Plan B Forum

One more word on Perry...

After his disastrous debate performance last week, a source in his campaign made this observation:

"We're not electing a 'debater-in-chief'".....

That sounded really familiar to me, and then I remembered where I'd heard a very similar statement...

From another Presidential candidate just a couple of months earlier:

"We're not electing an 'entertainer-in-chief'"....

That assertion came from Tim Pawlenty, and you see how that worked out....

Herman Cain:

Elsewhere on this board, Scooter suggested that he has as much chance of getting the GOP nomination as Barbra Streisand...

I think that's unfair; Babs has a much better chance....

One thing I really like about Cain is his willingness to say he can't give an answer on a subject (usually related to foreign affairs) because he doesn't know enough about it to give a good answer....

The problem is, because of his complete lack of political experience, there are so many subjects he has to make that confession about....

Ron Paul:

It really amuses me the way there are so many in the liberal media punditsphere, who seem to like Paul, and the way they like to characterize him as as a "principled Conservative"....

The first thing they like about Paul is the fact that he can't possibly win. This is something that they always see as a virtue in a Conservative. (It's almost as great a virtue as being dead...some of them are now even managing to find nice things to say about Mr. Reagan) The second thing they like about Paul is his McGovernite defense policy, and third would be his views on legalizing drugs....(Paul's views on abortion...not so much...)

The fact is Paul isn't a "principled Conservative"....

He's a Randian crackpot (no offense, Crackpot) with a severe streak of paranoia....(he recently suggested that the reason he's opposed to building a fence along our southern border is because the government could use it to keep people in....That would probably strike a responsive cord with our own dear Steve, and those who think that Apollo 18 is a documentary....)

Coming Up, In Part II Tomorrow....

The Fall Of Michelle Bachmann, The Resurgence Of Mitt Romney, The Ghost Ship Candidacy Of The Guy Doing The Best In The Debates, and What's Up With This Chris Christie Thing?

You should think about doing a Bill Maher type show from a conservative perspective - I think you'd be good at it

Re: liberals and Ron Paul - I think one of the reasons a lot of liberals get attracted to him is that he deliberately obfuscates some of his more right-wing positions in order to attract them. I can remember the last election cycle, he had attracted a LOT of younger voters to his campaign who actually believed that he wanted to keep the federal gov't out of abortion and had no clue that he had proposed a constitutional amendment to protect the rights of a fetus.

So far, Jim, you and I are in agreement.

So far, Jim, you and I are in agreement.

Well, we'll see how that holds up tomorrow, Sue...

Perry knows how to win over the US public, start a war in a foreign land....

Texas Governor Rick Perry - who is seeking the Republican nomination for US president - has said he would consider sending American troops into Mexico to combat drug-related violence.

Mr Perry was speaking during a campaign appearance in New Hampshire.

"It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and keep them off our border," he said.

Such a move would go far beyond current US involvement in Mexico's drugs war.

The suggestion is also likely to irritate Mexico's government over the sensitive issue, correspondents say.

Governor Perry gave no further details of what sort of possible military intervention he would consider.

"I don't know all the different scenarios that would be out there," he said.

"But I think it is very important for us to work with them to keep that country from failing".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-15140560

Insane.

Real politics....

Republican presidential contender Rick Perry is on the defensive after it emerged a hunting camp used by his family had a racially offensive name.

His campaign said his family had years ago painted over an entrance stone that once displayed the name, Niggerhead, at the rented West Texas camp.

But the Texas governor was heavily criticised by rival Republican nominee Herman Cain, who is African American.

Mr Perry is a leading contender for the Republican nomination for president.

The Perry campaign did not deny that the term was used as a name for the property, but said it was changed soon after Mr Perry's father joined a lease that gave him hunting rights there in 1983.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15155042

Wonderin' if he also has one of these...



where's medi?

Rick Perry = Texas Toast.

Ron Paul may not be a "principled Conservative," but he is principled, which is more than many conservatives, many liberals, or many progressives can honestly say for themselves.

His principles are not the same as mine; nonetheless, he has some. His persepctive on abortion rights is grounded in the idea that the fetus is a person who has rights. Whatever one may think of that idea, his position is a principled one based on that idea. Personally, I think that the idea is wrong; still, I can respect someone who operates on the basis of principles.

Is there even one other right-wing Representative or Senator who operates on the basis of principles? Perhaps so, but off the cuff, I cannot think of one.

In contrast to Paul, most of the Republican candidates have no evident principles at all. Or, if one cares to dignify it by the term "principle," theirs is simple: "One of ours in the White House, and whatever it takes to make that happen is A-OK with us (even if it means that millions of Americans will remain unemployed), and the consequences be damned."

Unless there were no alternative representing real America -- genuine, progressive, productive American -- I would not vote for Ron Paul. His ideas of what America is and ought to be are not mine.

But as against the effluvia that the Republicans have offered America in recent decades, the choice to vote for Paul rather than "the more innocent people we execute, the better; it will keep those nigerheads in their place" Perry or "of course we need to fund the central government, but we need to wave our magic wands so that funding the central government will not cost anyone anything" Bachman or "my way of creating jobs is laying off thousands of people" Romney or any of the other worthless shit that the leaders of the Republican party -- who have nothing but contempt for ordinary Americans, Republican, Democrat, or other -- Paul would be the best choice, intellectually and morally.

Still, one can hope for a truly pro-American candidate. And although the odds of getting truly pro-American candidate from among the pogressives are lamentably slim, the odds of getting a truly pro-American candidate from among the radical right-wingers who have completely displaced the genuine conservatives in the Republican party are vanishingly small.

It's a sad, sad thing.