BREAKING: Indiana first state to cut off Planned Parenthood funding as Gov. signs bill

Life Site News ^ | May 10, 2011 | KATHLEEN GILBERT

[wtc911]

I will admit he does govern better than McCain though. LIke I said, he walks the walk better than he talks the talk.

_______________________________________________________

A) McCain doesn't govern, never has.

B) You're annoyed because he let's his actions speak louder than his words? Really?

Perhaps we should not bother to study any potential candidate's actual record and pick our nominee based solely on twitter bombs.

[wtc911]

It’s not how Rush reads him, not how Sean reads him... Maybe you have insight they don’t. Or maybe you have kool aid they don’t.

____________________________________________

Not much of a groupie, are you?

A) It can be argued that Rush helped Obama get the nomination through his efforts to sabotauge HRC.

B)Hannity is an idiot, an effective cheerleader but an idiot who has yet to come up with any original thoughts.

[Lakeshark]

I congratulate Governor Daniels on this “gutsy call.” I like his decertifying of public unions on day one even better. And I can buy for a minute that his low key style would score points versus Obama. What bothers me is he is quick to “reach across the aisle” in a sound byte for some totally unknown reason. He does “go McCain” on us from time to time.

I do like that he signed this bill. It's a great triumph.

That being said, he has two strikes and a couple of foul balls that are very troubling to me.

His call for a truce on social issues, and his dissing of Rush, Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Levin seem a bit more than just reaching across the aisle.

This idea of moderating the tone sounds somewhat familiar doesn't it? Where have I heard that before?

The idea you can be a good conservative while dissing the conservative base might be called somewhat dumb, or even a mild form of insanity.

[wtc911]

In his address to CPAC - which should be an audience that Daniels would have felt comfortable letting it all hang out at - he said that we must expand our base beyond the audiences of Rush, Sean, and Laura, etc.

__________________________________________

Reach out to non-radio listeners!!!! The horror!!!

You clearly have an agenda, Mr. C. Edmund Wright, and it will become clear over time...if you hang around.

[Lakeshark]

It can be argued that Rush helped Obama get the nomination through his efforts to sabotauge HRC.

Yes, but someone who argued that way is foolish beyond belief and either didn't listen to Rush, or can't comprehend what he was doing.

His entire campaign was to boost Hillary, so Obama wouldn't waltz in unopposed. He wanted the race to continue so Obama would spend more money.

How that helped nominate Obama is hard to spin, so I'll be awaiting your brilliant answer.

[Gasshog]

The bill also puts Indiana at risk of losing $4 million a year in federal family planning grants.

No it puts baby-killers at risk of losing $4 million and a whole lot more if other states follow Indiana’s lead...God Bless you Mitch I am glad I help put you in office.

But this Fed Judge in Indianapolis could gum up the works...its what they are best at.

[C. Edmund Wright]

We have no disagreement on McCain.

And am I annoyed his actions speak louder than his words? No, I simply say that in 2011 America, the rhetorical battle is just as important - or perhaps more - than the legislative battle. And for the record, I’ve mentioned that I fully applaud his governing accomplishments.

Now if you want to be a little kool aid drinking snot and reduce the very important battle of ideas in the public arena to “twitter bombs” - then you and I have nothing to discuss. And if you want to call me a “groupie” because I defer to Rush and Sean when we are DISCUSSING TALK RADIOs IMPRESSION of DANIELS COMMENTS - we aren’t tracking.

I’ll certainly support Daniels if he wins the nomination. But you can bet I’ll be on the look out for his “foul balls” as Lakeshark called them. Go hit your kool aid stains with some Oxy Clean.

[C. Edmund Wright]

Glad to know you’ve bought the liberal media’s analysis of the “hope he fails” comments hook, line and sinker. If you don’t understand that context, you are not paying attention to the larger national debate.

And if you and Mitch Daniels don’t understand how those comments plays into the liberal media’s narrative on this subject, then he will indeed have a very hard road to the nomination because this means he will trip up again and again and again.

[Lakeshark]

LOL.

I started reading your comment and thought to myself Who the heck is he talking to?

Thankfully I looked up and saw the other poster name.

And then, I fully understood...........

:-)

[wtc911]

Nice dance, but you avoid entirely the question...since failure of US FP would certainly result in more American dead, exactly how many more American dead would would you find acceptable?

Just ballpark it for us...less than a hundred? Is a thousand dead Americans ok with you, I mean as long as the correct political point is made?

btw...childish remarks about cool-aid don't mean a thing. You might think it an effective way to make your point, and it might be in the schoolyard but taking an "if you don't agree with me it must be because you're a brainwashed tool" tack is tantamount to admitting failure on merit.

