Sizing Up Tim Pawlenty
It’s 2009 and the 2012 presidential contest is underway, a full three years early — too early if you’re a typical person who hears 2012 and thinks of the apocalypse, and not early enough if you’re a political nerd who gets the excitement from elections that he should be getting from football games. Obviously, I fall into the latter category. Sports always seemed to me like an inconsequential exercise in watching big guys run, fall down, and throw stuff.
Give it up for Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, also known in his true ghetto fashion as T-Paw, who telegraphed his intentions by starting his Freedom First PAC while everyone else plays coy. This move was hardly unexpected, as he had declined to run for a third term as governor, gave a well-received speech at the Values Voters Summit, and appeared so often as a McCain surrogate during the last election that sometimes I thought he was the one running for president. After McCain’s defeat, Pawlenty appeared anywhere and everywhere, including several appearances on MSNBC, seen as the likable conservative that even Rachel Maddow didn’t mind conversing with.
Pawlenty was smart to make an obvious move toward running for president early. As time goes on, people will pay more and more attention to every step that more high-profile potential candidates like Palin, Romney, Gingrich, and Huckabee take. He had to do something so that his name would be mentioned in every 2012 discussion — and he succeeded, even scoring the top headline on the Drudge Report. Now his every move will be closely followed, generating a steady stream of coverage that will be necessary for him to get his name recognition up.
He also enters the field with another advantage: he hasn’t run for president or vice president before. Any ten-second look at a Republican blog discussing 2012 shows there’s a huge amount of fanatics and haters of each major candidate. They have a fan base, but also a group dedicated to driving up their negatives. By not having a caricature pre-established by the media or other candidates, Pawlenty has more freedom to craft his own image. And that will be one of a successful, evangelical governor who was reelected in a blue state during the Democratic tide of 2006, who managed to balance the budget and achieve a surplus without raising taxes.
It’s a wonderful resume, but he’ll still have trouble exciting enough people to create a firm base. He isn’t an inspiring speaker and he doesn’t have a defining issue or character trait. Romney is the successful businessman who can fix the economy, Huckabee is the witty ex-preacher that supports the FairTax, and Palin is the exciting conservative babe. These are just generalizations, but there can be no doubt that these potential candidates have specific features that draw people to them. Pawlenty will cast himself as a successful conservative, but how will that give him special significance over anyone else?
My lack of enthusiasm for Pawlenty goes back to the campaign when during an interview last fall he failed to challenge or correct already debunked smears against Sarah Palin. Ignorant, timid, or self serving? Who knows, but I can’t take him seriously.
Republicans, conservatives are instinctively judgmental, which is a big factor in why we lose political campaigns so often. Good grief, why are you cataloging T-Paw’s weaknesses instead of giving him full credit and support for entering the race? Did you notice the Dems chose between 2 candidates they rousingly supported — Hillary and The One — while Republicans settled for the candidate they disliked the least?
To use a sports analogy, the campaigning for president is like golf: only one player wins the tournament, but many play very well. I love to watch golf, and have learned to cheer for every player even though I am a huge Tiger fan.
We need to be positive about our candidates. The months ahead are profoundly daunting for each of them. Hey, could you face what T-Paw has stepped up to?? Don’t spook him when he is teeing off. Follow him over the course. Cheer his good shots. Do this for Romney, the Preacher, and the Baracuda. May all of these and others who enter the race be shaped for leadership by our support!!
Speaking as a citizen of Minnesota: Pawlenty is boring and he’s not really much of a conservative. Against Obama, he’s toast.
And now that I’ve read your article, let me just say that being like McCain in any way, shape, or form, is in and of itself a HUGE negative. The Pubbie who wins will be the Pubbie who successfully distinguishes himself from the feckless Obama and the useless McCain.
