Posted on 02/14/2011 1:28:03 AM PST by pissant
Dennis Kucinich tells it how it is from his perspective too—but that doesn’t make him my candidate for 2012.
Unlike some of your heroes, this “midget” as you name call much like the typical liberal, will have a chance to either sign or not sign an immigration bill. We’ll see how that goes.
Daniels already has has a miserable record on immigration, and I wouldn’t be fooled by a presidential-campaign-year conversion on one bill:
http://24ahead.com/indiana-gov-mitch-daniel-immigration-not-good-not-enough-inf
(And if you don’t think his lack of charisma or stature are factors against him, you’re not facing election reality.)
How did he win Indiana the first time and then after ramming his agenda down everyone’s throat, how did he win re-election?
The US presidency ain’t the IN governorship and plenty of re-elected govs couldn’t win the presidency. The irrelevance of your rebuttal—other than to almost suggest he’ll do anything for electoral popularity—just underscores that he’s got a lousy record on immigration.
Being a Hoosier, let me give you permission from the home office: Scratch away. Daniels is a technocrat, which is better than a bureaucrat, but not by much. His first thought when dipped his toe into the water was to proclaim that all “social” issues needed to take a backseat. I always thought bankruptcy was a social issue... ? Anyone who thinks he will tame the beast in Washington hasn’t read the back of the cereal box yet.
Ping!
But I bet you will the next time Daniels is contesting an election.
Let's be fair. Even Jan Brewer herself was non-committal when SB1070 was being voted on in the AZ legislature. There was even some drama over her decision. Let's wait until Gov. Daniels vetoes a bill which hasn't even passed yet - before we condemn him.
He has not. he is a competent Statist. he is a more competent GWB or a smarter George Bush SR. Mitch Daniels is not a conservative on any issue.
Details, please.
Because you’re hicks?
Well, we could be more enlightened, intelligent and so forth. But, then we’d probably have elected people that would have our state in the same condition as yours.
Your second post:
There is no way they’re reliable morally. They will go whichever way is politically popular.
Politically popular never equals conservative.
This doesn't sound entirely consistent.
“...if you want to be President you have to know the public’s mind instinctively...You’re obviously stalling because you’ve got your pinky up in the air to detect the direction of public opinion.”
I was commenting on Daniels silence concerning a proposed law on illegal aliens in Indiana and how he is not acting like a true leader nor like a Conservative.
There is widespread political support for enforcing our present Federal immigration laws, the “rule of law”, which cuts across the political spectrum and includes independents. It is not a “Conservative” issue. The rule of law is politically unacceptable to those politicians who’s supporters benefit economically from violations of our immigration laws, or see illegal aliens as potential future voters.
“Politically popular never equals conservative.”
Only 35% of the U.S. population is considered “strongly conservative”. It’s those ‘pesky’ social values and possessing a moral code that turn so many folks off of conservative politics.
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.