"All He Has To Say Is 'Stuck on Stupid', And (Senator) Vitter Is Toast."

Stuck On Stupid ^ | August 29, 2009 | George

[Quaker]

Retired Lt.General Russell Honore is considering running in a primary race against Senator David Vitter (R – Louisiana).

[CharlesWayneCT]

interesting to see how many people will declare their support for Honore, before they see a single position on an issue from him.

[CharlesWayneCT]

And what is the General’s ACU rating? What is his position on Abortion? On tax cuts? On immigration? On guns?

Or does none of that matter, so long as he’s a general and all?

[Excellence]

It’s a man, baby! Yeah!

[Sudetenland]

What I was thinking as well. Everyone needs to remember the lessons of Colon Powell. Mere military service does not automatically equate to conservative values.

Need I mention Jim Webb of Virginia and Mad Captain Jack Murtha of Johnstown, Pa.? There are a bunch of looney lib vets. Better to wait to see if he has anything useful to say.

Vitter's infidelity is disturbing, but should conservatives automatically flush every one of their own just because they have demonstrated that they are human.

Vitter does have an admirable conservative record. Honore has "Stuck on Stupid." I am not certain I wish to gamble the future on another slogan...after all, how's that "Hope and Change" thing working?

[srmorton]

Corzine is no longer in the Senate. He is the current Governor of New Jersey, who, God willing, will be replaced in November by his Republican opponent who now has a double digit lead. I sincerely hope you are right about the other three!

[DanZanRyu]

Being in the military makes a person a pragmatist. He/she will be inclinced to use the best method available to get an operation done. Thus candidate with military service will unlikely be a “Die for conservative dogma” kind of person.

[Sudetenland]

"Conservative dogma" was good enough for our Founding Fathers...including those who served in the military.

If men like Murtha and Webb represent miltary pragmatism, I will do without.

The truth is that I am not big on career military men. By the time they have risen to the level of command, they have become so political that I no longer trust their judgment. Patraeus comes the closest to a military man I might support, but I would have to hear a great deal more about his political philosophy before I would support him.

We have been burned by men like Eisenhower and Powell. Remember that George McGovern and Daniel Inoye were decorated combat veterans; Frank Church-the man who almost destroyed the CIA-was an intelligence officer in Burma; and many of the other men who orchestrated the loss of the Vietnam war were WWII combat veterans. Having a military record is not a certification of loyalty either to the fidelity of the Constitution or the country.

Far too many of our Liberal-anti-capitalist, anti-war, soft on communism members of government have been military men. On balance, probably more were strongly conservative, but being in the military, by itself, is not a recommendation as far as I can tell.

Honore wants my support, I need to see his bona fides.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Being receptive to the idea of the man running is hardly a declaration of support. He hasn’t said a word yet and hasn’t given any positions on anything. If he isn’t a conservative, most, if not all of those very same people would change their tune quickly.

It’s kind of like a company coming out with a new product. They advertise their product and maybe it appeals to someone. That appeal is not a commitment to buy the product and that appeal can go by the wayside in a flash when that someone hears a bad review of the product.

You see, Charles, we’re not all blind, sycophantic, devotees of candidates like you and the rest of the Romney crowd. Unlike you guys, who support a candidate based on his phony conservative veneer, people who are expressing interest in General Honore’s candidacy are attracted to the idea of a citizen politician with a military background and a penchant for telling the media to pound sand. It is tentative support pending further information and there is nothing wrong with that.

[Czar]

"We have been burned by men like Eisenhower and Powell. Remember that George McGovern and Daniel Inoye were decorated combat veterans; Frank Church-the man who almost destroyed the CIA-was an intelligence officer in Burma; and many of the other men who orchestrated the loss of the Vietnam war were WWII combat veterans. Having a military record is not a certification of loyalty either to the fidelity of the Constitution or the country."

Lets see now, who comes to mind.

John McCain.

[Sudetenland]

Ya think??? :)

[Sudetenland]

The really disturbing thing is that the comment that all he has to say is "Stuck on stupid and Vitter is toast," is probably right. It won't matter what his politics are, we will see another cult of personality arise.

Certainly he is deserving of praise for the way he came into South Louisiana and straightend out that mess, but again that was simply making chaos respond to military discipline and regimentation...not sufficient for me to support him without knowing his ideology.

I will say this however, at least he would have the management skills to deal with problems...unlike the current occupant of the White House.

[little jeremiah]

Who cheated on his wife?

[little jeremiah]

I’ve got to stop asking questions until reading down the thread.

Duh - sorry!

[notaliberal]

I’ve been guilty of the same thing

[little jeremiah]

I’ve done it a lot lately.

Must add it to my list of bad habits to stop!

[CharlesWayneCT]

You obviously haven’t read the comments in the Honore threads, if you think nobody has expressed support yet.

And in fact too many people are like the caractature you draw of the Romney supporters. Just go look at the Palin supporters justifying her giving money to RINOs (I’m not attacking her for it, but I know how those same people would react to a thread about Romney’s PAC giving money to the same people).

You still find it much easier to categorize and marginalize than to have an intelligent conversation.