Posted on 03/24/2015 5:54:52 AM PDT by Biggirl
Amen. The GOP has been a ship without a captain for far too long. Time to get her back on course.
Now, about, That’s a very odd post.
In re
(A)RR IS SO held up as perfect
(B): Yes. My mistake. I guess I myself, am looking for an all-powerful saint!
(C) IMNVHO, RR did not do near enough as a "Party Leader" to provide himself and us with allies in that 'baked-in Democrat" Congress
(D): Yes, he demonstrated the Laffer Curve ... lower taxes = more government income. But he did come up short on cutting government spending. One may, I suppose, blame that on the Democrats. But it was on his watch.
(E) Guilty with an explanation, your Honor. I went through the 1960's immigration wars in California. We could never get the leading California Republicans to shake their rather feudal view of Mexicans, whom they invariably regarded as necessary support troops (mi gente) for their 30's and 40's Better Homes and Gardens Lifestyles of Ye Olde Southwest. Of course, now we all know better, I hope.
Obama wasn't a governor, and look what he's managed to accomplish. He's gone full steam ahead with his agenda and almost destroyed the country---as intended.
I agree that vision is very important. But if you can’t manage the office, the vision will perish.
I think that the ideal candidate would be someone who has been the Vice-President. But, that would be from an ideal Presidency.
It makes sense to have the President focus on foreign affairs while the Vice-President focuses on running the government apparatus.
The President would then train the Vice-President in matters of foreign affairs. Thus, the Vice-president would move up to handle foreign affairs while having a solid background in being the Chief Executive.
Of course, this was developed when people saw politics as a means of selecting the best person for a job. Now, with the Democrats, they could care less about being good Executives. Look at Obama. He couldn’t run a snocone cart. The Democrat Party exists to give thieves access to the public treasuries in order to loot them.
It’s absurd to think that Cruz can’t manage the office because he hasn’t been a governor...and it’s absurd to think someone can manage the office because he’s been the governor of a small midwestern state.
My point is, this formulaic stuff just doesn’t fly. I think Cruz or Walker would be a terrific choice. That one’s been a governor and one hasn’t is not even on my radar screen. Being President is really nothing like being governor, unless you are governor of a mega state - in which case, there is some analogy.
The only vision a president needs to have, IMO, is promoting peace abroad, promoting prosperity at home and promoting personal liberty for all.
A) Then you need to take that up with those who hold him up as perfect. That would NOT include me.
B) Does appear you over estimated what a President, especially one that obeys the limitations of the Constitution, can or will do.
C) That’s thin. Just very thin, even if true. Wow, he had the Evil Empire and the Carter recession. He didn’t look at the office as a 48 month campaign the way Obama does. Very thin - did I mention that?
D) See B above. Also, see Laffer Curve. Says ZIP ZERO NADA about spending.
E) You are clearly far older than most voters in this country. The majority were not alive in the 60s, let alone fighting the wars in the 60s. But history is a continuum....always building on the past.
Top down cramdowns only work in the short run. I don't think you can measure success by looking at damage done. In the medium term much of his aganda gets watered down or thrown out. Obama is a bad president. I don't just mean in terms of what he wants to push through (he's bad there too) but also in how he gos about it. Everything is either the product of a lie or done by fiat. Lies eventually unravel and fiat orders can be undone by another fiat. To make things stick a president needs the backing of the country. He doesn't have it. Even Democrats are starting to weaken over his double down on a horrible, top down, ME/Israel policy.
Levin should go one step further: Governors should be disqualified. They have sold out by definition.
I listened to Mark Levin last night and I am in agreement that what this country needs right now is a leader. I only see two people with the force of personality to do what needs to be done and the first is Ted Cruz.
You can when damage & destruction was the primary goal all along.
Rush Limbaugh even said it recently....Obama has succeeded in what he wanted to do.
" In the medium term much of his aganda gets watered down or thrown out. Obama is a bad president. I don't just mean in terms of what he wants to push through (he's bad there too) but also in how he gos about it. Everything is either the product of a lie or done by fiat."
Yet if, after two more years of him, we don't have a country left, the method won't matter, will it? He will have achieved what he set out to do.
" Lies eventually unravel and fiat orders can be undone by another fiat. To make things stick a president needs the backing of the country. He doesn't have it. Even Democrats are starting to weaken over his double down on a horrible, top down, ME/Israel policy."
Democrats aren't going to stop him. REPUBLICANS won't even do it. He's on his way to accomplishing his entire filthy agenda....and he isn't even that bright.
Imagine what a brilliant man like Ted Cruz can do.
You are correct. Principles do not need to be managed.
“(D): Yes, he demonstrated the Laffer Curve ... lower taxes = more government income.”
Didn’t happen. This is what long-time Reagan aid Martin Anderson dismisses as “the myth of the supply-siders” in his book ‘Revolution’. You can’t just compare tax revenues in 1989 with those of 1981 and ascribe the increase to the rate cuts. When deficit spending and other factors are accounted for the rate cuts themselves reduced the total tax revenue, but not as much as static analysis predicts. About 2/3 of the cuts were recouped from economic growth. You can see a breakdown in Lindsey’s ‘The Growth Experiment’.
Reaganomics was designed to promote private sector economic growth while killing inflation and it worked as planned. The only real surprise was that the inflation rate collapsed much faster than expected. If the goal had just been to increase the amount of tax revenue taken in then tax rates would have been left higher, but the economy would have sucked. We call this “Obamanomics”.
Ping for later
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.