Posted on 11/23/2008 6:02:47 PM PST by redk
People wonder why Mike Huckabee would come out with a book that violates Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment, which is not to criticize another Republican, and trashes the wholly deserving Mitt Romney.
Is it that Huckabee wants to get Romney out of the way so that he can emerge pre-emptively as the GOP alternative to Sarah Palin in 2012?
(Excerpt) Read more at lvrj.com ...
RE :”So governors should serve as senators now to prepare for a run for the chief executive office” “Since when did a senator get more experience than a governor? I believe that the job of President is in the executive branch like that of governor.Senators are too compromised as mcnutts sure as hell proved.” “Yeah I would hate to see the media take the kid gloves that they have thus far handled her with off.”
It’s not just experience, it’s about winning. It’s PR. Two years ago I posted that we need a Republican who is conservative and can communicate, and got a bunch of angry replies that communication was not necessary, just GWB vetos. So now we lost two elections.
I do NOT want to see her ripped apart again. You may not like the media attacks, but they did draw blood outside of conservative circles. You do want her to win dont you?
Lastly, Couric asked her a very predictable question “what qualifies you to be commander and chief?”, and she gave a little joke about Russia that was mocked all over TV. Now what if she had answered following ?” I am a governor like Reagan who won cold war. When will the media ask BoB that same question? I am more ready than BoB but he is never asked” But she didnt.
I didn’t understand your post, and what was the little joke about Russia that Palin told Couric?
Let us hope that those trying to rebuild GOP in a conservative vein are not just blowing smoke (like last time). It is up to us to let them know that we no longer accept liberal Republicans. Period. No more “lessers of evil”.
RE : “what was the little joke about Russia that Palin told Couric?
“
Her reply was not the obvious one I suggested that most FResr think of, it was : “I can see Russia (or Putin) outside my window..” that most people saw in an SNL clip. (I blame McCain’s people on this BTW, they prepped her.)
I am saying you cant run as a conservative Christian and expect to not be able to answer questions like this in a strategic way that are not easy to parody. It’s not about Biden’s slips, not about fairness. It’s about winning. Hillary strategically was on the Senate military committee, for politics. I talk to non-Frers non-Palin lovers and this media stuff sold. It’s a fact. Republicans need to think strategically and what sells, and how to sell it, not just what they believe (what they WISH)
“Lastly, Couric asked her a very predictable question “what qualifies you to be commander and chief?”, and she gave a little joke about Russia that was mocked all over TV.”
I still don’t understand you, did she make the joke or not, what was it?
I don't understand the mentality of people who would attempt things like that just to hold on to a transient commodity like "my job". I think they are just competing out of instinct, with no clear concept of what they are really fighting for. But someone who publicly displays such instinctive, unthinking behavior should be fired immediately, anyway - he'll do something to screw up the company at some point.
Before you repeat that allegation
It was a question, not an allegation. I don't generally repeat myself unless some one didn't understand it. In this case, it still doesn't need to be repeated.
You can answer it or not, it really doesn't matter to me.
...maybe you'd like to (a) reread what I wrote
OK, I did.
...b)consider the relationship between jumping to conclusions and Christian charity
Ahh, I think that is what you did. Ironic.
(c) consider whether the "have you stopped beating your wife" sort of quesiton is compatible with the Christian walk
I wouldn't ask you that, I know nothing of your domestic history.
...and (d) consider apologizing.
It seems there is some kind of misunderstanding here, care to clear it up?
Oh, and it might help to explain what IHS stands for.
Thanks
Your question contains and conveys the almost explicit premise that I don't "like IHS." Your question would make no sense if you thought I do "like IHS."
Are we clear on that?
If so, then it is an allegation that I do not "like IHS." Hence the complaint about an allegation.
Two things follow:
(1)You did indeed allege that I do not "like IHS."
(2)The question is of the form typified by the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" That is, it appears to be a question but actually conveys a charge, an allegation, which may or may not be true.
I am saying that there is nothing in what I wrote to suggest whether or not I "like IHS." What I did write was the I do not consider IHS a philosopher. He is much, much more. He is, among other more important things, the answer to the questions of the Philsophers and the Truth for which they seek, whether theyu know that they seek Him or not.
Also there is no condescension in my reporting the FACT that Dubya said the IHS was his favorite philosopher. I do not have condescension for Dubya. I disagree with him on some things (like whether IHS is a philosopher), but I admire his piety and fidelity.
So it seems there were two assumptions: (1)That I do not "like IHS," and (2) that I think I am somehow superior to Dubya so that I can condescend to him, (since the root sense of condescend is "go down to be with [someone].")
So I did not jump to conclusions. I look at what you wrote in your first message, to wit: Why don't you like IHS? and considered the meaning of the words you used.
So I have dealt with the questions of allegation, of my jumping to conclusions, and with the nonsense about domestic history. What else?
Okay, misunderstanding: A) Something led you to ask why I don't like IHS.
B) That suggests that you think that I don't like IHS, right? You asked a question which implied that thought, right?
So the misunderstanding is your implication (whether intended or not) that I do not like IHS.
IHS is a conventional and old abbreviation of the Greek Word ΙΗΣΟΥΣ. The Greek majuscule Sigma, conventionally written as Σ, is written at the end of words and in minuscule as ς. So there's a kind of graphic drift toward our sinuous "S" shape already in Greek, and as the old abbreviation gets Latinized the sigma becomes an S.
There, I've tried to track down the questions the best I could. Let me know my errors, please.
Yes, something like that was in the SNL clip and it was a gross distortion from what she really said which was that you could see Russia from Alaska.
Her point was that if Russia started action in the area between Alaska and Russia the branch of the Military that she commands would report it to her right away.
Being as many people get their "news" from SNL and Jon Stewart they think what ever they put out there is the truth, especially if it can be twisted to denigrate a Conservative.
You described I.H.S. as a philosopher.
I asked you what I.H.S. stands for.
You have shown your intellectual bone fides, now what is the name of the philosopher with the initials "I.H.S"? (I put periods after the initials to make it clearer)
Yes I know he is much more than a philosopher, I managed to get that from you dissertation.
RE “they think what ever they put out there is the truth,”
No its not ‘they think what ever they...” , but it’s ‘they can change public opinion’ ! That is my point. It doesnt seem fair? Doesnt matter. I know there are things republicans did, that in the democrats viewpoints, they think were very unfair. they lost before and thought it was unfair and dishonest,when they were losing . But now they are winning and we are losing. I was talking about being prepared and winning and it’s alot deeper than this issue!
Just because fellow conservatives hear something, dont assume the public does. Pelosi had a 4 year demonize GWB strategy that took advantage that the press smelled GWB blood and stayed on him like a seeker(and he was a huge slow target) . So while many at this site dream of Palin as president in 2010, make sure she is prepared to win the election first.
but but ...
You described I.H.S. as a philosopher.No I didn't. I yam SEW innocent of that!
I described Dubya as thinking IHS (Without periods, WITH periods it's something else -- I know the Jehovah's Witnesses say it stands for Isis, Horus and Set, but that's nonsense -- IS there a philosopher with the initials I.H.S.? The only three-initialed philosopher I can think of is A.N.Whitehead., and I guess he's good, but I disagree with him. There's G.W.F. Hegel .... ) was his favorite philosopher.
In fact, I just looked at my message and I said, parenthetically, "I don't think IHS was a philosopher, ...."
But I'm getting that it was all an innocent misunderstanding anyway.
Gotta go do stuff --- in the rain, darn 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.