Boston Globe: Romney’s the only adult left standing among the 2012 hopefuls
posted at 8:17 pm on March 10, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
But — but what about Huck?
Seriously, though, it is starting to feel that way.
For a while, it looked like Mitt Romney would become more a figure of ridicule than promise. Stiff, square, and allegedly two-faced, the former Massachusetts governor was a triple-punchline target of late-night comics.
But now, with a more statesmanlike bearing and some measured criticisms of the Obama administration, Romney suddenly seems like the only adult left standing among the 2012 Republican presidential hopefuls…
[W]hile Limbaugh and some other CPAC speakers were serving up cable-show vitriol, Romney made clear that he wished President Obama well and hoped for the best for the country. He then offered a more measured – and therefore more believable – critique of the new administration.
“Parts of the stimulus will, in fact, do some good,” he averred. “But too much of the bill was shortsighted and wasteful…
He also broke with many in his party to endorse the bank bailout, but repeated his criticism of both Presidents Bush and Obama for using bailout funds to aid the auto industry.
He won the CPAC straw poll, of course, and as I write this he leads the field on InTrade with 24 percent, followed by Jindal at 19 and Palin at 15, neither of whom I expect will run. He’ll have an advantage in the early primaries in 2012, too: Huck will win Iowa thanks to evangelicals, but Romney should take New Hampshire and Michigan easily now that there’s no McCain-type around to run to his left. The question is what happens in South Carolina, where Huck nearly knocked off McCain thanks to Christian voters. If he beats Romney there, it’s anyone’s race. And while in theory Mitt should have an easy time with him in blue-state primaries like New York, economic circumstances may be such that the rich guy is a hard sell compared to the folksy populist, regardless of which one of them has more financial expertise. Maybe Sanford will get in and end up acting as a stalking horse for Mitt, stealing SC away from Huck and splitting enough social-con votes with him elsewhere to give Romney a clear path. Romney/Sanford 2012? I could live with it, and Sanford would take that deal in a heartbeat. He’ll only be 52 and landing on the ticket would give him the national exposure he’ll need to have any chance against Jindal or Palin in 2016.
Exit question: What about Newt? He’s adult-ish, no? If he jumps in, do he and Romney split the centrists and technocrats, leaving Huck as the last man standing?
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: « Previous 1 ... 7 8 9
With all due respect. Fred had only one really really great moment that I can remember from the campaign and that was when he refused to raise his hand in that dorky debate in Iowa.
I like Fred when he is on script and has studio makeup. His ideas are his strong point. But he wasn’t even a good enough actor to act like a Presidential canidate. He seemed insulted by the whole process.
Fred is an idea man, maybe a spokesman, but he doesn’t have close to enough energy to run the country.
petunia on March 11, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Absolutely, the whole country needs a fresh introduction to Palin. I think she’s smart to stay in Alaska to focus on her state’s problems for a while and avoid the media glare for a while.
I agree with you that the political pay off for fixing Louisiana is potentially much greater than anything Palin accomplishes in Alaska, so Jindal definitely has the edge there. It’s also just plain easier for the media to cover Louisiana and for Jindal to attend select national events from that home base — again, advantage Jindal.
I have to say, though, that I don’t get the big hit of genuineness off of Jindal that I do off of Palin. She really is very authentic. So if I had to choose between the two of them now in a one voter “election” where nothing else mattered, I’d choose Palin. I trust her. Jindal seems like a more typical politician to me.
Y-not on March 11, 2009 at 1:37 PM
Yet Fred would make a good V.P. choice for Palin.
yogi41 on March 11, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Agree. While I do like Jindal, he is also lacking the “it” factor. Some people argue that in 2012 people will be so sick of Obama’s style that they will embrace someone “boring” in 2012. I disagree. You have to have charisma in order to raise money and generate the grassroot effort needed to take on Obama, who regardless of the economu will have tons of money and ACORN + MSM support on his side.
Whoever we nominate in 2012 though; it can’t be a has-been who lost to McCain in 2008. Running Romney or Huckabee would a gigantic mistake.
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Again, the recently recognized leader of the Republican Party, Sarah Palin, will be travelling the country and working to support leaders who share this (conservative) vision.
