Posted on 06/22/2011 6:04:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Looking at the current GOP field, I share what seems to be the ubiquitous feeling of “blah.” Apart from Michele Bachmann, no one in the field appears to be serious about beating Obama, and the two guys getting the most love from the mainstream media, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, are destined to lose if they secure the Republican nomination.
To be honest, just the fact that the mainstream media keeps them front and center should be warning enough for every lucid Republican. After all, this is the same way the media carried John McCain through the primaries in 2008: because they knew if he were the Republican nominee the Democrats could win with any candidate. (I dare say Jimmy Carter could have beat McCain.)
So here we are, it’s 2011, and two different versions of McCain-lite, McRomney and McHuntsman, are trying to convince us they’re ready to lead. But I’ve got news for you: if either of these two gets the nomination, Obama will literally skate back into the White House for four more years.
Apart from the obvious problem of having instituted Romney-care while governor of Massachusetts, McRomney has the added disadvantages of supporting continued ethanol subsidies and refusing to sign a pledge to nominate only pro-life justices to the bench (were he to be president). The pro-ethanol subsidies make him look like a big government RINO (Republican-In-Name-Only), and the refusal to sign the pro-life pledge on justices makes us wonder what the future would hold were he to become president.
Think about it: Who wants a president that’s going to continue to take our tax dollars and give them to corn farmers whose corn is used for ethanol, only because those farmers are accustomed to getting government handouts? And who wants a president that would simply write off Roe v. Wade as something that can never be overturned?
Anyway, McRomney is a non-starter.
So what about McHuntsman?
I hate to say it, but McHuntsman is even worse. He puts civility above victory: by which I mean, he would rather run a nice, positive campaign and lose than run an aggressive, in your face campaign and win. (In other words: he would rather run a campaign like McCain ran than one like Ronald Reagan ran.)
Let me jog your memory here, because I have friends and family members who, although old enough to remember, have somehow forgotten how aggressive Reagan was in going after Jimmy Carter.
While campaigning for the 1980 election, Reagan said: “I have talked with unemployed workers all across this country. I’ve heard their views on what Jimmy Carter has done to them and their families…[and you can] call this human tragedy whatever you want. Whatever it is, it’s Jimmy Carter’s.” In other words, Reagan said Carter owns it.
And he continued: “I’m looking forward to meeting Mr. Carter in debate, confronting him with the whole sorry record of his administration — the record he prefers not to mention. [At that time,] he’ll answer to them and to me.”
I love that last line: after highlighting Carter’s utter failure and the damage he had done to this country, Reagan said “he’ll answer to [the American people] and to me.”
But what does McHuntsman say? He says, “I respect the president” (i.e., I respect Obama), “[and I want] the voters to [decide] who will be the better president; not who’s the better American.”
Isn’t that nice? Instead of going after Obama, who has arguably done more damage to this country in two years than Carter did in four, McHuntsman wants to run a gentlemen’s campaign.
(Does he know the office he seeks will be in Washington DC rather than the Hamptons?)
Nevertheless, the good news for the Republican Party is that if either Sarah Palin or Rick Perry throw their hat into the ring, McRomney and McHuntsman will both become bywords. For the Tea Party will carry a true conservative to victory in 2012.
The bad news for the Republican Party is that if either McRomney or McHuntsman get the nomination, the socialistic policies Obama will enact in his next four years may be more than we can recover from as a nation.
McRomney and McHuntsman are losers. The question is, are we dumb enough to lose with them?
Looks like Snow White and eight Bob Doles.
Romney/Huntsman 2012.
The winning ticket! ....for obozo.
amen
Well said, and too true.
T. Boone Perry and the great energy swindle? No thanks.
Huh?
The easiest way to identify the RINO morons is when they say “I believe man-made climate change is real”. We have ObamaCare inventor Romney, Newt (a lizzard), high school drop out Huntsman, etc. who all believe in the Gore paranoia.
What about Cain?
I like Cain too. He is my second choice behind Bachmann.
Ditto for me. But the GOP could run a corpse in 2012 and win in a landslide. Don’t listen to this liberal crapola. Its not even going to be close. It will be a miracle if Barry Soetora even runs for re-election. I look for him to resign or announce he is not running by next Fall.
Perry and Schwarzenegger jumped on the clean energy band-wagon, signing laws that mandated x% of electricity come from renewable energy. In Texas’s case, the law favors wind. Who were those lobbying for this change? Enron and T. Boone Pickens were the most prominent. Who was to benefit from these mandates? I think you know the answer.
Now that the mandates are in place (see RPS), and the ante has been upped a few more times, the federal (taxpayer) dollars are flowing to the same scum that pushed this through. To get federal dollars, they’ve greased the skids with folks like Pelosi who was exposed for benefitting from the federal subsidies. They also rallied for billions in bond issues to fund their follies (in California’s case, voters told Pickens to shove it). In Texas, they’re going crazy, even using eminent domain to seize land for windmills.
Google will give you a lot more. It’s been a decade-long disgrace. Perry is often found touting the world’s largest windfarms, failing to mention the taxpayer dollars squandered for an inefficient energy source. Of course, when the dollars go to the likes of Pickens, who in turn funds the campaigns and careers of folks like Perry, I don’t think they think of it as “squandered.”
When I used the word “swindle” above, I was not aware of this article. But it’s a good one. It shows the overreach of these thugs in state and federal government to advance their green agenda and enrich their benefactors.
http://www.masterresource.org/2011/03/texas-wind-swindle-i/
That website appears to have a lot more good articles on the subject.
What??? Palin or Perry? How did Perry suddenly become the Palin Alternative? I read all the US founders/constitution bus tour threads a few weeks ago and there was no Perry in them. Where did he come from? Where was Perry when Sarah was fighting Obama-care, the Obama-Mexican invasion of Arizona and the unions in WI and doing the US constitution teach-in bus tour???
Um .... Texas? ;-)
I'm still figuring out how he qualifies as a conservative. Folks must have short memories.
There is no way I would vote for that guy. Period.
As far as the primary election being blah, no way. Conservatives have NEVER had such an powerful impact as in this party and in the upcoming election. The Tea Party, and the libertarians (of which I am not), constitutional conservatives, and so on, they have and are making an impact and in fact are the determining factors to the outcome of who will be the candidate for the Republicans.
I worked for Reagan when he lost, and later when he won. And this is as exciting a time as then. Also, I want to say, I am so thankful to those talk show hosts such as Mark Levin, Rush, Laura, Hannity, and those more local who are on the air, what an impact they have all made. We need to thank them so much.
I am glad I am alive right now. Each of us need to decide and then cast our vote in the primary. Right now, I am probably going to vote for Michelle. I am watching also what Perry has to say if and when he gets into the race.
And while I am so impressed with the broad, vast and wonderful candidacy of so many now in the race, and that includes Newt, I can say for sure, though, Jon Huntsman is a goose that won't be on my table no how. As for the others, including Paul, God bless them and keep up the great work!
Anyway - love her, go girl!
Congresswoman Bachmann lost my vote back in January:
Veterans Vow to Fight Bachmann Budget Cuts
http://www.military.com/news/article/veterans-vow-to-fight-bachmann-budget-cuts.html
Bachmann eyes cuts to veterans health benefits
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/28/bachmann-veterans-cuts/
The Ed Rollins thing just solidified it.
Huntsman is a shill for the same cabal that brought McCain out of the political ashes to be defeated by Obama, The republican candidates need to take a close understanding of why Huntsman asks for ‘civility’. His ‘civility’ would mean no questioning as to why he gave thousands of dollars to help elect Reid in Nevada. His ‘civility’ would mean no questioning as to why Baroness de Rothschild reportedly said she/they gave 1.2 million dollars to help Huntsman. This is of the same international banking family that for centuries have bought and fought governments for their gain. The same Rothschilds that gave Soros seed money for his hedge fund start up. The same Rothchilds that helped establish the Rockefeller empire and the UN. Yes, Huntsman wants other candidates who have not been on Obama’s diplomatic team and have their own integrity to not question him so as to enlighten the people of the USA about his political associations because of his call for ‘civility’.
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.