The Un-Bama
Obama has become the beacon for the notion that America needs to repent for its presumed amoral past and beg for forgiveness the world over in order to restore our moral standing. A popular view among the far left and university personnel (Obama’s roots), this view encapsulates the never-ending game of western or American guilt: The requirement that Americans behave as if they have unjustly enriched themselves off of the backs the rest of the world and, as such, need to “give back.” To boot, it is never made clear when enough “give back” is enough.
This is symbiotic with a related perspective — America, anything but first. Hence, American exceptionalism is forbidden and to be despised. Instead, Obama will use every opportunity to demonstrate how respectful he is of others and how humble he is as an American. Yet the most rudimentary psychological evaluation of Obama reveals anything but humility. Perhaps no American leader has demonstrated as much true hubris as Obama carries with him daily.
Emotional resonance is another critical attribute. He has been the consummate salesman, or “flim-flam man,” coming into town ready to sell whatever the audience will accept, only to later figure a way to weasel his way out of living up to his word. After awhile, those who look at him with open eyes bounce between fear to panic and back as they realize the country has elected a leader who, along with his close staff, is willing to sacrifice the most fundamental priorities of the nation with the most shocking cold-heartedness. His complete lack of “real” emotion, covered up by a false, almost Las Vegas “Rat Pack” veneer, has recently become apparent to more and more of the nation.
Finally, “change” has been Obama’s calling card. And, as with any hypnotic induction, vagueness can powerfully bind many a subject when left to the mind of the listener to clarify. Nevertheless, many Obama supporters are beginning to realize that the “change” he or she imagined the president to have suggested is different from the almost complete overhaul of our national fabric that Obama and his minions have been pounding out. As more of the country discovers this, they are becoming less interested in a radical and massive transformation of the country and more interested in simple “baby step” improvements while maintaining the integrity of our system.
All of this leads one to consider whether what is truly needed to beat Obama is to have someone who doesn’t resemble him. Perhaps what will emerge for Republicans is not a charismatic, dream-laden salesman who knows how to wow audiences, handle Oprah, and romance NBC “news” personalities, but rather someone who is simple and, perhaps, not very good looking or stylish at all.
Perhaps they should choose someone not looking to be on Mt. Rushmore before he can ease the economy and address the true faults in our health care system while not destroying it. Perhaps someone who doesn’t claim to be open and transparent while keeping under wraps critical aspects of his past; one whose past is easily understandable and relatable. One who, to his core, is American, from America, and, most importantly, loves America. One who is strong enough to fight for America, show he is prepared to fight, believe in its exceptionalism, and no longer apologize for any so-called “harms” upon which the world’s numerous “victim” groups have cast their identities. One who sees clearly the dangers of “radical” Islam and has tired of pretending it is anything other than what it says and does. And one who tells the truth and loves the truth.
Perhaps what is needed is the Un-Bama.
The Un-obama? Only someone better than Obama can beat Obama. Someone who can produce billions of dollars to pay the national debt BEFORE he gets elected.
Obama is a lawyer. Lawyers can argue any position, and Obama does. However, since the press treated him with kid gloves we didn’t know a lot about his core beliefs. Now we do. He is a statist. Not a great leader, but more of a Politburo bureaucrat.
What the Republicans need is a person who can clearly and comfortably speak about economic values, core capitalistic values of freedom and individual liberty.
Sarah Palin, while a great retail politician cannot speak clearly about economics. You get the feeling that she can talk the talk, but that there is no hard edged understanding beneath her words. Fred Thompson is convincing, but lacks the fire and charisma. Romney gets it, but has trouble getting his point across in an efficient plain spoken manner. We have a long way to go to 2012. It’s way to early to tell. Somewhere, there will be a voice.
No one who is now a complete unknown can be elected president in 2012. Name recognition is too important in politics today. No one in America today can achieve the necessary name recognition without either being attacked or promoted by the MSM. Argue why that shouldn’t be true all you want but you have to realize that it is true.
If you don’t have the name of someone who might run for president in 2012 then you are just performing an exercise in creative writing. Elections are won by real politicians, not imaginary ones.
Sorry but I have to argue with someone here at Pajamas Media or the liberal trolls will think I don’t have an open mind like they do (/sarc).
I’m going to have to take the author’s word for it that Obama is charismatic, he has always seemed to me to be a closed, cold and self-obsessed individual. And the gap between what he says and what he does has always been vast.
Who will run against him in 2012? There may be a challenger or two in his own party and hopefully there will be a full slate of candidates from Repubs and Independents. And back to charisma for a moment, I guess I like the old fashioned kind, when a politician makes me, the voter, feel important.
In 2012, there will be a weak record to run against and the successful candidate will be talking about self-determination, patriotism, JOBS!, and a better tomorrow. I think the “at play” groups in the Obama coalition are women and independents and large numbers can be wooed away.
