«

»

Some Choice

Oh boy, Mitt or Newt, just shoot me now.

The most important election in our lifetime, at least that is what everyone is saying, is turning into the most dreaded, ambivalent, narcoleptic election in our history.
As it stands now, barring some miracle where the party described as too dumb to live comes to it’s senses and drafts someone capable of turning the bus around, we get a choice between a shit sandwich and a poop sandwich.

Romney, who is more McCain then John McCain ( and who is dumb enough to think this is a compliment) has finally decided that this is a street fight and not a coronation. And Newt, who has:
1) Wiped his ass with the Constitution at every turn, giving (or aiding) the federal government authority (education, law enforcement, foreign aid) no where authorized by the Constitution, and, who while in office said “The American challenge in leading the world is compounded by our Constitution,” he said. “Under our [constitutional system] – either we’re going to have to rethink our Constitution, or we’re going to have to rethink our process of decision-making.”

2) Who after leading high five’s all around with his Contract With America, according to CATO :

“the combined budgets of the 95 major programs that the Contract With America promised to eliminate have increased by 13%.” Crane also pointed out, “Over the past three years the Republican-controlled Congress has approved discretionary spending that exceeded Bill Clinton’s requests by more than $30 billion.”

3) Who was the only Speaker in history who got sanctioned (Yeah, considering that Pelosi was not imprisoned makes this charge hollow, I admit, but the simple fact that he was forced to pay a 300K fine and lost the respect and support of fellow GOP’ers indicates some wrong doing on his part).

4) And probably the most damaging, he has proved himself the ultimate Washington insider, prostituting his services to the highest bidder (Fannie/Freddie, and the ethanol lobby),and paling around with enemy for personal (monetary) gain (Gore, Pelosi, Sharpton)

Here his George Will’s take on our sour predicament, he thinks Newt would have made a marvelous Marxist.

And here is Mitt’s new ad, deciding it is time to start swinging:

Personally I think we should make Daniel Hannan an American citizen immediately and draft him.

18 comments

No ping yet

  1. Seattle Outcast says:

    I just might vote for my dog.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  2. Tripper says:

    I’m a little confused about how Romney was fairly popular with conservatives 4 years ago, and is now almost universally despised by them.
    The thing is, most of the stuff he’s despised for, happened prior to the last election, and all his flips have been in the direction of conservatism (as far as I can tell) and he hasn’t flopped back.

    So how has he gone from being the best hope conservatives have (winning the CPAC straw poll in 2007, 2008 and 2009), to basically being despised by most conservatives today?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  3. richtaylor365 says:

    For my own self I do NOT despise Mitt, I admire him. I admire his accomplishments, his commitment to his family and his faith. His Mormonism nor his flip-flopping does not bother me, I expect most people have evolved in some positions over the years and I would not put to much stock in CPAC winners, Ron Paul has won the last two, I don’t want him as president either.

    It’s natural to want a candidate most like ourselves and I would prefer a more conservative, less government, less nanny state European type, more capitalistic free market type like myself. And given what we have had for the last 3 years, it’s even more natural to gravitate to the antithesis of that.

    Mitt seems to have won Ann Coulter over and she is not an easy sell, but I am more skeptical. I wanted someone who saw the urgency of the situation in which we finds ourselves, and I don’t think either one of these guys will work as diligently as I would like to change that course.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  4. Kimpost says:

    Looking at the main candidates, past and present, I wonder. Who would you guys have preferred? Should Pawlenty have hung in there? I kind of think that he perhaps should have…

    Current field:
    Mitt Romney (too liberal, flip flopper)
    Newt Gingrich (not very likeable, part of the establishment, yesterdays news)
    Rick Perry (catastrophic debater)
    Michele Bachmann (congresswoman, crazy lady)
    Ron Paul (congressman, foreign policy, monetary policy)
    Jon Huntsman (too liberal, lacks charisma)
    Rick Santorum (socially nuts, lacks charisma)
    Gary Johnson (who?)

    Drop-outs:
    Herman Cain (knew too little, liked them ladies)
    Tim Pawlenty (lacks charisma)

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  5. Seattle Outcast says:

    That’s the problem – the current crop of candidates are either evangitards, big-government GOP (aka democrats), or nutjobs.

    I haven’t really been sold on any of them….

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  6. Tripper says:

    Seattle Outcast, who would be your preferred candidate now, I’m talking about a hypothetical but a realistic one, example “Christie” not unlikely / impossible like “Reagan”

    Who was your guy last time around, I mean from all the legit Republican candidates regardless of when they dropped out?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  7. Seattle Outcast says:

    I’ll have to think about that – I’ve been in a “voting against” mode for 25 years now. It’s not that I actually like ANY of the candidates, I just go for the least worst option….