Awesome! SarahPAC reigns.
technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 1:55 PM
I will say it again. You don’t argue for conservative or even Republican principles. You don’t really say much of anything, but attack other people. Yet you go on about how Conservative your Voice must be.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 9:24 AM
chuderroad, you were the one out of no where who called me a fake.
as far as my comment on March 10, 2009 at 9:22 PM
I don’t claim Romney is a conservative. His position on gun control is luke warm. He plays with socialism. He is a moderate conservative.
As far as not claiming Sarah is a conservative or not…so far she appairs to be one, she certainly says the right thing. But so did Fred, and after looking at his record he supported McCain on campaign finance reform. So its too early to claim one thing or another.
“You don’t win your argument by be-littling others and calling others names either.”
I called him a liar because he was lying. There is nothing belittling about that. I called you an ass, a word I rarely use, because you out of no where called me a fake. You might want to take out the beam in your eye before you get on my case ovre my mote.
So instead of looking at how I offended you, you might take a look at my arguments, and you will see that I do argue conservatism.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 2:22 PM
People like you will assure that The Messiah has 4 more years to destroy America… Folks need to unite behind whomever the Republicans select… Look, I hope it’s Jindal or Palin or Sanford or even Cantor, but to go off to a protest vote is folly… And it cost us the mess we are in!
Mark Garnett on March 11, 2009 at 8:42 AM
People like me? I didn’t vote for Obama or McCain, but for the 3rd party. Like I said about both parties, both are corrupt and for bigger govt., one way or another. Most Repubs are RINO’s with liberal agendas. There are only a few conservative Repubs who I believe in but it will be very hard to see any of them electable because 51-52% of the people in this country want the govt to take care of them, just like Obama was chosen even though many will be very disappointed!! Obama and yes even GWB, Clinton, etc., were “puppets” chosen by the Global Elite, but that’s another long story, so read up on the History of that along with the Fed Reserve Banks stealing from us since 1913 when they put in the tax code. Oh yeah, they’re not part of the govt either!! Of course too many people went beyond their means so add that to the problems we’re all dealing with now.
We need to go back to the foundation our ForeFathers gave us, Constitution/Bill of Rights, smaller govt., less or NO taxes would be better, but I know that won’t go ever away! Plus, Liberty, Freedom & Pursuit of Happiness!!
corvettelady on March 11, 2009 at 2:50 PM
It’s a little early in the game to be ruling anybody in, out, or a prohibitive favorite. We should not insist upon selecting the candidate that will appeal to everyone, or even every conservative, because such a person does not exist – if the Republicans ran Superman, someone would complain that his flat Midwestern speaking style will drive away urban voters. This is what I’d like to see in a candidate:
1. Solid conservative ideals articulated with an understanding of the philosophy behind them. The candidate doesn’t necessarily have to hit every item on the policy agenda, but should display a grasp of the reasoning that illuminates these ideas, instead of just displaying them as gaudy accessories designed to lure in conservative voters.
2. A track record of implementing these conservative ideals, to help soothe my fears that the candidate will “grow” in office.
3. Fighting spirit. You can’t run on a platform of blind rage, but people are going to be mad as hell about the Obama debacle when it’s over, and a good candidate can honor their passion – and look out for their interests – without losing his or her cool. We need someone who will pull no punches, because pulled punches got us a devastated banking industry and 3000 points melted off the Dow.
4. Charisma. The same electorate that voted for an empty suit with a smooth baritone will be voting in 2012. The empty suit will still have 90% support from the media. The last charisma-free candidate didn’t work out any better than Bob Dole before him. You go to war with the electorate you have, not the one you would wish for. They’ll be angry and confused – and possibly cold, hungry, and unemployed – in 2012, but they won’t turn into philosophers and scholars in four years.
5. Ethics. Socialists are inherently corrupt, and Obama’s crew is more corrupt than most. Their corruption has already caused staggering damage to the country, but it won’t be useful as a campaign issue if the Republican candidate has a closet full of skeletons. Never forget that the media which ignores Democrat bank robbery will eagerly tackle a Republican for jaywalking. A slate of clean government reformers winning in 2010 would really help set the stage for such a presidential candidate in 2012.
Doctor Zero on March 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM
???
Actually, I think tourism accounts for less than 10% of their economy. Ever heard of petroleum? Agriculture/seafood? Shipping?
cs89 on March 11, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Doctor Zero on March 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM
+1
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Nope. That is both my point and my weakness. Govener I-still-can’t-remember-his-name could do alot for his resume by making Lousianna more prosperous and by attracting business. And making people like me think of businesses instead of Mardi Gras when they think of Lousianna.
petunia on March 11, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Amen. Which is why we should avoid wooden/boring, uncharsimatic candidates in 2012.
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Never happen. Jindal could double the manufacturing base, and Mardi Gras would still get the coverage. Beer & beads are sexier than assembling widgets.
cs89 on March 11, 2009 at 3:35 PM
As to Mitt, apparently there are still rumors swirling that he may knock of Reid for the Utah Senate Seat.
http://www.newsreview.com/reno/Content?oid=921991
(followed the links from Ace. RNR’s not the best source, but there it is).
cs89 on March 11, 2009 at 3:39 PM
(Should be “Knock off Reid for the Nevada Senate Seat, obviously).
cs89 on March 11, 2009 at 3:43 PM
cs89 on March 11, 2009 at 3:39 PM
That would be amazing, especially since Reid is in Nevada. Actually I hope that Mitt does this instead of run for President, taking out Reid will do more for this country than Mitt as President.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM
It doesn’t matter who is ahead right now. If the individual states don’t clean up their act as far as who can vote in their parties primaries, we are going to end up with another McCain-type nominee as Dems cross over to saddle us with a weaker candidate. Romney should have been the nominee during the last election, but we all know how that turned out…
Kevin71 on March 11, 2009 at 4:04 PM
There is word out now that the knives are out for Michael Steele. Does anybody know any more about this development? Do you think that Romney is involved in some way with this?
technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Given that the liberal Boston Globe is pumping Romney (per Allah’s headline); shouldn’t that indicate that the Dems wants to “saddle us” with Romney?
No thanks. Both Romney and Huckabee (receiving favorable treatment among the left these days) should be a warning sign for us to NOT nominate either of these two candidates.
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 4:17 PM
I can see that my statement was a bit misleading. My comment is directed at those who are bigots and are also Christians. Most Christians are not bigots and I have noticed that many who vote for huckabigot ARE bigots. Especially when the subject of religion is concerned.
csdeven on March 11, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 4:17 PM
There are hundreds of thousands of us or maybe millions of conservatives who will not allow this happen in 2012. We know that Sarah Palin is currently the leader of the Republican party. The results of the recent HA poll confirmed that. We are not mind-numbed Obamatrons who vote like sheep because Brian Matthews tells us to. Just think if every one of Sarah’s 516,000 Facebook supporters donated to Sarah the minimum suggested of $25 that would total about $13m and that would not include Team Sarah members or those disenchanted with Steele for calling Rush out. I am now firmly convinced more than ever before a RINO will not prevail this time. You betcha!
technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 4:26 PM
technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Assuming of course that Sarah is everything you think she is. Does she look promising…you betcha. Its too early to declare who is the leader of the Republican Party, let alone who to vote for in the primaries.
But here is a hint that should rattle your chain…instead of getting all worked up on one candidate to be the savior of the Republican Party, or even America…think local.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 4:35 PM
That’s “it” in a nutshell. There are certain things no pedigree will buy.
Romney may get the nomination, but he’ll never be elected.
ddrintn on March 11, 2009 at 4:42 PM
To add, we conservatives need to help our neighbors understand principles, put our faith in principles, not in a single person.
Obama would of been powerless if Republicans controlled Congress. Since that is not the case, then our best defense is the people…right now even the blue dogs cower because they look at the polls. So get the word out, so that Obama’s poll numbers drop. That is how we stop it.
We Surround them, but if we wait for some Savior to come around on a white horse, we are doomed.
Lastly, and this is a plea to all people of faith…Socialism is an enemy to God, they will split us apart…they will attack Mormons, they will attack Catholics, then they will go after…and if we continue to bicker with each other, then our pride will cause us to all fall and lose until the Lord sees we are sufficiently humbled.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 4:52 PM
Yeah, when you can’t stand up to the drunk socialist aka Teddy Kennedy; how can you stand up to Ogabe?
Sorry, but Romney had his chance in ‘08 and failed. Rehashing failure is not the way to go in ‘12.
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Can I get an Amen? For we Christians feel that once a failure, always a failure…repentance and all that religious stuff is for Sunday School right? /sarc
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 5:01 PM
I don’t think the topic is Romney’s personal life.
ddrintn on March 11, 2009 at 5:05 PM
ddrintn on March 11, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Reacting to the old argument that Romney can’t be a conservative because of how he ran against Kennedy. Right now Romney claims to be a conservative…I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, because I’m not pulling the lever right now. I will give him the benefit of the doubt, but keep my eye on him. And if it comes to the time to vote, then I will judge him on how honest of a conservative I think he is.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Romney IS the only adult in the room.
I have watched him, he does not engage in childish personal attacks. He debates issues on the merits of policy positions and is guided by principles in his governing. He is not a career politician who always aspires to the next greatest elected office like most in Washington who are always and forever on the public payroll.
He is a leader who has been very effective. He does what he says he will do and measures his actions against the good of the enterprise. He plans everything with eye for metrics on how to judge success. Romney knows what he is doing which is so much more than I can say about that kid Obama who is playing dressup in the whitehouse.
The Liberals will whine if Romney is elected that they hope he fails, but this Romney never fails!
Lori on March 11, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Sensible position.
I’d add that one reason I’d like to see him running a high-profile non-profit or work in some other position where he’s accountable to the public in some way is that actions speak louder than words. I’d like to see him show us through his deeds how he would govern in the future.
Y-not on March 11, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Doctor Zero on March 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM
+10
sarahpalinfan99 on March 11, 2009 at 5:43 PM
When did Regan ever lose the nomination to a third stringer like McCain? For that matter, when did Regan ever lose an election? The only valid comparison between Romney and Regan is that both of their last names begin with an “R.” And that is where their similarity ends.
Maxx on March 11, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Maxx on March 11, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Reagan didn’t win the first time he ran
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Maxx on March 11, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Another key differecne:
Reagan never said the following in public: “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush; I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”
Romney did.
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Here is a prime example of what we are dealing with:
On CNN’s Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer he had a young mind-numbed Obama supporter come on the air to grade Obama’s first month in office. Of course he gave him an A. But that is not the story.
But what is why he gave him that grade:
“because he (Obama) has the ability to lead people to come to HIS (the Messiah’s)conclusions”
You would have thought he was talking about Adolf Hitler.
We don’t call him the Messiah for nothing!
technopeasant on March 11, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 6:40 PM
if you don’t bother reading counter points to your posts, then you are a tool.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Agreed…
I don’t think I have to link the youtube of Mitt Romney denying he is a Ronald Reagan conservative do I?
When he was asked in a debate with Kennedy, Romney buckled and denied Ronald Reagan.
It is a foolish to compare Mitt to a man he “disowned”. And a disservice to Ronald Reagan.
right2bright on March 11, 2009 at 8:25 PM
What people say they want in a candidate, and who they actually vote for are miles apart.
They first are attracted emotionally, then they build their case to support…which is how Obama got elected.
If he (Obama) was white, buck teeth, bald and 5′2″, he would not even have been considered.
People vote for the package, then look inside…that is why Mitt has a tough time. He spent record amounts of money, and failed miserably…people don’t connect with him.
Besides, he fails at most of your listed items (#5 he hits it), or at least his record indicates he is well short.
He is a great man, smart, articulate, ethical…and un-electable.
That is why I always touted him for VP or high profile powerful cabinet position.
right2bright on March 11, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Norwegian on March 11, 2009 at 4:55 PM
You don’t want any 2008 rehashes but you want to rehash part of our failed 2008 ticket? Sorry to break it to you, but the Republican nominee, win or lose, is almost ALWAYS a rehash from a previous primary. McCain, Dole, Bush Sr, Reagan, Nixon, the list speaks for itself. The one time we bucked the system was to nominate the SON of the previous Republican president.
