As we struggle through the obamanation, many of us are looking foward.
How about this guy for 2012? http://draftsanford2012.com/
JeffR
Jeff:
There are a number of Politicians who look and/or sound good on one or two issues.
He sounds good on fiscal responsibility and the role of Federal Government.
Where they get tripped-up is when they start addressing the myriad of problems and concerns of a) the most diverse population in the World b) the United States place in the World as a whole and c) the specifics of how they would address those problems.
Mufasa
By the way…
I thought “Jidal/Palin” was the GOP ticket for 2012???
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Jeff:
There are a number of Politicians who look and/or sound good on one or two issues.
He sounds good on fiscal responsibility and the role of Federal Government.
Where they get tripped-up is when they start addressing the myriad of problems and concerns of a) the most diverse population in the World b) the United States place in the World as a whole and c) the specifics of how they would address those problems.
Mufasa[/quote]
Mufasa:
I happen to agree with you on your premise. I would like to use obama as an example. It’s real sad how much of a pass the press gave the guy regarding specifics during the recent campaign.
Imagine the press reporting on the specifics of the spending plan prior to the election. Or, vetting his potential cabinet choices.
McCain still might not have won, but, obama certainly wouldn’t be running around trying to squelch all dissent with, “I won.”
To continue with the example, obama looks good on a couple of issues only. Pros: He isn’t George Bush and he delivers an excellent speech from a teleprompter.
Then he tries to form a cabinet and deal with the economy.
From most accounts, the House did most of the heavy lifting on his signature bit of legislation.
The DOW is giving his (pelosi/reid’s) ideas the finger.
Not to mention iran.
I don’t know about you, but, I’m getting REAL nervous about a nearly 4 trillion dollar Federal Budget.
Or a nuclear armed iran.
I’m sure they are feeling emboldened by obama.
By the way, I think Sanford has more going for him than these two issues.
I’m interested in learning more.
Was I pushing for Jindal/Palin? I don’t remember that.
Both would be preferable to socialism, however.
JeffR
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
There are a number of Politicians who look and/or sound good on one or two issues.
He sounds good on fiscal responsibility and the role of Federal Government.
[/quote]
They all sound good on these bits. Give them any power however…
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
By the way…
I thought “Jidal/Palin” was the GOP ticket for 2012???
Mufasa[/quote]
So the Republican ticket for 2012 is “4 more years” again?
“…So the Republican ticket for 2012 is “4 more years” again?..”
If the GOP/Conservatives (many feel, especially on this Site, that they are NOT one in the same) response continues to be “Get your guns and ammo! The Socialist and Gays are Here! The Socialist and Gays are Here!”…with no real viable solutions or alternatives…then that WILL be the DEM rallying cry in 4 years…
Mufasa
Conservatives are still looking at the GoP?
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
“…So the Republican ticket for 2012 is “4 more years” again?..”
If the GOP/Conservatives (many feel, especially on this Site, that they are NOT one in the same) response continues to be “Get your guns and ammo! The Socialist and Gays are Here! The Socialist and Gays are Here!”…with no real viable solutions or alternatives…then that WILL be the DEM rallying cry in 4 years…
Mufasa
[/quote]
I suspect it will be, in part, “I’m not obama.” I expect it to be that bad.
How about balanced budgets, lower taxes, no more paying for other people’s mortgages, military strength, reform the corruption, proud to be an AMERICAN?
By 2012, those are going to look REAL GOOD.
JeffR
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Conservatives are still looking at the GoP?[/quote]
Yes. Of course.
The dems are going to socialize themselves right out of a job.
[quote]Malevolence wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
There are a number of Politicians who look and/or sound good on one or two issues.
He sounds good on fiscal responsibility and the role of Federal Government.
They all sound good on these bits. Give them any power however…
[/quote]
Did you vote for obama?
Yes or no will do nicely.
Thanks.
[quote]Jeff R wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
“…So the Republican ticket for 2012 is “4 more years” again?..”
If the GOP/Conservatives (many feel, especially on this Site, that they are NOT one in the same) response continues to be “Get your guns and ammo! The Socialist and Gays are Here! The Socialist and Gays are Here!”…with no real viable solutions or alternatives…then that WILL be the DEM rallying cry in 4 years…
Mufasa
I suspect it will be, in part, “I’m not obama.” I expect it to be that bad.
How about balanced budgets, lower taxes, no more paying for other people’s mortgages, military strength, reform the corruption, proud to be an AMERICAN?
By 2012, those are going to look REAL GOOD.
JeffR
[/quote]
The proverbial “Devil is in the Details”, my friend…
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
By the way…
I thought “Jidal/Palin” was the GOP ticket for 2012???
Mufasa[/quote]
Fuck you. I was having a pretty good day until you brought this possibilty up. You’re probably right and I’ll probaby have to vote libertarian again.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
By the way…
I thought “Jidal/Palin” was the GOP ticket for 2012???
Mufasa
Fuck you. I was having a pretty good day until you brought this possibilty up. You’re probably right and I’ll probaby have to vote libertarian again.[/quote]
Sorry, D…!
Mufasa
On a serious note, Jidal said something interesting tonight on “60 minutes”…
In so many words, the GOP has to do more than merely be attack dogs, spouting off rhetoric about God, Country and Cutting taxes…and at this point should be coming up with real and tangible plans to lead the Country out of this mess.
This “exanding the base” plan (which I guess means putting Jidal out front and appointing a Black chairman of the RNC), seems to me to be a losing strategy.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This “exanding the base” plan (which I guess means putting Jidal out front and appointing a Black chairman of the RNC), seems to me to be a losing strategy.
Mufasa[/quote]
They should’ve known it was. Conservatives want to know what the GoP will do about Pro-life, small government, illegal immigration, Affirmative Action, marriage, etc., issues. Not lip service, but if they actually plan on doing something about these issues. And, they want to know from the GoP, why? Why should they be trusted to actually stick to conservative principles?
The “hey, we have a few minorities, too!” stragety is dumb. They’re spinning their wheels targeting minorities.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
This “exanding the base” plan (which I guess means putting Jidal out front and appointing a Black chairman of the RNC), seems to me to be a losing strategy.
Mufasa
They should’ve known it was. Conservatives want to know what the GoP will do about Pro-life, small government, illegal immigration, Affirmative Action, marriage, etc., issues. Not lip service, but if they actually plan on doing something about these issues. And, they want to know from the GoP, why? Why should they be trusted to actually stick to conservative principles?
The “hey, we have a few minorities, too!” stragety is dumb. They’re spinning their wheels targeting minorities.[/quote]
You see Larison on this? Very funny post:
Curtis Sliwa: When you used the hip-hop vernacular, man, Barack Obama has bling bling in this stimulus package, you got people?s attention.
Michael Steele: Absolutely. There?s a lot of bling bling ? the bling bling?s got bling bling in this package. That?s how bad it is.
There are no words sufficient to express my bewilderment.
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/02/26/slums-are-for-lovers/
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
This “exanding the base” plan (which I guess means putting Jidal out front and appointing a Black chairman of the RNC), seems to me to be a losing strategy.
Mufasa
They should’ve known it was. Conservatives want to know what the GoP will do about Pro-life, small government, illegal immigration, Affirmative Action, marriage, etc., issues. Not lip service, but if they actually plan on doing something about these issues. And, they want to know from the GoP, why? Why should they be trusted to actually stick to conservative principles?
The “hey, we have a few minorities, too!” stragety is dumb. They’re spinning their wheels targeting minorities.[/quote]
The GOP appears to be making cosmetic changes. I think what we are witnessing is them doing just enough to win votes from independants. At least in their mind. They really don’t give a shit about the issues or conservatives. Politics has become a popularity contest.
I honestly can’t beleive this is the current state of politics. We have a two party system with both sides stacked with incompetent idiots. Neither side is attemping to put the most qualified candidates forward or speak honestly about any substanative issues.
I watched Rahm Emanuel speaking to Bob Sheefer yesterday and I could not beleive the double talk and avoidence I was witnessing. Out right lying and deception. In politics this really shouldn’t shock anyone. What shocks me is the fact that don’t even attempt to cleverly disguise their lies and deciept anymore. They know that not many are even paying attention. The wife had to usher the kids out of the room, as i was getting a bit worked up.
We are witnessing an amazing shift in politics. One where elected officials can lie and decieve with little effort or second thought. One where they can make policy completely contrary to the constitution AND public opinion. I can see ignoring the constitution or public opinion, but the fact that they can now ignor both is amazing to me.
Those waiting for the GOP to come around are going to be waiting a very long time. If conservatives really want to steer the GOP they will start supporting the Libertarian Party. The Libertarian party has some pretty serious issues and I don’t see them filling many seats. That’s not the point. We need to show the GOP how many votes, and how much money they will lose by moving left and making ridiculous cosmetic changes.
Continuing to vote for them will not change anything.
Taking financial support away will not change anything.
Staying home will not change anything.
We have to make it much more obvious to these idiots. If this means Obama and a Dem majority for 8 years, so be it. What is 8 years or even 16 years in the grand sceme of things?
True conservatives should think of politics as they think of economics. Relative short term comfort should not come at the expense of long term catastrophy. Conservatives voting for most Republicans is the same as the bailout or monetary manipulation. Conservatives voting for most Republicans sound just like the liberal fucks supporting the stimulus and the countless bail-outs. “We have to something” = “Well they’re better then the Democrats”.
We all need to grow some balls and make an attemp to fix this. Voting for most Republicans isn’t going to do shit for this country. We first have to bring them back, and this means not voting for them.
end of rant and back to work.
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
This “exanding the base” plan (which I guess means putting Jidal out front and appointing a Black chairman of the RNC), seems to me to be a losing strategy.
Mufasa
They should’ve known it was. Conservatives want to know what the GoP will do about Pro-life, small government, illegal immigration, Affirmative Action, marriage, etc., issues. Not lip service, but if they actually plan on doing something about these issues. And, they want to know from the GoP, why? Why should they be trusted to actually stick to conservative principles?
The “hey, we have a few minorities, too!” stragety is dumb. They’re spinning their wheels targeting minorities.
You see Larison on this? Very funny post:
Curtis Sliwa: When you used the hip-hop vernacular, man, Barack Obama has bling bling in this stimulus package, you got people?s attention.
Michael Steele: Absolutely. There?s a lot of bling bling ? the bling bling?s got bling bling in this package. That?s how bad it is.
There are no words sufficient to express my bewilderment.
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/02/26/slums-are-for-lovers/[/quote]
That’s painful. And yes, as Larison points out, Romney’s “who let the dogs out” was an equally forehead slapping, cringe-worthy, GoP moment. Lol.