Paladin2 wrote:
“No, most already know Willard will be lacking in being a force in the right directions. Folks already have low expectations of Willard and thus will not be disappointed as his (lack of ) actions are already discounted.”
True. Can’t argue with the logic there.
“Leroy is less Conservative and principled than W.”
False and True. Leroy is definitely more conservative than W. But W is more principled than Newt only because W never claimed to be a conservative, as his spending habits proved. And as Rush said many, many times, and was never contradicted by W. Don’t get me wrong, I respect W for many things, especially in the foreign policy sphere.
However, when it came to budgetary discipline, wobbliness on social issues/programs (”No child left behind” and the drug benefit being simply the best examples), and immigration, where he was completely unhelpful to the U.S. and even, in the long run, to Mexico (a little too friendly with Vincente Fox and the corrupt politicians around him), he was little better than a Dem. He was - surprise, surprise! - a Bushie. I well remember “discussing” with George H. W. Bush activists in the 1980 Minnesota caucuses these very kinds of fiscal and social issues. Their positions were not Reaganite, emphatically not Reaganite! W. is his father’s son, a mixture of good and bad.
I disagree. Based on past actions (rather than current pandering) Leroy and W are, at best, on average, comparable. Leroy takes money from the evil FM/FM, sits on the Global Warming Couch with Nazi (No oil for YOU!) Pelosi, comes out for gov't healthcare, wants the gov't to do all sorts of unnecessary tasks, etc.
Leroy had not been consistently been on the Conservative side.