Vice President Toomey?

By Erick Posted in Comments (75) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Probably not, but Pat Toomey's op-ed today is your must read.

The Republican Party spent decades building its brand as the party of small government, free enterprise and fiscal discipline. That brand put Ronald Reagan in the White House in 1980 and gave Republicans control of Congress in 1994. When it became clear two years ago that Republicans had abandoned those principles, voters swept them from power.

The path back requires re-establishing the GOP as a party of limited government and economic freedom. This is essential to Mr. McCain's political future, the fortune of his party, and the economic well-being of the nation. And the first big indication that he intends to bring back the party of Reagan will be who Mr. McCain taps as his running mate.


« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Crunching the Democratic Numbers, 02/07/08.Comments (55) »
Vice President Toomey? 75 Comments (0 topical, 75 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

McCain himself is already that type of candidate.

This would be akin to Huckabee running and adding Pat Robertson as his running mate.

Sanford is an exception since he is a three-legged conservative.

If we're going to go "out of the box" then go with JC Watts.

He's a conservative and has been in both government and business and he's an African-American.

The truth is that I don't like any of our "likely" choices for VP with the exception of Romney and he has negatives (like ... will he close the deal for conservatives), but also positives (I think he could bring us Michigan).

Fred, of course, is conservative enough, but that's two old white guys.

If Hillary is the nominee then Marsha Blackburn might make some women feel better about not voting for a female Presidential candidate.

McCain is not that type of candidate. McCain may be a spending hawk, but he still has some big government leanings - campaign/finance, global warming regulations, etcetera. We need a true small government conservative as VP.

JC Watts, Mark Sanford are good choices because they fit that bill, are also full 3-legged conservatives, and have some youthful energy that McCain, Thompson, Forbes and the like lack.

I've seen Marsha Blackburn interviewed a couple of times - unfortunately she is not ready for prime time. She would have significant trouble in any VP debates. She needs to continue to develop and maybe seek the TN Governorship in 2010 before she's a national candidate.

JC Watts for Vice President
Please sign the petition here.

"Character is simply doing right when no one is looking."

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Is this the same Club for Gowth president who has a long standing feud with Huckabee?

http://garepublican.blogspot.com/2008/01/club-for-growths-pat-toomey-dro...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/huckabee_is_a_fiscal_c...
http://www.cafemom.com/journals/read.php?post_id=716444

He writes, "Moving forward, Mr. Huckabee on the ticket would be a disaster. The former governor has a record of raising taxes and increasing spending."

Huh? Huckabee's overall record is holding spending down and lowering taxes (see Dick Morris' RCP article above). How then is Huckabee a "tax and spend liberal" (as Hannity called him) and Romney a fiscal conservative? Both men did the best they could with heavily Democrat legislatures.

He also writes that Mike Pence is a good choice for VP. The same Mike Pence who supported and led on the illegal immigrant amnesty legislation? I heard Mike Pence speak on this topic a while back, and he is perfect for McCain on the issue. They both want amnesty.

The fact is that Huckabee is the only consistent conservative in the race, and has the experience to lead as a conservative. Those who don't want McCain have a conservative choice - Huckabee.

If McCain was smart, and got the nomination, if he wants to win, an even better choice for VP than Huckabee would be Oliver North.

===============
Christian. Husband. Father. Grandfather. Conservative. US Navy Veteran - all by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

I live in Georgia, and I'm a born again Evangelical literal-bible-believing Christian... and I'm shocked just how many Christians are "taken" by Huckabee just because Huckabee is a former Baptist pastor.

Personally, I think that Huckabee is one of the most deceptive and lying Republican politicians I've seen in a long time. And the fact that he thinks he can so easily lie and re-write history shows that he has a certain amount of contempt.

here are some examples:

Huckabee raised some taxes and lowered some taxes in Arkansas. But put these together and there is a OVERALL NET GAIN of 500 million in taxes raised. If Huckabee was honest about this and state that Arkansas was simply behind other states and that he believed in States rights... but a VERY limited FEDERAL Gov't... if Huckabee has stated that, he'd have probably convinced me on this issue. Instead, he insults my intelligence with his "I lowered taxes" ads.

Immigration is NOT a top 5 issue for me. But I find it despicable how Huckabee can go from calling people in the grassroots the anti-illegal-immigration crowd "bigots" and "racists"... and doing everything he can to accommodate illegal-immigration in the state of Arkansas... and then do a 180 and act like he was the strongest anti-immigration person all along. (At least when Mitt Romney flip-flopped, he didn't lie about his past and he told a good story about how/why he flipped... and his Romney is at least stopped flipping around for the past few years... Huckabee is still flip-flopping around.)

Attacks on Romney were dishonest and utterly unethical. Particularly in that attack add that Huckabee fake-pulled. Both statements in there about Romney were bold-faced lies. But it seems that Huckabee believes his own B.S. Huckabee later referred to his points about Romney stating that "what does it profit a man that he gain the whole world and lose his soul"... problem is, this applies MORE to Huckabee than to Romney. (And I'm NOT a huge Romney fan. I was in favor of Thompson... but the fact is that Mass. doesn't have a death penalty and the $50 co-pay was added to Romney's legislation after-the-fact by a liberal court. That was NOT part of Romney's own plan.)

Huckabee has a knack for seeing big government as a solution. He is compassionate conservatism on steroids. He also has a knack for wanting to accommodate the elitist liberals. Combined, these lead to things like Huck's expressed desire that Bush not veto that awful child healthcare expansion that would over-empower gov't as a solution. (And this was one of few times that Bush stood up to liberals trying to exand gov't. A real conservative would praise Bush for this, not jump on the liberal bandwagon criticizing him!) Huck is also against school vouchers. (And other political convenience since the teacher lobby is so powerful!)

I see Huck as a sort of "Harriet Myers" candidate that the Christian Right gets all excite about because of the results-oriented candidate's promises. But, like Myers, Huck's method of trying to get there would be through "conservative activism" rather than by a return to limited constitutional gov't. And, if that were to happen (any more than it has already happened), all we are doing is empowering and *legitimizing* the Liberal's attempts to shape the gov't to do their bidding in extra-constitutional ways. We lose our Constitutional high ground when the Liberals get back into power and you can piss away religious freedoms at that point. (And we would all be thanking Huck if/when that happens! Hasn't Bush and the Republicans already done anough damage here!)

Additionally, Huck's past and present ethics problems should be a red flag. Do evangelical Christians really want an ethic-challenged Christian in the white house on display year after year? What would that do for the gospel? I’m all for the idea of having an evangelical Christians in the White House… I’d just like one with the ethics and record to match the image that candidate was trying to convey.

I think that most Huckabee supporters are well meaning.. they have just let their infatuation for what they *want* Huckabee to be cloud their judgment about his actual record.

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

nothing. You covered the bases quite well.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

...it's outa here! It's a grand slam homerun.

That's why this conservative, literal Bible-believing Christian had Huck at #7.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

I gave legitimate URLs that dispel much of what you assert.

I am for Huckabee because he is closest to what I look for in a solidly conservative Presidential candidate. I wish we had someone of the stature and record of an Oliver North, but we don't.

That Huckabee was a pastor is relevant only in the sense he successfully ran the business affairs of a church, meeting payrolls, hiring good staff, and motivating people. No one I know is looking for "Theologian-in-Chief" or some sort of leader to bring the US into some version of a theocracy (Boortz's concern).

I have yet to see any hard evidence that Huckabee is a big government (i.e Hamiltonian) conservative or has ethics problems. Someone, please point me to specifics on substantiated ethics violations. Funny no one brought up the ethics problems that arose when Romney was leading the ultimately successful Salt Lake Olympics.

The concerns some have about Huckabee's supposed bent towards taxation and big government in Arkansas mirror what Reagan had to do as California governor with a left wing legislature. Yet, Reagan had the opportunity as President to implement his core political values. While no politician is another Reagan, I see Huckabee following that pattern of governing according to his consistently held political core values of limiting spending, government regulation, and taxation, as well as a strong defense against foreign enemies and illegal immigration.

