Rick, trying to pick up a few votes in some forum where he probably does not even know where he is, and probably physically exhausted, contrasts himself to Romney (the 'Manager") and Newt (the 'Visionary) and ends up sounding like a nothing.
The current primary system (which only exists because of the Commie lead riots in Chicago in 1968) is a prescription for fratricide, not for choosing the best candidate.
And I'll add to that. Washington DC professional "Political Consultants" (i.e. Guns for Hire), who only exist because of this screwed up primary system are more dangerous to our liberties than Al Quida.
They (the political consultants) are all whores who care nothing about the Republic and only about their fees, which is why a presidential election costs billions of dollars today.
They might as well be GEICO and Progressive battling it out with incessant (and stupid) advertisements for car insurance policies.
It's all 'got-ya' not issues. And this nation has big issues that need to be dealt with.
I'm sick of it --- ready to resign and head to the hills and let the world turn without me.
No. You don't get to resign.
this nation has big issues that need to be dealt with.
And we're going to deal with them.
I’m witchya. Can you imagine a candidate for leader of any country on earth saying: “I’m a mediocrity, vote for me?” !
We are screwed. More so seeing that mediocrity appeals so much to some here.
I don’t think it’s as bad as all that. It’s a little annoying that FR could be overrun by those political consultants, so it’s hard to tell when you are getting keen insight, and when you are getting the party line by someone who was paid by a politician.
I find it refreshing when a candidate just says what they think, and not what has been drilled into them as the “politically correct” statements. In that regard, both Gingrich and Santorum are fun candidates.
I am certain the people at the speech knew exactly what Santorum meant by “visionary” in context. Being a visionary isn’t necessarily a bad thing; better as an adjective I guess, a “visionary leader”, than as a noun.
But I don’t feel a strong need for a president who keeps coming up with wild schemes all the time. I’m not as opposed to a manager — the country could use some good management. We need some good ideas, but what we need is a president who can recognize good ideas, not one that HAS the good ideas.
That’s why you would hire an “ideas man”. Reagan may have been considered “visionary”, but he was a communicator, and a smart man who recognized good ideas when he saw them. Gingrich is the guy you want on your staff, because a good leader will recognize the 1 good idea out of 5 and be able to act on it. Gingrich’s flaw is that he thinks all his ideas are great, and acts on them all.
I’d still much prefer Gingrich over Obama as President — I just still don’t see him actually winning the nomination, or being able to beat Obama. I’m hopeful Santorum can; I don’t know he can, I’m just less pessimistic about his prospects — so far, he’s survived the attacks, but we’ll see.