Replies

“After his less-than-commanding performance in two presidential debates, George W. Bush faces a tougher race than expected amid growing signs of Republican discontent—including a new poll that shows major slippage in the key primary state of New Hampshire.

As it turned out, of course, John McCain did stay ahead of Bush in New Hampshire that cycle and whomped him good on primary day by about 15 points. The next morning, with aides vowing to get serious, the Bush campaign moved on to South Carolina, where the Texan won.

And the rest, as they say, is history that Barack Obama reminds us all about every few hours.”

The suggestion that Rick Perry is “done” is ignorant nonsense. As the article points out, the media pumped out the same story line after the first couple of debates in the 2000 cycle. Bush was supposed to be done because he stumbled so badly. McCain was going to catch him any day. It never happened.

It was always obvious that McCain would lose for the same reason it is obvious now that Romney will. Each positioned himself as the champion of an extinct (or at any rate endangered) species — the Rockefeller Republican. If you want to win a GOP primary contest in this day and age you need to be a more plausible heir to Ronaldus Magnus than any serious competitor. McCain couldn't do that against Bush and Romney can't do that against Perry.

Perry, in fact, has a much bigger ideological advantage over Romney than Bush had over McCain. There was a serious argument that McCain was the more conservative candidate in 2000. I didn't buy it and neither did the electorate, but it was out there. Any attempt to argue that Romney is to Perry's right is absurd on its face.

As long as there are no other serious candidates on the right, Perry is in the catbird's seat, whatever any poll or commentator might say (and the polls probably aren't ever going to look nearly as bad as the commentary does). Romney could have beaten Bachmann, Cain and Co. But with a serious player to his right, he's toast.

Anyone who doesn't understand that Rick Perry is a serious player, doesn't know the first thing about American politics. There isn't anyone else in the Republican Party who can put together a campaign organization for 2012 to rival Romney's, Perry's a prolific fundraiser and an extraordinarily successful politician.

Embarrassing debates can't finish a guy like that, any more than they finished George W. Bush. Brilliant debates can't elevate someone who isn't a serious player into the top tier. It didn't work that way for Alan Keyes in 2000. It won't work that way for Herman Cain in 2012.

We're stuck with Perry, like it or not, just as we were stuck with Bush. The good news is that Perry seems to be a much better package than Bush was.

At least he didn't go to Yale.

How will Palin explain this?

Palin Position on Immigration

• According to Palin there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the US and deporting them is not possible economically as well as it is not a humane way of dealing with the issue. They should be made to follow rules and made to understand that legal immigrants should have the first preference of opportunities provided by this great country. If they follow the rules they can be treated fairly and equally in the country.

• Not having expressed her views on illegal immigration often, Sarah supports citizenship for illegal immigrants but feels there is no amnesty for the illegal immigrants. Priority should be given to the legal immigrants before granting opportunities to the illegal ones.

• She has reached out to the illegal immigrants requesting their needs. She feels that they require more vocational training, the end of gang violence, assistance to seniors and mostly outreach and communication within their communities. Palin insists on a diversity task force.

It looks to me like Palin is for educating illegals plus giving them many more benefits.