. If she is both running the campaign and is herself the candidate, the odds of success are even higher, and a favorable poltical climate (ie-if the economy is not much better in 2012; unemployment below 7% which is highly unlikely) would make her invincible. In other words, her political savvy, plus her political skills (charisma, if you will) added to favorable circumstances for a challenger will make her next to unbeatable in a national election.
The “Romney saved the olympics, so he can be president” line is complete hogwash.
Whatever he did with the olympics has nothing to do with what our next president, or any president, needs to do. I’m sure Romney was very hands on and controlling when he “saved the olympics.”
But we already have a “hands on” president right now, look at his takeover of GM. And everything else.
To be president one needs to have the wisdom and the restraint to release the free markets from the grip of government.
What we need is a hands off president. Do you realize how difficult that is for a person sitting in the Oval Office? Bush claimed to be a hands off president but look what he did. Romney would be worse.
Watch it kid...
I have a Sarah Heath in my family lines...
My 5th g grandmother..
She was born in Great Cheverell, Wiltshire, England abt 1751 died abt 1834 and married John Dunford 18 Nov 1770..
I dont know how she was related to Sarah Heath Palin’s ancestor Joseph Heath from Wiltshire who came to the US in the 1700s...
and I have several early colonial families...
Dont make me list ‘em...
Well OK ask...
I have names dates etc...
:)
Listening to Dennis Miller. In discussing her as President, Miller says:
“I love to think of you and that big jet [Air Force One], plunking that down in Fairbanks...Murkowski looking out her window grinding her teeth to the pulp....”
I almost fell off the chair laughing.
The “Romney saved the olympics, so he can be president” line is complete hogwash.
___________________________________________
Well there was that government bailout that Romney arranged...
and did Romney do whatever he did for recognition of some big type ???
Knowing Romney. what do you think ???
Romney never has been a “shy guy”...
A shrinking violet usually doesnt use Botox and hair dye and Armani suits and kiss up to Barry and the gang......
We didn't have $100 trillion of unfunded mandates. We didn't have the HUGE dependency class suffocating hard-working people like we have today and although Carter was a disaster, he was just a naive fool. We now have a Marxist lunatic rapidly building a gigantic out-of-control bureaucracy that threatens our country's existence as a free nation.
We can't stand any more statist "tinkering class" Republicans that would basically transfer influence from one group of K-streeters to another. We're out of time and millions of Tea Partiers are sensing it. It's a beautiful thing.
I love the way you expressed the truth of Mitt. Pefect!
Uh oh. My “perfect” wasn’t.
Good points. I guess comparing the Olympics with the Presidency was silly. I am not sure why I went there. I believe maybe because of the organization and financial aspects of it. But you are correct, it has nothing to do with the Presidency.
Your sincerity is humbling.
you asked: “who is more economically skilled, Romney or Palin.”
Romney encumbered not just the entire state of MA with state controlled, state mandated healthcare that is already proving to be a catastrophic financial failure, but he encumbered the U.S. taxpayer in order to pay for his MA boondoggle of a healthcare program. And I challenge you to show me anywhere that mitt romney has ever cogently explained his strategy/plans to revive the economy. He actually went on beta-joe scarborough earlier this year complaining/whining to beta-joe that “obama has not created any jobs”. Any businessman knows that they don’t want obama in the way lecturing about job creation. They want free market principles to apply, allowing the market to decide who the winners are, not some soft-handed politician or trust fund boy that was handed 37 million dollars in the mid ‘80’s to invest with. I’d write more but time doesn’t allow.
Ok here is my take.(Take it for what its worth)Romney is no conservative so therefore he is not grounded.He will be pulled to the left like he was a governor(ROMNEY CARE!) and as happened to bush senior as president with raising taxes(HE LOST.For what Palin may lack in economic prowess she more than makes up for it will her conservative views with regards to gubmint.I bet she can pick the very best economic advisor.She will shrink the size of gubmint just as Ronald Reagan did and noone else since.With the gubmint out of the way the economy will take off just as it did because of Reagans policy.The bushes are backing romney as all bluebloods do which is not surprising and is all I need to know.Comes down to having a country club blueblood running the country or a grounded conservative.Its up to you to decide which way you want to go.
And I'm sure that Sarah will be happy to hire him for some position where he can be of use to his country (assuming that's what he REALLY wants to do). But as far as Mitt being in the center seat, I don't think so.
“The problem with the bush family is they have way too many liberals in it.”
Yes, like all of them!
No argument there.
I may have some good (and a bit of bad) news for you. According to this one chart, all presidents except Van Buren are descended from King John Lackland. http://weareallrelated.com/page.php?6
Since you have several colonial families I’m guessing you must share some of this same lineage. The bad news for me was that according to this chart, Reagan was one of my most distant presidential cousins and 0bama was one of my closest.
I wish you were right, but I don’t trust Republican primary voters in IA, NH, SC, FL, and VA. I think they will fall for the “Myth” again. After those five states speak, it’s about all over.
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.