The Choices on the Right are just that BAD

Southern Christians won't vote for a Mormon. Southerners won't vote for a black man. Independents will not vote for Bachmann or Perry. People not in a coma will not vote for Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul. Nobody knows who Huntsman is and he is a Mormon. Who does that leave that you think is going to waltz into the job as POTUS? If I've forgotten anyone after watching all of their debates, they obviously don't have a shot either. Keep hoping. Let me know how it works out for you.

 

Yet idiots will vote for an inexperienced community agitator who, as expected, has turned out to be a complete & utter failure a second time around? I'll take my chances on "any of the above".

 

I was talking about the Right-wing base. You might take your chances but the reast of the RW base do not agree. Must be nice to be the lone voice in the wilderness out there on the fringe?

BTW Criticize my candidate when you actually have one of your own.

 

You keep thinking that way - until BO is defeated!

 

I hardly think classifying BO & his reign as a failure places me on the fringe of anything....

 

Again, criticize my candidate when you actually have one.

 

Day one. As Commander in Chief. An actual designated power of the Presidency..our foreign interventionism, nation building and military status quo would change immediately. Iraq would truly be done not just transferred to managed mercenaries. Afghanistan would be done. Libya, done. All the rest of the places we are likely to get involved in, done. Add in a major pull back in overseas troops and bases and infrastructure and a renewed stance of protecting our own country over building others and our military budget would shrink to realistic pre 'new age of war' levels.

I also guarantee the many erosions of liberty and national morality in this country, such as the TSA, Patriot Act, Gitmo, renditions, surrogate torture, wire taps, and many other things would be reigned in very quickly as many of them can fall under the power of the President.

As far as most of the economic issues and what the government should be... there is no doubt he is to the right of me as all the Republicans are...and just as Obama and the Democrats are far to the left of me. So, from where I stand, both parties are equally bad, extremist choices for what I would like to see the government, revenue and spending be. Aka...a wash.

And since the President is not the legislative body, I would choose the significant number of things that I do agree with Ron Paul on which would be very good for this country and are also things that he can actually change as a President quite readily.

 

Why wait? You have succeeded very well in criticizing every possible candidate the Republicans could possible nominate.

BTW, See! I don't even have to shout!

 

Newt and Bill working together? There's one from the vault. Sorry, that's not the way it is now. And it's totally characteristic that you are apparently absolving the Republican leadership of all blame here. It's Pelosi (who I don't think is speaker anymore) Reid, and Obama all day every day for you guys.

The Republican Party is one big NO. As in no compromise, no end to filibusters, no end to blocking votes, no on discussion, no on everything that this President or the Democrats propose. Republicans have redefined compromise to mean give us everything we want and then some and we'll be happy to work with you. That's the reality. It's time for the rest of us to accept that. And I think maybe it's sinking in.

 

Hummm! You (the liberal side) keep touting how Clinton handed Bush a balanced budget. You really think Clinton wrote, voted on, and passed that budget all by himself? If all your blame is on the Republicans now (even if they only control the House), all of your praise ought to be for the Republicans for the balanced budget while Clinton was president. Let's see how you twist this one.

 

But as moen has proudly pointed out, BO can get anything he wants done through Executive Order. He has no regard for the other side of the aisle so it is only logica lto extrapolate that he hasn't used Executive Order because those in his own party are not on board.

 

If I wasn't voting for Obama I'd consider writing in "Stujoe" after these comments.

 

Moen, my opinion on why right-wing extremists here haven't declared support for a candidate is that someone else hasn't made the decision for them yet. They need to see who the likely winner is, with a high probability, before they can "commit". It's not about policies, it's about politics. When a concensus is reached in the party, watch how fast the right-wing here endorses him/her!

I'll make it easy for them: It's Romney. Ok, maybe not easy for them at all, especially after I endorsed him for them.

 

I have already posted whom I would like, but I will let you stew about it just so you can keep posting BS like this.

 

Heh, their choices just got a bit tougher. Seems Herman Cain's got some 'splaining to do about some problems with sexual harassment when he headed up the restaurateurs' lobby.
And I agree, they are just waiting to be told who to support. Their talk-show leaders seem divided and so the kiddies are at sea.

 

Probably because it hurts too much to say it twice.

 

Absolutely spot on. They are milling around in a quandary waiting for someone to tell them who to support.

 

On the contrary--I'm also disturbed by our lack of good choices. I'm not waiting for anyone to tell me to vote for or who to support. I feel that Gingrich is a liability to the Republican party and whoever suggested that it would be good for him to run should be given serious psychotropic meds until s/he recovers. Perry is a disappointment to me, because he's fiddled with the facts of his tenure in TX and because even though he claims to be supportive of hunting, he's also signed into law some truly horrible anti-pet/anti-breeder legislation forced through by animal rights activists. Whether you care about animal issues or not, that kind of action does not bode well for his integrity in the face of special interest groups. Ron Paul and Michelle Bachman have both been rendered all but inconsequential at this point, although Bachman may have had something to contribute. Romney? I could get behind him, but I don't trust his former foray into the whole socialized medicine thing. The Republicans need a fresh candidate that will come out of nowhere, take the world by storm with brilliance and engaging personality, and wow everyone with his or her ability to work with both sides of the aisle. Wouldn't hurt for the Democrats, either.

 

More likely because the first 2 times I posted it in your threads, you did not bother to read it

 

I said "right-wing extremists" ...... are you saying...