Quote of the day
posted at 10:30 pm on March 10, 2009 by Allahpundit
“As ‘loyal’ opponents, conservatives would avoid the ‘politics of personal destruction,’ which successfully demonized individuals for their principled convictions during the past 15 years but consequently eroded American’s faith in the ability of all elected leaders to solve the pressing problems facing our country. Conservatives will need to band together to defend one other to succeed in changing the tone of the debate.
This ‘loyal opposition’ should base its policies on the two pillars of conservatism – a bedrock belief in limited and efficient government and a passion for reform of the services government must provide. Our guiding principles should be that government should not grow faster than people’s ability to pay for it, that it is immoral to indebt the next generation to pay for things in the here and now, and there is always a better, improved way to deliver government services.”
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 am going to have to go back to the DailKOS, HuffPO, and DU to glean “Chimpy McShrubHalliburton!” being “loyal opposiition”…..
hammer and nails to our foes and if the country burns be it on their heads not mine.
sven10077 on March 10, 2009 at 10:32 PM
Conservatives are expected to step into the ring unarmed, and to fight fair, while the Democrats are armed to the teeth, and show total disdain for the rule of law.
I agree we should be civil and principled, forthright, and abide by the rules. But we are fighting an insipid enemy, and we must coordinate and plan our attacks. Of course the enemy will accuse us of all sorts of conspiracies, but this is a fight we must win. In this case, the means are just as important as the ends.
stonemeister on March 10, 2009 at 10:34 PM
I love people who bring knives to gun fights!
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2009 at 10:34 PM
I say we hang the Marquis of Queensbury and after. . . start aiming for happy sacs.
- The Cat
MirCat on March 10, 2009 at 10:37 PM
“conservatives would avoid the ‘politics of personal destruction,”
Jeb doesn’t speak for me. 8)
Dusty on March 10, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Allah, you should have made this an update to the Romney blog below….
Vashta.Nerada on March 10, 2009 at 10:38 PM
There is only one rule people need to know:
Politicians want to grow the size and/or role of Government.
Statesmen want to reduce the size and/or role of Government.
We have a flood of politicians and are in a famine of Statesmen. Parties do not matter. R and D do not matter. It is the outlook the person has.
Elect Statesmen. It is the only way that things can become sane again. The quoted comment is that of a politician. We should NEVER grow the role of government, regardless of the people’s ability to pay for it. That is where “conservatism” went wrong, believing that growing cancer slowly is ok. Cancer is still cancer, it is never healthy for it to grow. The Government is a benign cancer, swiftly becoming malignant.
Voidseeker on March 10, 2009 at 10:39 PM
i dont have a problem w/ any of htat. just beause they fling doesnt mean we need to. as a matter of fact we certainly dont need to. we have facts and results on our side.
and this
is so dead on its scary. i thought he was less a conservative then W, but maybe not. frum should take a lesson from this column
chasdal on March 10, 2009 at 10:39 PM
I disagree. When the stakes are all the marbles, when losing means the end of the republic as we’ve known it for over 200 years, winning is the only thing that counts. Remember, it’s easy to get forgiveness than permission.
keep the change on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
This is pretty sensible advise.
billy on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
you mean offering amnesty to illegals, and calling it “immigration reform” , Jeb, darling
runner on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I thought there were 3 pillars to conservatism. Only two? That makes for one hell of a wobbly chair.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
This ‘loyal opposition’ should base its policies on the two pillars of conservatism – a bedrock belief in limited and efficient government and a passion for reform of the services government must provide.
This says it all. Simple but powerful. As to the rest, Jeb is not living in reality anymore.
catlady on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Whoever wrote this–maybe it really was Jeb!–is a good writer.
I’d support him for Pres if not for amnesty and the BDS phenomenon.
Nessuno on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I disagree with the first paragraph and agree with the second. We do need to concentrate on limited government and controlled spending. However, being nice and bipartisan doesn’t achieve crap. This is politics; not grade school. Democrats came to power by ripping apart Republicans.
amerpundit on March 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I think that we should propose a law that says that government spending must be proportional to GDP. If we go into a recession, the government must cut spending. If we are in a boom, they can increase it, but only with the knowledge that all spending increases could be temporary.
That would handcuff these jerks.
jimmy the notable on March 10, 2009 at 10:41 PM
” limited and efficient government”
word parsing perhaps — but if it was the 2nd it wouldn’t need to be the 1st — this is where the compassionate conservatism gets a [destructive!] foothold …
/short form — jeb, stfu …
Buckaroo on March 10, 2009 at 10:42 PM
You mean indebting each household with $80K for the Congress’ Stimulus Package (so far) isn’t neccesarily a good thing? Say it’s not so, Jeb!
Colorado Anne on March 10, 2009 at 10:42 PM
It’s the Jeb-ster, being Presidential. Leaving the politics of personal destruction to others.
exdeadhead on March 10, 2009 at 10:42 PM
[stonemeister on March 10, 2009 at 10:34 PM]
And don’t forget to bring an effigy of your favorite unbiased reporter to burn.
Dusty on March 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Exactly. It’s like we’re playing against the Oakland Raiders and the refs (MSM) are letting them get away with murder while we’re getting flagged for sneezing.
Patrick S on March 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM
There is a marxist in the White House and a band of total lunatics controlling Congress, and they got there by underhanded and illegal means along with a neo-Pravda media working fully on their behalf. This is not a time to for the faint of heart. This is for the future of the US. Nothing less. People who treat this as if it were any run-of-the-mill political scuffle are whistling past the graveyard.
progressoverpeace on March 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM
I think Jeb’s column has good ideas except I don’t think he understands the nature of the Dems or of the political fight in D.C.
INC on March 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Allah,
read your first paragraph again.
neuquenguy on March 10, 2009 at 10:45 PM
The loyal opposition stuff is fine, if both parties are working within the context of our social contract, the Constitution. However, the new Socialist Admin. is in a different place. Their announced goal is to foment crisis for the sake of implementing fundamental changes to our society, a good many of which are unconsititutional and unAmerican. This is a despicable and fundamentally disloyal strategy.
And so, as George Bush never quite figured out, when it comes to the left, we are not merely debating the details within the broad framework of an agreement. The Marquis of Queensbury stuff has no place, in this context.
We are in a fight. I want fighters. (And I don’t believe I can ever buy into another Bush as one of our fighers.)
james23 on March 10, 2009 at 10:45 PM
AP highlights
and his thin skin in one swell foop.
Stephen M on March 10, 2009 at 10:45 PM
I’ve OD’d on people telling me what “we” must do and what “we” must not do. All of you: go away.
Blake on March 10, 2009 at 10:45 PM
You notice, as Jeb runs through a list of “good” governors, he pointedly leaves out his successor in Florida….
notropis on March 10, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Loyal to the Opposition of the Destruction of America?
Get off that right now!
old trooper2 on March 10, 2009 at 10:48 PM
I guess the typo is in the original:
Conservatives will need to band together to defend one other to succeed in changing the tone of the debate.
neuquenguy on March 10, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Meanwhile, the White House is coordinating personal attacks with blogs and other media on private citizens who happen to have a radio show. Or just various other private citizens who do not have a radio show.
SouthernGent on March 10, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Your brother blew a big hole into that. Too late. The left and the right are pretty much the same. We’ve lost our “representative government”. We’re scroomed from all sides. The left and the right, too many, don’t understand the Galt effect. Not yet, anyway.
Entelechy on March 10, 2009 at 10:49 PM
I would like to know Jeb’s definition of “loyal opposition.” Out of curiosity I looked it up on the web. Wiki said:
That seems to be the common use of the term in Britain. Wiki went on to say something I didn’t know:
That certainly rules out the Dems. They were the “traitorous opposition.” They trashed the idea that Politics should stop at the waters edge! long ago!
INC on March 10, 2009 at 10:50 PM
On this thread he didn’t write a singe one. What are you referring to?
Entelechy on March 10, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Aye, there’s the rub.
toliver on March 10, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Jeb is a nice guy but he is also a pro-amnesty RINO pussy.
echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 10:51 PM
Jeb/Bobby ’12!
jgapinoy on March 10, 2009 at 10:51 PM
Brrr, s/b “single one”
Tell me what you’re asking of a non-paragraph?
