Posted on 05/10/2006 3:19:27 PM PDT by LouAvul
Oh, good grief - not that old rhetoric. See my post #23 re dynasties.
And come to think of it , if Jeb ran, the Hilderbeast would be so outraged that no one could help her keep her true self under wraps. I can see and hear the screeching now. She'd turn off half of even her most staunch supporters.
Bet get over this catch word "dynasty" -
Yep... I-95 and US-1 come in to Georgia from Jacksonvill.. I grew up just north of the Georgia-Florida line. (Also, I-75 comes in at Valdosta).
Off topic, but this reminds me of a joke... You know what the difference between Georgia and Florida is? When you cross into Florida, there's a sign that says "Clean Restrooms." When you cross into Georgia, the sign says "Free Pecans."
got that right.
Why do so many people think that ANY president can do 100% of what he wants to - or that if he doesn't do everything exactly the way we want it done -well , "That's it. I'm taking my marbles and going home. So There!" ---and forfeits the field to the enemy. Talk about abandoning the party...
bump
Exactly.
I want a front row seat. They'd be so busy gnashing their teeth, pulling our their hair, screeching to the roof tops, that people would get a good look at who they really are -
We AUGHT to start floating the rumor that we're going to draft him...What fun. They would implode...
Even if it's the best bet in town? (see my post # 23 - I'm tired of repeating myself.)
Amen.
Amen
Amen
Most of understood, ad hoc - but there are those who will grab a tidbit and rubber-band it to get in a point of theirs that isn't relevant
It's not a catchword. It's a word expressing what it would be. It doesn't make the country look good if 2008 is a Bush/Clinton race, it makes us look like a country of morons. For one thing, Jeb is very vulnerable on the gas price issue because he's the genious that decided that, political pressure was on him because of offshore drilling in Florida, so maybe he should go to big brother and end offshore drilling which he did. You know, there should be rigs off the cost of Pensacola, Tampa, and even Horseshoe Beach. Much of Florida's coastal waters sit on the same petro field that the rest of the Gulf does. We've got better candidates in 2008, for starters, Haley Barbour. Anything bad people ever thought about him was erased in Katrina. I think he'd have a good shot at winning.
Gosh, you don't have to use the lib habit of SHOUTING at us.
The dictators of the world and the libs - (oh, there's not a lot of difference, is there?) SHOUT and foam at the mouth - good litmus test to spot them
I've always disliked the whole notion of political dynasties (a la the Kennedy's), and to be honest, I wasn't too keen on GW running for prez just because of that. But, he'd been a pretty good governor here in Texas, and after he won the primaries, I certainly fell in line and supported him. And, did so again, whole-heartedly in 2004.
But, I really, really don't want to see another Bush on the ticket anytime soon. I'm too steamed about the President's catering to illegals and Vincente, and the whole idea of Jeb waiting in the wings tends to leave me a bit, um, nauseated, at this moment.
Unlike.......ah, forget it. Some stuff ain't worth responding to
I don't know what's worse.
Unions blindly following Democrats or conservatives blindly following Bush or our so called Republican Congress.
I do not think the American people would go for it though.
I hesitate to us the word "dynasty" but I think the voters would be loath to create the appearance of one. We are so hostile to the idea of "hereditary rule", that many would not vote for him simply from an uneasy feeling about appearing to make it happen.
Is there any logic to it? No. But there doesn't need to be with the general population in an election.
But generally, I object to him of principals, not name.
That said, it would be TOO much fun to see the Libs completely loose it. But I think we'll see that eventually anyway.
Then why do we not hear any backlash to the thought of Hitlery =- the WIFE of a pres. - running?,
There's plenty to say against her but the fact that it would be 'dynastic' isn't mentioned..........
I know, I know. Cattle futures, land flipping, book deals, etc.
I guess I'd care less what they lined their pockets with if these folks just followed the Constitution. It gripes me that some of them line their pockets while pretending to be conservatives when they are not. I'm disappointed about that.
bump
One thing we can thank the kennedy family for -- very few reporters will be dumb enough to raise the "dynasty" spectre at the prospect of another Bush in the WH -- or at least, not directly. The leftist media have no objection to dynasties so long as their name is something like, say, Daley.
Well, for two reasons.
One, she is not his descendant, as is a king passing down his throne. And also, it would be only the second Clinton. Two from the same family we could tolerate, but three is pushing it. Same thing would apply if say Chelsy ran for President after a Hillery reign.
Please note, I'm not saying any of this has any validity, it's just that my gut tells me this is how the American people would feel.
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.