thecountofincognito on March 11, 2009 at 9:42 PM
You should have demonstrated how he was wrong instead of just calling him a liar, if you’re such a staunch conservative. As for calling me an ass, I’ve been called once. I just enjoy watching you turn your invective toward someone who actually provoked you. You’re not the only one who enjoys stirring the pot, but I’ll assure you that you didn’t hurt my feelings. You big fake.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:13 PM
That was in response to
And it should have been, “I’ve been called worse.” Though, I think I’ve only been called an ass once. In my generation, once we’d all moved on from “doodie head,” it got really colorful.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Liberal newspaper endorsing Romney. Now I know who NOT to support in 2012.
adams6kids on March 10, 2009 at 9:05 PM
adams6kids on March 10, 2009 at 9:05 PM
really that is how you make your decisions, by who endorses who? please don’t vote, leave it for grown ups
Conservative Voice on March 10, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Conservative voice- Since you missed the sarcasm (kids tend to do that),let me put it this way…if Romney is a conservative then Obama is a centrist. SARAH…SARAH…SARAH!
adams6kids on March 10, 2009 at 9:17 PM
adams6kids on March 10, 2009 at 9:17 PM
I never claimed Romney was a conservative, I don’t claim Sarah is one either. But please don’t play the sarcasm card and insult people’s intelligence…liars do that.
Conservative Voice on March 10, 2009 at 9:22 PM
and then out of the blue you claimed I was a fake…no reason, just that I was a fake…the irony?
You should have demonstrated how he was wrong instead of just calling him a liar, if you’re such a staunch conservative.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:13 PM
And how that is related to me being a conservative, Im not sure…but in any case the fact that you took up his battle and made the giant leap I’m not a conservative because I dare challenge him for claiming sarcasm, I find rather interesting.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I never took up his battle.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Closing in on 1000 comments……
Brian1972 on March 11, 2009 at 10:46 PM
And I know chuderhead, that its rather difficult to keep up, but all you had to do in this thread search for my name, and find
I will endorse the first candidate that admits to being a Rush Limbaugh Fan, or a Glenn Beck Fan, and holds the same values and principles.
Conservative Voice on March 10, 2009 at 8:44 PM
among many things. From your own words “You’re not the only one who enjoys stirring the pot, ” that is the definition of an ass if there ever was one….I didn’t come here to stir the pot, but to have a political discussion….adults do that.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 10:47 PM
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:44 PM
really? could of fooled me, since that seems to be the quote you like to use as proof that I am a fake and “not conservative”
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Because one would think a truly Conservative Voice would be advocating those policies rather than making ad hominem attacks on “Palin gushers” and “Mittens fans.” It seems suspiciously counterproductive, not to mention hypocritical since you’ve said the reason you’ve chosen to do that is stop all the infighting.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:51 PM
I never defended him, just brought it up randomly as a illustration, as per your request.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:52 PM
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:51 PM
I know you listen to Rush, well at least I came to that conclusion when I read that you said that is why you like the guy. I used the word Mittens and Palin gushers to provoke thought…the same way Rush uses words to provoke thought. I do work hard to unite where I can…and so the term Mittens, and Sarah gushers, and Fred Heads, and the Huckbots are to those who see their special candidate as their Messiah…their candidate can do NO wrong, and everyone else should just quit because they are unworthy to be even considered. It is these zombies that I go after, because I don’t worship men, I worship God…and men have to earn my respect and admiration. Please note, I don’t consider Fred, or Palin, or Romney to be conservatives, because they don’t meet the George Washington test. They come close, in some areas, and very far in others. Fred may of apologized ( weakly I might add ) with campaign finance reform. Romney with gun control. Palin, its hard to say, but poptech has brought forth legitimate concerns….and I bet all three see no problem with the Fed, with Social Security, with Federalized welfare, and such.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 11:05 PM
To add the Mittens, the Fredheads, the Huckbots, and the Sarah gushers also engage in spreading half truths and slanders to make the other guy look bad…as a way to make their candidate by default look good. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to defend Romney’s record, or had to tell poptech that he was way off for making her resume an issue. Its annoying to see the gross in-fighting and seeing every news story as if we are in the primaries and its 2011.
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 10:52 PM
an illustration to prove that I was a fake…weird
Conservative Voice on March 11, 2009 at 11:10 PM
ah more rino front runners. We haven’t learned our lesson. Forget Mitt, Huck, etc.
