Posted on 08/03/2005 2:56:07 PM PDT by doug from upland
6-8pm Eastern
Listen to Mark Levin, AKA "The Great One," AKA holdonnow, on WABC RADIO in New York.
The most famous six words in radio --
GET OFF THE PHONE YOU MORON!
Thanks for the help.
Can someone take the responsibility to put up the Levin thread everyday and do a ping list? I may not be available on many days. If two or three of you do it on a rotating basis, we know we'll always have it up before show time. Thanks.
Bush was discussed as a possible candidate before he won re-election. When he won re-election with an even higher margin he instantly jumped to solidify the front of the pack. Allen wins in '06 with a considerable margin, wouldn't hurt if he picked up increase in minority vote as well, he could well jump to the front the same as G.W. did.
There are a few peeople that have races in '06 that could make or break their chances. Including Hillary. She doesn't just have to win, she has to show a substantial increase. yes, it's a Dem state but picking up demos that ususally don't fall to you boosts your chances.
Hagel is McCain-lite. He's trying to be the opposite of McCain, in the sense he'll vote (so he says) for filibuster but trashes this President on the WOT. McCain takes shot at the WOT, but it's the Judiciary he targeted by joing that compromise. IMO, the only thing hagel could do for us is possibly harm some of McCain's crossover votes. Which would be good. McCain will energize conservatives to settle on a candidate before we vote so we can defeat him as done in 2000.
Looks like you are safe from any law suits Doug, even got it notarized.
From my viewpoint the main people right now are Allen, Rudy, Pataki and Romney.
What do they have in common? All are appealing to the Republican base to the extent they can.
Frist, Hagel and McCain are clearly not interested in the concerns of the base. They'll compete for the small group of Dems & Indy's that cross over, and Rockefellar Republicans.
There are a few others making noice about entering, Pawlenty for one, but it's still pretty light news from their quarter.
Of the four first mentioned, Allen is currently the conservatives first choice bringing executive and senatorial experience. Rudy brings 9-11 and strength with WOT and U.N. Romney has to be given credit for his stance on some social issues in Mass of all places and his running of the Olympics, Pataki isn't as ntoiceable as the other three but he's clearly tring to appeal to social conservatives and took Hillary on recently.
None are perfect in every arena, but no candidate ever is and I respect these four for trying to reach out to US. Anyone that doesn't is dead in the water.
He has got an annoying squeaky voice too, I'm told.
Yea well, some of us like that voice
Have a lovely day JJ
You too. DFU is a prick too.
Geeeezzzzeeee You just don't know how scared I was that instead of holdonnow, that you was gonna say that about me... : ) <<< me
I didn't say it was a bad thing...
Rudy
Romney has a presence, Allen exudes warmth, Pataki has a puppy dog kind of appeal, but Rudy is the most charismatic hands down at this time.
which one would do best in a dog fight against hillary.
Depends. They all have different styles. I'm not really up to speed on Romney though he did win in Mass so I assume he does have an ability to challange liberals in debate, but the other three, imo, could all and would take Hillary on. They'd just do it in different approaches befitting their personalities. Pataki would simply state the Truth in defiance. Allen would challenge with an incisive wit and smile. Rudy would go right through the throat in a way most cannot, but he can pull off because people give some leeway to the brashness of a real New Yorker.
Who is the cleanest, that is, who would stand up best to all the fables that will be invented against them.
Rudy, I think, would have the most trouble in this arena. New York isn't a clean town, he went up against filth and had to mingle with filth. messy divorce. I don't know enough about the backgrounds of the other three to know their possible liabilities, but I suspect Allen may be the cleanest.
(We need another GW or Reagan.)
Yes and no. It wouldn't hurt to have someone charismatic, but if the Republicans rack up impressive legislative victories the base and Americans in majority like, it's not absolutely crucial. A good candidate, vs great charismatically, could win just running a soild campaign to continue the successes. Now if our senate doesn't get its act together to accomplish these tasks, yes, we'd have to lean more heavily on personality.
"Brit Hume just said that the FBI has raided the homes of William Jefferson a Congressman from Louisiana, and it is a criminal. Anyone know anything?"
My guess is they got the wrong name and address on the search warrant. Since DOJ is involved, it's most likely in regard to the Plame case and probably should have read Mr & Mrs William Jefferson . . . Clinton, they just forgot to add the last name ;-)
What time does he come on and what station in Southern California? Thanks.
"I'm pretty sure he's also the soundbite thief that Rush caught."
I agree with that, I was fishing and heard a soundbite on Rush and then heard the same one on Hannity. Next day came the watermarks from Rush. I sent Rush an email that Sean wouldn't do it again. Never got a reply but I'm sure it was him.
Sean, you're a great American but your show is Boooooring!
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.