Posted on 10/09/2011 6:59:14 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sarah Palin is a very special American, she appeared to be our next Ronald Reagan, but with her deicsion not to run, what should we do?
Sarah Palin was my hope for America! And while her future was uncertain I was unwilling to listen to the babble of Republican Primary. I was set on Sarah. For me, she was the answer, and I honestly believed I would be able to cast a ballot, whether it be Republican or Independent for Sarah. Sarah seemed to have that rugged American personality which had not been corrupted by special interests and assimilated into the neo conservative view of globalism. Sarah appeared to be an America First candidate, one with an inherent optimism based on what she knew of America and our history.
When I read the headline stating her decision not to run it was like having the wind knocked out of me. My first emotion was disappointment, my second was futility. America is collapsing and it's not just economically. We are not an America of Christian values, our President has denied we are a Christian nation. I said to myself; I will just sit this one out, let America burn in its own selfishness and wait for the only remaining political answer, secession!
And, if Sarah was driven out of the race by the “politics of personal destruction” then we deserve every evil which happen to us.
But then God got into the act. This morning while preparing for Mass I turned on CNN, to see first Herman Cain and then Michelle Bachmann interviewed by a heavy set liberal woman named Candy.
My first impression of the interview questioning was the obvious bias in every word said by Candy. Her point of view had two purposes, one to create tension between the half dozen Republicans running for office and secondly to demean first Herman and then Michelle. No questions were asked which attempted to find out the issues and positions of either candidate. Instead questions were intended to establish false realities, or to minimalize the political potential of either candidate. Candy did her best to walk these two Republican conservatives into discussions which could not help them with the electorate. And in every case the two were smart enough to avoid the purpose of the question. At one point, in obvious frustration, Candy said to one of the candidates, “would you admit you have avoided the question?" The answer given seemed to say; no, I just didn't answer it the way you wanted me to!
This was my first time to listen to either of the candidates for any extended period of time and I was impressed by both of them.
Herman Cain is for real. He has lived, risen in the business community, has life experience and seems to have a solid intellectual and character foundation. And one great advantage for Cain is that he is an African American and can speak to issues of race without having to couch his terms in apologies and understatement. Cain also knows business and knows the American economy cannot be engineered to take off through government projects.
Michelle Bachmann is very sharp in her interview skills and knows her views on governance. She also knows politics. My great worry about Michelle is that Congresspersons normally don't have a large enough electoral base to translate into at least a statewide start. Michelle has an advantage over Herman in that she knows what being elected to office means. She knows the connection between office and constituency and policy. And she has an understanding of legislative politics that only someone serving, or their staffs, can know.
Where Herman and Michelle are equal is that they are both excellent thinkers and speakers and they both seem to have a solid conservative philosophical base.
So this morning when I woke up I was sitting out the GOP primary, and by the time I got into the truck to drive to Mass I was reinvigorated by the choice of these two Americans. Thank you God.
Fair enough. So if Cain wins the nomination and chooses either Perry or Gingrich for VP, which one would you prefer?
Perry? Gingrich?
In case you haven't noticed, Herman Cain's man is Mitt Romney.
Cain endorsed Romney before Super Tuesday, 2008.
Cain still supports Romney today. He will not even support Perry against Obama but he has no problems supporting Romney.
This Romney:
VIDEO clips of Romney/Kennedy Debates: Liberals For Romney - More Liberal than Ted Kennedy
===================================
Romney has the leadership qualities United States needs,
By HERMAN CAIN
Published on: 02/03/08
The dynamics of political party connections, the political process itself and public perceptions have once again yielded the top two contenders of each major party in the 2008 presidential race. And once again, the public can only hope that the ultimate winner of the White House will be a candidate with the most leadership substance.
My vote is for Mitt Romney.
History is important, but the future is more important. The success of this country in the future will be shaped by the leadership abilities of the next president.
Our success will not be based on pandering to uninformed voters, promising emotional quick fixes over common sense or nitpicking of opponents' past records. Success will come from focusing on the right problems and solving them. That will mean making tough decisions about some problems that have been with us for decades. It will also mean taking a tough stand on new problems and challenges.