=====================
Christian. Husband. Father. Grandfather. Conservative. US Navy Veteran - all by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.


____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I'm glad that we both like to use him-he's been uncommonly necessary this season.

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

In your signature, maybe you were confusing John McCain with Lucas McCain (character on the TV show "The Rifleman"). :)

McCain is the one who is pushing for closing Gitmo, and doing away with waterboarding (which has saved American lives). Aside from the surge, which was already being setup when he jumped onboard, he hasn't missed many opportunities to undermine President Bush in public on the war.

But I understand where you are coming from now, given that you think the 2 most liberal Republican candidates (McCain & Rudy) would make a good ticket. Just the votes from the wives they've deserted would hurt the campign. :)

=============
Christian. Husband. Father. Grandfather. Conservative. US Navy Veteran - all by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

I was a Fredhead first adn foremost, and I was with Mitt all the way from 3 weeks before Iowa until yesterday. I am getting behind our nominee because I think the Democrats would be a disaster. But judging from your response, your general lack of knowledge and the fact that you were stupid enough to call me a liberal, I'm going to go ahead and peg you for a Huckabee supporter. They must make the Kool-Aid stronger down in Georgia from when I remember...

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

You're a liberal if you don't hate the gays and think that Mormons are in bed with the devil...now I remember what makes SoCons like you stupid enough to fall for Huckabee. But you're right, I'm just a closet liberal, funny that I've been able to troll on this site nearly 3 years.

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Please try to have a sense of humor. No insult was intended, and I apologize for not being clearer. I wasn't calling you a lib - just using absurdity to illustrate the absurdity of posting a Koolaid picture instead of something informative and factual that I could use to reassess my position.

I was for Fred, too, until it was obvious he wasn't able to mount a successful campaign. The only conservative left was Huckabee.

The idea that Christian conservatives (SoCons, I think you called them) hate gays and Mormons is ginned up out of whole cloth. We don't hate gays, but we believe that sexual behavior outside of the marriage of one man and one woman is innately immoral. That is a moral belief. We do not look to have laws that enforce Scripture outside the ages old natural law that our Founders used (which is why we do believe in laws against murder, theft, etc.). But neither do we believe our government, our public institutions, nor citizens in general should be required to affirm the immoral as acceptable just to keep from hurting someone's feelings. As for Mormons, we certainly have different religious beliefs, but that is where it ends. Many Christians are friends with Mormons. Many Christians, like me, who have or had Mormon friends, have read the Book of Mormon, the D&C, and the Pearl of Great Price to better understand their faith. I've never had a problem working with gays or Mormons, or Hindus, or anyone else. The relationship one has as a friend or aquaintance with someone whose moral and/or religious choices are different should not be self-prohibited unless the other person requires you to do things that are immoral to you.

Almost all "SoCons" are also conservative on economic and defense issues. I firmly believe in small, limited government that should be limited to its Constitutional duties, I believe in personal, God-given liberty and responsibility, and private property rights. I disagree with Huckabee, for example, on a Constitutional amendment on abortion or what a marriage is. I believe that electie abortions are murder, and that marriage is only valid between one man and one woman. But, those are not federal issues. Those are State issues. Creating a Constitutional amendment goes against the concepts the Founders had. For example, we have no amendments or national laws against murder (except on federal property or against federal agents). Murder, theft, etc. are left to the States to handle as they see fit. If California wants to allow marriages between people and poodles, no other state is forced to recognize it. if you live in California, and don't like it, and can't get teh law changed, move. But such things are not federal interests.

As for the insults about being stupid, and that Huckabee supporters are by their nature stupid, you can't see how much that resembles what libs do? So why act like them? But since you seem to think Southern and stupid goes together, I have a college education, work as a software engineer, and used to work as a nuclear engineer. I joined Mensa in 1980, and the organization above it, Intertel, in 1981. I may be a lot of things, but stupid, ignorant, and uneducated I ain't.

If you are for McCain now, great. At least you are not for Clinton or Obama. But, IMHO, if McCain is successful at getting elected President, you will see a huge turn to the left compared to the CPAC impersonation of a conservative that we saw. Come on, the guy even believes in man-made global warming.

==============
Christian. Husband. Father. Grandfather. Conservative. US Navy Veteran - all by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

Come on...I have gone on record many times saying the South is the heart and soul of our country, and I still think that today. I think that the kool-aid is in buying what Slick Huckster is selling, because it ain't conservatism-it's populism. In fact as a side note, the people that I admire most on here are Southerners, Gamecock and haystack (fellow Texan) I believe are two of the brightest here. Johnny Mac was my 4th choice after Fred, Mitt and Rudy, because I care about the war. Huckabee does not care about the War at all-he is a worse panderer than anyone else running. He goes from compassion to illegals to coming out with deporting everyone on his first day; he goes from an "arrogant bunker mentality of Bush" to seeing this through to the end. He's slicker than Willy and I think we would survive Clinton if it means keep Huckabee away from the White House. He's a pro-life Clinton, and just as slick.

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

I'm an old Texas boy too and I didn't even make yore list :-(

Guess I'll jist have ta try harder :-)

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

I add you to my future list :-)

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

me wanting to give you 3/4s of my Prozac bottle...when I find it. Right now I'm settling for a bit of JD & Coke :-)

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Patron for me, even though it's not even Mexican tequila, which she rags on me for all the time; but sometimes I go for the 1800.

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

run you for office somewhere. You got the whole diversity thing going! :-) Ahhh, Patron....now ya got me droolin'

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Chicago's cooooooooooold this year in the winter but whiskey warms you up for real. BR couldn't run for office-I'd be at least as detestable as McCain when we started doing play by play breakdowns-BR's soft on the border and soft on gay marriage-run me in a purple or blue state, maybe...

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

hearts you anyway (in a manly kind of way :-) Don't even talk to me about cold. I live in southern MN now. Now that'll freeze your nads off.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Vikings fan-with an Okie as your running back-:-)tsk tsk tsk. Cowboys and Bears only for me...and of course I Hook Em

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

Over my frozen corpse! Mrs. Burke is from WI so I've become a Packer fan. Jones shafted Landry and that did it for me with the 'boys. But I bleed burnt orange! Hook 'em Horns!

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Eburke, you just stabbed me in the heart there, (I cheered for Favre to win the Super Bowl tho ssssssssshhh) No self respecting Bears fan could ever cheer for the Packers, but hey I'm with you on the going with the Missus. Although my gf and I fight over politics (she's radical leftwinger, its cute) and baseball (She's Cubs, I'm Sox), there are a couple of sports where its nice to be on the same team. It's always nice to cheer with your girlfriend too :-).

"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.

ObiWan, That Farve guy brought be over to the dark side with his joy of playing the game. Would it help if I told you I thought Lovee was one heckuva coach?

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

I thought that is what liberals did. Being unable to advance their point on the facts, they throw ad hominems, usually reflecting what they themselves do :).

Note I didn't use a single bit of Huckabee-sourced propaganda. Just looked at the facts, challenged the spin and summed them up.

=======================
Christian. Husband. Father. Grandfather. Conservative. US Navy Veteran - all by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney

I'm not sure if you missed the memo, but Romney's campaign was predicated on his turn-around credentials. The 2002 Winter Olympics were deeply in debt and the officials were under investigation for bribery when Romney was hired to fix it, which he did. The ethics problems didn't arise when Romney was leading the Olympics, they arose before he got there.

I'm for McCain, and I'm all in. But this love for Huckabee, and the related revisionist history of his, and others', records, is just disturbing.

But haven't given him a thorough going over. Which they HAVE done to Romney, cause he's EEEVILLL!

And not even Christian! And you know, that Jesus and Satan being brothers and all, that's a crucial point to bring up, don't ya know.

Huck IS the male version of Harriet Myers.

But he would STILL be better than our other McCandidate.

