Posted on 07/03/2009 2:54:59 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache
You need to stop protecting people even if they are wrong just because they are red.
>>> I’m not looking forward to anything.
I merely understand what is being done to the currency. <<<
Once again: a deus ex machina. Which is in odd contrast to the post of yours I initially commented on:
>>>>>> Looks like the only way to get our country back is the same way the founding fathers created it. <<<<<<
Given that our Founding Fathers did not create our nation in response to a currency crisis, I sense either confusion or an unwillingness to speak frankly on your part.
>>> Feel free to believe it’s possible to spend limitless amounts of money while the Fed runs the printing presses 24/7 with no consequence. <<<
Feel free to put words in my mouth, flog dead horses and distribute red herrings. Beats having to work hard at trying to salvage what our ancestors fought and died to protect and defend.
>>> Happy Dependence Day! <<<
Yep. Dependent upon the political institutions and ideals developed and defended by my forbearers, come hell or high water. Sure beats the Hobbesian nightmare you envisage. Good luck!
With all due respects...you are, it appears quite nutz.
I think you just have a problem with comprehension....
LMAO...truly! ;^)
LoL lead that drive to >2%. That ticket will get you a looong way to that number.
Certainly there are those who would like to see Sarah doomed to political obscurity which joining a fringe party will certainly do but those with any insight know she will have to stay with the Republican Party or go into the media herself for a while.
Until the Democrat party is split it would be suicide to split the GOP.
She will never be out of the line of fire. The frothing hatred of the Left is for good reason they see her as the biggest threat to their power.
She should go on attack particularly against the media which is the biggest source of the Left’s power. It defines Truth only after direction from the DNC.
BINGO. The Treason media is target #1.
Of course it would. Since RINOs and assorted pantywaists would be horrified.
What I envisage or you envisage is irrelevant.
You can only stack a house of cards so high.
Those who view 95% of the Republican Party as “RINO” do not have a clear eyed view of the American population. So who cares what is considered a “pantywaist” in that group.
Of course, there is the gigantic problem that anyone acceptable to the Purists can’t win statewide elections and only a few Congressional districts. Their tent is so big one can almost get a Flea Circus under it.
All I have to do is look at the most popular president in the last 70 years and see he was a rock-ribbed conservative. And yes, he frickin horrifed the Rockefeller/pantywaist wing of the party.
“Most popular”? Oh, please lets stop the revisonist history. Reagan was certainly the most popular in my lifetime but he was certainly not more popular than FDR.
Nor is there any Reagan’s out there with the possible exception of Sarah. None have his media savvy which allowed him to defeat the media at its own game. Reagan won as much because of his personality and his ability to project it as his political ideology just as FDR did.
And who do you propose? Hunter! Someone, despite his correct politics, as far from the sunny optimism persona of Reagan as you can get. Someone who has NO chance.
This is not a conservative country. At best there are 30% conservative hence, any elections broader than a Congressional district are rarely won by conservatives outside of a couple of states. Yet, you castigate anyone daring to appeal to the 40% in the middle as a RINO. Hence, I can only conclude you do not really care about winning or political power.
You sound like the democrats: ‘Reagan won because of his sunny optimism’.
He won because he drove home the point that the bullshit transpiring in the country was dead wrong, unconstitutional, and dangerous to our survival.
As for FDR, he won his last two elections by less than 5 mil, and 2.5 mil, respectively, equating to 54% and 53% of the vote. Reagan won re-election at 59%. And had Reagan run a third term instead of the hapless GHWB, the would have won even bigger.
Don’t distort what I said.
His personality was a very important aspect of his appeal. Just as it was to Clinton’s. You can’t deny that. What the hell electorate are you looking at?
He won because he could COMMUNICATE his views. And his personality was a huge factor in that communication. His ability to handle the media has no parallel.
Someone like Duncan Hunter has no chance to go big time facing this electorate. He is simply too grim looking. It isn’t his fault and I have the same aspect. We simply are not photogenic enough.
The only significant fundamental changes that came out of Reagan’s administration was the tax cuts (which Kennedy had done as well) and the rebuilding of the military. Government did not shrink so the rhetoric was not realized. It grew instead. But it would have taken a miracle for him to accomplish that.
Well you have to admit that FDR’s last election was like electing a dead man. He looked awful and very sick.
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.