Entelechy on March 10, 2009 at 10:51 PM
To the first paragraph quoted in the actual post.
neuquenguy on March 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM
NOOOOO more Bushes, Clintons, Obamas, Kennedys. NO MORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Entelechy on March 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Wait a second…these “two pillars” are what defines conservatism? Well, I’m glad we cleared that up.
flipflop on March 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Try some maturity. Disagree agreeably. Don’t hate people, especially your allies. Bush is right on most issues.
jgapinoy on March 10, 2009 at 10:53 PM
AP didn’t write a thing. That was written by Jeb Bush. Now, tell me what you mean. This is QoD (quote of day).
Entelechy on March 10, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Ever feel like we’re playing the Raiders with no refs around?
Rhinoboy on March 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM
This kind of nicey – nice political correctness is what is WRONG with the Republican party…the moral high ground means nothing if you’re extinct. We need FIGHT these PsOS democrap/socialists tooth and nail. Go back to nicey-nice when the corpse is cold!
jwp1964 on March 10, 2009 at 11:01 PM
When those in power act like enemies of the Constitution and citizens of the nation, they are enemies.
No “loyal opposition” possible. They must be deprived of power.
Sounds as if ol’ Jeb has had too much of that D.C. Kool-Ade. I didn’t think much of him before, think less of him now.
MrScribbler on March 10, 2009 at 11:03 PM
I don’t hate Jeb, like I said he is a nice guy. But like his brother and dad he is weak in many ways. And he is pro amnesty, a BIG issue. The Bush’s let people shit on them and do nothing. That is the last thing we need right now. We need fighters who can articulate conservatism in a way that resonates with the public. God love the Bush boys, but none of them did that very well.
echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Agreed.
You don’t hate him? Would you like me to call your son or your dad what you called Bush?
jgapinoy on March 10, 2009 at 11:06 PM
A Bush says this??? A Bush?
ha ha
ha ha ha ha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
PrincipledPilgrim on March 10, 2009 at 11:07 PM
Wait a second…these “two pillars” are what defines conservatism? Well, I’m glad we cleared that up.
[flipflop on March 10, 2009 at 10:52 PM]
Jeb was rolling. AP left out the preamble ” … when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor ….” on the cutting room floor.
Dusty on March 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
It’s really not that important. I know this was a quote and already pointed out what I think is wrong with the paragraph:
neuquenguy on March 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Sorry, Jebber, but if you try to take the high road with liberals you’ll get your genitals cut off. Daddy and big brother both discovered that.
Percy_Peabody on March 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
In order to win “the game”, you need to understand today’s rules…………
…….. George Soros, with his Millions of Dollars, created an army of think tanks, focus groups, ACORN associates, La Raza allies, bought politicians including John McCain, all the Main Stream Media video and print, all of the Unions, Labor and Teachers especially, Hollywood, Late Night jesters, Global Climate Change Religions, ……………
It is never ending.
……… What we have on our side is the truth, and what Mr. Teleprompter and the Democrat controlled Congress’s policies that is flushing the toilet on this country.
It starts with you…… every single one of you who are reading this to stand the fu#k up, and take a stand.
Get rid of the RINO’s, create another “Contract”, and shove it down every Liberal Democrat’s pie hole……..
Seven Percent Solution on March 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
You are soooo right!
PrincipledPilgrim on March 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
And he is pro amnesty …
[echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:04 PM]
Sure, the 2009 one, but what about the 2017 one? I don’t think he’s made his position known on the latter.
Dusty on March 10, 2009 at 11:11 PM
The term “pussy” wouldn’t apply to my son. And don’t be an idiot, this is a comment section on a blog where folks can just air their views anonymously with abandon. Most of us tend to dispense with all the politically correct crap here. I think I would have the good sense to not call Jeb a pussy in public. Savvy?
echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Hey Jeb you simpleton! It might be sort of difficult not to grow government when you’re Bro allowed 12-20 million illegal immigrants stream across the border under his watch and did very little to stop it. Of course now we have to pay for their hospitals, schools, food stamps, government housing, prison to jail the millions of criminals, and on and on.