Newt
Jindal
Palin
Brains on March 11, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Why bother with dividing and conquering, if you’re here to unite? Calling people zombies and cultists implies they are beyond reason. You are not uniting at all, if you are attacking with the (presumably) hope of scoring points. We don’t need another hero, dude.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 11:15 PM
An illustration of hypocrisy. If you were a Conservative Voice, you would argue conservative points instead of appointing yourself the Simon Cowell of the 2011 American Idol season brought to you by the GOP.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM
This statement is just one example as to why I can not take anything you say in a constructive way. When you give Poptechcredit you lose credit in your argument.
Clyde5445 on March 11, 2009 at 11:53 PM
I hope that Romney doesnt run again…and I sorta doubt he will.
The dude is too perfect and intelligent to be elected to a national office like POTUS. He is better suited to areas where intelligence, judgement, and talent gets you places…a meritocracy if you will as opposed to a beauty contest where the deciders include a huge percentage of dumb people…like the people on Hot Air let alone the people on liberal blogs.
Jesus would never get elected to anything if he was here running for POTUS…so could Mitt win anything.
By the way, when I say Jesus, I am talking about the real Jesus described in the New Testament…not the fake Jesus described in the Nicene Creed (which was formed by a political establishement) that Huckster and Apalopys believe in.
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 12:13 AM
Now just wait a damn minute. I thought the brilliant non-newspaper-reading Sarah Palin said that these two younguns are doing the right thing and doing their best and will soon be married and will raise a happy family.
I guess when this particular Palin got knocked up in the back of car, the skank didnt marry the sperm donor. In Sarah Palin’s case, when the exact same thing happened, she married the sperm donor cause he a terrific snowmobiler.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!
You know what the problem with the Palins is? You can take white trash out of the trailer park, but you cant take the trailer park out of the white trash.
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 12:19 AM
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 12:19 AM
You know it doesn’t help Romney’s case to use such vulgar language. He would never talk like that.
I like him too, he has everything going for him with his looks, his intelligence, his business acumen, his family life, his family and I voted for him. However, I also like Sarah. It isn’t always the parent’s fault when 2 kids get carried away.
Please let’s talk about qualifications and not name call.
Bambi on March 12, 2009 at 12:50 AM
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 12:19 AM
I’m a Romney supporter and I often spend time defending him on the blogs I read…but comparing him to Jesus and calling the Palin’s white trash is just trollish and makes me believe you’re just hanging around to make Romney look bad.
thecountofincognito on March 12, 2009 at 1:42 AM
This is a sad, pathetic display.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 1:46 AM
I totally agree, and love corvettes.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 1:47 AM
Spoken like a true Mormon.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 1:48 AM
Of course!
“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.” George Washington
I agree with him.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 1:50 AM
WARNING! WARNING!! RON PAUL RETARD ON BLOGSITE!! WARNING WARNING!!
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 1:51 AM
HA HA HA HA!!!
Apacalyps above just stated that only christians should be allowed to govern us. Mind you, that means his version of christians…i.e. people dumb enough to believe in the Nicene Creed.
So, all you Jews, Muslims, Mormons, whatever….Apacalyps the pretend-christian says your ilk should NOT BE ALLOWED TO GOVERN US.
Hey Apacalyps, which picture if Hitler do you have on your wall???
The Wall on March 12, 2009 at 1:54 AM
Dude, you are a serious asshole, and a dickhead. Congrats, you get both titles, and they fit you well. Now get yourself some help. Professional help.
Brian1972 on March 12, 2009 at 2:05 AM
Dude, you need some help. Professional help. A$$hole.
Brian1972 on March 12, 2009 at 2:10 AM
The Holy Bible is not a pleasant thought for some. Some people do not like that Book because it chaps their hide. It cramps their style. I mean, the Book indicates right here – no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no cursing, no pre-marital sex, no pornography, uh, and that right there effects your lifestyle in which case I can see your point.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 2:23 AM
Clyde5445 on March 11, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Poptech may be overbearing thick headed Mitten, but to outright marginalize him, and me for that matter for even coming to his defense, makes you no better.
An illustration of hypocrisy. If you were a Conservative Voice, you would argue conservative points instead of appointing yourself the Simon Cowell of the 2011 American Idol season brought to you by the GOP.
chunderroad on March 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM
you called me a fake conservative out of no where, and have yet to demonstrate how I am a fake conservative…and lecture me about if I was a true conservative I would act like a sage and discuss conservative points…and the irony, you are now calling me a hypocrite.
As far as sheathing my blade on calling people out for being zombies…I didn’t call everyone here a zombie, but it seems you took it that way…truth to the soul? Again, I could vote for Fred, Mitt, Rudy, Sarah…they seem reasonable fair votes. But I’m not going to put my blinders on and give them my full trust. I did that with Bush, and therefore no longer consider myself a republican. I am a conservative, a Rush Limbaugh Glenn Beck George Washington conservative, with a dash of Ann. And so I will listen to pop tech when he bashes Sarah. And I will defend Sarah when I know he went too far. And I will listen to people’s complaints about Mitt, but will defend Mitt when they go too far…when they are being dishonest with their quest to make Huck or Sarah or whoever they hope for to win look better by tearing the other guy down.
All I ask for is that we have an honest discussion. That we say hooray for when anyone says the right thing, and boo when they don’t. I do not trust politicians, but am adult enough that they are a necessary evil. Government is like fire, and we must always keep them under control, or we will get burned, like we have been in the last 100 years.
Again, to Sarah who you worship…and there is plenty that she does that we can certainly get excited about…but is she as conservative as you think she is? I bet she isn’t. Certainly more than Mitt with regards to guns, but what about getting rid of the Department of Education, getting rid of all of the social programs on the federal level including Social Security?
And again, I also think this energy on primaries for 2012 is counter productive…think local. Obama can’t get anywhere if his poll numbers are 30 or less.
Conservative Voice on March 12, 2009 at 3:44 AM
Let me explain something to you. You do not do yourself, or your beloved Huckabee, any favors by hurling scripture at everyone over everything that is ever said. I am not looking for any religious consultation here at HotAir, yet you persist in preaching at me nonstop. If I want Biblical guidance, there are people in my life that I can turn to, when I decide I need it. All you are doing is coming off as a stuffy prude. You also are not helping conservatives in general by giving credence to the “right-wing religious nut” line. I tried to be nice to you a few times, and even agreed about Washington and the Bible.
I do think that our society is based on the Judeo-Christian principles found in the Bible, and the farther we get away from that the worse off we are. What good is an honor system when no one is left with any honor? These are general principles, not specific religious doctrine from one particular denomination or another. My point to you is when you beat someone over the head with scripture like you do, you do not allow them to come to the Word of their own volition, and it results in people like me being pushed away from the very things you are saying. That’s why I chose the phrase “throwing your Bible at me” because that is literally what you are doing. It’s a big turn off to me.
I seek spiritual counsel in my own way, at my own pace. Yes, I am a sinner. So is everyone else. Judge not lest ye be judged. Remember that one? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Mind the beam in your eye before worrying with the mote in mine. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Now is there not some wise guidance for you in those lines? Are you not sinning yourself in some way?
In short, this is current events and politics here, not Sunday Sermon time. A wise quote from the Bible once in a while isn’t out of bounds at all. However, scripture is the only source you ever cite, no matter the topic. How about the Constitution, the Declaration, The Federalist Papers, the diaries of Washington, Jefferson, even Reagan? Do you ever read anything else? My advice to you is to broaden your horizons on political philosophy, and render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.
Brian1972 on March 12, 2009 at 3:56 AM
Your display of bigotry is a perfect example of what is wrong in America today. You use George Washington’s words as if you are the embodiment of his ideology. GW wasn’t a religious bigot. He allowed that religion was necessary but never choose one over the other. You have denigrated everyone who doesn’t subscribe to your specific belief system. I expect you are one of those zealous evangelical types who has no room in your belief system for any view other than your own. In other words, the very definition of a bigot.
csdeven on March 12, 2009 at 7:39 AM
Watch out bigot, your projection is showing.
csdeven on March 12, 2009 at 7:41 AM
yo quero taco Romney
hanzblinx on March 12, 2009 at 7:47 AM
I was only referring to his losing the party nomination to Nixon in ‘68 & the fact that he came back to run again later & won & went on to become prez.
As far as comparisons between he & Romney- I see some similarities, but no-they are not carbon copies of each other.
Reagan had to compromise as prez (farm programs) just like Romney did as gov MA.
So get a hold of yourself before going on the attack, will ya?
Badger40 on March 12, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Are you totally discounting Cantor and Pawlenty? I think Pawlenty especially has both national ambitions and merit, is well spoken, conservative and comes without the unfortunate taint of being a rich guy.
redfoxbluestate on March 12, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Maybe you didn’t know this, but the King James Bible was created much the same way…with historians, and scholars arguing what should be included and what should be excluded.
So your problem with how the Nicene Creed (and similar) was created, you have to have the same with the KJ bible.
Now all this would be moot, if someone (even a child molester) just stuck their head in a hat, with a “seer” stone, and came out with a perfect rendition of the “truth”…which then wasn’t so perfect so had to be revised to become perfect…but that can’t happen.
So like the KJV of the bible, the Nicene Creed was created. It “summarizes”, in a couple of paragraphs what Christians believe in…if you don’t accept the Nicene Creed (or it’s “brothers”), then you aren’t a Christian.
right2bright on March 12, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Enough of your anti-Mormon ridicule. Go away. That kind or rhetoric should have no place in political discussions. No religion should be disrespected in America. No one of any faith should have to face your personal crusade or jihad against their beliefs. Terrorists do that, not Americans. Act like one.
Lori on March 12, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Still haven’t seen the Rominator’s resume yet…
das411 on March 12, 2009 at 4:01 PM
It is a great American tradition that the accused gets to face his accuser. Provide me with evidence of your claim. And for the record I think that you are a very dangerous individual. What I mean by that is you are a threat to free speech. You use the word “bigot” so much and so often that it has lost its meaning when it comes from you. “Bigot” is your favourite word. “Bigot” this. “Bigot” that. You’re a “bigot”. He’s a “bigot”. I should start counting how many times you say somebody is a “bigot”. Perhaps the most banal argument is to call someone a “bigot” when they clearly are not. It lessens the real impact of what being a bigot means when it becomes a playground insult in the hands of some of you in this forum.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Brian, I read your comments and I disagree with most everything you said. I think you’re being a little unfair too. I believe you have issues that need resolving with God, that’s what I think. I contemplated whether I should even respond because I don’t think you realize that I am trying to help you, not hurt or embarrass you. I don’t think the message is getting through. Like many, you have misapplied the words of Jesus. The phrase “judge not” does not mean that everybody should just be nice, pat each other on the back, and let immoral conduct go on as if nothing ever happened. It doesn’t mean we haven’t the right to draw conclusions about wrong conduct and wickedness by others. You forget that we are told elsewhere in Scriptures to “Try the spirits,” to “prove all things,” and to “beware of false prophets.” We are to use discernment and distinguish between the false and the true, but we are not to condemn others which I have not done. Jesus warns against condemning the actions or motives of others. Only the LORD has the right, since He has full knowledge of a person’s actions and motives. Secondly, the way we are presenting the Gospel today in many of our churches is radically different from the way it has been presented for the last couple thousand years. The way that Jesus presented it. The way Paul did. Great preachers like Charles Spurgeon, and Whitfield, and Wesley. Men with powerful ministries. And what modern evangelism has done is it has decided to avoid addressing the conscience because it doesn’t want to make a person feel guilty. It doesn’t wanna offend them. So we say things that appeal to a person’s desire for happiness, instead of showing them their sin and letting their guilty conscience drive them to a merciful God. Well, I’m sorry if I have offended you Brian because that is not my intention. I don’t even know you but I care about you. I’m not judging anybody. I’m telling you them the truth. I’m just being me. The Bible clearly warns, “And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire” (Revelation 20:8). It should be grievous for any Christian to make light of or joke about hell, or not to be concerned about the lost. This verse should break our hearts, drive us to weep for the unsaved, and then motivate us to put legs to our prayers and plead sinners to turn to the Savior. In summary, to be a good Christian you have to do what God says, and I have no sympathy for those who argue that they are free from that restriction in political matters. I’ll be praying for you, Brian. I’ve said all I’ve got to say on this for now. I do hope to see you in heaven one day. Thank you. Amen.
apacalyps on March 12, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 7 8 9