Obama is a sad example of the results of affirmative action: an individual who is not well educated, is not especially smart and who has never been asked to produce anything. By personality he seems naturally conniving and manipulative, opportunistic and self-absorbed. But he has the attention span of a gnat and will never take the initiative on behalf of our country. He and his wife and their posse are actively seeking to be celebrities – perhaps out of gross envy of the successful achievers? Who knows – but Obama is showing all the signs of someone who’s pretty bored with his day job and looking for entertainment. Michelle shows all the signs of someone who loves the SWAG she’s getting for showing up. They have done incalculable harm to race relations in the country and display many of the worst stereotypes of the bad boys and bad girls of money grubbers everywhere. I think he really would like Mugabe’s job. No questions asked and all demands met.
My own planning is for declining interest in being President and even less Presidential-like behaviour. If Congress wasn’t so activist a lazy guy in the Oval Office would be good. Pick a local conservative to support and do some work in 2010. Otherwise this dreck will go on for a long time and the corrupt election mechanism that put him in place in 2008 will re-elect him in 2012.
A good place to start your search for an Un-Bama would be from the West Point Academy Cadets that were forced to sit and listen to the real McCoy stuff 15 pounds of crap into a five pound sock last night.
Obama is, represents and stands for everything that those Cadets despise.
I am ready for “CHANGE” in 2012……………..let’s go for Mitch Daniels, governor from Indiana.
He is the opposite of our current “rock star” who only performs well when campaigning in front of idolizing crowds (as opposed to speechifying at West Point).
Give me someone who has a track record and who I can trust. I don’t care about anyting else.
Let’s hope the elephants don’t make the mistake of trying to match Obama’s supposed “strengths”.
There is no perhaps about it.
They will lose.
Sara is the ONLY candidate that can win. That is because she is the only conservative on the horizon.
Except Jeb, who, fair or not, will have to wait for history to remove the tarnish from the name ‘Bush’.
Bill, you still haven’t figured it out yet. A RINO cannot win the White House. A democrat dressed in an elephant suit didn’t fool anybody in ’08 and they won’t fool anybody in ’12.
It isn’t about labeling or clever political tactics. It’s about fundamental principals. When there is no difference between fundamental principals of either candidate, conservatives sit on their wallets until election day, then they stay home. Non-conservatives vote for the Democrat.
Why vote for the Democrat calling them self a Republican when you can vote for the real thing?
I don’t think Sara can win the nomination, since she is a greater threat to guys like you than ANY Democrat. If the effort cleans the RINO’s out of the Republican party, then it will have been worthwhile. Spincter is gone and Snowe needs to go.
I should hope the R’s will not choose a un-Obama. If you define yourself by your opponent, you’ve lost the argument. We need to get someone much better without wasting time obsessing over BHO. Spend the energy in taking back the schools (K-16), state legislatures, etc.
It’ll be Romney vs. Obama in 2012, and Romney will win.
Campaign Slogan for 2012: STEVEN FORBES – ROCK SOLID not ROCK STAR.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think the populace would heave a collective sigh of relief is someone like Forbes ran. He is brilliant, from the business world, and loves this country. He isn’t the most telegenic candidate but at this point that is an attribute. He is serious and has boatloads of integrity. His spirit and heart are unquestionably American and his election would signal the restoration of sanity and the condemnation of mayhem we are living with now.
Along these line, there is an article re the resurgance of the conservatives in the UK on American Thinker. At the end, there are nine points. I would make those nine points the basis of the platform of the Republican Party.
Then hammer them relentlessly.
Whomever takes the gaunlet has my vote.
Haley Barber 2012.
Barber has Washington experience, experience running the GOP, is very conservative and has been a fine Governor of Mississippi. Hurricane Katrina hit Mississippi head on and Mississippi did not collapse like Louisiana.
You want an Adult? You want someone who loves is country? You want someone who will put this country back to work? You want someone who will stop demonizing the private sector? Gov Barber.
check-out the un-obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bAjexQFZv8
If Pete DuPont was 25 years younger, he would be my choice (an engineer and manager before becoming a politican). I like him much better than HW Bush in ’88.
Steve Forbes is certainly an un-bama. Plain talking (and looking)common sense backed up with lots and lots of real-world experience and knowledge. I wish he would run for Senator here in NJ.
Somebody like Mitch Daniels might fit the bill – at least he speaks like a real person:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg2D1zGztSk&feature=player_embedded
The Republicans must run someone who represents American values. Someone who the American people can identify with. Someone who scares the shit out of the liberals. Only one person comes to mind. That is Sarah Palin. They got the first Black person, now we get the first Woman.
#11 Nick G.:
“It’ll be Romney vs. Obama in 2012, and Romney will win.”
Nope, sorry. Romney’s a RINO too, no matter HOW Presidential his hair is,(and he undoubtedly has the most Presidential shag of any of the likely contenders…far and away, the most qualified scalp of our generation. Makes John Edwards’ coif look like it was atop a 1970′s fancy-lad gay porn actor.)
Alas, good hair does not a good President,(or Vice-President), make…look at J.Danforth Quayle.
The un-bama? Unfortunately, we tried that the last election with McCain….
The characteristics of a good leader and president include:
. a thorough and ever-increasing knowledge of the history of America and the world;
. a deep appreciation for American exceptionalism in science, democracy and freedom;
. a clear understanding of basic economics
. a deep appreciation for the basic intelligence of all levels of the population, which includes;
. a rejection of elitism, of a sense that the mass of people require a statist governance and can’t be left to their own decisions;
. a commitment to the Constitution and an acknowledgment that government rests with The People; and
. a deep sense of humility and service.
Obama has none of the above characteristics.
In 2005 pretty much no one had heard of Obama, despite his convention speech. Yet here we are with him. As a former Democrat but not nascent Republican, I don’t have a lot of feel for whom the Republicans might come up with but it is entirely possible that the eventual candidate is not well-recognized today.
Obama will be easy to defeat in 2012, like Jimmy Carter in 1980. But that doesn’t mean the Repubs cannot still lose. If they nominate old, stiff non-conservatives like Bob Dole, George HW Bush or John McCain, they will lose. Furthermore, the Democrats have the advantages of the MSM, Academia, Hollywood, Unions and Govt bureaucrats — which gives them a 10% handicap advantage right off the bat.
The Repubs should focus on Sarah Palin now and groom her for 2012. She’s their best bet. She is a true conservative and is the equal of Obama in charisma. She’s a fighter, likes a challenge and will overcome the left’s ongoing attempts to destroy her. #2 Jeff, as far as economics, I just finished her book, and she knows economics. She proven in that department. But cutting spending and taxes, she made Wasilla and Alaska’s economies boom.
There isn’t a single Republican on the table who wouldn’t immediately sink to the bottom and drown trying to deal with the stuff Obama is dealing with rather well despite clueless and insipid comments to the contrary. At least wait until the country’s in better shape before electing another corrupt and/or fumbling Republican to mess things up again.
H. Bowman, M.D:
I absolutely disagree. McCain was Obama lite. He proposed slightly smaller government programs. He ran as a liberal Republican.
You can go your own way,
you can call it just
another rainy day
OR
You could look for a candidate who
knows this poem by heart:
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_normansaxon.htm
and has no inclination to take a run
“with the Night Mail” to a place where
it is “As Easy as A B C” to hear this song:
http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/kipling_ind.html
Sung by those who followed an obsolete,
dysfunctional, tax-and-spend political
paradigm right off an economic cliff,
and found out the hard way that while the
fall is fun, the impact is not, and the
climb back up is difficult to impossible.
I don’t know that we need an Un-Bama. I think in the minds of a lot of voters they saw a temperance and articulation in Obama that failed to live up to it’s expectation once the real tasks of dealing with a world where there are no easy choices came into play.
I still think we need that articulation and temperance, we just need it to be genuine. Out of our current crop of candidates I think Romney could fit this bill and unfortunately Palin would not.
My concern with Romney is that he strikes me as a business-as-usual Republican who may very well continue the deficit spending.
#18 Bowman – You beat me to it. McCain is the Un-Bama of the article. It’s the first thing that came to my mind at the start of the article.
#10 marsouin – Interesting point, but i disagree. One cannot just ignore your opposition’s strengths. One must account for them, and neutralize them somehow. Sometimes that means matching them. Sometimes that means diminishing them by emphasizing something else.
#22 BC – You really think McCain would have struggled like Obama? Really? Sadly, Cap-n-Tax would be a done deal with him, because the mod Pubs would have gone along with him on it. Likewise healthcare reform. For this, I’m glad Obama won.
Afghanistan would be half over by now, as the additional troops would be there already. Iranian nuclear facilities would already be dust. Free-trade agreements with Colombia, South Korea, et al would be done. Foreign policy was McCain’s greatest strength.
#12 scythe – I could vote for Forbes. He could win, too, if the economy was still sucking.
#11 Nick G – I cannot support Romney. I can’t trust him at all. Another reason? RomneyCare!
#17 Bilgeman – So… you watched 70′s gay porn?
#16 Ragshaft III – If Sarah can get the nomination, she will win the general election. People, especially women, will vote for her for the same reason many voted for a black Obama. It goes without saying that she’ll get the white male vote….
The “Un-Bama?”
Except for the part about “…someone who is simple and, perhaps, not very good looking or stylish at all…” you’ve just described Sarah Palin.
The reason the Dems did everything they could to destroy her last year – and continue their efforts to destroy her – is she represented not only a tactical threat to their party at the time, but continues to represent a strategic/existential threat to their lock on the Black and Female vote.
The Democrats know that if the Republican party ever makes as much as a 5% in-road into their lock on these two voting blocs, it’s all over.
For this reason, they they have no choice but to destroy a Sarah Palin, or, for that matter, any conservative black politician who dares stray from the Liberal Plantation.
By any reasonable measure, Sarah Palin is the quintessential “Modern Woman.” She’s smart, she’s articulate, and is comfortable in her own skin. For the Left, however, she commits the Unpardonable Sin of being unabashedly Evangelical and Pro-Life.
Not only Pro-Life, but she REALLY put it in the Left’s face by CHOOSING to have a Down’s Syndrome baby. (How’s that for truly being Pro-Choice?)
And as a red-blooded American male, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention, she’s also not bad on the eyes.
So she’s not a foreign policy expert. So what? Neither was Ronald Reagan. She can learn.
In the meantime, assuming she is elected President, she can and will surround herself with people who are.
And as for being “qualified” to be President, Sarah Palin has more executive experience in her little finger than Obama has in his entire miserable, narcissistic, community-organizing, America-hating — I could go on — body.
She also understands and relates to average Americans in a way the average politician from either side of the aisle can’t.
She also has the strength of her convictions, a quality that the aformentioned “Average American” recognizes and identifies with. As such, she doesn’t need a teleprompter to articulate those beliefs and values she holds dear because they are a part of who she is.
With Sarah Palin, what you see is what you get.
She is a woman who loves her country, and isn’t ashamed to say so – loudly and proudly.
For an increasing number of Americans living in “fly-over country,” as the “Nightmare-Without-End” that is the Obama Presidency nears the end of its first year, Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air, and truly represents “…change we can believe in…”
The Democrats, and some establishment Republicans, would do well to keep that in mind.
T.W. Elliott
LCDR USNR (Ret.)
author of The Price of Liberty – A Novel
available at: wwww.amazon.com
To Marc Malone: McCain did not and would not have had a clue about where to begin, and the tip off was in the people he brought into his campaign, including the likes of Randy Scheunemann, another friggin PNAC pinhead. That by itself showed McCain to be absolutely clueless about foreign policy.
(-correction to comment #27 above)
The Price of Liberty – A Novel
by T.W. Elliott, LCDR USNR (Ret.)
available at: http://www.amazon.com
-note to self: “Fire Editor.”
More about Palin..In her defense, three years is ample time to work on her public speaking skills and get up to speed on foreign policy.
I think that she has the philosophical fundamentals in place–she actually likes America and likes Americans, sees this country as special and exceptional, and doesn’t seem to agonize over the sins of America’s past.
Remember this:Bill Clinton was not always a good public speaker, and Hillary still isn’t that great. Palin had a really really bad debut, IMAO she still has time to make up for that.
On the other hand, the candidate that beats Obama may be someone not on our radar at all.
No more old white establishment men candidates.
Republicans need a complete change.
Sex – female … 2012
Race – white .. 2012
Intelligence – no brains … 2012
We have our candidate…Sarah Palin
An excellent companion piece to the backdrop of the Obambi response to flailing at being war-time presidential.
Last night was almost entirely a political speech. To do so at West Point was particularly disturbing – despite the venue being so utterly appropriate. It was infuriating. I can only imagine just what those cadets were dealing with.
A commander in chief who believes eanestly mentioning his time spent at hospitals visiting the wounded and comforting directly families whose service members gave the ultimate sacrifice is supposed to balance ‘you got 18 months’ to ensure islamic terrorists don’t succeed toppling a corrupt and tenuous nuclear ally when our enemies are already knocking at that door – while of course delivering adequate infastructure to a host country stilling living like it’s 1850????
Never did the O look less a president and more like a substitute college instructure filling in. It was depressing and chilling at once. This is what he held up for months so he could spotlight – ‘deliberating’ – and this was it?
The challenge Bill Siegel writes about starts with being critical without being incendary. When Bush was savaged it was the media voices on the left that led the way. But it was Harry Reid who famously – as a then sitting minority leader – that the war was lost. Reids pronouncement was only a part of what Democrats engaged – they were absolutely craven when abusing Iraq/Afganistan in their pursuit of political power at home.
Most certainly conservatives have a responsiblity to resist the same kind of invictive that Bush suffered from ’05 thru his term – esspecially on the war. Where as the political equation for Dem’s in ’06 was 3/4th’s mud-slinging (think back to how trivial Joe Wilson now looks with all thats transpired since – yet how effective it was then) – Siegel gives a good analysis on Obambi’s primary rhetorical bait ‘n switch – presenting the illusion of being moderate thru mentioning conservative views – and then reverting back to his leftist inclinations when actually governing/doing anything.
O didn’t have to attack McCain directly over anything in the campaign – since the tattered economy and the already discredited GOP enabled him to spend his nearly 1 billion on effective vote buying and propandizing – in a media enviornment where they greatly profited (which partly explains why they never vetted much of anything) I recall one gabfest/love in with the press on the campaign trail when asked about Palin – he never even had to speak. One reported asked what O felt about her qualifications – and another reporter answered it – and then he just mugged along – while the whole crew cracked up.
