Posted on 06/08/2008 7:20:30 AM PDT by army2008
Everyone has a different theory as to the direction in which Senator McCain should go with his VP pick for the ticket. Some say choosing a Democrat like Joe Lieberman would appeal to moderates and independents--I like that idea only because it would drive the hyper-caffeinated left-wing blogosphere into apoplectic conniptions. But there are practical matters to consider. If, heaven forbid, a Vice President Lieberman assumed the presidency, one would assume he would affiliate himself with the Democrats. Unacceptable.
So we're left with the slate of rumored Republican picks, among them Florida Governor Charlie Crist, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Minneapolis Governor Tim Pawlenty, and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal. They all have plusses and minuses, but one stands out: Bobby Jindal. Here's why:
(Excerpt) Read more at rightupfront.org ...
Jindal is too smart for that.Why would anyone want to be first officer on this Titannic of a campaign?
While I don’t disagree with what you say, the 9/11 hijackers were not illegal Mexican immigrants who crossed the border into the country. A ten foot high fence between Mexico and US with armed guards every foot wouldn’t have stopped them. Sometimes its seems as if 9/11 itself has been hijacked for the illegal immigration debate.
What about the war here in this country with open borders?You think winning the war on terror is going to make us any safer with mcnutts kooky amnesty/open borders,restrictions on free speech etc.
Now you’re talking.THE HERMANATOR!
To say that my issue with McCain is that he "isn't ideologically pure enough" is laughable. On many extremely important issues such as free speech and illegal immigration, he is farther to the left than many liberals. I'm not at all certain that he will name solid constructionists to the SCOTUS. His track record indicates otherwise.
Now that might sound harsh, but it pales in comparison to what Senator McCain has had to say about me over the years.
As I said, I might accept the nickle an hour I'm being offered vice the $40/hr I want, but don't tell me I'm just parsing minor issues and that I need to smile as I work.
Please, no Mitt. We don’t need another RINO on the ticket.
How about John Boehner from Ohio? We will need to win Ohio and Boehner does a pretty good job in Congress.
Well, since 9/ll happened, they've tightened the restrictions on people coming here - especially by air. It seems absurdly easy for terrorists contemplating another 9/11-type attack to just sneak in over the border & not have any traces of them being here. The situation is ripe for the opportunity & any politician that cannot see that is blind as a bat & has the same IQ. I find it much more reasonable to assume that they see the danger & just don't care - because big business wants cheap, third world labor to replace American workers. Any politician that will not acknowledge the breach of security that is our borders is in the pocket of big business & doesn't care about anything else. There it is.
I’m intrigued by Sarah Palin. In addition to strong conservative credentials, I am hoping that if she were added to the ticket she might at some point convince Juan to change his mind about drilling in ANWR.
He’s relatively inexperienced, but he looks pretty good on the issues. I’d be fine with him as VP.
Naivety HAS been the undoing of the gop for some time now.
How about Clarence Thomas?
“It doesn’t make any sense to me that McCain would choose a conservative to be his VP. He has made it crystally, painfully UBER clear that he is banking on winning this election by gaining independent & moderate votes. It won’t help him much with those voters if he picks a real conservative. He has as much as SAID that he is not trying to win over conservative voters.”
This is the ONLY way that the election can possibly be won by a Republican candidate this year, particularly in light of the opposition.
2008 is a “war for the middle”. The “right” is less relevant this time around, like it or not.
I did not vote for McCain in the primaries. Nor was he my first, second, third, or fourth choice. But I fully comprehend why he is the only one of the candidates that would have a shot this election at winning against Obama.
A “hard-conservative” candidate like Thompson or Tancredo would have left the “mushy middle” of the electorate cold, and driven them to the Obama side. In that case, the only tactics that might be usable to defeat the ‘rats would be a “race card” campaign directly targeting “white fears”.
I’ll go a bit further and say that the American electoral demographics have changed so much in the past 25 years, that it may have become impossible for any “hard/conservative” type of candidate to win. Yes, he might win the red states easily, but the fact is that we are in danger of _losing_ “formerly red” states to the blue side. If you don’t believe me, look at how New Hampshire has changed in the last twenty years.
The America that elected Ronald Reagan simply doesn’t exist any more. It ain’t coming back. Like you, I wish this weren’t so. But one of the core principles of conservatism is to “see reality as it is” - and to accept that truth, and then act accordingly. America’s “face” is literally changing colors before us. That is a truth that only fools will deny. And the new faces don’t particularly seem interested in the old Euro-American style of “conservatism”.
