Ok, so who SHOULD the GOP put up against Obama in 2012?

[Guest]

bkcunningham1 responded to a post I made in another thread when I asked who could beat Obama in 2012 - as I didn't see any viable GOP contenders on the horizon.


But anyway, I'll tell you who I think will run for the GOP nomination. Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Ron Paul and maybe, last but not least Rick Peery


Interesting list. I'll start there and at least give my impressions (what I have) of them.

Sarah Palin - a joke. If Katie Couric can make her have that "deer caught in the headlights" look, imagine what would happen in debates. As I said in the other thread, the Democrats would *love* to have Sarah Palin as the GOP nominee because it's very easy to cut her down.

Newt Gingrich - I think his time has passed. He very well could have won the nomination in '96 had he decided to try. Lately, though, I think he's been tarred with the "Party of 'No'" feather. Right or wrong, that's what it appears.

Mike Huckabee - I'm of two minds about him. He seems intelligent, articulate. Very much an up-and-comer. However, by his own admission, he's a Creationist. I'll be honest and admit a bias that I have a hard time with someone believing that being in charge of everythign form NASA to education. It's not a case of believing in God - personally my response has always been 'who says God didn't invent evolution?'.

Mitt Romney - here's the bigger Tale of Two Cities. On the one hand, he's the guy who successfully ran *Massachusetts* as a popular Republican governor *and* rescued the Salt Lake City Olympics. Strong credentials. However, the press and others will take his Mormonism and dissect him with it - one comedian frequently bringing up the "magic underwear" stuff and reminding people of the tenet where Mormons believed that blacks could get into Heaven as the aides or servants of whites. Romney will have to distance himself from the more radical ideas of Mormonism (strage and that sounds to say it) much in the way that JFK had to defend himself against accusations that he would take orders from the Pope because he was Catholic.

Ron Paul - hate to say it because I like the guy but he'll never win because he just doesn't play well on TV. In the debates he looked *terrible* and was unable, in one particularly bad debate performance, to keep from steering almost every question to a rant against the Federal Reserve. It was like he had one script or a small set of talking points that he was going to hammer no matter what the moderator asked. That being said, he's probably the best plain-talker of the bunch (of those I've seen)

Tim Pawlenty - don't know enough about him to have an informed opinion.

John Thune & Rick Peery - Haven't heard of them at all.

But I live in New Hampshire. I'll be hearing from ALL the candidates long before they declare. In fact the first declarations should be showing up in about 12 months. They get earlier and earlier every 4 years.

[Guest]

DJPLONG says...

"Mitt Romney - here's the bigger Tale of Two Cities. On the one hand, he's the guy who successfully ran *Massachusetts* as a popular Republican governor *and* rescued the Salt Lake City Olympics. Strong credentials. However, the press and others will take his Mormonism and dissect him with it - one comedian frequently bringing up the "magic underwear" stuff and reminding people of the tenet where Mormons believed that blacks could get into Heaven as the aides or servants of whites. Romney will have to distance himself from the more radical ideas of Mormonism (strage and that sounds to say it) much in the way that JFK had to defend himself against accusations that he would take orders from the Pope because he was Catholic."

Interesting comments. How could this be...we now have a President who sat in the church for TWENTY years with a pastor who he himself referred to as a friend and his mentor. This pastor, of course, is Jeremiah Wright the infamous black liberation philosophy and infamous remarks condemning this country and asking God to damn it.

Now, all this President had to do was say...oh, I never heard that in my TWENTY years with my friend and mentor...and I just dont agree with him.

Hey....all was forgiven and the press coverage stopped and all was well.

Seems Romney has less difficulties than that dont you think ?

[Guest]

DJPLONG says...

"Mitt Romney - here's the bigger Tale of Two Cities. On the one hand, he's the guy who successfully ran *Massachusetts* as a popular Republican governor *and* rescued the Salt Lake City Olympics. Strong credentials. However, the press and others will take his Mormonism and dissect him with it - one comedian frequently bringing up the "magic underwear" stuff and reminding people of the tenet where Mormons believed that blacks could get into Heaven as the aides or servants of whites. Romney will have to distance himself from the more radical ideas of Mormonism (strage and that sounds to say it) much in the way that JFK had to defend himself against accusations that he would take orders from the Pope because he was Catholic."

Interesting comments. How could this be...we now have a President who sat in the church for TWENTY years with a pastor who he himself referred to as a friend and his mentor. This pastor, of course, is Jeremiah Wright the infamous black liberation philosophy and infamous remarks condemning this country and asking God to damn it.

Now, all this President had to do was say...oh, I never heard that in my TWENTY years with my friend and mentor...and I just dont agree with him.

Hey....all was forgiven and the press coverage stopped and all was well.

Seems Romney has less difficulties than that dont you think ?

The difference here is that the controversial and long-standing Mormon beliefs are what Romney has chosen to embrace. He has complete control about what he believes and has exercised this choice for many years, if not for life. For the period when the President attended Wright's church, it was mainstream and uncontroversial, until Wright realized he had a national audience. It's all well documented that his change to extreme, off-the-wall statements was a sudden and strictly personal choice about which the President had no control. So the President exercised his choice by quitting the church.

Especially because Romney has made his religious choices deliberately, if he is a candidiate the media will roast him unmercifully for that. I frankly consider this a miniscule issue, but it seems there isn't any such thing for presidential candidates these days.

[Guest]

For the period when the President attended Wright's church, it was mainstream and uncontroversial, until Wright realized he had a national audience.

Please tell us that you are drunk.....or at least off your meds.

Yoda

[Guest]

Please tell us that you are drunk.....or at least off your meds.

Yoda

LOL Wright is a documented racist and has spewed hatred for years. Maybe our liberal friend needs to vary his reading considerably.

[Guest]

It is interesting to see ijusluvit's comments. "For the period when the President attended Wright's church, it was mainstream and uncontroversial, until Wright realized he had a national audience. It's all well documented that his change to extreme, off-the-wall statements was a sudden and strictly personal choice about which the President had no control."


Seriously, I've wondered how people really (really) justified Obama's association with Wright. in light of the fact that Obama sat in Wright's church for more than 20 years, met with him in a personal manner, considered him a mentor, Wright was a member of Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee who helped get him the Democratic nomination, Obama called him "an old uncle," quoted him in one of his memoirs, et al.

If I had a close friend, let alone a pastor, who has such a sudden, radical turn in personality; at the very least I'd be looking into an intervention or begging them to see a doctor.

[Guest]

[quote=ijusluvit;260514]The difference here is that the controversial and long-standing Mormon beliefs are what Romney has chosen to embrace. He has complete control about what he believes and has exercised this choice for many years, if not for life. For the period when the President attended Wright's church, it was mainstream and uncontroversial, until Wright realized he had a national audience. It's all well documented that his change to extreme, off-the-wall statements was a sudden and strictly personal choice about which the President had no control. So the President exercised his choice by quitting the church.

Especially because Romney has made his religious choices deliberately, if he is a candidiate the media will roast him unmercifully for that. I frankly consider this a miniscule issue, but it seems there isn't any such thing for presidential candidates these days.[/quote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While I knew what you said was incorrect, I wanted to make sure at least to document some things for you instead of just saying it was so. I did so much research on our current President during the campaign that I was sure I could find stuff and was easy.

A few things from an ABC article in March of 2008...

"The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."

In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in

Note that it was LONG TERM and not just a recent thing and also note that the immediate response from our President was...oh shucks.

A few other quotes from the article...

"An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans."

"Rev. Wright, who announced his retirement last month, has built a large and loyal following at his church with his mesmerizing sermons, mixing traditional spiritual content and his views on contemporary issues.

"I wouldn't call it radical. I call it being black in America," said one congregation member outside the church last Sunday.

"He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive," said another member of the congregation.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1


Now, you can make your own assumptions of what is real and what is not, but our President DID spend many many years in this church and with this man. You can say he tossed him aside, but dont you wonder HOW this President of such high ideals could sit there for TWENTY years and consult with him for TWENTY years and then pass him off, as he did, as an "old uncle" and say that he knew nothing as Schultz used to say in the old tv series.

Not only does the church's beliefs send out a warning signal, but how about simply tossing your pastor aside for politics ? Isnt that a bit bothersome. He did this, as memory serves me, with a few comments during the campaign.

The press pushed Romney so hard he had to have a special press conference to reaffirm his faith and how it does not contradict anything.

You pick the quality of man that you would want in the WH !!!!!

From Rev Wright's own website talking about his lifes greatest accomplishments...

"Some have even said that my preaching which produced the first President of the United States of African Descent was my life’s greatest accomplishment. Dr. Gardner Taylor, the Dean of Black Preachers in America, has honored my pulpit work by saying that had it not been for me, Barack Obama would not have discovered what it meant to be a Black Christian man in America. Many consider that to be my life’s greatest accomplishment — especially after the media tried to trash my sermons, my ministry and my 36 years of work in the local church parish setting.

http://jeremiahwright.com/2010/02/my-lifes-greatest-accomplishment/

Does this sound like a sudden change in behaviour that our President was not aware of ?

[Guest]

Regarding Mormons, including Harry Reid, I think there are currently 16 Mormons who are members of Congress.

Calling someone's religous garments or vestments that are a reminder of your obligations to God "magic underwear" is as wrong as making fun as a Jewish kippah, an Islamic headscarves, a Christian cross, ornamental eucharistic garments or any other religous covering that represent a commitment to God IMHO.


Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) since 1977

Harry Reid (D-Nevada) since 1987

Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) since 1997

Representatives:

Robert Bishop (R-Utah) since 2003

Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa) since 1997

Christopher Cannon (R-Utah) since 1997

John Doolittle (R-California) since 1991

Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) since 2001

Dean Heller (R-Nevada) since 2007

Walter Herger (R-California) since 1987

James Matheson (D-Utah) since 2001

Howard McKeon (R-California) since 1993

Michael Simpson (R-Idaho) since 1999

Thomas Udall (D-New Mexico) since 1999



Read more at Suite101: Mormons in the U.S. Congress: Which U.S. Senators and Representatives Are Mormon?

http://mormonism.suite101.com/article.cfm/mormons_in_congress#ixzz0le7pSKQJ

[Guest]

It is interesting to see ijusluvit's comments. "For the period when the President attended Wright's church, it was mainstream and uncontroversial, until Wright realized he had a national audience. It's all well documented that his change to extreme, off-the-wall statements was a sudden and strictly personal choice about which the President had no control."


Seriously, I've wondered how people really (really) justified Obama's association with Wright. in light of the fact that Obama sat in Wright's church for more than 20 years, met with him in a personal manner, considered him a mentor, Wright was a member of Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee who helped get him the Democratic nomination, Obama called him "an old uncle," quoted him in one of his memoirs, et al.

If I had a close friend, let alone a pastor, who has such a sudden, radical turn in personality; at the very least I'd be looking into an intervention or begging them to see a doctor.

bkcunningham: I agree with you . :eclipsee_gold_cup::eclipsee_gold_cup:

[Guest]

...I'll start there and at least give my impressions (what I have) of them....

Pretty much agree with your assessments. I hope the Mormon thing doesn't get too much in the way for Romney. He's the only one of the bunch that has the experience and smarts to deal with the most important problem facing the country--deficit spending and the national debt.

By the way, didn't we "secede" from the British Empire over a few issues, one of which was freedom of religion? Why now would religious beliefs become a litmus for being elected to office, particularly if the candidate either never mentions religion or specifically says that his/her religious beliefs would not affect his decisions? Heck, there's one guy on the list that says just the opposite and he's considered a favorite by some.

Rick Perry? How could a guy who ran for governor on a platform of having Texas secede from the union ever be a serious candidate?...for any office!

[Guest]

Pretty much agree with your assessments. I hope the Mormon thing doesn't get too much in the way for Romney. He's the only one of the bunch that has the experience and smarts to deal with the most important problem facing the country--deficit spending and the national debt.

By the way, didn't we "secede" from the British Empire over a few issues, one of which was freedom of religion? Why now would religious beliefs become a litmus for being elected to office, particularly if the candidate either never mentions religion or specifically says that his/her religious beliefs would not affect his decisions? Heck, there's one guy on the list that says just the opposite and he's considered a favorite by some.

Rick Perry? How could a guy who ran for governor on a platform of having Texas secede from the union ever be a serious candidate?...for any office!


I wanted to respond as quickly as possible on this VK.

We AGREE !!!!

I think Romney, at least at this point, would be my favorite of course he was last year as well.

I am not sure if I could maintain my cool if the media made a big deal about the Mormon thing after the last election and the Wright thing !

[Guest]

VK, your comment about Rick Perry running for governor of Texas on a platform of sucession is as misleading and full of half truths as jplong's about Mormons. I for one love the story of Perry's rise to Governor of Texas and his beliefs in state's rights and his frustration with a federal government intruding into our lives. His Tenth Amendment stance and supply side economics beliefs are right on.

[Guest]

bkcunningham1: Just to clarify, I'm not saying I agree with the comments about Mormonism. I've had the chance to be exposed to that religion and have had several friends who were members. I have absolutely no problem with them and one particular elder in the church locally is a good friend of mine. What I'm saying is what the *media* will do with that. I don't think my friend believes in the whole "blacks getting into heaven only as servants" tenet any more than saying every Jewish person MUST believe that the world is less than 6000 years old.

Just because he has different beliefs than I do.. Well, I'll let Thomas Jefferson speak for me:

"But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

[Guest]

Well, if the press digs into Romney's past as much as they digged into Obama's then the whole thing will be moot anyways.
They will treat Romney as fair as they treated Obama, right? :censored:

[Guest]

Well, if the press digs into Romney's past as much as they digged into Obama's then the whole thing will be moot anyways.
They will treat Romney as fair as they treated Obama, right? :censored:
If there's any "bad" stuff in Romney's past, one thing is for sure...there's a whole lot more good stuff than bad.

I even have fond memories for his forebears. His Dad, George Romney, was one helluva auto executive (CEO of American Motors during their best years) and later a great Governor of Michigan. Too bad he got beaten out by Richard Nixon in 1968. History might have read better with Romney.

George didn't have the stomach for national campaigning. Hopefully, Mitt has learned from his Dad's experiences.

[Guest]

Good stuff does not matter with bias press.

They will look for bad with Romney.

They only looked for good with Obama.

[Guest]

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.

[Guest]

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.
OK Let me rephrase my previous post.

If the press found anything damaging in Obama's past, they skimmed over it or did not report it.

If the press find anything damaging in a Republican or conservative's past, they will not only report it, they will beat the public over the head with it like a club.

I hope this is more clear. People are not falling for the racist BS anymore. When the media tries to silent the protesters with racists allegations, it only encourages more rebellion. These are not skin heads, they are your hard-working neighbors.

[Guest]

Regarding Mormons, including Harry Reid, I think there are currently 16 Mormons who are members of Congress.

Calling someone's religous garments or vestments that are a reminder of your obligations to God "magic underwear" is as wrong as making fun as a Jewish kippah, an Islamic headscarves, a Christian cross, ornamental eucharistic garments or any other religous covering that represent a commitment to God IMHO.


Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) since 1977

Harry Reid (D-Nevada) since 1987

Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) since 1997

Representatives:

Robert Bishop (R-Utah) since 2003

Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa) since 1997

Christopher Cannon (R-Utah) since 1997

John Doolittle (R-California) since 1991

Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) since 2001

Dean Heller (R-Nevada) since 2007

Walter Herger (R-California) since 1987

James Matheson (D-Utah) since 2001

Howard McKeon (R-California) since 1993

Michael Simpson (R-Idaho) since 1999

Thomas Udall (D-New Mexico) since 1999



Read more at Suite101: Mormons in the U.S. Congress: Which U.S. Senators and Representatives Are Mormon?

http://mormonism.suite101.com/article.cfm/mormons_in_congress#ixzz0le7pSKQJ

OMG The Mormons are taking over the country!!! lol

[Guest]

Much as Ron Paul has appeal & there is much validity to his bservations about the monetray system, please keep in mind his opinions about international issues.

In one debate he stridently defended his defense position; (approx.:) that the only reason the Muslim fudamentalists hate us is because we have military presence in that part of the world. If we weren't there, they wouldn't bother us; 9/11 o8od never have happened. That shows a dangerous lack of 3-D perspective regarding the world's number one military issue.

[Guest]

I figured I'd use the direct sources fromthe 2007 debate: (Emphasis mine)


REP. PAUL: Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Congressman?

REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.

They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if we were -- if other foreign countries were doing that to us?"


END

Despite the attack by the High Priest of Republican 9/11 Theology, Rudy Giuliani, Ron Paul stood his ground. And he was rewarded for that by running a strong second in FOX News' own text poll with 25%, four points behind Mitt Romney and 6 points ahead of Rudy Giuliani.

The Libertarian Defense Science Board is on his side:

'Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.'

[Guest]

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

[Guest]

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

Yes, and their number get bigger every day. I wonder why?

[Guest]

I disagree Donna. The press found plenty of 'bad' with Obama - but I think they were scared to death to push it very far for fear of being branded as 'racist'.

Dont agree a lot with you but on this one I totally agree. What was there was not hidden, just ignored for whatever reason and the one you gave was a big one !!! It, that reason you gave, continues with the media today and fostered by the WH !!!

[Guest]

You've left out the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the "New" Republican Party- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.

I'm sure the American people would be thrilled to have any of them at the top of the ticket, since they speak for so many.

You lost me with Savage.

Yoda