That's what leaders do.
Mitt Romney has done that as a chief executive officer in business, as a governor and as head of the U.S. Olympics. He has done so while balancing political consequences but not compromising fundamental principles of the founding of this country or free-market economics. We have prospered as a nation by strengthening those principles; we will not remain strong if we allow those principles to become diluted with a lack of leadership.
Anyone who wishes to find a reason not to vote for Romney can find one. But the reasons to vote for him are far more compelling. He has successfully managed a real business with other people's money and some of his own. He has balanced budgets. He successfully led a turnaround situation with the Olympics. And he has spent more of his career outside government than inside.
On the other hand, John McCain has spent more of his career inside government than outside, and the reasons not to vote for him as the Republican nominee are very compelling.
He voted against letting people keep more of their money in 2001 and 2003 when President Bush pushed through his tax cuts. He has been part of the escalation of the federal debt during his 20-plus years in the U.S. Senate. He showed questionable leadership on a failed immigration bill. And he showed no leadership by failing to support the president's efforts to establish personal retirement accounts — a proposal that would have started to fix the coming financial train wreck in the Social Security system.
That's not leadership.
I do not question the character, integrity or sincerity of either Mitt Romney or John McCain, nor do I question their desire to do what's best for the country. I do not worry that they would fan the flames of social and religious differences. My focus is on their prospective leadership relative to national security, the economy, federal spending, free-market health care solutions and the elimination of dysfunctional programs.
Mitt Romney's history is more indicative of the substance needed to make major progress on critical issues, and not just to make more politically palatable incremental changes in Washington.
Media momentum and campaign funding aside, there are several other Republican candidates who would not cause me to worry about our grandchildren's future. The two leading Democratic presidential candidates, however, cause me great concern because of their severe lack of leadership substance and their policy proposals.
This is despite Barack Obama's appeal and strong public perception but entirely consistent with Hillary Clinton's self-proclaimed but quite invisible experience.
Great leaders are born, and good leaders keep working on it. We are not favored with an obvious great leader in the 2008 race, as is apparent from the primary process and the results thus far.
But Mitt Romney's leadership credentials offer the best hope of a leader with substance, and the best hope for a good president who could turn out to be great.
“Newt’s far and away the smartest and most capable of the bunch.”
No doubt, but he is also the first to bend when the Democrats look at him. We need someone up to that task. Strength and steadfastness, not great rhetoric and empty follow through.
“In case you haven’t noticed, Herman Cain’s man is Mitt Romney.”
That’s so LAST WEEK. You guys need to synched up a bit.
I’m with you. I think we should wait and see what she has up her sleeve. She’s done pretty well for us since leaving the Governor’s office. I fully expect to see more good things from her...just not the presidency, for now.
Same old, same old. Perry is a professional, career politician with all of the baggage establishment candidates always have. The record of governors becoming President in the last 100 years, except for Reagan, is very poor; Wilson, Coolidge, FDR, Carter, Clinton, Bush. Is this what we really want, more "pay to play", "Crony Capitalism", business as usual?
I don't want anyone with Perry's type of career politician executive experience. That type of government "experience" is possessed by most of the scoundrels who have gotten us into this mess.
Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result is a sign of insanity. We have had enough and are not going down that road again.
If they can’t stand vetting then they shouldn’t be running for office in the first place. A candidate with integrity has nothing to fear.
How much elected experience did George Washington have?
It’s time we elected trustworthy Americans and dumped the politicians.
This is why we liked Sarah, this is why we like Cain!
Bear ... did you ever hear Newt speak on the subject or why he sat on that couch for the commercial? In short, it was Newt's position that the republicans should be in the argument about global warming and that, above all, all things related to policies on global warming and green energy commerce should be dictated by the marketplace, not by government.
At the time Newt made that commercial, the left was making their biggest push for all things green and the republicans were doing nothing but standing in the wings saying no. Newt realized that the republicans needed to be in the debate because they would win and he had a point.
This notion that Newt sold out to the viewpoint of Nancy Pelosi should not be perpetuated in this forum, IMHO.
Nice to see ya ... how's the kitty?
If you like him and he represents your values, support him, or he will be so much easier for his foes to attempt his downfall. Why hang around to see if he makes it a bit further? Help him make it further.
Who is more conservative? Perry or Romney?
VIDEO clips of Romney/Kennedy Debates: Liberals For Romney - More Liberal than Ted Kennedy
Who has Cain supported and who is Cain still supporting? Perry or Romney?
======================================
Herman Cain in 2011
======================================
Herman Cain in 2008
Romney has the leadership qualities United States needs,
By HERMAN CAIN
Published on: 02/03/08
======================================
Since Cain has never governed a single day in his entire life, (due to the fact that he has never won a single election in his entire life) Cain gets to hide behind a blank slate and use his pizza selling skills to sell conservative sound bites.
Talk is cheap and Cain's governing record simply does not exist.
What we do know is that Cain has backed and is backing the most liberal candidate by far in this GOP race.
But, rest assured. Whatever Cain thinks you want to hear, Cain will say it to you. That's the beauty of dealing in soundbites but never having had to make an actual governing decision in your entire life.
If you didn't like the first sound bite, Cain will simply claim he never said it.
======================
Cain, May 5, 2011, Regarding the killing of al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki
"He should be charged. And since he's an American citizen, he should be tried in our courts," Cain said of al-Awlaki. When asked if he considered it legal for President Obama to order al-Awlaki killed, Cain said, "In his case, no, because he's an American citizen. If he's an American citizen, which is the big difference, then he should be charged, and he should be arrested and brought to justice."
======================
Cain, October, 2011, Regarding the killing of al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki
"Asked why he had backed off his opposition to the U.S. military's targeting Anwar Awlaki, the al Qaeda terrorist and American citizen who was killed Friday by a drone strike in Yemen, Cain denied that he had ever opposed taking out Awlaki. “I never said that [President Obama] should not have ordered [the killing]. I don’t recall saying that. I think you’ve got some misinformation," Cain said. "Keep in mind that there are a lot of people out there trying to make me sound as if I am indecisive."
You wish!
BTW, what is a "fairly steady conservative direction"? Can we rely on somebody that "should be a steady president"?
You're using some qualifying language there.
Like your screenname ... just made me smile.
Unfortunately, that "incident in Hollyweird with the middle-aged gay creep attacking Bristol" is what Reality TV is all about and Bristol most likely was set up by her own producer.
For her own sake, Bristol really needs to leave Reality TV. It's nothing but Jerry Springer-style trash.
They ARE the two smartest men in the race. At this time in the condition of our nation, I'm willing to go along with Gingrich as a VP, rather than concentrate on where his pants got itchy. Hey, David Vitter is my senator and I support him because he does not vote against my values. His wife can deal with the rest.
The whole election process is a cat and mouse game.
*Needs fixing*
Palin Perry is fine, it’s the mindless worship of her him that I find offputting.
*Fixed*
I enjoyed your satirical reply. But I am disconcerted that some take it seriously! Golly!
Cain is an empty vessel huh........................Phhhtttt ....... eyedigress
Name a single governing decision that Cain has ever made in his entire life, eyedigress.
You can't and neither can anybody else because he has never made a single one.
Cain cannot even make HYPOTHETICAL governing decisions without contradicting himself.
======================
Cain, May 5, 2011, Regarding the killing of al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki
"He should be charged. And since he's an American citizen, he should be tried in our courts," Cain said of al-Awlaki. When asked if he considered it legal for President Obama to order al-Awlaki killed, Cain said, "In his case, no, because he's an American citizen. If he's an American citizen, which is the big difference, then he should be charged, and he should be arrested and brought to justice."
======================
Cain, October, 2011, Regarding the killing of al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki
"Asked why he had backed off his opposition to the U.S. military's targeting Anwar Awlaki, the al Qaeda terrorist and American citizen who was killed Friday by a drone strike in Yemen, Cain denied that he had ever opposed taking out Awlaki. “I never said that [President Obama] should not have ordered [the killing]. I don’t recall saying that. I think you’ve got some misinformation," Cain said. "Keep in mind that there are a lot of people out there trying to make me sound as if I am indecisive."
Yep, they’re both fine.
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.