All threads referencing George P. Bush require a photo for research and discussion purposes.
Posted on 07/01/2005 8:40:33 AM PDT by RWR8189
I don't think there is any way he can run for Governor, straight outta nothing, at 30.
If he A. Waits 10 years and makes a name for himself in law or business or B. Runs for Congress/State Legislature or some other lesser office, sure.
But he'd get Tauzan'ed if he ran straight for Governor, at 30, with no previous political experience. And he'd deserve it.
"I think it's the only Bush district in Texas that still has a Dem Rep."
Damn. We need to get some lower-level Bush people to return to Texas and run for these seats. I'm betting we have some aids that can win these seats if they tie themselves to Bush enough.
unfortunately the pubbies let aarp run circles around them on this issue.
they shoulda mounted an effected pr program earlier.
Edwards beat a fairly well known candidate in Representative Arlene Wohlgemuth, who was hurt by her controversial behovior in the state house (I think she derailed several bills by submitting amendment after amendment) and by the fact that she isn't an Aggie and Edwards is (Texas A&M is in the district). I think a good candidate would beat Edwards in 2006, since, unlike most Texas Democrat Congressmen from the late 1990s, Edwards is very liberal.
Ortiz and Hinojosa are longtime incumbents in 70% Hispanic districts. When they retire, I think a Hispanic Republican who is socially conservative, pro-military, but more moderate on economics could mount a strong bid---but only if he has close ties to the district. Having one of Tom DeLay's aides move south just before the filing deadline would not cut it. Perhaps Rebecca Armendariz-Klein, who ran against Lloyd Doggett in the hopelessly Democrat Austin-to-Hidalgo 25th CD in 2004, could move a few miles east to the part of Hidalgo County in the 15th CD and run when Hinojosa retires.
All threads referencing George P. Bush require a photo for research and discussion purposes.
Untrue. I am a working American in that age range, and I most certainly do NOT seek a Social Security entitlement. On the contrary, I wish to opt out of the system, and would even be willing to forfeit everything I've paid in thusfar.
I wasn't thinking Delay aids, I was thinking more people like Karen Huges or a Judge Bush appointed as Governor.
It seems to me that we should at least be taking the fight to the Dems in these seats.
Yeah...research and discussion my foot! More like salivating from you gals.
Damn right. You can keep every penny I've put into Social Security--just let me and my kids out! I'm even willing to guarantee that Boomers get a fat check of everything they put in plus interest--even though the debt will skyrocket and we'll still have to pay them off. JUST LET MY KIDS AND ME GO!
On a more thread-related note: George P. Bush is a twit, and if I were living in Texas, I would work for the Democrat before I worked for him--and I mean that. If Dubya is Vincente Fox's bitch, P. is the equivalent of the Vincente Fox cult worshipper. I will never accept P. as a candidate even for dogcatcher, no matter how many stupid people think he's a cutie-pie and plan to vote for him. If you vote based on a candidate's looks, you deserve to be disenfranchised.
George P. was already in law school when war was declared on us on 9-11. Do you really expect ALL to whom you would vote for to drop their career and join up at the age of 30? Don't get me wrong, it would be an honorable thing to do, but I'm not going hold it against a person for not doing so.
This particular Bush lost me when he referred to S.S. as "one of the most cherished entitlements sought by all working Americans".
(a) Politics isn't in the foreseeable future.
Umm, no, I certainly would not.
I was in my early 20's during 9/11. I considered joining, but they seemed to be getting more recruits then they would need, and I don't think I'd be much more then a mediocere soldier.
Who's suggesting that everyone under 30 should have run to join?
No, I would have expected that given his background he'd have volunteered long before the age of thirty. Having said that, yes, he ought to have volunteered; like LT Pantano or Duncan Hunter's son.
So if you're the son/grandson of a politician, or whatever you mean by his background, you must volunteer or you are a "despicable" person?
What about people not from his background, do you have a different standard for what a despicable person is?
I didn't volunteer, am I a despicable person? Or am I exempt pursuant to your background test?
Google up Duncan Hunter's son for a guy who did it right.
I think that's fair. With little to no info on two candidates whether or not one volunteered may be a helpful guide. But I wouldn't go smear a person out of the blue who is by all means a good guy.
We should honor those that do serve, they are indeed special people. The corollary that those that don't serve are somehow the opposite is ridiculous.
The country was at relative peace for the first time in almost a century (post Cold War, Gulf War; pre 9-11) when I, like George P., was at the age where young men typically volunteer. Comparing an 18 year old with a wide open future with a 30 year old with a career to critisize the 30 year old for not jumping to his feet to enlist to fight the war on terrorism is not exactly a fair one (notwithstanding the 18 year old's great sacfifice).
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.