[C. Edmund Wright]

Yeah, someone with zero sense of humor and no sense of the overall political dialogue on talk radio, etc, can be tiresome on these forums.

[wtc911]

Intentional mis-representation of Daniels' statements, snide comments and no answer to the question about the outfall (American dead) of your wish for American Foreign Policy....do you represent the quality of the intellect at American Thinker?

Once you go to mis-representation of facts and follow it with degradation to third parties of those who call you on it you show that you cannot succeed strictly on the merits of your argument.

[curiosity]

DANIELS: We need a lot more revenues. If you take what I believe is a very flawed tax system, way too complicated, too many preferences and gimmicks in it, many of them, by the way, tilted toward upper income people —

In other words, Daniels wants a flat (or at least flatter) tax system, which would raise more revenue with lower tax rates by eliminating special interest deductions and loopholes. Last time I checked, the flat tax is a conservative idea.

It's also a fact that the vast majority of special interest deductions in the tax code benefit upper income individuals and big corporations. That's something Steve Forbes has pointed out too.

Are you now going to call Steve Forbes a RINO as well?

[curiosity]

The idea you can be a good conservative while dissing the conservative base might be called somewhat dumb,

So saying conservatives win the support of people who don't listen to talk radio somehow constitutes "dissing" of the conservative base. Please explain how.

[C. Edmund Wright]

You clearly cannot — or will not — understand my problems with Daniels— which speaks to how the “talk” is extremely important in a Democratic Republic in the information age. Actually, it is perhaps more important given the limitations a President has legislatively.

I am not alone. These are the same problems shard by millions of conservatives who like a number of things he has done. But since you refuse to acknowledge the importance of the arena of ideas and how Mitch has played into our opponent’s play book a number of times, I am done with this thread. Please make any future posts to the OP and not me.

FTR, I like the Flat Tax ideas of Forbes and I will vote for Daniels if he gets the nomination.

[curiosity]

DANIELS: If it does, that would be good. What we want is an effective foreign policy, and we want this — I want this president to succeed. I’m very pleased for him and his team at that one victory, and I hope it’s followed by many more. If it is, that’s a great thing for the country.

WRIGHT:In other words, Daniels hopes Obama succeeds. In other words, screw Rush and his “I hope he fails” message

CURIOSITY: What the hell are you talking about? Where do you see Rush mentioned in Daniels' statement? In fact, Rush was never mentioned in the entire interview. Your propensity to put words in Daniels' mouth is amazing.

Do you honestly want a massive foreign policy failure between now and 2013? Do you want to see another Iran hostage ciris, as happened under Carter? Or another Mogadishu humiliation, as happened under Clinton?

All Daniels is saying is that he hopes US foreign policy succeeds during the remaining part of the Obama administration, and I can't see how any patriotic American would want anything else.

Do you honestly put your desire to see Obama humiliated before the interests of your country?

[curiosity]

You clearly cannot — or will not — understand my problems with Daniels—

That's because they aren't rational.

which speaks to how the “talk” is extremely important in a Democratic Republic in the information age.

Daniels is actually an excellent communicator, and he's done a great job explaining and selling conservative policy positions.

The reason you don't appreciate his talk is because it's not sufficiently combative and bombastic for your tastes. You fail to grasp the reality that while bombastic rhetoric might be great for getting a talk radio audience all fired up, it's not a good strategy for a statesman who actually wants to get elected and get things done.

I am not alone. These are the same problems shard by millions of conservatives who like a number of things he has done.

Well, unless people like you accept the reality that a succesful conservative statesman can't sound like a talk radio show host, we are doomed to lose the next election.

Stop confusing your emotional satisfaction with talk radio rhetoric with effective electioneering. The two things are very differernt.

But since you refuse to acknowledge the importance of the arena of ideas

Far from it! I think the arena of ideas is crucially important, and not only does Daniels have an excellent grasp conservative policy ideas, he's also extermely effective at selling them.

Why is it that you are so prone to confuse bombastic rhetoric with serious discussion of ideas? The two are not the same thing.

and how Mitch has played into our opponent’s play book a number of times, I am done with this thread. Please make any future posts to the OP and not me.

This is the sad thing. It's people like you, not Daniels, who are playing into the left's playbook.

FTR, I like the Flat Tax ideas of Forbes

So then why are you bashing Daniels for advocating them?

and I will vote for Daniels if he gets the nomination.

Glad to hear it.