Interesting items today dissing some possible VP picks. I haven’t seen any commentaries dissing Pawlenty, yet today, though. :)
Kay Bailey Hutchinson: Roe was rightly decided (Abortion is a Constitutional Right)
Senate Roll Call Vote ^ | 3-12-03 | Hutchinson herself
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2069086/posts
Ten Reasons Mitt Romney Should Not Be the VP Nominee
National Review Online ^ | August 27, 2008 | David Frum
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2069088/posts
Reason #3
“..With McCain’s implicit one-term pledge, a Romney nomination – giving the vice presidency to a deep-pocketed candidate – would sharply divide the Republican party by effectively conceding the 2012 nomination to him, sidelining both up-and-coming candidates like Governors Pawlenty, Palin, and Jindal and current figures such as Mike Huckabee (who came in second, remember – Romney did not). How will the party react? The same consideration does not apply for a pick of, for instance, Pawlenty, Jindal, Governor Jon Huntsman, or Rep. Eric Cantor. They do not have the money to dominate the party and the conservative movement as Romney does. The 1988 primaries show that a sitting Vice President can be effectively challenged – but Romney would begin the race with a huge advantage simply because of his personal wealth. ..”
oh no not this again.....
Whoever McCain picks, they will have to be ready to stand for election against Hillary in 2012. That says Palin to me.
Everyone will have a beef with one McCain pick or another. But, we must ALL realize that whoever is picked is McCain’s choice, and a less than “perfect” VP is far more desireable than a Marxist-Plagirist administration.