Here is an example of what is wrong with the GOP Hierarchy. They are so clueless and out of touch. Darvin Dowdy
Darvin Dowdy on March 10, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Jeb’s position on amnesty is known, he supports it. His wife is Hispanic. It is not a good issue for him.
echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Here is Jeb quite clearly trashing Tancredo and supporting amnesty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtcLWrt9NeI
Case closed.
echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:18 PM
[echosyst on March 10, 2009 at 11:13 PM]
I guess that went over your head. Sorry for being so subtle.
Dusty on March 10, 2009 at 11:18 PM
But none of them are conservatives, so WTF are they talking about?
Kick ass in defense of the Constitution, secure the borders, name the enemy’s ideology clearly , and defeat it.
The rest is just dancing in tutus at a fey Georgetown soiree.
profitsbeard on March 10, 2009 at 11:20 PM
And these fools don’t even try to hide it:
No question where the idiot messiah wants to go with the Constitution. It’s morbidly funny that the moron throws in his little “as it’s been interpreted”, which includes the interpretations that the actual writers of the document held. Just crazy.
I would like to see someone present the idiot messiah with a nicely framed version of one of Madison’s quotes:
“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”
–James Madison
… right before they drag the moron off to jail.
progressoverpeace on March 10, 2009 at 11:20 PM
When a fight is over, years from now, no one will discuss tactics. Just who won.
GarandFan on March 10, 2009 at 11:22 PM
It appears that most Republican leaders have to some degree surrendered on the issue of limited government. More and more they are coming tom the conclusion that the electorate is too far gone in terms of expecting more from government and have decided that the only strategy is to deliver the services more efficiently than the democrats. This seems to be Newt’s position as well. Is anybody championing a minimalistic philosophy of government any more?
neuquenguy on March 10, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I am.
Mojave Mark on March 10, 2009 at 11:26 PM
The *only* way to make the Left give up the ‘politics of personal destruction’ is to give them a heavy dose of it.
Both Bushes tried to appease them and look what they got for it.
18-1 on March 10, 2009 at 11:26 PM
The answer is to clearly articulate conservative principles without either appeasing or destroying people…be like Reagan.
jgapinoy on March 10, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Tea Party attendence is MANDATORY !
Conservatives have to show themselves and stop being the Silent busy as hell Majority.
Tea Parties are Local and Convenient
BE THERE 4/15
JayTee on March 10, 2009 at 11:32 PM
So, here’s the plan. On April 1, 2009, all Americans are asked to send a TEABAG to Washington , D.C. You do not have to enclose a note or any other information unless you so desire. Just a TEABAG. Many cities are organizing protests. If you simply search, “New American Tea Party”, several sites will come up. If you aren’t the ‘protester’ type, simply make your one voice heard with a TEABAG. Your one voice will become a roar when joined with millions of others that feel the same way. Yes, something needs to be done but the lack of confidence as shown by the steady decline in the stock market speaks volumes.
This was not my idea. I visited the sites of the ‘New American Tea Party’ and an online survey showed over 90% of thousands said they would send the teabag on April 1. Why, April 1?? We want them to reach Washington by April 15. Will you do it? I will. Send it to; 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington , D.C. 20500 ..
Visit the web sites for more information about the ‘New American Tea Party’. I would encourage everyone to go ahead and get the envelope ready to mail, then just drop it in the mail April 1. Can’t guarantee what the postage will be by then, it is going up as we speak, but have your envelope ready. What will this cost you? A little time and a 40 something cent stamp.
What could you receive in benefits? Maybe, just maybe, our elected officials will start to listen to the people. Take out the Pork. Tell us how the money is being spent. We want TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. Remember, the money will be spent over the next 4-5 years. It is not too late.
- Marble (commenter on politico)
MB4 on March 10, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Jeb Bush advising conservatives to bring knives to gunfights? OK, we’ll get back to you on that, Jeb.
Jim62sch on March 10, 2009 at 11:40 PM
If only this were true.
exception on March 10, 2009 at 11:45 PM
You notice he places no limit on the size of the government or a limit on the services offered. It must not offer services it can’t pay for, and it must be efficient in delivering those services are the pillars of his conservatism. I’m sorry but that doesn’t fit my definition of conservatism. I think some “services” cannot ever be offered by the government because they will hollow a person like cancer.
DFCtomm on March 10, 2009 at 11:46 PM
MB4 at 11:39 PM-
I would suggest that people only send USED teabags.
Otherwise the bastards in Washington might use them.
Don’t encourage (feed) the s.o.b.’s, even accidentally.
profitsbeard on March 10, 2009 at 11:49 PM
How about we all pick our favorite Congress person and teabag them?
jwp1964 on March 10, 2009 at 11:51 PM
^^ ‘Cause he’s got … high hopes!
He’s got … high hopes!
He’s got … high apple piiiiie in the … sky-opes!
Please … enough of the Bush mentality that we’re all playing a civil game of croquet here. I’m sick of this … seriously. His brother, and his legacy, are perhaps permanently destroyed by the politics of destruction elevated into an art form by the Left.
Folks … this is a war … and the other side is using nukes while Bush wants us to continue the “Rope-A-Dope” strategy. Sorry … tain’t workin’.
HondaV65 on March 10, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Oh yes, lets follow the Bush model of defending ones self. It worked out so well these past 8 years. He stayed above the fray, allowed himself to be made the boogey man for every liberal whack conspiracy which than bled into the mainstream. Bush allowed the RNC to defend him so much it had no more fight it in for ’08.
Too many people carried water for Bush those 8 years. Lets not do that again. Let the person running carry it for awhile.
portlandon on March 11, 2009 at 12:04 AM
1. The left of today has no principled convictions, they only lust for power. We should plainly state that.
2. I am not looking for Politicians to solve my problems, I want them to defend MY FREEDOM and then basically stay out of my way and not steal the fruit of my labor.
3. People have lost faith in their leaders because they are corrupt, incompetent and flat out dumb. And they don’t serve US, they server themselves.
4. Jeb’s brother tried to “change the tone” and got his as handed to him and we are still paying the price for it.
echosyst on March 11, 2009 at 12:04 AM
As if I’d give that privilege to any of them! Waterboarding, however…
SouthernGent on March 11, 2009 at 12:05 AM
Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
- George S. Patton
MB4 on March 11, 2009 at 12:05 AM
I have had quite enough of the Bush brand of conservatism.
Kjeil on March 11, 2009 at 12:13 AM
When there’s something beneficial for the country to be loyal about, elsewise unfurl a big banner on the floor of the house:
Are you nuts!
Speakup on March 11, 2009 at 12:14 AM
I’d rather send a donation to my favorite politician. It would actually do some good.
jgapinoy on March 11, 2009 at 12:23 AM
It ain’t war. It’s debate.
Clearly articulate conservative principles without either appeasing like W. or destroying people like Bubba C.
Let’s be like Reagan.
jgapinoy on March 11, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Jeb should read a book about Russia or Cuba and find out what happened to the “loyal opposition” there.
Meanwhile, the rest of us should focus on being the “well-armed lamb contesting the vote”.
joe_doufu on March 11, 2009 at 12:42 AM
My biggest worry when the Democrats and the MSM started the personal destruction campaign against Sarah Palin was that if it worked it would create a permanant change in American Politics.
It worked and now and everyone on the left from DailyKos to NBC has learned..”Hey we can pull this off!”
Now we see the Rush things coming from the White House as more of the same strategy. I am sorry but if Jeb Bush thinks that the Democrats and others are going to change to a different gameplan when they are within striking distance of all their socialist dreams he is the one who needs advice. I feel no guilt in fighting fire with fire in an all-out war.
Conan on March 11, 2009 at 12:53 AM
Are you suggesting that they are a dying species? *gasp*
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 12:58 AM
I was actually impressed by many parts of Jeb’s article. One can only fight the opposition if one has a solid opposing viewpoint.
I know many are angry about the “staying above the fray” approach”. Hopefully, after this “who-’killed’-the-conservative-movement” scapegoating is over, we can thank President Bush for the good things that he did for this country.
youngTXcon on March 11, 2009 at 1:05 AM
It’s certainly more than a debate. The future of our nation is at stake. Our freedom and liberty is at stake. If you think this is a simple competition, you are underestimating the importance of this struggle.
FloatingRock on March 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM
I disagree wholeheartedly. When you fight, you fight to win. McCain lost because he failed to fight. Obama won because he and his team cheated, bent the rules and were looked highly upon by the media. If you want to win America back you’ve got to have your facts ready, but you also need to have a handful of sand and the willingness to deliver a nut shot if it gets you closer to victory.
People, this is serious. This is not the time for Roberts Rules of Order. We are talking about the future of America. Fight to win or prepare to lose.
cannonball on March 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM
Serious question: Do we fight them the same way they fight us, or do we assertively challenge them on ideas & principles? Personally, I would rather have the Reagan approach than the Obama approach, but that’s just me.
youngTXcon on March 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM
youngTX, start with honor. But if you need to, get down and dirty. Sometimes you have to jump off of your horse to get the bull.
cannonball on March 11, 2009 at 1:08 AM
cannonball on March 11, 2009 at 1:07 AM
You presuppose that John McCain & his campaign were “principled” & “forthright” in their “conservative convictions”. I certainly didn’t hear him articulate any ideas better than the Dims, & certainly not conservative ones–did you?
youngTXcon on March 11, 2009 at 1:10 AM
cannonball on March 11, 2009 at 1:08 AM
I agree–but I don’t want us to take a page out of Richard Nixon’s playbook. Fight them to the death with the pillars of conservatism, challenge them on their ideals, rebut their nonsensical drivel.
But I don’t think we should have to cheat, etc., to do that. Conservatism can stand on its own merits if it’s articulated properly–which President Bush failed to do with the population-at-large.
youngTXcon on March 11, 2009 at 1:14 AM
Allahpundit, it’s a good thing to shed the funk and eat red meat. Congrats.
AES on March 11, 2009 at 1:19 AM
Jeb better tell left wing Democrat Camille Paglia to stop criticizing Obama’s team!
(See Drudge link.)
Play fair Camille!
Cut out the politics of personal destruction, now!
(People seem to forget that Reagan was no “Hail fellow, well met!” pantywaist kind of pol, as he mercilessly mocked Jimmy “Malaise” Carter into oblivion, then vilified the “evil empire” into extinction, and fought for the strongest Defense possible, not afraid of a fight.)
profitsbeard on March 11, 2009 at 1:22 AM
No, you don’t want a moderate and a conservative. Didn’t you learn from McCain/Palin? That bigoted little conservative dragged old Backdoor John down. You want a full on moderate ticket. You want maybe…Bush/Huckabee; or maybe Bush/Specter. I’d suggest Bush/McCain but I don’t think Backdoor John would play second fiddle to a Bush. But think of how happy we could make all the citizens of Mexico if we ran Bush/McCain. Wow. Moderates and amnesty. That’s what we need. That’s what America wants. Remember the GOP motto: We don’t throw away our garbage. We eat it.
Just an idle thought: I know jeb supports amnesty..and we know he’s all aquiver about the politics of personal destruction..so I’m sure he wasn’t one of the pro-amnesty Repubicans that referred to us Border Security first types as bigots was he? But then again, civility in politics is only a concern when it’s the Republicans turn to speak. The Democrats can get away with calling the President a moron and accusing him of being complicit in the 9/11 attacks, but if we say we want Barrack Obama to fail, we’re engaging in hate speech. Garbage. Jeb, I like your family, but with all due respect, retire. Find another hobby. Please don’t run for President. I’m sick of your family.
austinnelly on March 11, 2009 at 1:39 AM
OK, you have a point, but we also need to point out that Bush, for the most part, was no conservative. I’ll first be nice and mention the GOOD’s:
1) Good Supreme Court nominations (those that were confirmed)
2) Limiting government funding of morally controversial and unproven Embryonic Stem Cell Research. His stance on abortion on demand is something that is not to be ashamed of either.
3) Stable relations with China (considering the political climate). For that matter, he should also be given credit for improving ties with India.
4) Strong relations with the UK (initially)
5) Also, we can all agree that he at least was serious about terrorism.
Upstater85 on March 11, 2009 at 1:43 AM
Thanks for the link to the Paglia article. I swear she is my new favorite lib. One thing this whole Rush episode points to and Paglia makes this case objectively, Dems are focused on the wrong issues and don’t appear to be in any hurry to do anything different. Whoever emerges as the GOP nominee in 2012 will have no difficulty winning if the Obama admin continues with their buffoonery.
msmveritas on March 11, 2009 at 2:14 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »