I can tell that our discussion on the first part won’t really be productive. I’d just say that the public’s perception of her ability to think on her feet suffered. I said it probably wasn’t fair, but she is easy to straw man at this point for a very unsupportive media. Sad perhaps, but hard to dispute. Dan Quayle may have been a great leader for all I know, but baggage is baggage.
On the second part, I give you my word of honor that I don’t have a pick. My comments were not loaded with the agenda of an existing candidate. I don’t do things that way. If I had one, I’d have tried to convince you of my preference. My concerns are frankly amplified because I don’t get excited about any options that are out there currently.
When it comes to a candidate for 2012 I have a few, negative, criteria.
A) No one who primarily a legislator, unless they are named Lincoln.
B) No one who served in the Bush administration.
C) No one who is not a reliable free market conservative.
D) No one who is not pro-life.
E) No one from north of the Macon Dixon Line and east of the Hudson.
Based on my criteria, who would you suggest?
Oops Macon-Dixon is of course Mason-Dixon.