"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -Samuel Adams
Showing posts with label Mike Huckabee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Huckabee. Show all posts
Thursday, March 6, 2008
On Beer and Politics
A word of encouragement from a patriot. In light of the discontent among the various conservative groups over John McCain's nomination, I thought that this quote is timely. So to all you Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee fans out there, crack open a Sam Adams and remember:
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Democracy in Action
Check out this article in the Washington Post from an older staff writer regarding deadlocked and brokered conventions of yesteryear. I am looking forward to seeing McCain, Paul and Huckabee come to blows. That sounds like fun. It would not be cool if Obama and Clinton got into a fistfight because of the gender differences (its pc for me to claim that at least) but my money would be on Clinton, I hear she packs a mean right cross.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/03/AR2008030303277.html?nav=rss_politics
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/03/AR2008030303277.html?nav=rss_politics
Friday, February 15, 2008
Should Huckabee and Paul Drop Out?
The idea has been put forward on various political blogs, tv shows, radio shows and even in a recent Facebook/ABC opinion poll that Huckabee and Paul should drop out now since Romney did. The arguments vary but most are some variation of the unelectability at this point or that them losing to McCain somehow hurts him in the general.
Ideas matter and both of them have important ideas that can and should be addressed at convention. Politics has become more about winning and less about democracy. Everyone's ideas should all be represented at convention so the platform is balanced and not just one man's vision.
With the definition of conservatism apparently up for grabs, I for one would prefer to at the very least see more than just McCain's "conservatism" represented when they draft MY party platform.
Ideas matter and both of them have important ideas that can and should be addressed at convention. Politics has become more about winning and less about democracy. Everyone's ideas should all be represented at convention so the platform is balanced and not just one man's vision.
With the definition of conservatism apparently up for grabs, I for one would prefer to at the very least see more than just McCain's "conservatism" represented when they draft MY party platform.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
California Debate
Tonights debate...
McCain-It seems like he is so happy with the Wolfowitz/Bush doctrine, Bush's economic policy, the current state of our economy. I can't help but wonder if his cognitive functions are all there. He blatantly lies, doesn't respond to the questions actually asked and name drops in place of presenting a defense for deviation from his party line. He kept making that awful smile in place of what you know he really wanted to do, which was light up Romney and Anderson the same way that he has to numerous Republican Senators and aides. Seemed to be running toward Bush while everyone else was running away. Kept Romney on the ropes and the spotlight off of himself.
Huckabee-So funny. Starting to take off the gloves a bit in his differences with Bush. Potentially has an old right streak he is trying to keep under wraps? He almost hints at, especially with his NRO article that he may think we should take a non interventionist approach in the future but with Iraq, "we broke it, we bought it." Sounding more and more Teddy Roosevelt every debate as well. Laid off the focus on his faith which is to his credit largely but may make some question his credibility. The Clintons talk about God a lot in the south too. Seemed a little whiny and much less in control with his not enough question bits.
Romney-"Facts are stubborn things." He did well. While I may disagree with him on some issues, he is a great speaker, a great debater and wears better suits than all the other candidates combined. Probably needed a much stronger night than he had. Should have tried turning the tables on McCain and focused on the economy. Paul showed during the last debate that the economy is a HUGE weakness of McCain's. Romney needed to go for the jugular here and didn't.
Paul-Not given many questions tonite. Didn't handle the ones he did receive very well. As most of you know I strongly support Ron Paul, but don't need to hear him rehash the same points with every question. I do agree that our occupation of over a hundred countries impacts our economy in severe and unneccessary ways, I also know that I am in the minority opinion. One must never hide the truth or lie, but taking every opportunity you get to talk to share those things which keep you in the minority is just bad strategy. But one of the best moments of the night had to be when he said, "I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with," he said. "They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy."
McCain-It seems like he is so happy with the Wolfowitz/Bush doctrine, Bush's economic policy, the current state of our economy. I can't help but wonder if his cognitive functions are all there. He blatantly lies, doesn't respond to the questions actually asked and name drops in place of presenting a defense for deviation from his party line. He kept making that awful smile in place of what you know he really wanted to do, which was light up Romney and Anderson the same way that he has to numerous Republican Senators and aides. Seemed to be running toward Bush while everyone else was running away. Kept Romney on the ropes and the spotlight off of himself.
Huckabee-So funny. Starting to take off the gloves a bit in his differences with Bush. Potentially has an old right streak he is trying to keep under wraps? He almost hints at, especially with his NRO article that he may think we should take a non interventionist approach in the future but with Iraq, "we broke it, we bought it." Sounding more and more Teddy Roosevelt every debate as well. Laid off the focus on his faith which is to his credit largely but may make some question his credibility. The Clintons talk about God a lot in the south too. Seemed a little whiny and much less in control with his not enough question bits.
Romney-"Facts are stubborn things." He did well. While I may disagree with him on some issues, he is a great speaker, a great debater and wears better suits than all the other candidates combined. Probably needed a much stronger night than he had. Should have tried turning the tables on McCain and focused on the economy. Paul showed during the last debate that the economy is a HUGE weakness of McCain's. Romney needed to go for the jugular here and didn't.
Paul-Not given many questions tonite. Didn't handle the ones he did receive very well. As most of you know I strongly support Ron Paul, but don't need to hear him rehash the same points with every question. I do agree that our occupation of over a hundred countries impacts our economy in severe and unneccessary ways, I also know that I am in the minority opinion. One must never hide the truth or lie, but taking every opportunity you get to talk to share those things which keep you in the minority is just bad strategy. But one of the best moments of the night had to be when he said, "I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with," he said. "They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
