There is no free lunch...or free shipping.
I'm going to have to re-label my Google Reader feed for your blog as "The Sarah Palin Channel".http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sarah-palin-network/1217966
KadI am not pushing Sarah for President. At least not for 2012. I am just reporting what I am finding out there. The fact is, politics being what it is, she could emerge as the front runner. Those of us with some party responsibilities need to contemplate these things. I remember, and at the time believed, the Richard Nixon line to the press: "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference." If only it had been so.For 2012 I am looking for someone with the integrity and insight attributed to a Joe Biden or the experience and depth attributed to a Barack Obama. I don't think I yet see someone like that on the Republican side, except maybe for Bobby Jindal. And, I haven't seen anyone like that on the Democratic Party side in over a decade.Do you have anyone to offer up from the Independent side? And, I am not buying Mayor Michael Bloomberg as the answer to all men's prayers.Regards — Cliff
Did you watch the clip? I thought it was pretty funny, but, then, again, I tend not to hesitate to laugh at politicians of all stripes.I have felt for a long time that Ron Paul's fiscal sobriety is desperately needed to address our #1 national security and civil rights issue, which is our burgeoning federal government and our inability to pay for it. He carries many negatives where many people are concerned, (I, for one, abhor his strange inconsistency with Libertarian policy to support the government's right to intrude on a woman's reproductive privacy), and that is simply too bad. We need fiscal austerity to maintain our Republic, and few politicians are capable to deliver it. Ron Paul is certainly one in my opinion.Absent possibilities for a fiscal miracle worker, I would hope to find a centrist (preferably unaligned with either major party, but I will take what comes) who not only demands bipartisanship, but also marginalizes the influence of partisans and demagogues of BOTH parties. This absolutely excludes social reformers of BOTH parties who see the government as their private tool to judge private individual opinions and behavior. (I.e. no Christine O'Donnells crusading to overhaul public school curriculum to suit their religious preferences, no Nancy Pelosis to advance sweeping social programs that can't be afforded, etc.)Colin Powell has always intrigued me as a man of integrity and capability...
The Ron Paul idea has appeal, but who is he going to drag along into the US Congress if he becomes President? The President proposes, but the Congress disposes.For the record, I am not for teaching creationism as science. I might be for having it as part of a critical thinking class. But, I would think it déclassé for a teacher to use acceptance of creationism as a reason to put down the ideas of some of the students or their parents.That said, "Senator Coons" sounds as intellectually unsound as creationism as the current explanation of how humans got to be who we are.Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment