Posted on 05/29/2005 2:33:50 PM PDT by strategofr
Of all of that stuff you listed as George Allen's strong suits that you THOUGHT you were getting with George Bush, just which ones did you think you'd get, but didn't?
"This conversation is really getting old!!!!!"
Yeah, just treat these comments as immaterial background noise.
Woah! Hats off to you. You sound like one of those dudes I like to be in the vicinity of when the Presidential returns are coming in.
"Allen would be one to look at, IMO (though what's that worth),"
Does anyone actually know anything about Allen, other than he did the right thing on filibusters. Not saying he's wrong to do so, strategy and tactics are important, but he seems to be playing the standard candidate early game---give them nothing so they can't attack. But us activist types don't want to wait till 7/08 to start learning about the guy, like the average American.
LOL!
"It'll be a complex primary because the moderates(guiliani,mccain etc) would have a better chance in the general,
I disagree. "
With you. The Reagan/W.Bush analysis.
"Okay, I guess the 500+ volunteers I've talked to over the last 2.5 months.."
If you felt like saying, I'd like to hear about that. Also, were you one of the "72 Hour" Texans who went to battleground states in 11/2004?
Ditto.
"The federalist option as you call it, is principled, politically viable, and based on a sound understanding of the founders' intentions."
You got it. Did you happen to read Bork's Tempting of America?
Before this Border issue erupted, I felt the approach you are talking about was the key to GOP unity & victory. It still is, but the Border thing now must also be addressed.
The thing about your issue, the Right to Lifers need to get clear on the need for Strict Constructionist Supreme Court judges.
Here is part of an old post of mine on strategypage.com:
"...I have a strong feeling though, that there are a significant number of moderate Republican Senators who secretly like the idea that Specter will preserve Roe V. Wade.
To me, however, this badly misses the key point, which is the fight for strict constructionism. Because waht the Left is quite intentionally doing is outmanouvering the whole mechanism of government with the Supreme Court. It is a vast flanking movement, and from my perspective, Roe v. Wade is a smokescreen to cover that move. Because to the extent that the Left succeeds in this manouver, they have vitiated Democracy itself. And I do feel that this is the goal of the driving forces behind the Democratic Party, even though the rank and file of the party still believes in Democracy."
In addition, it would not surprise me if the Left supports Right to Lifers who want to put Supreme Court justices on the bench who will invent a "law" outlawing abortion to counteract Roe v. Wade. This was apparently McCain (the Mancurian Candidate's) position in 2000, according to an FR post I read. Theoretically, this would be "terrible" for the Left, because it would outlaw abortion. But I don't think the people really drivign the Hard Left care abput abortion nearly as much as destroying the Constitution. That would be the ultimate in 'political judo". To lose to the Right at some point and have them reinforce the idea that US Law is entirely the creation of Supreme Court judges.
"Maggie Thatcher was a good one, Golda Meir did fine"
Condi is no Maggie Thatcher or Golda Meir. She was a good National Security advisor. But she is not even tough enough to clean up State, let alone run the gov't. not that cleaning up State isn't one of the toughest jobs imaginable. But I'm not seeing it happen.
At a guess, the conservative part.
Doesn't having been Co-President count for anything?
Well, perhaps, but even President Bush referred to himself as a compassionate conservative, so if you want to pick nits, he wasn't misrepresenting himself....
voters maybe, were misreading what he was saying...
It counts for why she has those FBI files, White House silverware, and the MSM paving her way down the yellow brick road to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, once again....
Follow, the yellow brick road....the only thing that can save us is if someone throws water on her!!
Start here - very interesting!
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=CNIP9093
Jeesums, she only became SoS January 26, 2005. Don't you think 4 months is a little quick to judge anyone on a job of that magnitude?
1924: Former Massachusetts Governor Calvin Coolidge trounces John Davis of West Virginia. Check out the bio on Davis-- a far more impressive resume than modern near misses such as Kerry and Gore.
Indeed!
Senator Allen is not just a senator but is also a former governor. The reason that senators haven't won often is that most of them have nothing more than legislative experience. Good legislators are not necessarily good executives, and that's why some people question the jump from the U.S. Senate to the White House. As a former governor, George Allen has already shown that he can be an executive.
Bill
Thank you for deciding that for us.
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.