Chuck Norris: Romney’s buying the election
posted at 2:04 pm on January 29, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The Hammer and I had a two-hour IM argument on this very subject to pass the time during the last debate, to no good end. Chuck’s asking, implicitly, “Where would Romney be today if not for his dough?”, but since there’s no way to do that counterfactual without separating his wealth from the career that earned it, it’s like asking “Where would Romney be if he were a totally different person?” Besides, the lament here isn’t about Mitt so much as it is the perceived effect of saturation advertising on voters — which is itself a stupid counterfactual, tantamount to “Why do people have to react to ads like people?” while ignoring the fact that the policies being promoted in those ads may have a teensy impact on their effectiveness.
Hannity’s right: A fatally weak candidate can’t buy an election, which is why we never had a President Perot and we’ll probably never have (god willing) a President Bloomberg, although a $1 billion ad budget will certainly test the theory. I think the reason this knock has taken hold against Romney, though, is that while he’s not a weak candidate on paper, he’s run a weak enough campaign that it’s sometimes hard to believe he’s in the semifinals with McCain. Part of that is luck — a centrist-heavy field to which he’s a natural alternative, the surprising incompetence of Fred and Rudy — and part of it is owed to his team’s fundraising, but yeah, part of it is the fact that he can afford to write himself checks when he needs to. Now that he’s running against a guy whose name is an epithet to the conservative base he can expect to have his right to do so defended. But I wonder what would have happened had the final two had come down to him and ol’ Fred. Now there’s a counterfactual.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I’ve always thought Chuck Norris was a putz.
robm on January 29, 2008 at 2:05 PM
Yes, he is.
bnelson44 on January 29, 2008 at 2:06 PM
chuck is a moron.
Tacitus on January 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Call the waaahmbulance for the whiny-assed Chuck Norris.
Boo-freakin-hoo.
thirteen28 on January 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Idiot(s).
therightwinger on January 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Why is it when a candidate runs out of money, they start screaming that the other candidate is buying the election?
Joshua P. Allem on January 29, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Well, I suppose it’s better than the Chinese buying it through Hillary. Good thing McCain got the money out of politics or we’d be knee deep in superfluous celebrities spouting silliness.
trubble on January 29, 2008 at 2:10 PM
So all of those people voting for him are paid stooges?
It’s not possible to “buy an election.” The entire assumption is a phrase usually uttered by envious campaigns.
Slublog on January 29, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Chuck Norris, “professional” actor, amature analyst. Why are we even listening to him?
darii on January 29, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Chuck Norris’ tears cure cancer. Too bad he never cries. Ever. Seriously, what a whiny tool. You backed the wrong candidate — live with the consequences.
HebrewToYou on January 29, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Why do we even care what kickboxer Chuck Norris thinks?
Where was Chuck Norris during the Reagan Revolution?
He is only in this campaign to trade on his Hollywood name and sell exercise equipment. That is fine, but it buys him no credit to tell us what is wrong with the Republican party or what is wrong with Mitt Romney. He should be telling us what is wrong with Mike Huckabee…
IntheNet on January 29, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Do you think Chuck is behind the push to go after Romney for not eating the skin on fried chicken? According the Darrel Ng, KFC advertises on Walker Texas Ranger.
ninjapirate on January 29, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Chuck Norris is such a dimwit. While it’s true that Mitt Romney would likely be commiserating with Brownback and Gilmore right now if it weren’t for his wealth, it’s also true that Huckabee would be doing the same if it weren’t for his Jesus-juice, which so far has proven to be worth nearly as much as Mitt’s millions.
Strip the candidates of their respective currencies and neither one would have made it this far.
FloatingRock on January 29, 2008 at 2:13 PM
If Huckabee had the money he would have spent it. That ends the whole discussion.
regal on January 29, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Eh. You can’t give more than $2,300 because of McCain. Maybe he should be complaining about that then Mitt’s personal fortune.
matd on January 29, 2008 at 2:15 PM
Mitt Romney is buying the election?
There is a God.
Pcoop on January 29, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Chuck Norris doesn’t whine. He tells the world how the world ought to be. Or else.
Vizzini on January 29, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Oh grow up!
Like elections haven’t been bought before.
SimplyKimberly on January 29, 2008 at 2:17 PM
How dare you complain about anything ever again.
/insert “jealous” smiley here
saint kansas on January 29, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Yeah Chuck, all that money really bought the elections in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Wait, I am sorry, what’s that? Oh it didn’t. My bad.
Cool Chuck Norris Fact: Chuck’s an idiot.
