It's funny that we don't recognize the greatness until after the fact. Even with Ronald Reagan in 1980, people voted for him not so much because of his quality, which wasn't obvious at the time, but simply because he wasn't Carter.
Similarly, there is a lot of hand-wringing over Mitt Romney not being the Great Conservative Hope based on his time as Governor of Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in the country. Hardly a fair judgment; and wasn't Reagan in a similar situation as governor of California?
What we do know of Romney is that he's a good, decent man, good father and husband, and at least doesn't view the US as a country that needs to apologize for its role in the world. I'll take that as a start, and withhold further judgment until more evidence is in.
Honestly, I have a hard time telling the difference anymore...
I'll vote for Romney, but I have little hope he'll do much that's significantly different than the Obamassesiah. He's been running for president for 6 years now. That makes him a career politician in my book. They exist to make deals with whoever can give them the most bang for the buck.
The only bright spot for me with Romney is I believe his SCOTUS nominees will be moderate instead of hard left. You can forget about anyone leaning right.
Dunno, look Mitt isn't my huckleberry, but as someone pointed out above he does seem to be a decent guy (good dad, likes dogs, has managed to stay married).
He is "establishment" but that's not necessarily horrid, and it beats the self styled revolutionary we have now.
Also he has the brains and chops to speak with Wall street banksters and know when they lying sacks of crap. He does seem to have a certain degree of serious management experience and talent, also he managed to be governor of Taxachussets which while suspicious to some means he can probably at least talk to that crowd without A. Breaking out in Hives B. Causing that Crowd to intrinsically think he's an alien.
Based on just studies in my head he has the profile of the sort of guy who might get stuff done in the "achievable good is better than unachievable perfection" mold.
Horrid compromise it may be, but look at it this way, the liberals didn't get control of so much and change the discourse over-night either. Took them decades.
It's funny that we don't recognize the greatness until after the fact. Even with Ronald Reagan in 1980, people voted for him not so much because of his quality, which wasn't obvious at the time, but simply because he wasn't Carter.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, there is a lot of hand-wringing over Mitt Romney not being the Great Conservative Hope based on his time as Governor of Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in the country. Hardly a fair judgment; and wasn't Reagan in a similar situation as governor of California?
What we do know of Romney is that he's a good, decent man, good father and husband, and at least doesn't view the US as a country that needs to apologize for its role in the world. I'll take that as a start, and withhold further judgment until more evidence is in.
I've always said "Better than a kick in the head". Same concept though. It's fun to see people's faces when they hear my 4yo daughter say it.
ReplyDeletes
I'd take a severe beating over either of the guys on the block.
ReplyDeleteThat's the thing- be careful if you DO wind up with a canidate who is saying all the things you like. Chances are, he's lying.
ReplyDeleteIf you have a candidate who is saying anything - he is lying.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I have a hard time telling the difference anymore...
ReplyDeleteI'll vote for Romney, but I have little hope he'll do much that's significantly different than the Obamassesiah. He's been running for president for 6 years now. That makes him a career politician in my book. They exist to make deals with whoever can give them the most bang for the buck.
The only bright spot for me with Romney is I believe his SCOTUS nominees will be moderate instead of hard left. You can forget about anyone leaning right.
They're both self-serving, pompous solipsists with Ivy League degrees.
ReplyDeleteIt is high time we the people started making it a requirement of our candidates that they do NOT have an Ivy League credential.
Dunno, look Mitt isn't my huckleberry, but as someone pointed out above he does seem to be a decent guy (good dad, likes dogs, has managed to stay married).
ReplyDeleteHe is "establishment" but that's not necessarily horrid, and it beats the self styled revolutionary we have now.
Also he has the brains and chops to speak with Wall street banksters and know when they lying sacks of crap. He does seem to have a certain degree of serious management experience and talent, also he managed to be governor of Taxachussets which while suspicious to some means he can probably at least talk to that crowd without A. Breaking out in Hives B. Causing that Crowd to intrinsically think he's an alien.
Based on just studies in my head he has the profile of the sort of guy who might get stuff done in the "achievable good is better than unachievable perfection" mold.
Horrid compromise it may be, but look at it this way, the liberals didn't get control of so much and change the discourse over-night either. Took them decades.
Early results indicate Lugar taking a severe beating.
ReplyDeleteI know I helped it happen, along with encouraging the wookie suiter in his hopeless quest.
Lugar conceded.
ReplyDeleteMy liberal and RINO friends have already started the facebook nonsense about "teabaggers" and "troglodytes."
If those are the kind of people that supported Lugar, glad I could help usher his retirement.