Posted on 01/01/2015 5:32:39 AM PST by Zakeet
To the surprise of no one who has been following the will-he-or-won’t-he back-and-forth of the past few weeks, it looks he will. Jeb Bush is running for president.
Okay, he’s not running; he’s just “actively exploring” running. And Napoleon was “actively exploring” invading Russia. Let us conservatives hope, then, that Jeb doesn’t meet his own Waterloo in 2016.
The real surprise is that, almost before the pixels have dried on the pundits’ computer screen, Jeb Bush has moved to the head of the pack of presidential hopefuls, leading runner-up Christie by a full ten points according to a CNN poll.
Is it too early to warn conservative Republicans of the danger of sitting out an election? Failing to heed such warnings then gave us four more years of Obama, five million legalized-by-fiat immigrants, and normalized relations with Cuba and perhaps with Iran. Failing to heed such warnings in ’16 leaves conservatives with one, and only one, other choice: get ready for Hillary. And perhaps get ready, too, for the justice Hillary nominates to replace Nino Scalia.
So, GOP conservatives, consider yourselves warned. By all means, support whomever you like in the primaries. But commit yourselves also to support, in the general election, whoever emerges as our 2016 candidate.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The GOP-e doesn't accept us, so why should we take their sh*t sandwich and eat it?
Run, run, far far away.
In other words, once they start alienating the very voters whose votes will be necessary for them to win.
It would be nice to win the White House someday but, until then, I guess we'll have to content ourselves with winning Governorships, Statehouses and local offices.
I don’t care if Mitt or Jeb run...just as long as they run as Democrats.
Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush are not conservatives. I hate it when the press identifies these people as conservatives. I hate it when the press tries to stick us with someone they know that Hilary can beat. That my friends is what it is all about, the liberals selecting our candidates for us.
While I am not dumb enough to withhold my vote from whatever republican is running in the general I don't have to like it.
Yes. It is always either too early - or too late - for that. You see, it doesn’t matter whether I hold my nose and vote, or not. I always vote, but we don’t always win. The question is whether the people who don’t always vote turn out, for or against.only about half of Americans vote, even in high turnout years. Those who vote do so for a reason, and that reason is always that they care about something, or someone. You must motivate people to turn them out. Annoy them and they stay home. There's always room to expand either group. And the guy who turns out more of his supporters always wins.See, I Told You So
vanguard ^ | November 5, 2004 | Rod D. Martin
It is a given that the Grubercrats - both the Democrat politicians, and journalists - will play identity politics. You claim that Cruz can’t beat Hillary. But you know who can’t beat Hillary? Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush, and Mitt Romney. Because they don’t have a counter to identity politics. Mitt Romney proved that conclusively. You can’t beat identity politics with competence. “Competence” is Michael Dukakis. Identity politics can be defeated, but to do so you must be able to tell America’s story.If you are unable or unwilling to tell America’s story, you will lose to identity politics every time. What is America’s story? America’s story puts identity politics in context, by pointing out that America - warts and all - is a story of the rule of law. There is a Grand Jury decision in Ferguson, MO or Staten Island, NY that offends your identity politics? I hear you. But then, there were 300 million people in America on that day, and one life discounted, by your way of thinking. In context, that is bupkis. If those two “victims” hadn’t come into contact with policemen at the wrong time in the wrong way, you would never have heard of either one of them, in all of your born days.
That is aptly illustrated, of course, by pointing out how many black people were murdered in Chicago by other blacks, without anyone in the rest of the country knowing or caring about their names or stories. A strong conservative candidate would have a casualty list of such names in his pocket - and any time you brought up the subject of Michael Brown, he would whip out that list, eulogize a different one at random, and bemoan the fact that a cop - whether white or black - hadn’t been there to prevent the murder. And the fact that the culture of the place in question allowed that to be such a relatively frequent occurrence.
The story of America includes slavery. But the story of slavery is not the story of America. The story of slavery is the story of an institution which was accepted worldwide throughout history, until in the Eighteenth and especially the Nineteenth centuries, Christians abolished it among themselves. And exerted their considerable influence to abolish it among other peoples. Slavery in America was an exception. A very large exception, to be sure, but an exception nonetheless.
The real story of slavery is the fact that slavery existed in all cultures, worldwide - and that it exists today. People were enslaved and murdered by the tens of millions in Stalin's Soviet Union, without a peep from the Grubercrats. The people who make much of the exception in America which slavery was, care but little how many people - how many black people in particular - are enslaved today. Provided, of course, that the enslavers are not Christian - which they are not.
The choice, then, in Republican politics is not between nominating an "unelectable extreme conservative" and an "electable moderate." No, the choice is between nominating an American who is unashamedly committed to the Constitution and rule of law and who therefore has a powerful message to combat identity politics, and nominating a Romney who can hold a pat flush and still lose to a pair of sixes. The article points out that Romney has been proven right in everything he said in the debate. Yeah - everything he said was right, and he lost. Nominate him again, or anyone like him, and the same thing can happen just as easily.
Being right about the issues that Grubercrats like is not sufficient. You must also be right - and be vocal - about the issues the Grubercrats don’t want to hear about and will therefore smear you for bringing up. You cannot win if you allow the Grubercrats to define the battlefield.
No.
If GOP can't find anyone to back who disagrees with Obama, then I'm not GOP.
This headline. Too funny.
what is my status, since the fieldmarshal is in name only? I am a disenfranchised American like the rest of ya ... now 4 years older than I was when I wandered up north to NH to meet with the Palinistas.
No! Not this time. I ain’t playing again.
Sign me up for a new position.
maybe I will be a blogger and report on CRuz, Walker, etc.
yea. good idea?
The NH right will not be impressed with Pence and Cruz becoming “Zionists”. They are a different breed. Too much Paulinista inflooo-ence.
Mario would pay any price now to come back and do it right ... but there ain’t no re-incarnation in Tramonti.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6S-7Ap6J_FU
Alphonsus de Liquori was an attorney, too. Not the NYC type, however.
“We ask, finally, whether the damned would prefer to be annihilated and deprived of existence, than to submit to the punishments which they endure. St. Thomas, considering the question in itself, answers in the negative for, as he says, a state of non-being is never desirable, for it implies a deprivation of all good. But if this annihilation be considered as an end of all punishment, St. Thomas says that, from this point of view, the state of non-existence presents itself as a good. It is in this sense that Jesus Christ spoke this sentence of Judas: “It were better for him, if that man had not been born.” (Mt. 26:24). St. John seems to say the same thing when speaking of the damned in the Apocalypse: “In those days men shall seek death and shall not find it: and they shall desire to die, and death shall fly from them.” (Rev. 9:6). This will of the damned, however, is uncertain, for they wish to continue to exist, that they might always hate God. “
http://www.olrl.org/doctrine/hellbelike.shtml
You are Grand Poobah and High Muckety Muck.
Screw the Paulestinian swine, give them some weed so they forget there’s an election.
I will not support the nominee if it is someone like Jeb
He must have kicked himself for not running in 1992, we might be talking about former President Cuomo’s death.
Instead
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z4JDBgVWKs
Enough of the preaching of the past. 2015 rings in a new era of Hell, Fire, & Brimstone. Scorched earth to all who oppose the unborn ... and their Pilate allies who sit on their hands.
“In addition to their sufferings from the heat and the cold of the fire of Hell, Sacred Scripture enumerates a number of other torments which will afflict the damned. One of these is the “worm,” to which the Scriptures refer frequently. Some commentators have explained this “worm” as a material thing, which will feed upon, without consuming, the flesh of the damned. But most theologians explain it metaphorically as the remorse of conscience which will afflict the damned in the fire and darkness of Hell. Forever will they have imprinted on their memories the results of their sins; forever will they repeat the words ascribed to them in the book of Wisdom: “We have erred from the way of truth, we wearied ourselves in the way of iniquity and destruction and have walked through hard ways. What hath pride profited us? or what advantage hath the boasting of riches brought us? . . . Such things as these the sinners said in hell.” (Wis. 5:6-14). “
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.