If Romney wins, yes it will be a testament to a weak field but also to Romney as a guy who over came adversity. He had a plan and it was wrecked by Huck and Maverick. If he can regroup and still win votes and the nomination, I think that speaks well of him and makes him a better candidate than one who wins in an early walkover.
Drew on January 29, 2008 at 2:17 PM
You know, when Steve Forbes was running back in 1996 the media were screaming that Forbes was trying to “buy the election.” Jim Lehrer and his folks were particularly strident in this regard. Forbes’ candidacy never really got any traction.
John Kerry pumped a bunch of his wife’s money into his campaign.
McCain dumped his first wife and married an heiress. No wonder he doesn’t understand real-world economics. Odd that he makes jokes about Mitt Romney’s money.
Romney, while he grew up pretty well-off as I understand it, made his own fortune as a business owner. He can buy advertising; he cannot buy votes.
And he’ll get mine for free.
BigD on January 29, 2008 at 2:17 PM
And Huck would be no where if it weren’t for Chuck. I say Chuck the Huck!
You can not call yourself a conservative if you are using class envy.
Conservative Voice on January 29, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Where would Huckabee if not for the liberal media giving him MILLIONS of dollars of free media?
Seriously, Conservatives have to pay for attention in this country — Liberals get it handed to them for free.
EJDolbow on January 29, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Has Huck attacked McCain much ? I know he and Fred and now He and Mitt are at it.
Doesnt matter I believe today is Huck’s swann song. Chuck can go back to kicking imaginary terrorist butt.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 2:20 PM
He gets my vote and he didn’t give me a dime. Does that make me a vote slut?
Geronimo on January 29, 2008 at 2:20 PM
No, no, he would have given it to various churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees so that he can donate more money to churches so that they can pay him $10,000 speaking fees …
/me ’s head explodes.
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Why doesn’t Chuck give some money to Huck so that he could use it then
ConservativePartyNow on January 29, 2008 at 2:21 PM
He called him a “flip flopper” on Fox & Friends this morning… It would seem that Chuck Norris is Huckabee’s Bill Clinton. Oh, he also claimed he should have never attacked McCain on his age last week because it was “opinion not fact” (and said he has apologized to McCain)… It was then that he stated Romney is a “flip flopper” because that is “fact”.
I’m not saying Romney hasn’t changed his positions here and there… But that doesn’t take away from the fact that Chuck Norris is a retard.
RightWinged on January 29, 2008 at 2:24 PM
It’s not that he’s wealthy that’s the issue, it’s that he’s probably spent somewhere between $25-$30 million of his personal wealth on his campaign for the nomination. He has every right to do so, but combined with his nuance with regards to the issues and rather shameless pandering, it creates the impression of someone who wants the job just a bit too much.
Had he relied solely on contributions or contributed a more modest amount to his campaign his wealth wouldn’t be much of an issue.
Hollowpoint on January 29, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Willard doesn’t HAVE enough money to buy he election. People are intelligent enough to NOT vote for goofy McCain. It may come down to a lesser of two evils thing, but Willard DOES have a lot of things going for him like gubernatorial experience, executive business experience, looks, speech patterns of saying the right things to the right people. McCain, on the other hand, has been pissing off the people in his OWN state by siding with the illegals and wanting to raise taxes. People in Arizona want LEGALS not ILLEGALS from now on. McCain could care less. He avoids the subject like the plague. Hopefully, that one issue will be enough to bring him down. Willard might be an ex-liberal, but he sure talks a better game than Juan!
countywolf on January 29, 2008 at 2:28 PM
The claim that having lots of campaign commercials is buying an election is absurd on it’s face.
Now if someone wanted to say that promising a financial benefit, like increased farm subsidies to farmers or more Mexican serfs for plantation owners or more presription drug benefits for seniors or even eliminating the “Death Tax” for people who stood to inherit a lot of money, was buying an election, then that might make some sense as some people would obviously gain $$$ from that.
I mean it’s one thing to basically say that the American people can be bought with lots of $$$, another entirely to say that people can be bought just by seeing some candidates face.
MB4 on January 29, 2008 at 2:28 PM
What a country we live in. Norris is only “popular” now because he was such the perfect butt of Chuck Norris fact jokes. Dude, we’re laughing AT you, not with you. Dude, sell some more home gyms and shut up.
Sugar Land on January 29, 2008 at 2:31 PM
You know what they say.
Don’t hate the player, Chuck.
Hate the game.
Hawkins1701 on January 29, 2008 at 2:31 PM
You mean those campaign contributions are going out of my checking account every month and not going in????
I guess I Hucked Up!
I have no problem with Romney putting his money where his mouth is and since I truly do think that he is the best man for the job I figured I had better pony up too.
