willbeurdaddy
Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MileHighM
quote:
ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
The debate needs to be "greater than the party"? The debate is about saving the COUNTRY from the cancer in DC. It doesnt get any bigger than that. And your assessment that its "Kool-Aid" drinkers is incorrect imo. They arent watching because their minds are made up already. The debates attract the independents and those on the fence.
The debate should be about saving the country from the cancer in DC. However, I don't think it will be. One, I don't think Republicans have anything figured it out yet. They are still committed to the same dumb ass shit they have been doing the past ten years. They haven't had focus since the contract with america ran out. Their recent 22 point whatever, not focused, and a waste. Two there are still too many politiwhores in that debate. Three, there will be too much God in that debate, not enough rational policy. Four, the tea party hasn't done shit yet. Obstructionism is worthless. On paper they have a lot of good ideas, but in practice too many hijacked by the God brigade, they don't have a pragmatic means of implementing policy, and they lack a voice to get things done.
Finally, not one of them is a clear cut leader. It doesn't matter if any of them would make a great panel member on the economy and have good ideas. If not a one of them is a solid leader and a visonary, they might as well show monkies throwing shit. 4 years of Obama has showed us the value of limp dicked leadership. We need a stateman to emerge, and the republican primary candidates as of today blow about as much as FB thread.
I think its not about what theyve doing the past 10 years, but getting back to the 20 years before those. I don't disagree with "too much God", but I do disagree that it precludes rational policy debate. The tea party has done plenty. It has focused the discussion on where it needs to be, and without them we would have had more spending and more taxes, disasterous for the economy.
And I totally disagree with Romney and Perry at least not being leaders. They have been very succesful in two important states, Romney despite being a Republican in a state that leans far left. Obama gave all kinds of pretty speeches about reaching accross the aisle, and from the start showed the only thing that he would reach accross the aisle with is a stick with shit on the end.
We dont need a visionary, we need a competent executive. Romney at least has proven to be that, in both business and government. Will someone else come along? Doubtful at this point. Romney/Rubio 2012.
_____________________________
Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.
|
LMAO!! - 
Profile
RE: LMAO!! - 
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread