Posted on 04/27/2009 5:02:31 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Really? That's what Douthat is supposed to be -- a second token conservative? David Brooks' faithful sidekick, no doubt.
I sense a moderate liberal...who voted for Joe Lieberman.
One problem, Cheney would have called him as a huckster and teleprompter reader. When all was said and done, Cheney would have won and Obama would have gone back to the Senate where he doesn’t belong either.
Candidate 0bama isn't a big winner, either.
Did you read the whole article? He goes on to say...
...And when he [Cheney] went down to a landslide loss, the conservative movement might – might! – have been jolted into the kind of rethinking that’s necessary if it hopes to regain power.
Well, yeah that and Lynn threatened to bean him with a cast iron skillet...but the hatred of Bush by the media and Dems he never would of had a fair hearing. Next time around he will be too old.
I wish Cheney had run. He would have lost, too, but casting that vote would have felt a lot better. And we would have gotten some good moments. I would have loved to see Cheney go against Obama in the debates.
As it was, I watched only a small part of the presidential debates, and only because I had a sense of history. Now, someday, I will be able to tell my grandchildren, “Way back in 2009 I watched John McCain debate Barack Obama. It was totally unmemorable.”
OK, after Swine Flu and terrorists nukes wipe out most of the Blue state populations, then maybe we we will get President Cheney.
Yeah, it was started by George Soros with his run on Wall Street. He did the same thing years ago against the British pound.
I read it. I just don’t think it would play out the way he thinks it would. I think the result would be the very opposite.
Its when you are mealy-mouthed that you go down to defeat, thats why in part McCain was a disastrous choice. Bold is usually the better choice. But these days bold is hard to come by, I don’t know why.
Like I say, we’re flying straight into the tarmac, and almost no one is speaking up. There is a vacuum in our conservative leadership. If someone wants to step forward to fill it, this is the perfect chance. I don’t really see anyone.
Is that true? Or could it be that Cheney didn't care about economic or social or domestic issues and would have compromised on them the way that his mentors, Gerald Ford and GHW Bush did?
I don't know the answer, but it's certainly possible that people err in their assessment of what Cheney's views and priorities are. Isn't it often the case that politicians who give priority to foreign policy let other matters slide?
He wouldn't have won in any case, and the election wouldn't have been a referendum on conservatism. Other matters would decide the results. First, the economy. Second, Cheney's health. Third, his personality and unpopularity.
Me neither. I was just surprised to see the "he's singing my tune" comment after having read to the bottom of the article. He had launched into a different song by then, lol.
I think the result would be the very opposite. Its when you are mealy-mouthed that you go down to defeat, thats why in part McCain was a disastrous choice. Bold is usually the better choice.
Now you're singing my tune! :-)
There is a vacuum in our conservative leadership. If someone wants to step forward to fill it, this is the perfect chance. I don’t really see anyone.
I agree. The bench is light and a willingness to talk common sense and bold action is rare. It's almost like half of Republicans have been blackmailed to "go along" or be destroyed. I can't find a good explanation for the behavior during this past decade or so.
OK, OK. You’re trying to get me to admit I didn’t read the whole article until after I replied, and I’m trying to avoid admitting it. (cheers) :-)
I'm a Cheney fan, turning into a one-man Cheney Campaign, but your point is well taken. Cheney is outspoken and clear-minded on matters of foreign policy and the broad-strokes of economic policy. He is probably every bit as squishy as Bush on social issues if not a little more so. He might very well make the Bush mistake of giving away the farm domestically in order to get a blank check internationally.
On foreign policy he would probably be the best we could ask for, and he probably has a better understanding than most on matters involving energy policy. He's not perfect, I remember him lobbying to get American companies into Saddam's Iraq during the nineties, although I understood his reasoning. He might easily have the now traditional fondness for the Saudis that seems endemic in Washington's establishment. And I'm sure he's not nearly as socially conservative as I am.
Cheers back at ya!
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.