It says something when so many people with limited budgets donate money to a multi-millionaire.
Go Mitt!
Deety on January 29, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Dittos. I love Norris as an actor and a all around good guy. But he’s doesn’t get any of my respect as an analyst.
Go back to making movies Chuck.
Texyank on January 29, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Not exactly, but close. Read:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/romneys_major_florida_advantag.php
bnelson44 on January 29, 2008 at 2:32 PM
So when did conservatives suddenly decide to hate money? Between this and John McCain’s recent statement on Romney’s motivations, there’s been a lot of class envy in this election.
Slublog on January 29, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Without his personal cash, Romney would be gone by now. That is a fact just as sure as the sun is hot and water is wet.
But he stole and inherited that money fair and square and if he wants to spend on buying the presidency, then more power to him.
The reason the cash worked in this case is because Rudy’s position on abortion poisoned the well as far as the major influencers go on the conservative radio/TV circuit which is the core base for Repub primaries. Laura Ingraham has had a Jihad against Rudy from day one only because of this poltical correctness issue (which by the way has nothing to do with actually reducing the number of abortions which Rudy did in NYC)
If Rudy would have had the same phony “on the way to the Republican primary” conversion on abortion that Romney has phonied up and gotten the sheeple to believe, Rudy would have been the consensus candidate.
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 2:33 PM
$ buys ads not votes.
McVain has had 20+ years to get his name-regonition, Mitt only has 12 months.
And I’m a recovering Fred!aholic.
omnipotent on January 29, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Who cares? MB4 put it well upthread.
Still doesn’t count as purchasing the election.
Slublog on January 29, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Surely the fact that he’s had almost as much contributed to his campaign that all other Republican candidates combined has nothing to do with it.
Excuse me? Stole? Did you just escape from DKos?
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Oh, cry me a river. Go talk to Democrats McCain & Feingold about it… As long as it’s legal you can cry all week – won’t matter.
Chuck looks defeated to me – the look on his face tells you all you need to know about their internal polling numbers.
Hey wait, I though Jesus was gonna hand this election to Forest Huckabee. Hummm, not praying enough, I guess.
stenwin77 on January 29, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Well, I think many of the people here would be singing a much different song.
bnelson44 on January 29, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Agreed. Its not Mitt’s fault Chuck Norris can’t dump his Walker/3AM Total Gym commercial fortunes into Huckabee’s campaign to become the Christian socialist leader. Blame Huckabee’s new best friend, McShamnestyfinancereformgastaxingbushtaxcuthatingflipflopa.
malan89 on January 29, 2008 at 2:40 PM
As the only somewhat acceptable candidate left, I hope Mitt has the means to buy the nomination. There is a problem though, that I hope the party recognizes. With campaign finance reform and the primary system and schedule the way it is, fewer and fewer people are included in the nomination process. In this environment, the best funded candidate WILL have a huge and sometimes insurmountable advantage. Fringe candidates like Perot and Paul can’t buy it outright, but they can stay in longer than they otherwise would and affect the outcome.
We need to find a way for ALL interested Republicans (not independents, libertarians, or the uncommitted) to nominate our candidates.
Truth be told: if you had told me two years ago that Mitt Romney would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination, I would have laughed at you. If it hadn’t been for the millions he poured into his own campaign I don’t think he would have made it to South Carolina.
That said: Go Mitt!
edgehead on January 29, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Mitt Romney Fact: Mitt Romney beat Chuck Norris’ ass by buying a giant fighting robot so powerful not even Chuck Norris could defeat it.
BKennedy on January 29, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Exactly. I hope MKat is going populist on us.
Chuck is just upset cause they are losing. Here are the facts. Chuck is using his celebrity to help Huck. That’s unfair to less celebritized candidates. Stupid argument? Yep.
Every candidate comes in with strengths and weaknesses. One of Romney’s was name-recognition. Unlike actors or career politicians, he had to establish name-recognition. That was done with paid media. That by no means makes him a worse person than a career politician.
Moreover, Mitt has raised more money than any other candidate.
Spirit of 1776 on January 29, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Bingo!! I said last night he needs to go after John. That’s where the problem arises.
Spirit of 1776 on January 29, 2008 at 2:44 PM
McCain’s distain for wealthy people who have worked for their money is very telling. Most people work for money and admire those who have been successful – ever heard the phrase “good enough for government work”?
melda on January 29, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Romney, while he grew up pretty well-off as I understand it, made his own fortune as a business owner. He can buy advertising; he cannot buy votes.
And he’ll get mine for free.
