To: Drew McKissick
To: Drew McKissick
Amen! I love Mark Levin, but I’m getting tired of listening to him trash every Republicans Presidential candidate that’s not Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin. He contradicts himself calling every one else the “establishment candidate,” including most recently Chris Christie when there was talk of him making a late entry into the primary. How many “establishment candidates” can there be? A house divided against itself cannot stand, so how can the “establishment” have so many different preferred candidates according to Levin and Limbaugh. I wish they’d get over their school boy crushes on the female candidates and focus on winning instead of weakening Republican candidates for the general election next year. Bachmann isn’t going to be the candidate and Palin isn’t even running. So take a cold shower and focus on taking down Obama rather than one another.
3 posted on
09/28/2011 11:20:43 AM PDT by
MissesBush
(Raising taxes on an economy in a death spiral is like taking up smoking when you have emphysema)
To: Drew McKissick
Hear hear. The debate was like a cage fight, where we damage each other — something the liberals couldn’t do themselves. Eleventh commandment.
4 posted on
09/28/2011 11:24:40 AM PDT by
Tax Government
(Democrat: "I'm driving to Socialism at 95 mph." Republican: "Observe the speed limit.")
To: Drew McKissick
Yeah, let’s don’t VET OUR CANDIDATES.
Let’s not find out any DIRT ON THEM till it’s too late, after they get the nomination, and the media does it for us.
Let’s have a Republican “John Edwards.”
Because vetting candidates is so MEAN.
To: Drew McKissick
The Left get their talking points from the candidates which they twist even further with hyperbole and distortions. One they repeat a lie often enough it is seen as truth.
6 posted on
09/28/2011 11:29:29 AM PDT by
jonrick46
(2012 can't come soon enough.)
To: Drew McKissick
I agree. First I'm not a supporter of Perry or Mitt, or even Bachmann. (I'm a Cain and Palin supporter). But if they want to stop their slide down the polls they got to stop attacking each other. We have heard all the accusations, and heard all the defense arguments. We are not going to learn anymore from more of the same in next debate.
7 posted on
09/28/2011 11:30:42 AM PDT by
NavyCanDo
To: Drew McKissick
The old media are masters at dividing the opposition to Obuttface. I see it in these FR comments. Just remember, there are no less than 100,000 candidates in this country who would be far superior to obuttface. The old media will divide bos opposition and thereby assure he is elected for a second term.
8 posted on
09/28/2011 11:33:05 AM PDT by
Neoliberalnot
((Read "The Grey Book" for an alternative to corruption in DC))
To: Drew McKissick
Our own candidates need vetting.
10 posted on
09/28/2011 11:36:52 AM PDT by
cripplecreek
(A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
To: Drew McKissick
I would like to see more emphasis on critiques of the last 3 years of Obama. Still I like to see them vet each other. It tells me what the candidates’ instincts are. Like when Perry makes a plea to emotion to justify in-state tuition, that tells me he has the Leftist instinct to appeal to emotion to argue a point. Reminds me of the Rove strategy to employ the Left’s playbook for getting votes. Hate that.
11 posted on
09/28/2011 11:44:06 AM PDT by
throwback
( The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid)
To: Drew McKissick
Our side has a contest before we take on Obama. It is impossible to not go after each other’s records before the primaries.
I believe they are all capable of walking and chewing gum.
12 posted on
09/28/2011 11:47:58 AM PDT by
dforest
To: Drew McKissick
But Republicans dont need the candidates to tell us what their opponents weaknesses are. Were all too familiar with them.Well, pardon me, but you're outside of your friggin' mind! If what you said were the truth then there wouldn't be such a wild fluctuation after each debate as more people are exposed to the views of the individual candidates. And just because
you know the weaknesses of the candidates it doesn't automatically mean that Americans, as a whole, know them as well.
Too many Americans don't even know the names of the Republican candidates much less what their weaknesses or positions on major issues are.
Just looking at what has happened to Rick Perry alone on the issue of immigration over the course of the last month shows, to me anyway, that your opinion is uninformed and useless. Some people
may know the name, but they sure didn't know his position on many major issues. He, accordingly, took a drop in the polling results as his views didn't align with far too many conservatives when they heard them.
Are you still a Mitt Romney fan? If so then you should say so from the start and not try to obliquely run interference for the man.
13 posted on
09/28/2011 11:52:45 AM PDT by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Drew McKissick
BS, we, the republican voters, need to know about each candidate. They are supposed to take each other on during the primary function, that is the purpose of having primaries. After the primary with a Republican candidate selected is when the infighting should stop and the focus then becomes beat Bozo.
16 posted on
09/28/2011 12:59:23 PM PDT by
calex59
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson