Posted on 06/26/2009 12:44:26 PM PDT by smoothsailing
I don’t have a person.
It is really too early to jump on any bandwagon.
One person I would like to see run is Newt Gingrich.
But he also has a history of always being “about” to get in without ever actually getting in.
That doesn’t mean he is my ‘guy’ mind you.
He is simply someone I think may have the potential to at least raise the bar, elevate the discourse, and shape the debate in a positive way, even if he doesn’t prove to be the right person ultimately to carry the message forward.
I’m not a Ron Paul nut, if that is what you are trying to insinuate.
I think it is high time conservatives stop settling.
We’ve lost it all. We have nothing left to lose.
If now isn’t the time to put our foot down and demand better leadership than what we’ve currently got, then when the hell will it ever be?
I’ve been critical of Palin, John Boner, Eric Can’tor, Mitch McConnell, Michael Steele. They are all mediocre at best. We can do better than all of them.
But we won’t, so long as they have their apologists and cheerleaders.
It’s time we have some leadership that proves itself to us, instead of us carrying the water for them, and making excuses for their shortcomings.
We do have real leaders out there. Mike Pence comes to mind.
Perhaps not president just yet, but he ought to be the Republican leader in the House. Speaker of the House, to be exact.
It can happen, but only if we demand more from Republicans we elect.
Stop propping up clowns and demanding that America accept them.
It doesn’t work that way.
If we can’t cut our losses now, then when will we ever?
It’s time for a whole new Republican party.
No more RINOs, and no more clowns and halfwit bumblers either. It’s time to free ourselves from the burden of propping them up. All of them.
Let them prove themselves for once, and then see who is left standing.
their = they’re
And neither was Reagan, that B-film actor. Until we let him try, that is.
You've been making a bunch of high-sounding arguments here, like 'the long tradition of American statesmen'. I'd like to know if you consider Woodrow Wilson or Teddy Roosevelt in that history. I think we should avoid any long tradition that includes such big-government types.
What other long tradition of small-government American statesmen are you thinking of? How about one that includes that B-actor Ronald Reagan? Or the one that includes the backwoods hick Andrew Jackson? Or how about the do-nothing Calvin Coolidge? I think Governor Palin would be ok in that company, rather than anybody labeled a 'statesman' by the historians.
“the Democrats will have all the Republican deputies out of the way (Ensign, Sanford, Gingrich, Romney if they can find an angle). Sheriff Palin will be standing alone on the edge of town”
Me thinks you have been reading too much Wonder Woman, she don’t need no deputies, she don’t need no posse, she’s gonna take care of those hombres solo. I like this better http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/daltons.htm , the sheriff, deputies and armed citizenry (an analogy of course) teaching the Democrats a lesson that will be remembered as long as the Crusades.
The McCain/Palin ticket got the fewest votes of any presidential ticket since 2000.
That smells like a loser to me.
You can’t blame McCain.
If Palin was more popular than 0bama, more people would have voted for her ticket than his.
End of story.
If she hadn’t been hand-picked by McCain to be his successor, Palin would not have the support Choir she does.
You are all being played for fools by John McCain.
The RNC tried really hard to create a Sarah Palin mythology, and they failed.
The reason she doesn’t have support now among them is because of her embarrassing performance.
The woman can’t speak and is shockingly unknowledgeable. Trying to pretend otherwise is intellectually dishonest, and you’re not even fooling yourself.
The majority of Americans aren’t going to vote for someone who inspires so little confidence in her leadership qualities as she does. She just don’t got it.
And she’s not worth the uphill battle and inevitable defeat that comes with trying to push her towards higher office.
Thinkin’ Reagan would fail your scrutiny if applied equally.
The thing about agitprop previously was that it was difficult to respond to. The agitproper had a bullhorn that you couldn't shout down, or spent money sending leaflets that you couldn't afford to respond to.
Here, we can respond. And I'm finding myself encouraged by how many folks think like I do. Which is not what the agitproper is trying to have happen.
Also, I'm finding it educational to build counter-arguments, to pick apart the agitprop and show it's falsity.
This is also why Gov Palin needs to stay somewhat in the limelight. All the arguments against her will come out early and will have been countered.
Agitprop doesn't work if it's countered quickly and across the same audience. (or at least that's what I think.)
And just every now and then, it'll turn out that it wasn't agitprop, just some very confused person who eventually gets it right.
Absolutely, and I should have made that clear.
She lit a fire under many many in the Repub party and especially conservatives. The elitists in the party had better come around and realize that the party has to move back to the right if it's going to survive.
There are a lot of similarities with her and Ronald Reagan and given a few more years it could be more than just similarities.
Until such time as naysayers come up with a viable alternative to Sarah Palin they would do well to stop bashing her if not remaining mute all together, they just cause turmoil and descent and feed the DUmmies.
Excuses excuses excuses.
“She was muzzled!”
“THEY undermined her!”
“Romney was out to get her!”
No one made Sarah Palin ramble on incoherently in front of Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, the VP debate, or more recently, Good Morning America.
This is all her. It’s what you get.
Stop blaming others for her shortcomings.
We can do a lot better, and we’re going to need to if we want to take back the White House in 2012.
Hell no.
Reagan spoke in complete grammatically correct sentences.
That’s like saying she punched her way through two layers of wet paper bag.
Which may well be their intention. Their disdain for Sarah Palin is hard to understand otherwise.
Well, Brother, Mrs. Smooth calls, I'm off to grill the ribs before the Pirates game starts. Catcha Later! :o)
what the eff are u talking about ?
Calvin Coolidge was no ‘do-nothing.’
He was merely a man of little words.
In fact, I am reminded of a quote from him when thinking of the rhetorical failures of both Barack 0bama and Sarah Palin:
“The words of a President have an enormous weight and ought not to be used indiscriminately.”
Well said in a few words. It’s appreciated.
Stop being a mouthpiece for the left.
There was obvious tension between McCain and Palin on at least the global warming issue - maybe others. She deferred to his position as the VP should.
The state-run media has always worked overtime to trip Conservative candidates or edit them in the most unflattering way. She more than made up for that in the debate and multiple interviews and speeches during the campaign.
You have your warped opinion. I have the reaction of hundreds of voters who literally came out of the woodwork to volunteer and campaign BECAUSE of her addition to the ticket. And that was just a handful of precincts here in Texas where I have connections. I’m sure there are hundreds, if not thousands of precincts with similar stories.
You obviously hate her, but have offered nobody as an alternative except Newt. And that was priceless. Thanks for playing.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Oh, yes I can. He ran the campaign, and the poll numbers went up when he picked Sarah and down when he went for the stimulus.
Boy are you in la-la land. Once again, nobody got to vote for Sarah as President. The choice was McCain or Obama. Personal popularity aside, nobody votes for the VP slot if they think the P slot would be handled by a boob.
The RNC tried? BS. The RNC wouldn't know a good thing if it gave them an orgasm. The PR disaster of the clothing bit was their idea, trying to gild the lily.
What was shockingly stupid was to let Sarah walk into the lions den of those antagonistic interviewers. She hasn't made any of the unforced errors of Obama (57 states) or Biden (too many to recount), and Obama and Biden never had to deal with such an interview. Too bad McCain wasn't bright enough to stick with Fox News, the channel folks actually watch. And it's the Dems who watch Fox who might have been convincable, not the Dems who watch ABC/NBC/CBS.
Her few gaffes have been retold continually, while Obama's and Bidens are ignored.
Catchya after the game, buddie. :)
“The woman can’t speak and is shockingly unknowledgeable.”
False, you are now lying about facts in order to support your criticism. Your fear that the R’s might nominate an intellectual lightweight (in your view) has cost you your credibility.
BTW, I too wish Sarah was more eloquent and a little less “folksy”. She always seems to be in a hurry and that makes her look amateurish, IMO. However, she represents the citizenry, the people, unlike any politician I have ever witnessed.
"B-actor" and "hick" and "do-nothing" were labels other folks appended to Reagan, Jackson and Coolidge respectively during their political careers. I didn't invent them, nor did my post commend them as being true. Though, indeed, compared to Teddy Roosevelt before or Wilson after, Coolidge was a do-nothing president, which I do applaud.
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.