Posted on 10/21/2007 11:38:01 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Why is this? Its simple. Duncan has not got a huge election coffer to spend on media advertising, and he would surely beat ANY Democrat , once he has gotten genuine exposure. His movement is grass roots.
I do not think Duncan's race is over, it will begin soon in earnest at the grass roots.I have supported him from the beginning, and will support him to the extent of writing his name in on any primary in which I vote, if he does not appear on the ballot. History demands it.
Meanwhile we are placated as Republicans with men of lesser character and ability, who have money, and media recognition.In many ways we are fools for allowing that, and the nation may suffer greatly for it.
I do not care for McCain at all but that was a nice touch.
However I got a bigger kick out of Thompsons comment on Kennedy, My husband and I both almost lost it on that one.
I was not trying to give a presentation of what Thompson believes. I was trying to point out how biased toward Giuliani that report was at 6:20 on Fox yesterday morning.
In it they highlighted this attack of Giuliani against Thompson.
Thompson is one of my 2 favorites, so I wouldn't go out of my way to disagree with him. A federalist approach on that issue is fine.
I'm one of those rare conservatives who isn't particularly incensed over lawsuits. There's a place for them as long as they involve an assessment of actual, total damages inflicted on someone. If you injure Payton Manning in a drunk driving accident, and he can never throw again, then you should pay more than just the cost of setting a broken arm.
And if someone's kid becomes sick from chewing lead paint smeared on their Dora the Explora dolly, then there's a case to be made that either the manufacturer or distributer knowingly endangered an entire age group, and they should be penalized....and financial penalties are one way to do that....and they should have to pay full, actual costs.
Now, I'm not sure why they should pay the "fed." But, then again, traffic fines go to the community that's been impacted by the speeding.
I'm also not sure of an equitable formula for determining the penalty, but it should be enough to make that company never want to do it again.
Excuse it if you want to, I don't. It's too clintonesque.
Bush, the “nightmare” that he has been, is the best argument we have that the “lesser of two evils” is the RIGHT choice.
#######
Excellent points which I have saved for future arguments with “purists.”
My worst fear about our present field of candidates is that a three- or four-way split will allow a weaker candidate to prevail. I am praying that our primary process will somehow avoid this result.
As an example of what I foresee, in Maryland’s last election, a beloved pol with 50 years in one office after another was perceived as vulnerable by another competent pol for the office of state comptroller. Our Dem primary gives us the winner of the general election. A third candidate got into the race = a flaming socialist who is a DC lobbyist in his day job. He won with about 34% of the vote.
The aging beloved (conservative dem) pol should have retired gracefully, but.....
“Perhaps you don’t mind low level theft or fraud, many of us do feel that it is wrong at any level and that Rooty exudes that sort of “untouchable” attitude that breeds criminal activity.
Excuse it if you want to, I don’t. It’s too clintonesque.”
Again, you are making assumptions incorrectly based on your prejudice. I didn’t state that I don’t mind low level theft or fraud but merely cite it based on the citations listed as below the level of importance to attach to the Executive.
Do you attach every petty act of “low level theft or fraud” to the Executive of your State, similar in scope to the size of the NYC budget?
If you wish to make that “connection” why not tie it to the US federal executive? With that kind of logic President Bush is responsible for all corruption including where local governments have taxpayer funded luncheons.
Again, I would suggest that an attack on Rudy be based on his record and his positions with the key being HIS, not the actions of other petty government officials.
Spare us the reference to the Clintons to who deserves it: the Clintons.
And you keep pushing these criminals off as low level petty workers instead of those with close ties to Rudi. It shows a lack of judgement on his part and deserves a connection to the clintons.
Sounded unprofessional and showed poor sportsmanship...
If they weren’t supposed to have made a choice by then, that’s cool.
But to jump out of the box and start calling names like that....just didn’t look good on national T.V.
...but ... that’s just me..
First off there is no professional code in a focus group. Second you are encouraged by Frank Luntz to “be aggressive...go back and forth and be passionate about what you believe in, no ho-hum talks to a camera.” I went in with something to say about the process and what I wanted to hear from these men.
I could care less how I came off to people who are obviously going to disagree with me. I notice you just signed up 3 days ago onto FR so I am willing to bet you are probably a Ron Paulie Troll in disguise since they all seem to sign up in bunches.
It was a passionate focus group and had the Fox News producers and Luntz’s group aired a lot of the conversations that went on in that room you would find a lot of other people shared the same passion.
Think I am making that up? Notice I was moved from the second row in the first segment down to the front row in the second segment.
Luntz wanted the formula to be about passion.
He got it.
...still calling names I see....
Real Nice!!
But “Whom” I choose to vote for....right now it’s anyone but Fast-Freddie....is my business...
Don’t really care if you agree or not...nor do I care which chair you got to sit in...
Well since you are in the mood to post Hillary #’s...please tell us what the Ron Paul #’s were in that poll. Because we certainly have enough of them on this thread.
So why bother logging on to a new forum and start pointing out your issues with someone who has been a member for 8 yrs if you don’t care.
You do care and that is why you posted directly to me.
I don’t “keep pushing...criminals of” as you suggest. What I’m saying is there is a great amount of people who work in government. The Executive can’t be help responsible for all their petty crimes.
Unless one can show how Rudy profited for the petty criminal actions, I hardly view it as akin to the Clintons.
When the Clintons klan do bad things, there’s always the Clintons at the top getting something out of it. Always.
So your analogy remains begging, sorry.
I thought the whole reason we called him slick willy is because nothing seemed to stick to him. He always seemed to be on the fringe, yet no one could pin any criminal activity on him.
I happen to view Rudi the same way - too much going on around him yet he seems to sidestep it all.
I just don't buy that he has so much corruption around those closest to him yet he's blissfully unaware. And no, I have no proof, just my opinion.
I respect your opinion, I just don’t share your conclusions. A perfect example of the Clintons is the pardon scandal, the Travelgate scandal and the much less known Riday scandal to Asia where they even shut down competing mining development in the US to stop competition with their “friends” abroad.
That’s just a note, not a complete recitation. Who has that much time?
My favorite clinton info regards all the deaths associated with folks around them... no way to pin it on them but no way it is coincidental.
“Illegal immigrants already living among us who commit crimes must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and incarcerated or deported.”
“... who commit crimes ...” ??
They’ve already committed crimes and do so every day they are here, working under false SS#s and cheating the American taxpayers by having us pay for their kids to go to school, free medical care, free school lunch programs, foodstamps, etc.
The fact that Huckabee obviously doesn’t consider those as “crimes” is one strike against him. His second strike is the whiff of class warfare pandering you get from him. Minor in Sunday’s debate but blatant in the Oct 9th debate.
Ah, okay, I see what you were doing. I didn’t “get” that the parenthetical was a direct repeat of the poor info given on that 6:20 broadcast. Sorry. My bad.
I do like your take on the proper place of a well-founded tort case. There really IS a need, but the difficulty arises in determining how to delineate between a case seeking reasonable damages, and a case that is abusive of the system. I can feature that cases commonly arise that could be made to sound like they were abusive, but, if all the facts were known, truly wouldn’t be.
I hope you like the new psychiatrist Hillary chooses for you.
I probably could have been a bit more clear about that parenthetical comment. I should have put a “/sarcasm” after 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.