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      
  8. Mississippi Yankee says:

    Rick Perry (catastrophic debater)

    Kimpost, is this is the only flaw Gov. Perry has, in your opinion?

    BTW I agree with you and IMO he is marginally my first choice at the moment.

    As for SO’s evangitards fears, I listened to the same bullshit when the shrill cries against JFK happened in 1960. I was 12 but, guess what, no one was forced into Catholicism.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  9. West Virginia Rebel says:

    Heh. Try none of the above, indeed.

    Now that we’re getting past the Tea Party Flavor of the Month stage, it’s coming down to who sucks the least. As far as that goes, Romney and Huntsman still seem the most sane, Newt is indeed smart but comes across as Goldwater to Obama’s LBJ at times, Santorum is still Latin for a-hole, Bachmann is going to go where Congresscritters go to matriculate, and Ron Paul is, well, Ron Paul.

    The ones who could do the job either don’t want it. But then again, we live in a time where The Donald was almost taken seriously as a near-candidate by some people.
    West Virginia Rebel recently posted..Attack DropMy Profile

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  10. Seattle Outcast says:

    As for SO’s evangitards fears, I listened to the same bullshit when the shrill cries against JFK happened in 1960. I was 12 but, guess what, no one was forced into Catholicism.

    That isn’t the issue at all; I find these people to be so divorced from reality that I consider them to be somewhat insane. Also, evangitard GOP aren’t actually “conservative” in any real sense of the word, their belief and politics puts them squarely in the “Christian Socialist” party, which has been defunct for about a century. The politics didn’t go anywhere, they just moved around until they took over the GOP and drove out all the real conservatives.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  11. Mississippi Yankee says:

    SO your anti-theism is really starting to cloud you judgement.

    Every president, to date, has been either a christian or at least a Deist. Even the current occupant. And any evil any of them may or may not have done CANNOT be traced back to their religious beliefs.

    For the record, I am an atheist. What others choose to believe is strictly their business.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  12. CzarChasm says:

    Until GOP’ers who demand actual cuts in spending in the trillions of dollars range become a large, strong, bonafide movement, no single president or small group of congresscritters can save this country. Any candidate who is not at least trying to lead and influence thought in that direction cannot qualify as a true conservative in my book. Proposed cuts in the growth-rate of spending programs, as opposed to actual cuts in spending, gets us nowhere.

    So OK, Ron Paul has been rejected by GOP’ers, skewed polls (for whatever reason) notwithstanding. That leaves a gaggle of UN-nut-licking, globalist spendthrifts who can’t either create or save their own positive image in the eyes of the voters. We constantly vote for the lesser of lessers. Not since Reagan have conservatives had a candidate to be highly supportive of on the merits of their ideas, and even his support is exaggerated now in a sort of nostalgic fervor when juxtaposed against the realities of his campaigns.

    For the first time in our history, this primary season will be a vote on who we choose to lead us into insolvency. Actually, we’re already there, so we’re basically choosing a bankruptcy Trustee on the off-chance that they can lead the restructuring and get us through to the other side, but what lies on the other side for the economically-failed, formerly most powerful country man has ever known, is a complete and total mystery. It sure as Hell ain’t the representative republic that we think we’re participating in by voting for the next globalist, Fed-supporting Thief in Chief. The republic is as dead as MF Global(ists), and for much the same reasons. Our leaders have looted our republic out from under us, Democrat and Republican alike, and we reject the only prospective leaders who are willing to confront the looters in favor of varying degrees of more of the same. We are verifiably insane, which is why we will get exactly what we’re getting ready to vote for; more of the same.

    Good luck with that.

    CC

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      
  13. CM says:

    Perhaps the government should just delete the votes that are for the wrong candidate?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

      
  14. CzarChasm says:

    What, you think they don’t do that already? You’re more of a blithering idiot than I thought.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

      
  15. Xetrov says:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/obtuse

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      
  16. CzarChasm says:

    Awww…..You guys are so cute when you get all cuddly like that. LOL

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      
  17. CM says:

    LOL, what was that comment you made the other day about being thin skinned?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

      
  18. hist_ed says:

    I am hoping that Romney and Gingrich both stay in for the long haul and Paul keeps his 10-15% and stays with it as well. We need a brokered convention (first one in decades, right?). Then the three of them can anoint Cristy or Pawlenty or ????.

    There was a piece recently about the nomination process that argued it was time to scrap this experiment in democracy and go back to the smoke filled rooms. Not sure I would go that far, but at the very least states ought to limit primary voters to people who have been party members for at least a year (I say this as a life long independent who has never voted in primary).

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      

Comments have been disabled.