Posted on 09/26/2006 5:25:38 AM PDT by PghBaldy
HARDY, Va. - If Republicans decide to replicate the style and substance of President Bush when nominating a potential successor in 2008, they will likely choose another conservative named George.
George Allen, that is, the junior senator from Virginia, who agrees with Bush on most major issues. On their few points of disagreement, such as immigration and campaign finance, Allen sides with the more conservative Republicans who will dominate primary election voting.
“I like him very much — I consider him a friend,” Allen says of Bush in an interview with The Examiner. “And I know a lot of people like to criticize him. We even have Republicans distancing themselves from him because his approval ratings are in the 30s.”
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Now I know that sounds like a real psychological stretch, but remember that his father commited suicide in 1963.
So did Kerry's grandfather.
The guy really shouldn't be allowed near a newspaper.
The government can only do so much. The American people must choose not to use illegal drugs. However, that doesn't mean the government should sit back and watch as a flood of illegal drugs washes over our borders. What would you propose?
I do agree. Allen will start to look better because these attacks have backfired. But fundamentally he doesn't have what Republicans will be looking for after the non-ideological Bush presidency. I think Rudy will be the leader of the "Anybody but Hillary" faction of the GOP and the rest will be fighting for either the "Conservative Stalwart" or "Acceptable Compromise" candidate. Mitt fits into the latter. I know people push for Newt for the CS category, but I don't think he'll make it. He has great ideas. He also has dumb ideas for policy prescriptions. He makes them both sound great, but the presidency isn't a place for brilliant policy. It's the place for leadership. For big ideas.
Why would that be, since his grandparents, the Meyers, were Jewish?
See my post at 116.
I do, and I don't know what you're talking about.
I was and still am a George Allen supporter. What we are witnessing is the politics of personal destruction. It appears to be working on even people like yourself. The WP has been on a daily crusade to destroy Allen for many weeks. It matters not whether the charge is true or not, it is the seriousness of the charge that seems to count.
Allen is portrayed as a racist, redneck, bigot who is ashamed of his Jewish heritage. Hillary would win the minority vote regardless. The very fact that Reps like you now write off Allen as a Presidential candidate demonstrates how effective this smear campaign has been.
116 was another person asking you the same question I did, and I haven't seen a comprehensible answer.
Doubtfully the next anything, let alone president.
..the Dem's recent efforts at destroying George Allen this early out, tells me that THEY believe he is the biggest threat in '08.
The Macaca story was on the front page or inside the paper for weeks. It is still going on and being given new life by the N word "scandal." I subscribe to the WP just to learn what the other side is up to, but it is getting harder and harder to stomach this blatant partisanship. I have never seen such a concerted campaign to destroy a candidate. It is far worse than the Bush National Guard story or the NAACP commercial on Bush's failure to impletment hate crime legislation in Texas.
The point is that Donald Graham has psycho-social problems that he takes out on others with whom he identifies.
Really, it is amazing when you see conservatives eat their own.
This is not about 2008.
This is about 2006!!!!
...that the government decriminalize and tax so-called "illegal" substances, just as it does with alcohol. And, that if a person wants to destroy his/her life with drugs (or alcohol), let them...turn them away from free medical treatment, let them die homeless if they choose. Strong anti-drug laws have only made narcotics more expensive, made dealers rich and boosted crime rates as addicts resort to theft and robbery, etc.
I would have no problem with every employer conducting random drug screenings through urinalysis as I believe in capitalistic enterprise and ownership rights of property. I would urge that citizens arm themselves with firearms to protect their property and valuables.
But I also respect your right to live your own lifestyle and what you do behind your doors is your business, and not mine or the governments' as long as it does not infringe upon the rights of some else (minor child, someone held against their will, etc.)
IOW, I would like to see America be the America of the West circa 1870s when people took care of themselves and their families, helped their neighbors in need, enforced sanity and law with six-guns and a rope, and happily prospered by the sweat of their brow.
On the other hand, they will do what it takes to destroy anyone coming down the pipe and even resembles GWB.
Gulliani is no wonder their favorite, because he has demonstrated his caliber already, except on his social values. An SOCIAL VALUES, RELIGION, GOD... is what this battle is all about.
The left thinks that if they convince enough non social values Republicans that God and morality is not important, and if one of these media darlings make it through the primaries, then, the pervert wing of the democrat party (same thing :) ? would vote for him as well - sort of the reverse with Liberman in Connecticut now - Then, the perverts/Democrats of this country would indeed achieve a great victory and happily lead this country to the lowest levels of morality straight to hell.
It's more than that. This is not the VA Dems that are doing this, it's the national Dems. This has the hit-and-run character of the Clintonoids. They have no fear of backlash and they'll spread as much dirt as they can, through as many operatives as they can find and they don't care about the fallout.
These operatives get the benefit of being on TV, thinking they are smart and can survive a media blitz. Most can't.
Oh, regarding the deer head thing, I thought it was bizarre and "Hollywood". Well, I found this: Deer Head in Mailbox
It just sounds made up.
Donald is the product of his womanizing, alcoholic father by the same name and his mother, Katherine (who had a Jewish father--Meyer--and a Lutheran mother). He was raised an Episcopalian, I believe.
The Mr. T meets Forrest Gump, yes.
When this first broke, I looked up S.R. Sidarth on the web. He's actually a nerd. Seemed like sort of a nice shy guy. He's a journalist (none of the reports ever tell you that) on the UVA paper and happened to get involved with the -- get this -- Lieberman campaign. And he said in a posting that he did so because of Lieberman's national security stances.
The fact is, he's part of the "family" now and he's enmeshed in the dirty world of Dem politics. It's too bad, he's going to be a bitter and angry person.
Since I do not have an advanced degree in psychology, I will defer the analysis to you - providing you have such a degree, that is.
He's let it grow out. It looked worse than that. I'll try to find it.
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.