I'm of no consequence, now that I've left the Republicans, but for that matter, was I of much consequence to them when I was in it? They certainly didn't seem to think so.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. - Albert Einstein

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Huckabee

First, it's fairly well known that Dick Morris was a consultant for Mike Huckabee and that he's "informally" advised him on the campaign trail. It's not surprising that he would try and counter Huckabee's greatest weakness, just as it's no surprise to see James Carvill defending Hillary Clinton, even though he no longer officially advises her.

Second, the Cato Institute gave Mike Huckabee an "F" for fiscal conversativism. The Club For Growth has objectively concluded that Mike Huckabee has not established himself as a fiscal convservative, but even if you you doubt them, the Cato Institute's review should give you pause.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Of Toomey's choices, I don't think Sanford, DeMint, Forbes, and Pence have enough stature on the national security front. And I really like Pence, but he can't clear that hurdle.

Gramm is a safe solid choice.

I'm really interested to hear whether people think a person who has never held elected office can be an effective VP nominee. The names that come to mind are John Bolton and Bill Bennett. If Bolton could pass muster, I think he would be great (though I'd take him as Secretary of State!!! :) )

Giuliani remains the best "presidential" pick in my book, but Fred also would be fine in that regard.

I lean Barbour, with Sanford second choice. Barbour can talk Katrina.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I'd rank 'em 1) Coburn 2) Barbour 3)Sanford

It'd sure cut down on my Maalox purchases if I knew that Coburn was whispering in McCain's ear every night.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Having a governor with a track record in there as the initial frontrunner makes me more comfortable than having a Senator known for voting No.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

I don't think we need a VP with a ton of stature/experience on National Security. Certainly all of the above have some experience on that front and McCain has a LOT of national security experience. So... adding someone like Sanford to the ticket gives the ticket someone who has been in charge of a state and has business experience. He also has bona fide conservative credentials, particularly on tax and spending issues. Pence brings that to the table except for the experience of running a state. I think Sanford helps make up for McCain's weaknesses.

I think this is more wishful thinking than anything else. I Note that neither the Reagan military buildup or the Iraq experiment is small government in any sense.

Stopping government overreach is closer to the truth. The key to welfare reform was convincing people that welfare was a bad system. Tax reform requires nothing less. Being pro-business is not a virtue in the eyes of the American public. Look at Forbes's disasterous campaign before considering him for VP.

I'd prefer a VP who is a philosophical conservative, and can express that. Being able to connect fiscal conservatism to ideological conservatism is a big plus, as the best path to get approval for fiscal conservatism. And frankly, there's not much else for a VP to do unless the president dies.

Senator Coburn perhaps?

that defense spending is a legitimate function of a government thus not a part which counts toward the size of government. Increased defense spending on the liberation of Iraq are not "big government" projects.

but it is not defense in the literal meaning of the word. That's especially so considering the nature of the goals Bush has chosen.

I realize military spending or the Patriot Act doesn't count in the eyes of many small-government conservatives. I'm pointing out the term being used doesn't actually fit the position. Don't think that's not noticed by the public at large. Why on earth should they take us more seriously on fiscal matters? Unless, of course, they think we're the party of the rich. (sigh)

Calling ourselves the party of local freedom would be far better. It also means standing for a positive, rather than for a negative.

There's no doubt that defense spending is a legitimate function of government, indeed one of the primal functions of government.

However, I do believe this to be one of the key dilemmas of the conservative ideology. First, when discussing defense spending, conservatives are often lured into a similar argument made by liberals - that simply spending more money on this or that program will produce concrete results. E.g., conservatives often criticize "cuts" in the defense budget, the same way liberals would criticize "cuts" in social programs; both of these arguments are ad hominem attacks that simply focus on amounts spent, not results.

Second, growing up in an air force town, I saw first hand the amount of pork that can come from the defense budget. I am all for enhancing our military capabilities and maintaining a first rate service, but there are many, many boondoggles that Congressman X puts in the defense budget purely for the local benefit of Y Air Force Base in his district.

---
According to Democrats, it’s greedy to want to keep your own money, but it’s “justice” to demand someone else’s.

--Jonah Goldberg

Cheney was a surprise and so was Kemp in 96.

So don't be shocked if McCain picks someone from outside the box.

For McCain, I believe personal rapport will be critical.

Do not rule out Joe Lieberman as a McCain VP pick.

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

The last thing McCain needs right now is a Democrat, even if he is my favorite Democrat.

JC Watts for Vice President
Please sign the petition here.

"Character is simply doing right when no one is looking."

I'll take JC Watts for VP.

No offense to Joe. But McCain's credibility within the party is, shall we say, just a bit tenuous. Picking Joe would push him right off the cliff with a large number of people who are just now getting to the point of "well, maaaaaaybe we'll give McCain a little benefit of the doubt".

Veep needs to be somebody who can secure and motivate the base. McCain is already the crossover-appeal part of the ticket.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies
-- Frank J

Right on EPU.

absentee

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

The problem with Barbour is his lobbyist background. Way too much special interest stuff.

of who in this country considers themselves conservatives. It is elitest, short sighted and wrong. In addition he clings to an unfortunate misunderstanding about the 06 elections. That it was somehow a repudiation of fiscally conservative values?

Toomey's path is the path of disaster. It is time for new conservative leaders to fashion a new 21st century conservatism that can win. That embraces the past but doesn't forever seek to emulate it. The changing world we live in requires that Toomey and those like him figure it out or get out of the way.

This new breed of conservative leaders, triumphantly repudiating Pat Toomey and the stale past, should be you, me, Jill Wolf, and who else? And can Jill and I opt out if we don't like it?

but I don't advocate repudiating the past at all. As I said, it should be embraced but without allow it to constrain us.

My problem with Toomey is that he, like many in the party continue to pitch a solution that I believe to be unworkable in the future. In summary: pining for the glory days won't bring them back - we have to create our own instead.

Jim,
I hate to burst your bubble, but the TV show MythBusters on Discovery actually took this phrase on. They made a lead balloon and it did float.



Fighting for conservatism one day at a time.

Well yes, you are right, steel boats float as well.

Put Mr. Toomey on the ticket and lets see what happens.

Jim Tomasik

1/Forbes...No, not a great campaigner, would never have gone anywhere if he wasn't spending his own money. Allows Dems to paint us as the "rich guys party."

2/Gramm...Uninspiring campaigner who lost to Dole.

3/Coburn...Good guy but can he be demonised by the other side? When he was elected I remember the MSM went after him over some life issues.

4/JC Watts....Would he be considered if he was a white guy? I don't think he is qualified for VP.

5/What about Condi?....Black and female so she ticks two boxes, but also qualified because of her experience as Sec. State and NSA. Might pick up supporters from the loser on the other side. However has never run for elected office which is a big problem.

6/Mark Sanford....Governors often make good presidential candidates, and he would be well set up for 2012 if McCain loses.

VP choice is really important because as with John Edwards it is a way to save people from obscurity and set them up as future party leaders.

First, he must be staunchly conservative. I think McCain has done a decent job thus far getting conservatives comfortable with him -- I know I'm definitely warming to him, and I think his gradual approach to this is good. The best way to solidify the base is to pick an amiable, strong conservative to back up his credentials.

Second, he should be young. McCain is energetic, but he's still got the age thing going against him. It would suit him to choose someone under 50. Unfortunately, this means no Phil Gramm, but he wouldn't have been high on the list anyway.

Third, he should NOT come from Congress. It definitely looks like we're going to elect as President the first sitting Senator since 1960. People don't like voting for congresspeople for president, though, and despite McCain's "reformer" impressions, it will suit him best to pick someone from outside Washington.

With these three considerations, I think they all point to one choice: Mark Sanford. Haley Barbour is OK, but perhaps too "southern," and has so many lobbyist ties it would likely work against McCain. Gramm is too old, unfortunately. So is Forbes. DeMint or Pence would be good, but I just don't think we need two Washingtonians on the ticket.

I personally wish Mark Sanford would have run for President this year. If the age thing plays against McCain, Sanford could be an excellent set-up man for 2012 or 2016. He has the smarts, the charisma, and the conservative bona fides to make a real difference in this race.

---
According to Democrats, it’s greedy to want to keep your own money, but it’s “justice” to demand someone else’s.

--Jonah Goldberg

but he missed on this one badly. Although I suppose I can't blame him too much since the rest of the pundits seem to be spewing this line too.

A VP doesn't mean didly because as someone famous once said, "the job isn't worth a bucket of warm spit." You pick a VP to win his home state and maybe swing a tight race. Or maybe as insurance against an assassination attempt (nutroots thinking on Dan Quayle).

McCain won't swing conservatives he's lost with a VP pick. They will either stay home or vote for him because the back of the bus is still better than walking.

or worse, Republicans have this 'next in succession' thing going and who McCain picks as his VP will show me a) how much he plans to respect conservatives during his administration and b) which direction he wants the party to go.

If he picks a Coburn, a Barbour, a Brownback, etc., I'm all in. If he picks a Snowe, a Graham, a Hagel, et al, then absentee, Neil, BlackRepublican et al and I will be having some serious, rational discussions about when is it good to sacrifice your queen to win the chess game, and when it is suicidal.

Talk is cheap, especially considering McCain's record. His VP pick will speak volumes as to whether his CPAC speech was for real, or just more political rhetoric.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

VP is important because it gives someone national exposure and that can turn them into a contender in future elections. It can also help to make up for problems a candidate has like lack of experience (Cheney) or being too close to an unpopular incumbent (Liebermann) or it can help to unite a party (Gore).

I've been looking at Sanford and I think he's a superb choice. His support for doing something about global warming will help to sell him to moderates and independents. His fight against wasteful spending will be popular with many including independents, and conservatives seem to love him. His two terms as Governor of South Carolina give him the executive experience a potential President needs.

However, there is another choice who I regard as risky but potentially a winner. The Democratic race will likely end with many bitter and disillusioned blacks. Having a candidate picked by superdelegates, with backroom deals and questions over Florida and Michigan is going to leave the losers feeling that they have been cheated. Now what if the Republican Party offers a black woman as VP? It could pull a lot of votes from the Dems.

However, it is risky because Condi has never run for elected office. She may suck at campaigning. She is also too close to the Bush administration and the war.

So the bottom line is that Sandford is the safe conservative choice and Condi is the lottery ticket which could pay off big or not at all.

... "do no harm." A veep choice can really never help you much, but it can hurt you.

I think Sanford fits that bill, personally. Condi would be a good choice in my view, but quite risky all the same.

---
According to Democrats, it’s greedy to want to keep your own money, but it’s “justice” to demand someone else’s.

--Jonah Goldberg

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

His magazine serves mostly to delude the people that read it. There are a couple of legal cases where his reporters were obviously bought and paid for by the litigants. When you see things like that it pretty much taints everything.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

it, oh, at about 2 this morning :-). Loved the "Pork" & "Barrel" monikers he attached to the little oinkers but I'm assuming it didn't play out as well as it sounds?

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

probably a minority here in my lack of enthusiasm for Sanford. I moved to Atlanta from SC soon after voting for him. He is great on taxes and spending and race relations. But I find him to be a bit of a flake. He is into the global warming crap, opposing oil drilling off the shore. Plus, I don't think we need a southerner per se on the ticket.

I am persuadable on him.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com

well. I think the elephant in the room issue for conservatives right now is what the implementation of the AGW agenda will do to us economically. From my perspective, all the fiscal bona fides in the world will be rendered irrelevant after the trillion + dollars in cost our economy will endure as a result of the Goracle hoax.

It will take strong bully pulpit leadership to stand up to the MSM onslaught on this issue or we'll find ourselves hip deep in the Kyoto accords before you can say Al Gore. My prediction/fear is that this is the area in which McCain will do his worst damage to the economy and to the conservative movement.

So, thanks for the info GC.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

I realize the downside of putting 2 Senators on the ticket but Tom Coburn is as good as they get: McCain's tenacity with a 100% 3-legged stool conservative voting record.

For all my oft-state agony over picturing myself actually voting for McCain, if Tom's his VP...I am all in baby!

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service