BigD on January 29, 2008 at 2:17 PM
==================
Uh, no. All the start up money and business connections came from Daddy. The idea that Romney some bootstrapped his way to riches is a myth. He is just another silver spoon boy.
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Let us all say a prayer that Huck finds gainful employment.
Just not on Pennsylvania Ave.
Onager on January 29, 2008 at 2:47 PM
HuckChuckFacts:
Mike Huckabee supports scholarships for illegals and a new wave of socialism wrapped in the cross and the American flag.
Chuck Norris has his head stuck up his ass from too many workouts on the Total Gym.
malan89 on January 29, 2008 at 2:48 PM
The kind of thinking that keeps us saddled with the death tax.
Deety on January 29, 2008 at 2:48 PM
And I doubt there’s another person running for POTUS or posting on this board who could do as well with the same advantages.
Onager on January 29, 2008 at 2:49 PM
He gets my vote and not only did he not give me a dime, I donated a paltry sum to his campaign. What does that make me?
Thanks for the link.
Buy Danish on January 29, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Analysis of Romney Buying the election.. ~–pretty detailed.. ;)
Chakra Hammer on January 29, 2008 at 2:50 PM
I gotta admit I like Huck chutzpah. He is pointing out that dastardly Mitt is eating skinless chicken and now has money what other ‘evils” does mitt do ?
Serious this is beyond pathetic.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Mitt is a flip-flopper. To believe him is to accept that he was pandering to his voters in Massachusetts, and not to us now.
So we have to trust in Mitt, or side with McCain, who has demonstrated that he little tolerance for conservatives and will court the media’s favor above his party’s.
I’d rather take a gamble on Mitt the flip-flopper.
edgehead on January 29, 2008 at 2:51 PM
how petty
Onager on January 29, 2008 at 2:51 PM
BTW, did they ever release who was responsible for those 20 Minute Mormon “push poll’s”/”Research Polls”?
I still think it was Romney’s camp gathering research data.
Chakra Hammer on January 29, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Silver spoon or not, I hope Willard gets in and builds a fence – stopping the flow of illegals, and motivates the rest to leave. He may be the only current one to do it. He certainly is the only one who talks about it some.
countywolf on January 29, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Gosh! I certainly hope so.
Onager on January 29, 2008 at 2:53 PM
But, Romney called them “Un-American” so.. His camp is Un-American..
Chakra Hammer on January 29, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Awwwww. Are you one of the poor unfortunate souls Huckabee panders to who consider themselves lucky to have a spoon at all?
Buy Danish on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
We would all be sleeping better at night?
lan astaslem on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Conservatives don’t hate money–not when somebody went out and earned it legally or inherited it. I can’t speak for RINOs like McShamnesty and the Huckster, though. Why are we hearing attacks on Mitt based on fried chicken and Marxist class warfare instead of on the issues and his record?
ReubenJCogburn on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
IF Romney is in FACT responsible for those 20-minute Mormon research polls he has some splain’ to do..
Chakra Hammer on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I wonder what Chuckie would say about JFK and Teddy. Their daddy was super rich and got most of his loot in very questionable ways.
I recall the old line that old Joe Kennedy, JFK and Teddy’s dad, said that he didn’t mind buying votes for his sons, but he damned well didn’t want to pay for any more than were needed.
MB4 on January 29, 2008 at 3:00 PM
We have heard about the WOT. (wont go back into that) But yeah its becoming more and more about identity politics. That is what Huck is playing here.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Prove it. What are these folks given for their vote? A promised cabinet position? A cash payment? Just exactly what tangible thing will we get for our vote?
csdeven on January 29, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Who cares if Hannity is right. I don’t like that vicious little leprechaun. He needs to chill (much more then Bill) and stop making conservatives look bad.
budorob on January 29, 2008 at 3:05 PM
He is just another silver spoon boy.
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Awwwww. Are you one of the poor unfortunate souls Huckabee panders to who consider themselves lucky to have a spoon at all?
Buy Danish on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
=========================
NO. I have nothing against inheriting money or being rich. Personally I think it is great.
I do take offense at Romney lying to voters and his phony-baloney conversions on the way to trying to get the Republican nomination. I value honesty and American values over money, Romney, not so much
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Well Juan McCain promised us all $50 an hour lettuce picking jobs, didn’t he?
Of wait, he took that offer back as he thought that we were all to dumb or stupid to do that kind of work.