Pawlenty does not have the popular appeal nor the charisma nor the toughness to take on Obama and win the White House in 2012. He’s a lightweight compared to McCain or Bush 43. If the GOP direct all of its energy for him and not for Palin, Obama may win easily in 2012. We’ll see how that’ll goes in 2011.
Tim Pawlenty? Cut me a break. This what is wrong with our side.
How could anybody think that this man has the courage to take this country back to its constitutional foundation.
Is this the man that will roll back decades of socialism and what will soon be a few years of Marxism?
Will he have the guts to restore our elective process if it means arresting Black Panthers? Will he restore the 14th amendment and end the racial assault on white Americans?
Does he understand the threat of Islam to our nation and how our insane LEGAL immigration policies are allowing our country to be flooded with jihadists who emulate Muhammad i.e. Muslims?
Of course everyone knows about the need to cut spending and keep our miltary strong but we have address issues that are protected by political correctness because they are destroying our country. Limbaugh can’t even be an owner of an NFL team because he doesn’t bow before the black god Obama.
So far I see nobody that fits the bill and most certainly not Pawlenty.
The GOP elites are a disgrace. Look at who Newt Gingrich is backing while undercutting a consrvative Republican with the blessing of Nancy Pelosi and Al Sharpton – from Michelle Malkin:
http://michellemalkin.com/
“[Newt wants to divert monet towards]Dede Scozzafava, an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican. And you use that money to fight Doug Hoffman, a viable, bona fide conservative candidate in the race who is closing the gap in the polls.. Scozzafava is an abortion rights advocate who favors gay marriage. It would be one thing if Scozzafava balanced that social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. But as a state assemblywoman, she voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against.”.
No thanks Newt and I’ll take a pass on Timmy.
We need new blood to fight in this upcoming revolt or we will lose our country forever.
He is very solid and likeable, perhaps he’ll be on the ticket, just not at the top.
I am a Republican candidate running to replace Tim Pawlenty as governor of Minnesota. Tim Pawlenty should not be underestimated. He is ambitious, clever, energetic, and well financed.
As Governor he couldn’t even ensure a honest election for the US Genate seat. That’s a big negative for me and if he’s a McCain Conserative that’s a super negative.
Pawlenty? Seriously? He’s a white Bobby Jindal. Dweeb-tastic. Nice… and boring. The Presidency is about leadership, inspiration, and trust more than anything else. Can we get some with some cajones to run? No more go-along-to-get-along, work-the-system, conventional-wisdom, professional politicians. Enough, already!
We need someone with enough wattage to get past the Big Media filters. That’s why I support Palin, because the Media may trash her, but they WILL cover her. They just can’t help themselves! “Say whatever you want about my client. Just spell her name right!” Everyone else is some cookie-cutter, bland, whitebread pol. A dime a dozen.
Three more years of ‘hope and change’ and someone like Pawlenty may look like the very model of sober and workmanlike pragmatism. It may be an opening for another bland white Republican to put the house back in order.
I want to see new blood, no one from the last election cycle. Pawlenty is not bad,and we should not start eating our own before the race is even on! We have got to have a fiscal conservative, at this point that would probably get someone elected 10 times over. People are sick of the spending and finally, are getting alarmed. All of this money that the democrats are throwing around is going to have to be paid back. And I for one don’t want to be owned by China.
I hate to be superficial, but most Americas are, so it pays to look out that particular window now and then. Why do half the Republican party hopefuls have stupid sounding names like “pawlenty”, “Huckabee” …ect? Give me a break. Where is Dick Steele, oh wait… the chairman. LOL and that was just joking around. Their last names are right out of the gradeschool “book title” jokes ..Hu Flung Poo, Mr Rusty Bedsprings, I’m your Huckabee, Who has Pawlenty to spare…Jeaz.WTH?
T=Paw can’t carry his own state. That says enough about his Presidential chances.
He is a dream candidate. For Democrats. He is also a RINO.
I too am a Minnesotan. I would vote for him, if he were the nominee. It would be alot easier than voting for McCain. That being said, he’s farrrr too in bed with the green agenda(bio-fuels, wind, solar, etc. etc.). I view the green movement as commies, although, I think if push came to shove, T-Paw is no commie.
His strengths: fiscal sanity in an insane state, he’s pretty solid on veteran’s issues(how this pertains to his stands on national security issues remains to be seen), he’s likable(in a very Minnesota sense), and frankly, in the end I trust the man.
In all honesty, Pawlenty seems to have benefitted from the unique state of 3rd party politics in MN. Such a dynamic is not likely in 2012. More to the point, he has no national GOP constituency, much less a basis on which to appeal to independents. Sure, he will build name recognition, and reach out to evangelicals, but against Obama, he would be crushed like a bug on a windshield. He has not the skills. But who does?
Peace.
DS
If Pawlenty is the nominee we might as well say hello to President Obama in 2012. He might be a smart man with good intentions but we only need look at where he is coming from. Minnesota! Now there is a conservative state where he has really showed his conservative credentials. He will lose the entire South and any Tea Party groups through out the nation. This is what the Republican Party has become. Crist, Romney, Huckabee all neo-conservatives with absolutely no vision of returning to sound fiscal policies. Romney the business man who left a legacy in Mass. of health care bankruptcy. And Crist is as solid as a cloud on fiscal or social issues. He’ll take a stand on top of the fence anytime he needs to. And Huckabee. What a clown. He is at heart a preacher and his actions in Arkansas prove it. Imagine him processing a war! We are doomed if we can only come up with thissad bunch.
That’s no Pawlenty in that picture, It’s Bobby Jindal. Right? Or am I seeing things. It’s Jindal, right? Geez. they look exactly alike. Perhaps we can get Rush to weigh in. He’s good at making racial distinctions. Hey, Rush, is that Pawlenty or Jindal up there? Should be easy, you being such an expert on Injuns and all. Oh, not that kind of Injun? Sorry.
Hail Rush! Go Sarah!
If Pawlenty is a McCain surrogate, I am NOT interested. . . Pawlenty is symptomatic of what is wrong with the repub party . .. Moderate at best.
It seems Pawlenty has had the same “growing pains” Palin has. Both are national outsider (or were in Palin’s case). Pawlenty thought he was getting a national political name for himself for supporting the failed election of one of his own (bush apologist, norman coleman). While he succeeded in getting his named mentioned in the national press, as with Palin, his home state electorate soon became less than amused with his shenanigans. However, the matter was resolved (minnesota representation was restored, finally), and, unlike Palin, he chose not to quit and walk away from domestic chaos, which has improved his stature. And his state is interestingly more significant and representative of the midwest heartland than wasilla, alaska. So will this help him? Of course, the last few elections have proven one thing, if/when either major party hopes to win…the midwest .. is more important than crucial. Would he help? .. yes.
I think it would be best for all Republicans to join the Democratic Party. The Republicans, by being incompetent and being screwed by the MSM, do not have a prayer of regaining significant power to effect real change. The only thing left is for all Conservatives, Republicans, and Independents, is to join the Democratic Party and create change from within.
The Gov, despite his recent right-shifting pronouncements, is in the McCain tradition. He supported McCain early on (no crime there), has pushed Cap-and-tax in Minnesota, greater energy regulation, did nothing about health care competition (despite his recent conversion), and more. Look to his record, not his speaches.
Pawlenty seems OK: fairly conservative, a good guy. But, could he win? I don’t think so. Would I support him over Obama? Hell, I supported McLame over Obama and I’d support a “yaller dog” over Obama, so I’d sure support Pawlenty (love that “T-Paw” someone used above!), but probably without any real enthusiasm.
The Republican Party is one election from going the way of the Whigs in the 1850s, and they don’t seem to have a clue about it.
I’ve been a Republican since helping my Mother campaign for Ike in 1956, but it wouldn’t take much for me to support a new conservative party. The national party seems to be back to the “me too” era of the ’50s. I didn’t like it then, and I don’t like it now.
I’m a classical liberal and don’t want a whole lot of social conservative legislation — social conservative exhortation is fine, and even perhaps a good thing, but keep the power of the state out of it! But, we need a fiscally sane, strong defense, strong Constitutional principles, and fundamentally HONEST party. And, the ‘pubbies just don’t seem to get it.
Bush was wet as a conservative, but fine on national security. His instinicts were right in economics, but he just didn’t deliver and didn’t articulate the case to the American people. I won’t blame or trash Bush, though. It was the congressional party that was full of pork and scandal and did not move promptly and effectively to root out corruption in both parties. When the Republicans had the votes, Rangel should have been toast.
Corruption in voting should now be a major focus in 2010: it’s a Democrat ‘thing’ primarily (though I’m sure the ‘pubbies aren’t always pure) and I’m morally certain there are more than one senate and house seat that are now held by Democrats that would be in Republican hands had the elections been limited to properly registered citizen voters who voted only once in the districts in which they lived.
If these comment posters are any indication of what the GOP may yield as an 2012 candidate we are doomed.
I still think that secession is the only viable solution. These atheist, communist, black supremacists are incapable of delivering a first world society.
An Unconstitutional Nobel
By Ronald D. Rotunda and J. Peter Pham
Friday, October 16, 2009
People can, and undoubtedly will, argue for some time about whether President Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Meanwhile, though, there’s a simpler and more immediate question: Does the Constitution allow him to accept the award?
This Story
An Unconstitutional Nobel
A Peace Prize to Share
A Wave Takes Shape in Delaware
Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution, the emolument clause, clearly stipulates: “And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.”
The award of the peace prize to a sitting president is not unprecedented. But Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson received the honor for their past actions: Roosevelt’s efforts to end the Russo-Japanese War, and Wilson’s work in establishing the League of Nations. Obama’s award is different. It is intended to affect future action. As a member of the Nobel Committee explained, the prize should encourage Obama to meet his goal of nuclear disarmament. It raises important legal questions for the second time in less than 10 months — questions not discussed, much less adequately addressed anywhere else.
The five-member Nobel commission is elected by the Storting, the parliament of Norway. Thus the award of the peace prize is made by a body representing the legislature of a sovereign foreign state. There is no doubt that the Nobel Peace Prize is an “emolument” (“gain from employment or position,” according to Webster).
An opinion of the U.S. attorney general advised, in 1902, that “a simple remembrance,” even “if merely a photograph, falls under the inclusion of ‘any present of any kind whatever.’ ” President Clinton’s Office of Legal Counsel, in 1993, reaffirmed the 1902 opinion, and explained that the text of the clause does not limit “its application solely to foreign governments acting as sovereigns.” This opinion went on to say that the emolument clause applies even when the foreign government acts through instrumentalities. Thus the Nobel Prize is an emolument, and a foreign one to boot.
Second, the president has indicated that he will give the prize money to charity, but that does not solve his legal problem. Giving that $1.4 million to a charity could give him a deduction that would reduce his income taxes by $500,000 — not a nominal amount. Moreover, the money is not his to give away. It belongs to the United States: A federal statute provides that if the president accepts a “tangible or intangible present” for more than a minimal value from any foreign government, the gift “shall become the property of the United States.”
This is at least the second time that Obama has run afoul of the emolument clause. On June 3, 2009, the day before he gave his speech in Cairo on relations with the Muslim world, he accepted (and even donned) the bejeweled Collar of the King Abdul Aziz Order of Merit, Saudi Arabia’s highest honor, from the hands of King Abdullah. (President Bush was awarded the Order in January last year.)
Aside from whether a president shows questionable judgment in accepting any preferment from the House of Saud named for its anti-Semitic modern founder, there is another issue: The Collar is clearly a chivalric “order” of the Saudi monarchy conferring a rank in that system of titled royalty and nobility. It is not a mere decoration or campaign ribbon. There does not seem to be any record of congressional permission asked for, much less granted, for the president to accept this bauble. Washington, Madison and Hamilton would have clearly understood that the Abdul Aziz Order falls under the same ban they had in mind for any public officials coveting awards made under the honors system of the British monarchy.
Taking President Obama at his word that the Nobel award is “an affirmation of American leadership,” Congress should allow him to accept the award. The prize money, which legally belongs to the United States, ought to be applied by Congress to some worthy cause, such as reducing the deficit.
As for the Abdul Aziz Order, Congress should withhold approval and return the chain — until the Saudis show their support for international peace by recognizing the right of Israel to live in peace within secure borders. That would honor Alfred Nobel’s desire to promote “fraternity between nations” and fulfill the intent of the Framers that congressional approval would guard against attempts by foreign governments to meddle in American politics by dangling presents, titles or any other emoluments in front of our public officials.
Ronald D. Rotunda is distinguished professor of jurisprudence at Chapman University Law School. J. Peter Pham is senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Shut them down. Let’s make a tent city of armed Americans.
Let’s roll!
Why support any of the dwarfs who were unable to get past McCain in the primaries? 2012 will not be the year for girlie men or Hee-Haw hacks. Palin/Bolton in 2012 with Liz Cheney as Secretary of State.
Pawlenty: Vote for me! I’m soft and lukewarm and mediocre!! I have nothing of substance to offer — experience or philosophy — except the foolish arrogance of a small man who craves attention! Vote for me! After Dole and McCain, you can’t do worse (can you?)!
I’m sorry, but I am repulsed by pols who have been hoodwinked by the transparent “global warming” hoax. Such as Pawlenty. He’s either a fraud, or too stupid to take on the evil Kenyan Obama. If he couldn’t stand for truth against Al Gore, he’s not worthy of consideration, IMO. I know he’s not the only one who has swallowed the “green” lies among GOP potentials. Bob
Pawlenty is NO defender of liberty.-at best he is a RINO. The GOP MUST do better than him!
Conservatives are looking for passion and fire from a presidential candidate, not just someone who’ll promise the usual statist agenda and pledging to work “with our friends across the aisle.” This explains why Palin is so popular. Pawlenty is a completely non-starter but I wouldn’t have a problem with him as VP.
He’s another evangelical. That’s enough for me to say no.
Watching golf is about as exciting as voting for `T-Paw` #2. (hardy laugh ensues at the moniker T-Paw). Pawlenty is a McCain clone. Very boring and uninteresting. Count on the republicans to blow it again. What America needs is a candidate who can articulate the value of small government, lower taxes and individual achievement. Pandering to this group and that group simply ain`t gonna cut it.
Pawlenty is McCain is Ridge is Graham is Liebermann is Crist is not what America needs to srvive
Tim Pawlenty is a familiar name to me. He was th Republican hatchet man in the Minnesota Legislature for a number of years and is b-o-r-i-n-g. If a “young version” of McCain is the best the GOP can come up with (assuming there are even free elections in 2012 in the States), I don’t see how Obama can be unseated.
I would like to see Thaddeus McCotter run for President.
The downside?
He’d probably have to have his sense of humor surgically removed, and that would be a major disservice to the nation.
The next American political alignment is: Constitutional Capitalist Ecologists vs. Authoritarian Socialist Environmentalists. Pawlenty is weak on 1, soft on 2 and on the wrong side on 3. We can do better
The good thing I see in Pawlenty is that he has a small chance of carrying his home State of MN. It is the one State even Reagan couldn’t capture. It has voted Blue in every single election going way back.
Of course, his popularity is plummeting, there. Down to under 50%? Fuggedaboutit. This is so common with Dems. They’ll elect a fiscally conservative moderate Republican (aka, conservative Dem) fo rGovernor. They’ll like the job they do. They’ll re-elect them again and again. However, does that man seek the Presidency, they will reject him in the most partisan fashion.
This happened to Palin, who was an excellent Governor. The political machines hated her, but the people loved her. The moment she was the VP candidate, her ratings plummeted. Same thing is happening to Pawlenty. The more his candidacy is noised about, the more his numbers sink. None are more partisan than the damned Dems! Bipartisanship is for Republicans only.
Pawlenty was being interviewed about the states’ shares of the stimulus.
I waited for him, as a conservative, to declare that Minnesota didn’t need the money and felt guilty about robbing taxpayers in other states.
Needless to say, he did not say that. IN fact he said that, if there’s a pizza on the table and the slices are going to be eaten, he might as well take a slice, take his share, for his state, as a duty of governing. If he didn’t take it, he opined, someone else would.
THIS IS NOT THE APPROACH OF A CONSERVATIVE. Sounds more like a Huckabee populist tax-n-spend attitude.
Tim Pawlenty is not the guy that conservatives can rally behind. Sorry. I don’t live in minnesota and I cannot STAND the idea that Pawlenty thinks I am responsible as a taxpayer for paying some of his state bills. Jindal put up some kind of fight against taking the money, so did Sanford. But not Pawlenty.
Plus, he thinks he’s very clever, and repeats jokes that work, thereby ensuring that the public will see him telling the same joke six or eight times before he figures out he needs to move to the next one.
Pawlenty is Huckabee without the band. Populist, not dedicated to fiscal conservatism, not respectful of taxpayers.
Count me out.
Liz Cheney, anyone? Liz/Sarah 2012? Just sayin’…
Palin/Petreus 2012!!!!
Oh… this is an article about Pawlenty but who cares!
Palin/Petreus 2012!!!!
The fact that Huckabee ran for President once before and lost isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Republicans rarely get elected President the first time they run. Bush Sr., Reagan, and Nixon all lost once before getting elected President. Even the losing nominees didn’t typically win the nomination their first time (McCain, Dole).
Sorry, we’ve had enough with the moderate, middle of the road types.Any candidate that supports cap and tax is no fiscal conservative.
We need strength, conviction, conservatism!
And like it or not, Sarah Palin has more chops than any of the names mentioned…except maybe one. Liz Cheney.
Another factor, as always is money..and they will need barrels of it! Who can deliver on that?
ANYONE elected from Minnesota is automatically suspect. This is a state that elected a failed
standup comedian to the Senate and a ex pro wrestler
to be Governor. And now that big warm corny heart of the upper MidWest has become a nuturing shelter
for Somalian suicide bombers. And why not? A nice
Somalian boy with a penchant for Islamic martyrdom will never have any of his root beliefs confronted
in mush headed Minnesota, after all that would be intolerant wouldnt it?
At this point in time, Huckabee is my guy. Unless someone more conservative and with more fire in the belly comes along.
But so far, there’s no one on the horizon better able to kick the America-apologist, potentate bowing 0bama back into the arms of Jimmuh Carter.
Long answer: no.
I echo many posters sentiment regarding Pawlentey. He’ll get squashed.
Besides a handful, a small one at that, I’m looking moreso at 86′ing incumbents for ’09, ’10.
Clean house on both sides of the trough.
As for 2012, much too much can happen in the meantime.
If Rachel Maddow (or anyone else from MSNBC) liked talking to Pawlenty, I am already suspicious of his credentials as a Conservative and Genuine American. I am also uninterested in anyone who has to “craft his own image.” Mauro says he “isn’t an inspiring speaker and doesn’t have a defining issue or character trait.” Ummm. Not a conservative like Ronald Reason, for sure, or Sarah Palin either.
I didn’t have to go to the second page of Mauro’s essay to say no. Pawlenty doesn’t have the bones to get elected by real Conservatives or Genuine Americans who won’t accept the label Conservative.
Pawlenty aint for me.