Regarding Bob Jindal in particular, he is far, FAR too inexperienced yet to be seriously considered for the top spot. YES, the “top spot”, because McCain’s age and health force us to consider that whomever he chooses may have a truly possible chance at ascending to the presidency. For that reason, we must choose wisely.
Whomever is picked must be an experienced and seasoned officeholder who has demonstrated through past word and deed that he is capable of stepping right into the office of a wartime presidency.
Jindal ain’t that guy.
Nor is Sarah Palin, perhaps the most ridiculous choice ever proffered in this forum as a possible vice-presidential nominee.
Nor are J.C. Watts or Michael Steele. We base our choice on the criteria I mentioned above, not on skin color or the need to be “in style”.
Next?
- John
Are you calling me a traitor, hosepipe? Political parties, not candidates, have bases, and I am part of the Republican base. I was not originally for McCain, but now that he is undoubtedly our nominee, I will support him. If that makes me a traitor in your eyes, along with about half the people on this site, then as far as I'm concerned you can go to hell.
-ccm
McLaim is a tool.. Whether he was elected as nominee or the ballot boxes were stuffed I don't know.. For the last 20 or so years republicans have rejected (generally) weasles and obvious socialists.. Republicans for the most part do not like flip flop appeasers traditionally.. or turncoat cowards.. you know like McLaim..
McLaim was no doubt a weasle all his life, while a child, in Hotel Hanoi, and now.. OH! and in the FUTURE TOO.. Mclaim is already a part of terrible legislation passed with democrat cronies.. But as President ALL republicans would get blamed for the democrats socialism that he would gleefully pass.. He is a coward as are any that vote for him..
“the 9/11 hijackers were not illegal Mexican immigrants who crossed the border into the country. A ten foot high fence between Mexico and US...”
Several of them had overstayed their visas. They had 50+ driver’s licenses among them from multiple states. Some had gotten in on flimsy background checks. The “20th hijacker” was protected from real investigation by PC officials within the FBI. All just predicable outcomes when those responsible for enforcing immigration law deliberately neglected to enforce it seriously.
And the Mexican border and all our entry points will have to enforced much more strictly or we are just as vulnerable as we were pre-9/11. The terrorists know where our weak spots are (our entire immigration/visa system). Terrorists might enter from any of those weak spots, or they might already be here.
But all this importance being attached to Iraq and other points overseas is nonsense. That has some benefit, but the greatest danger is small bands of terrorists within the US.
What’s being done to stop the incubation of terrorists in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Syria, and all the other Muslim nations? Nothing’s being done. And nothing practical can be done to cover all those places. That’s why securing our borders and tightening all immigration/visa polices is the only sure way to improve the security of US citizens.
McCain acts like the real threats don’t even exist, and his policies re: the home front are reckless and dangerous.
I’m with those who think he and a Dem. Congress can do more harm than Obama and a Dem. Congress. Republicans would fight Obama’s initiatives, but too many might be prone to support McCain’s. And the initiatives wouldn’t be all that different. We’d be better off fighting Obama for two years and making a comeback in Congress in 2010, as was done in 1994.
Except for the military tradition in his family, and the Dems. “loathing” of the military, McCain would be a Dem. instead of a pretend Republican.
They'll pick some sacrificial republican who'd never have a chance at the white house otherwise, e.g., Trent Lott.
Why is everyone on the Jindal, Steele, or Watts bandwagon? They are completely non-starters.
This crap reminds me of the "Newt for Prez" FReepers, sheesh!
“McCain spent more time in a communist prison than Obama has spent in the Senate. I think his toughness is well established.”
Not the kind of toughness that’s needed in the Oval Office these days and times. You know, the 12 - 20 million illegal aliens are “all God’s children.” Well, God has about 6,5000,000 children on this earth now and several hundred million of them would like to come to the US, or perhaps a billion or two.
We need the toughness that can say no to the unending litany of sob stories and make us a nation of laws again. It’s just almost beyond belief that so many of our high officials rationalize away the need to enforce our laws, and McCain is one of the most guilty of all. Both our presidential choices are awful, and working towards improving the Congress and fielding a better candidate in 2012 is more important than trying to prop up McCain as anything other than what he is: a Democrat in Republican clothing.
Notice how quickly he forgot about how he “got the message” on immigration and went back to “comprehensive” reform after he had the nomination? He’ll forget about tax cuts and other promises just as quickly if he wins.
“Senator McCain: Excite the Base; Pick Bobby Jindal for VP”
Bobby is way too young. Besides, why destroy a promising future by hitching your wagon to...well, that liberal?
Well, since it’s too late for McCain to really excite the base by dropping out, he may as well try something else.
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.