What the country is waking up to now is the amaturish bumbling of a continuing candidacy – all the bluff and blunder of a pol leaning on his rhetorical skills while learing on the job. And it’s gut wrenching to watch the guy squirm – even to those of us who don’t like him and didn’t vote for him.
I heartily agree with Siegel’s suggestions when considering who should run and how they should do it. Obama is a walking talking cautionary tale advertising the dangers of style over substance.
Conservatives have every reason to look forward with pleasure – since half the battle is getting handed to them with this guys policy imitation of Carter.
Unfortunately the guy is also – as he was even at times last night – the polar opposite of Carter when it comes to giving a speech and more importantly deflecting rather than reacting to critism directly. In that regard he’s ever bit the shrewd political adversary that Bill Clinton was.
But if the GOP puts up a candidate like Jack Kemp instead of an aged ‘statesman’ like Bob Dole – O is every bit as vulnerable as Clinton was in ’96.
Provided of course there isn’t some catastrophic incident that would ralley a frightened nation sometime in 2011 or so.
By all means, let’s have the Unbama. The way to beat something, as we all know, is with nothing.
I’m looking for the candidate who is going to stand up and tell us that Washington has created many of our problems. The Department of Education hasn’t resulted in better education for our children, but it has cost us a pile of money.
The Department of HHS is now going to make us healthier, while saving money?
Yeah, right. Some people refuse to learn, even when they have their faces shoved in it, repeatedly. This time, it’ll be different.
Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Tim Pawlenty, Steve Forbes, Bobby Jindal etc. etc. There are plenty of good conservatives out there to pick from, we just need to make sure the party picks one instead of another RINO. That starts with electing conservatives at the local level in 2010 and taking the party back. I honestly believe that if JFK were alive in 2008, he would have been too conservative to get the GOP nomination.
Ronald Regan’s campaign slogan in 1980, “Let’s Make America Great Again” should be a big part of the campaign.
“Perhaps”??????? Stating this mildly, aren’t you grossly sugar-coating the issue? While your observation can’t be more astute:
“One who, to his core, is American, from America, and, most importantly, loves America. One who is strong enough to fight for America, show he is prepared to fight, believe in its exceptionalism, and no longer apologize for any so-called “harms” upon which the world’s numerous “victim” groups have cast their identities. One who sees clearly the dangers of “radical” Islam and has tired of pretending it is anything other than what it says and does. And one who tells the truth and loves the truth.”
You certainly “hit the nail on the head” with this assessment, because bho is nothing if not the opposite of your description above. Wait… I take that back. The man is NOTHING short of total evil and treasonous, and needs to be publicly and judicially treated accordingly (heck, I’d be just as satisfied if he were tried and convicted by an American military court; after all he is faking as the US Military Commander in Chief).
28. BC: Obama is an idiot. McCain’s mistake was speaking to him and about him as anything other than an idiot.
I agree that McCain was and is the un-Bama in 2008; and in fairness to McCain, he made Obama look small at the Saddleback Forum and outpointed Obama in the debates. But the fact that McCain was an un-Bama in 2008 does not discredit Bill Siegel’s argument with respect to 2012. In 2008, Obama was attractive to many (although never to me) for reasons that will not apply in 2012: financial crisis making economic issues paramount, Bush unpopularity, media propaganda, knowledge of how Obama functions as POTUS. Also, as Michael Barone once wrote early in 2008, it seems that in post-Eisenhower America, every 16 years the American voting public goes with a relative unknown — JFK (1960), Carter (1976), Clinton (1992) and Obama (2008). Once, however, we are confronted in 2012 with the consequences of Obama rule, particularly with respect to national security, foreign policy and military matters, the American voting public may rightly find an un-Bama very attractive.
Additionally, the notion that McCain would have been a liberal as POTUS is nonsense. McCain is a pro-life fiscal conservative and foreign policy hawk. His voting record in 2009 is as conservative as anyone’s. McCain voted against every Obama bailout bill (as well as the second release of TARP monies in late 2008). McCain voted against every Obama deficit spending budget bill, denouncing trillion dollar deficit spending as “generational theft.” Obama voted against the confirmations of tax cheat Geithner, radical pro-abortion Sebellius, leftist lawyer Kagan, and transnationalist Koh to their respective positions in the Obama Administration. McCain voted against confirmation of Sotomayer to the US Supreme Court. McCain has been so vocal in opposition to ObamaCare that the New York Times has accused him of throwing bombs. McCain has announced opposition to this year’s cap and trade bill. NcCain has been very critical of Obama on foreign policy, including for not supporting the Iranian dissidents and dithering on Afghanistan.
Sarah Palin/Liz Cheney 2012 (either order)
…you can’t get any more un-Obama/Biden than that.
You are correct. History shows democrats definately have had the corner on rock star, good lookin leader…imagery. And Bush did the Repubs no favors. But republicans have had some limelight with Reagan, though they borrowed him from the democrats. However, I would say Dems beware !! this latest crop of conservatives (Palin, Coulter and Bachmann) sure is giving any good lookin democrat a run for their money….at least in my book. You conservative fellas out there gonna argue with that?
The Un-Bama – how much more Un-Bama than McCain can you be!
Sarah will decisively defeat Romney or whoever the establishment GOP candidate is in the primary now that Huckabee is finished. Romney is basically finished because of his flip-flopping and Romneycare. However, it would not surprise me if Sarah picks Romney/establishment guy as VP to unite the party and quickly begin the general election fight.
She will then securely defeat Obama running as the optimistic Reaganesque candidate against his terrible record. She will not emphasize issues that are low priority with the American people, but concentrate on the important ones: energy, jobs, debt/deficit, smaller government, stronger foreign policy. She will win handily but in a VICIOUS fight due to the MSM doing everything to take her down and hide Obama’s bad record.
When you look at their lives, experiences, beliefs, etc., Sarah is the Anti-Obama. Her convictions, charisma, optimism, integrity, and courage win the day and convince the indies that SHE is the brave one who will do whatever it takes to bring back limited government/less spending/less taxes/balanced budget and help set the environment for the private sector to once again thrive.
She gets it.
6. While each and every one of those cadets is more fit to be Commander in Chief than Obama is, they are, unfortunately, too young to run for President. West Point won’t take you unless you’ll graduate by age 27 (29 if prior enlisted), but you have to be 35 to be President.
It’s gotta be Huckabee or Palin, and Huckabee is by no means finished. He wasn’t finished when they berated him with false accusations of being soft on crime, and he isn’t finished now. Primary voters actually care about politics enough not to make judgments based on sound bites, and anyone who actually listens to the story and has any heart whatsoever would have done exactly the same thing in Huckabee’s position. Robbery and burglary that did not result in injury to anyone does not merit a life sentence, and anyone who says otherwise is unfit for command. Discretion is the better part of valor, and in this case that means knowing when to throw the book at someone and when to show mercy. Huckabee made the right call and showed mercy when mercy was called for by the situation; it’s not Huckabee’s fault that the perp squandered the grace he’d been shown and went on to commit murder.
And that persons name is Dick Cheney.
Wrong Cheney. Father Dick is very happy to make news from the sideline. His daughter is an impressive force – we would be lucky should she choose to stay in public service.
I agree w/myth buster. I’m a fiscal conservative and as such didn’t really take Huckabee all that serious. But having seen him handle himself during the primary and after I’m a believer. He was a fantastic campaigner – never stooping to use Romney’s religion against him (though plenty tempted him) – while proving his toughness. I bought almost all of his perscriptions – save the late stage conversion to a ‘fair tax.’ Do not sleep on Huck.
Only a libetard pointy-headed academic would believe a talk show on Fox disqualifies a candidate for POTUS. He is hands down the perfect VP for any standard bearer that emerges.
If he doesn’t grab it himself.
I think you are looking for an Abraham Lincoln, who was a Republican, to run against Obama, someone who is not especially attractive, but honest honest honest and trustworthy and hard-working and thoughtful. I think experience WILL matter this time around, as Americans will have seen what can happen with an inexperienced politician attempting to be president.
I am at a complete loss to understand the republican party. They`re either eating their own, reaching across the aisle or busy snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.
Expect the dems to once again define the issues in the 2012 presidential election cycle….
#28 BC – I followed the link and read about PNAC. I don’t see the problem. I believe in a muscular foreign policy. I just think we should make sure that our allies do their fair share. Too many free-loaders.
#37 Phil Byler – Yes, McCain took those stances. He always takes whatever stance is popular. Always. He’s a gross opportunist, even to his choice of wives.
Read the debate transcripts. He was very clear on his belief in AGW and the need for Cap-N-Trade. The things in the healthcare bill, like taxing platinum insurance packages, were his policies. He substantially supported Romney’s gubernatorial campaign, and he supported RomneyCare. He DID support TARP I. See the first Prez debate, 9/26/8, first question. See the vote record. He voted for the Bush spending bills, then campaigned against them in the primary, only to support TARP I.
Now, he opposes these things, because that’s the way the political winds are blowing. His opportunism just disgusts me. Foreign policy is the one area where he won’t sell us out, and thus, is the only area he gets right.
#47 whyyeseyec – You mean, defeat from the jaws of victory, right?
Yes, we eat our own. It keeps out the Pinkos. It’s the fight against the Progressives.
Huckabee was a good campaigner, but he couldn’t get more than the Evangelicals. Sorry, no priests for President… and I’m devout! I saw Huck as a third term of Bush. Another Compassionate Conservative. I couldn’t tell them apart.
He’s against spending… except when it’s for some good cause, like scholarships for illegal alien children! I want no do-gooders using public money, thank you. I like Huck, but I want a take-no-prisoners Conservative, if we can find one.
Romney = Republican John Kerry (+Romney-Care)
Huckabee = Willie-Horton-Festival 2012
Republicans need an articulate candidate:
Gingrich/Rice 2012
I’d love to see Rice step forward, with her credentials as NSA and SecState, but I’m afraid she’s too smart to want to be President.
As for Palin… I like her (hey, anyone the media hates that much has GOT to be pretty good, right?), but I suspect her resignation as Governor of Alaska would hurt her too much in a 2012 run. She can do a lot of good from the sidelines, though, getting her message out.
We conservatives and out country must come up with a real conservative who can lead America out of the valley of darkness we are being led into. This country can not continue with the current “corrupt and/or fumbling Democrat messing things up”. (Thanks BC, that was a great phrase despite being misdirected.)
We have always had a leader emerge to lead us out of hard times. This is the first time we have had one drag us at a run towards even worse times.
We need a leader that puts America first, that recongnizes that the America of the 20th century has done more to make the world a better place than any polity it human history. We need a leader that will stomp socialist consepts with the clear sense that has been an American virtue throught our history.
Ooooh!! look at that B.C.’s back. I sure miss it when he’s not here to remind us of how little we have to fear from liberals.
Imagine that?
Romney/Palin or Bachmann/Huckabee 2012 or 2016?
wow…is that crazy? or impossible?
after Obama…………..
I have to say…NO
but it will be the Rebubs decision
certainly not mine..
God bless the GOP !!
Don’t forget Bobby J. I know he didn’t come off well before, but he is smart and a competitor. He will be back on the scene in 2012.
How about Romney/Cheney (Liz) or Jindahl/Pawlenty? Bachmann/Huckabee? Scarborough/L Cheney?
Can Obama win without ACORN and with address verification (on donations)?
To Marc Malone: there’s a wee bit of a difference between a “muscular” foreign policy and a shoot first, scratch-butt, muscle headed one. Anybody associated with the PNAC should have been strung up by their scrawny balls given the damage they and their “policy” have wrecked on the wrong targets in the Middle East and on the US’s world stature.
To Benson: speaking of which — so how’s the butt scratching goin”?
Isnt it pathetic that we have to flail around like this? We dont have ONE
competent man of real leadership. We use to produce Teddy Roosevelts, Harry Trumans, Dwight Eisenhowers. This is what the media has done to us..reduced the world to a cartoon simplicity where only…cartoon like characters can exist.
One who, to his core, is American, from America, and, most importantly, loves America.
Its sad that you don’t realize how stupid comments like this make you look.
Palin is the unbama.
She is honest, decisive, direct, articulate and is happy with who she is. This is the opposite of Obama.
As far as some of the other suggestions for president,
1. Gingrich-He is an opportunist and has no core values. He talks and talks and talks.
2. Pawlenty- He is from a liberal state and considers things normal those of us from red states could never swallow. He is competent but not unbama.
3. Romney- His time has come and gone. He may be business man but would make a poor president. He is a liberal at heart.
4.Jindal- I think he may be a leader some day but it ain’t now. He looks like a deer in the head lights.
There is only one person that can demolish Obama and that is Paalin. If she stays with this wave and takes on all of the talking heads and smashes them, she will be the nominee. But the thing she must do is state her positions on the issues and acknowledge that she is not an expert on everything and tell us who she will use as advisers. Tell us where she wants the country to go and how we are going to get there. She will kick his ass.
Lifelong registered republican here who voted Obama (because of Palin).
1) Would never vote for Palin. The only reason she gets the press she gets is the same reason crazy Britney Spears had 24/7 paparazzi coverage: everyone is just waiting to see what stupid thing she will do next. I would vote for a Kucinich before I would let “that one” anywhere near the White House. She is a circus act and a distraction for a party that desperately needs to renew its credibility after mishandling 2 wars, doubling the deficit, passing the largest unfunded mandate in the history of the country, and darn near running capitalism off the rails. She is a democrats wet dream. If she got the nomination, you would see a democratic blow out that would make Mondale/Reagan look like a nailbiter.
2) I am not really thrilled with any of the names listed in the above comments. The only match up that I can think of that would give me pause about supporting Obama again (who has frankly turned out to be much more conservative than the hysterical socialist my own party promised he would be) are the smart and steady crowd. Condi Rice or Colin Powell or someone along those lines. Centrist. Studied. Informed. Articulate. I’d love to see Condi and Obama head to head in a debate. I think she would clean the floor with him.
Under no circumstances will I be supporting one of those angry, chest thumping, radical conservatives. The mess of the last 8 years taught me that those people say one thing and then do another. Its a centrist republican or it’ll be a democrat for me.
Palin-Bachmann with Condi for State again.
=:obama has guaranteed there never will be a black elected again.
What a shame.
The Republican hate will not win elections.
You need candidates that respect people, not greed and violence.
Let’s call the game for what it is; the fight is against creeping bureaucracy that only eats up more and more tax dollars and provides nothing but more bureaucrats. Obama is one of them.
Has Obama guaranteed that no black will ever be elected president again? No, but, from now on, we will pay attention to the actions of aspiring politicians as much as their words.
You just described Sarah Palin through and through. No one is more the Un-O than Sarah Palin. She’s articulate, REAL,conservative, means what she says and says what she means, a true AMerican who loves her country. A common sense conservative…no need to look further. Sarah connects with the people like no other politician
Obama “navigating around white America”?. More like Obama using the benefits of his race to scam and victimize whites afraid to call him on his actions because he’s black.
Obama is going to be reelected in 2012. The Republicans are so fragmented it’s not even funny. The more Sarah Palin gets involved the less of a chance the Republicans have of winning back the White House.
I AM A CONSERVATIVE BUT IT’S TIME TO FACE REALITY PEOPLE.
Jindal will be elected President someday if he chooses to run and the Republic survives long enough, but he’s too young to run in 2012. He needs two full terms as Governor of Louisiana first. Realist, I’m sick of this negativity; you advocate giving up! Obama getting reelected is a recipe for civil war, because America can’t endure seven more years of this redistribution and irresponsibility. We’ll be lucky if we don’t have hyperinflation before the 2012 elections.
@myth buster: I am not familiar with this redistribution you have suggested Obama is conducting. I am familiar with TARP, but that was a Bush program, initiated with the exact same last minute hysteria he used when Iraq went south and he wanted a “surge”. My taxes are exactly where they were under Bush, so I am not quite sure what it is that is going to trigger this civil war you are anticipating. Hyper inflation is a danger, but once again the huge spending push began under Bush. The only thing we can immediately do to ward off the dangers of hyper inflation is raise taxes (revenue) to make sure our bills get paid which will slow the economy and certainly impact any economic recovery – but as long as we can meet our bills by raising enough in revenue, hyper inflation won’t happen. These are indeed ugly choices, but these are the choices we are left with after a massive 8 year spending spree that ended in the near collapse of our economy. Bush gambled big on tax cuts and deregulation, and unfortunately for the country (and the party) it came up snake eyes.
Realist is right in so far as he can clearly see what a lot of Americans can see right now: republicans seem fresh out of solutions but have no shortage of time wasting personal vitriol. It is clear that with the debt left us by the previous administration, the money being spent to prevent an economic freefall, and the devastation to our tax base that the current unemployment situation has handed us, the knee jerk republican cry to cut taxes yet again won’t cut it. As a party, we need to begin to define a bigger picture of fiscal conservatism that acknowledges that we can’t unspend the $10 trillion in debt already accumulated, and that responsibility calls on every one of us to see to it that those obligations are met, even if it hurts. Furthermore, we must make sure it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
Do I wish this were not the case. Of course. No one wishes to pay more, certainly when we will have precious little to show for it. But there is no Santa Claus. It is time for the party to man up to the challenge of leading this nation out of the rubble with realistic, responsible solutions instead of simply calling for fantasy tax cuts we can no longer afford no matter which party happens to be in charge.
Perhaps the GOP should choose a candidate in 2012 who contrasts in every way with our rock star president.
For sure, they have.
John Birther Stanford,
Jeb Bush is cut from the same cloth as his brother and father, he is a moderate at best. He is hanging with the moderates in the big GOP tent and trying to persuade all the Sarah is not the person of the hour.
I agree with you on Sarah, she and perhaps Michelle Bachman along with Lt Col West, who was involved in being mean to a terrorist so he may not be able to run, but he will be a force to be reckoned with.
As to the birther movement, I am certainly a part of that. People keep bringing up the on line BC, but it is a fake. I don’t know your age, but anyone over 55 will know that the blank on the form that ask for race was filled in with the word, African, that is not a race any more the American is a race. The word that would have been used to describe his race in 1961 would have been Negro, not African. Some wet behind the ears yuppie lib created that document, he was not as smart as he thought he was.
I just recheck the version out there, wondered if someone had wised up yet, Snopes hasn’t as they have the African version.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg
John Birther Stanford,
Jeb Bush is cut from the same cloth as his brother and father, he is a moderate at best. He is hanging with the moderates in the big GOP tent and trying to persuade all the Sarah is not the person of the hour.
I agree with you on Sarah, she and perhaps Michelle Bachman along with Lt Col West, who was involved in being mean to a terrorist so he may not be able to run, but he will be a force to be reckoned with.
As to the birther movement, I am certainly a part of that. People keep bringing up the on line BC, but it is a fake. I don’t know your age, but anyone over 55 will know that the blank on the form that ask for race was filled in with the word, African, that is not a race any more the American is a race. The word that would have been used to describe his race in 1961 would have been Negro, not African. Some wet behind the ears yuppie lib created that document, he was not as smart as he thought he was.
I just recheck the version out there, wondered if someone had wised up yet, Snopes hasn’t as they have the African version.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg