Shucks folks, I'm speechless.
Posted on 01/31/2007 5:46:06 PM PST by Dark Skies
I really like Keating and had hoped he would get the nod for AG in 2000. I know his name was reported on the short list and that there were whispers about some kind of financial dealing, maybe involving his kid's education (I don't remember the specifics). Maybe he was never really considered as reported, I just remember being disappointed he wasn't nominated.
I think that whole "polarized" nonsense is claptrap from the drive-by media. If people are "polarized" then someone can be blamed for being "polarizing". The fact that people didn't overwhelmingly go for one candidate over another says more for the candidates than it does about the people. There is a middle, but they make a choice just like everyone else. Reagan was probably the best at appealing to a broad spectrum of people, although Clinton was a good con man.
Well, I actually believe that many of those in the "Middle" are there because they aren't committed enough to fit the other categories. Call it the "mushy middle". I have a hard time with that, because I am the type that's either for or against, not a compromiser.
Not uncommitted; mostly uninformed and uninterested.
That too. Add uneducated as well.
Nah I don't think so- most of the less-educated people I know have firmer convictions, especially on nitty gritty issues. The pseudo-intellectuals tend to be wishy-washy.
There are millions of people in America who still don't know what a partial birth abortion is. Once they find out, they are outraged that they have not heard it before.
so the SCOTUS is going to overturn the new law in NJ, is that it?
Shucks folks, I'm speechless.
What new law is that?
If the Supreme Court determined marriage was subject to legislative statute in the Reynolds case, why would they intervene?
so you are agreeing with me then - gay civil unions is going to be a matter left to the states?
No.
What law are you talking about? What case before the Supreme Court are you talking about?
NJ just passed a broad gay civil unions bill. its everything that marriage is, but with the name.
does this new law face any kind of challenge in the SCOTUS? I don't think so, the states can do what they want regarding civil unions.
Never happen. She can and will control what questions can be asked in exchange for her appearance.
Polls are tough for me to be confident in. Most are push polls without admitting it.
When people are polled are they simply asked if they are registered republicans? By the NYT's? CNN? Reuters?
How hard is it to say yes and then say, "I like Rudy".
Makes sense.
The base finds Rudy too socially 'liberal' so they will place their de facto vote for a Stalinist.
Time for the base to grow up.
What's black and white and read all over and is more self-destructive than pre-9/11 thinking?
Pre-clinton thinking, that's what....
Putting doctrinal purity ahead of making sure a defective and dangerous clinton never again controls this country is pre-clinton thinking.
We no longer have the luxury of time or circumstance to massage our sensibilities, to indulge our indignations.
We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first one.)
BTTT
Motivate the base. Win elections!
AMEN!!! AMEN!!! AMEN!!! Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter '08!!
bump
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.