MB4 on January 29, 2008 at 3:11 PM
A guy from Arizona recently told me his friends & neighbors are glad Willard is running against Juan, money or not. The recent Arizona legislation against employers for hiring ‘backs’ is working and they certainly are happpy about it. Yes they will pay more for the white kid down the block cutting their grass, but he doesn’t have to worry about the ‘backs’ hassiling his daughters in school or the 7-11. People are VERY happy without the illegals. He said a lot of people in Arizona are happy to vote for anybody but Juan. He thought Juan might even have trouble carrying the state because he was against the legislatures’ new law. People definitely are not happy with Juan in Arizona.
countywolf on January 29, 2008 at 3:13 PM
desperation is so unbecoming.
bridgetown on January 29, 2008 at 3:13 PM
MB4 on January 29, 2008 at 3:13 PM
So why didn’t Romney just run as a Democrat from the beginning – way back when for Senator, Governor, and now POTUS????
Brat on January 29, 2008 at 3:18 PM
A wise man once told me, “Lose your cool, lose the game.”
Norris sounds desperate, petty and spastic.
Not a good combination.
Domino on January 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
That was laid at Huckabee’s feet some time ago. Because as a good Christian he needs to save us from t3h Mormons. The power of the floating cross compels us, and all that.
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Then why’d you accuse him of stealing it back at 2:33? I mean, disliking the guy is fine but the baseless accusations you’ve been throwing around don’t do your opinions any credit.
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 3:26 PM
That rats nest on Chuck’s head is squeezing his brain.
Hilts on January 29, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Chuck Norris makes a light, full bodied whine but you can’t bottle it because it shatters glass.
BL@KBIRD on January 29, 2008 at 3:29 PM
This is incorrect. The $2300 limit to candidates is not because of McCain/Feingold. Been around since the 70’s.
JStew on January 29, 2008 at 3:35 PM
I liked Chuck’s old movies, and he is sort of an American Icon. But honestly he is also a has-been who has zero expertise on the issues he is commenting on. He is just another guy with an opinion.
I agree celebrities have the right to speak out but they don’t have the “right” to do it on national television. I am not sure why Fox or anyone else thinks that this guy’s opinion is meaningful or that anyone really wants to hear it.
echosyst on January 29, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Chuck should stick to selling home gyms on late night TV. The man can’t act to save his life and as we can all see his political compass is very misdirected.
MIA-2 was pretty good though.
Sammy316 on January 29, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Bull. Check the FEC for quarterly candidate filings.
Through 9/30/07 – (the 12/31/07 quarter will be reported in 2 days)
From May until Sept 2006, Romney loaned his campaign $17.5m in 4 different transactions.
However, to make the statement that Mitt has no other source of funds is simply incorrect:
Contributions received: (does not include loans from candidates)
McCain – $32.125m
Huckabee – $2.346m
Romney – $44.850m
Thru September, Mitt had out-raised all of them, with none of his own money included.
BacaDog on January 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM
A lot of commenters on this blog are going to live this commercial soon, I think.
A whole mess of round-house kicks, coming up. :-)
Slublog on January 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Thank you to all commenters here that contribute facts.
It’s a full time job trying to find out truths about each of the campaigns…
Can’t count on television / radio …as I serf through both mediums, I also serf through this internet….
exhausting and annoying.
What’s the point of the totally free press if they don’t do a good job for us?
ugh
bridgetown on January 29, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Norris really just wishes Romney would buy him a new rug.
D2Boston on January 29, 2008 at 3:51 PM
ust exactly what tangible thing will we get for our vote?
csdeven on January 29, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Sammy316 on January 29, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Thanks for looking that up. Nice post!
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 3:59 PM
Romney/Thompson 08!
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:03 PM
NP. Facts are our friends!
I still like Romney/Steele better.
BacaDog on January 29, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Shut up and
SingKill PeopleJiangxiDad on January 29, 2008 at 4:11 PM
That would be fine too.
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Romney has run anything but a weak campaign. I heard it said that Romney’s organization + Fred’s politics would mean instant TKO.
HYTEAndy on January 29, 2008 at 4:25 PM
Contributions received: (does not include loans from candidates)
McCain – $32.125m
Huckabee – $2.346m
Romney – $44.850m
Thru September, Mitt had out-raised all of them, with none of his own money included.
Please let the “money talks, BS walks” be true!
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:25 PM
*Loses more respect for Chuck everyday*
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 29, 2008 at 4:27 PM
*Loses more respect for Chuck everyday*
JayHaw Phrenzie on January 29, 2008 at 4:27 PM
You know what? I still like Chuck even though he has been blind to A LOT of the Hucksters shuck & jive. At least Chuck has the ba11s to vote on the Republican ticket, be open about it and even campaign for a “republican”.(I use that term loosly in light of the candidate) Mini Kudos to Chuck.
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:33 PM
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:33 PM
Just to clarify, I still think Chuck is waaaay wrong.
kcd on January 29, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »