See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 7:45 am, zorro said:

   The current field of GOP candidates is uninspiring. Jeb Bush we need you.

2. #2
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 7:56 am, meatpieandtatters said:

   Uninspiring? Please don’t intellectualize the basic blocking and tackling! If you’d just look across the isle and objectively consider the absolute train wreck of democrat contenders, the GOP isn’t doing too badly.

   I’m sorry, but Fred doesn’t have the energy. Rudy is just a bit too peevish. Mitt is pretty darn handsome but this wildly wealthy thing evokes a John Kerry syndrome though Mitt did actually earn his. Ron Paul, for all his off-the-main-path antics, may be growing on me. McCain, I like him but his flop-flipping…hmmm?

3. #3
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 7:56 am, ajmontana said:

   Mitt, Mc Cain, Rudy and Fred it would take the four of them combined to fill President Reagans jellybean jar, and the Dems wouldnt be able to figure out what they were.

4. #4
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:10 am, On-my-soap-box said:

   Ron Paul, for all his off-the-main-path antics, may be growing on me.

   You are joking – right? Ron Paul who said the World Trade Centers were taken down by 19 thugs – not terrorists.

   If Ron Paul is growing on you might I suggest a fungus remover.

   The Huck came in first after the debate (you have to throw out the Ron Paul votes). He came in second in Iowa (only because Mitt threw so much money there) and the value voters liked him as well. He is still being ignored.

   If we send someone to the White House who is into Bar-B-Q, we will lose everything next go around.

   Can you say line item veto? I know the Dimocraps can’t. How would Murtha survive if he can’t make the crooks fall in line without the pork leverage?

5. #5
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:14 am, ctisa said:

   Why don’t they include Mike Huckabee when they talk conservatism? He looks like the only true conservative. All the others want to act like one, just to get elected. We need someone who will be true to conservative values after they are in the office!

6. #6
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:21 am, conservativesRus said:

   #1 – do we really need another from the family that has pretty consistently turned it’s back on the values that got them into office in the first place?
   Bush 1 – no new taxes..
   Bush 2 – fiscal conservative (negative), smaller less federal gov’t (negative), pandering to special interests and illegals (yep). And I could go go.
   Don’t think more from that family is an especially good risk.

7. #7
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:25 am, conservativesRus said:

   #4 Soap. Might I add to Line Item Veto – Term Limits.
   My observation is that learning the rules of pork takes time. Two terms for a Senator (that’s 50% longer than the president), three terms for a Representative.
   Make no mistake – 12 years for a senator is plenty of time to learn pork – but there at least would be an end in sight. Not like lifers we have now.

8. #8
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:27 am, derel3433 said:

   I’m not sure a “true conservative” is electable at this point. They’ve done too much toe tapping, grandstanding, and failed nation building.

   If Huckabee or Romney or any of the other midgets were to get the nod, they couldn’t run as conservatives. Our only strategy would be to scare the Hellary out of the American public. And it’s just not enough as fun as it might be. It really only winds us up and makes us feel good about doing politics.

   But what would Huckabee et al. do with a Democratic Congress?

   We need to strategize for 2012. What do we need to do elect a true conservative for 2012? Part of it is building the candidate. A more conservative Jindahl? Part of it is identifying those issues that will help us build our forces–immigration sure worked well for instance. Gay marriage? Not so much in the long run. And lastly, we need to re-energize our cadre. Too many of us were sucked up in the administration and will be tarnished forever, whether it be Katrina, Iraqui Provisional Authority, or the Justice Department.

   We have to rebuild that good infrastructure, but to do so around better people. Too many young right-activists have gone off the reservation these past few years–and become embroiled in weird sex stuff and other scandals.

   I’m really thinking 2012 is what we need to look toward.

9. #9
   On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:38 am, pressto said:

   The GOP is just as bad as the DNC in pork now. Heck just look at every Iraq spending bill and the Billions in pork in every one of those when they complain on how expensive the war is.

10. #10
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:41 am, steveegg said:

    That second item is why I’ve called most elected officials the bi-partisan Party-In-Government.

    Wish I could say things are any better here in Wisconsin, but we’re about to get another massive spending and tax increase.

11. #11
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:41 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

12. #12
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:42 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

    I can’t get the link button to work for me…

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58255

13. #13
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:44 am, ACHefty said:

    GOP: Grossly Overspending Politicians?

    Boy, would the Gipper have a few words for these clowns!

14. #14
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 9:09 am, fiona said:

    Believe it or not, Huckabee is even worse on illegal immigration than Bush. Here’s the info:

    http://tinyurl.com/2nsn5x

15. #15
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 9:15 am, conservativesRus said:

    Fiona #14…I agree. World Magazine did an interview of Huckabee. There is so much to like there but his position on immigration not only baffles me, it scares me.

16. #16
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 9:18 am, Cadman said:

    If you’d just look across the isle and objectively consider the absolute train wreck of democrat contenders, the GOP isn’t doing too badly.

    Oh man, don’t tell me our slogan will be Anybody but Hillary. I don’t vote that way. I am totally uninspired by the main candidates. It seems like they are just going through the motions. There are two people I would vote for. Alan Keyes or Newt.

    I want solid answers on the issues, from a candidate that won’t back down once in office.

    Healthcare
    Terrorism
    Illegal Immigration
    Welfare
    Income Tax

    Anyone think Newt or Keyes could have a chance?

17. #17
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 9:39 am, Marshall Russ said:

    Republicans or, if you prefer to be called conservatives, can ill afford to stand aside until 2012. The Democratic candidates are beholden to the wacko left fringe and will move the party even farther left. The damage that Hillary could do if elected would take years to recover from if ever. We can wish and hope for an incarnation of RR but, these are the men that have stepped forward.

18. #18
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 9:55 am, Rusty said:

    I actually dressed as Reagan once. Scariest costume ever.

    And I think Derel3433 (Comment #8) is right. Conservatives need an overhaul to get the taste of the Bush administration out of their mouth.

19. #19
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:25 am, Boomer said:

    I received an interesting link from my 72 year old Mother yesterday, which shows which lying crapweasel running for President you have the most in common with from a policies view.
    http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

    It is an interesting exercise. I found I was in a tie with Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson while the wife was in a three way tie with Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, and John McCain. She was not too happy with McCain she believes they damaged him beyond reasonable thought during his time in the Hanoi Hilton. Having very good knowledge from my Air Force Survival Training of the trails men like McCain it’s amazing any of them survived. We salute him for his service and sacrifice, but don’t trust him on his policies.

    If you follow the link answer a few questions you will see who’s polices you are most in step with. Enjoy!

20. #20
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:33 am, MrVIBEMAN said:

    I love Duncan Hunter. I hope we get some more dropouts to make more room for him (and Tancredo.) They’re the only ones with the right approach to border security, abortion, and trade.

    Other than name recognition, I have no idea why they’re not at the top of the polls.

    Hunter is the closest thing to Ronald R. we’ve got, but it’s hard to compete against the ‘Hollywood’ of Thompson and Guilliani.

21. #21
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:43 am, Alphonse said:

    Reagan meant well, but in practice he became the first borrow-and-spend liberal. Bush and Reagan are much alike–sunny optimists who spend, spend, spend and have the gambler’s silly confidence that the next roll of the dice (tax break) will stimulate the economy and bring our ship home. Borrow-and-spend liberalism like tax-and-spend liberalism has pretty much run its course as trade and budget deficits worry the sensible portion of the electorate.

    Is an anti-abortionist a conservative? Looks more like a Catholic or Evangelical in sheep’s clothing to me. Some voters might wonder if the pedophile coverup church is really the infallible arbiter of morality. Is a neo-conservative a conservative? Looks more like a liberal Jewish Zionist in sheep’s clothing to me.

    You have to go back to Goldwater to find a real conservative, although moderates like Ike or Nixon would be a vast improvement over Evangelical and Jewish religious fanatics who stand for nothing but packing the Supreme Court with puppets of Rome, relentless drives for tax breaks for the rich, and killing Arabs and Persians for Israel.

22. #22
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:48 am, ctisa said:

    Great, I just went from thinking I had someone to get excited about (Huckabee)to not liking any of my choices again!

    Being a New Yorker I learned that running an anti-Hillary campaign is not good enough. The republican party gave us a no name, no ability child to run against her for the senate seat and look what happened.

23. #23
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:55 am, Yashmak said:

    #20
    I too wish Duncan Hunter had managed to build up a bit more steam than he has so far. I like his positions on most things.

    I’d like Thompson more if he. . well. . if he injected a bit of fire into his campaign. He was billed as a ‘savior’ for the GOP by many pundits, but now seems just another in a line of similar candidates.

    Picking a GOP candidate this election is like standing in the paper products aisle at the store, weighing which one costs the least per sheet vs. which will cause the least rawness in sensitive areas.

24. #24
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:56 am, ThackerAgency said:

    Really, the only thing that these republican candidates have going for them is when they mention either Reagan in a positive light or Hillary in a negative light.

    It’d be good if they didn’t need such props because they could stand on their own.

25. #25
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 10:59 am, ThackerAgency said:

    wow alphonse, a powerful post there, and I agree – sort of.

26. #26
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 11:01 am, Marshall Russ said:

    Boomer #19; I took the quiz. It was a little over simplified i.e. the question on a line item veto. I would love to see a line item veto but, I believe that the wording in the Constitution would give the SCOTUS the excuse to strike it down. I love the fact that I line up with Duncan Hunter but, I don’t have a problem with a candidate that can disagree with me in reasoned debate.

27. #27
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 11:21 am, dakine said:

    Finally, a post that isn’t a recitation of the same old tired parroted punditry. Good stuff Alphonse, and like ThackerAgency, I agree…sort of.

28. #28
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 11:41 am, feebiebabe said:

    Alphonse, I do not agree that Reagan and Bush are kissing cousins. But your post is a good one.

    All I can say is, I really miss Reagan right now.

29. #29
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 12:30 pm, Buck I said:

    Kathryn Lopez and Zorro:
    Lynn Cheney or Jeb, huh? Bwaahahahahaahhaa. teehee, whoo.
    Yeah, please put together a Jeb Bush or Lynn Cheney ticket, and just watch how many independents or moderate republicans just stay there tails at home on election day, or dance with the dems.

    It’s gonna come down to Rudy against Hillary, and it’s gonna have the lowest voter turnout in presidential election history. The Christian conservatives will stay home, and Hillary is so hated by people from all walks of life, and ideologies that I don’t know who will win it. I’m betting it will be Rudy, due to Clinton fatigue, and then I’ll throw up and cry.

    A 3rd party candidate could have won this election with about 35% of a three way split with Rudy and Hillary. He/She would be a fiscally conservative, TOUGH ON IMMIGRATION and socially moderate/libitarian type, who is strong on defense, but more isolationist minded. Where is this person? I think the presidency could be there for the taking.

30. #30
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 3:29 pm, Yashmak said:

    Well, if it does come down to Rudy vs. Hillary, and Rudy wins, I’ll be satisfied. Thrilled in fact.

    But then, religious issues (i.e. abortion) has never played any part in my choice of a candidate.

    A return to isolationist principles would be disastrous for us in this day and age. We can’t afford it as a nation.

31. #31
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 3:46 pm, hunkahillbilly said:

    Truth is…Huckabee was the ONLY one resembling the greatest, Ronald Reagan.

    But the idiots at Fox refuse to acknowledge his growing popularity. So do airheads like the guy who drew the ‘toon.

32. #32
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 4:24 pm, Marshall Russ said:

    ThackerAgency#24 Can you put Hillary in a positive light? Huckabee even said there is nothing funny about a Hillary presidency. What say you? Or anybody else?

33. #33
    On October 23rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm, Perk said:

    I discarded Huckabee as a loss to start, but I have to say he is gaining ground. Thompson was a flatline in the debate. McCain, though he admits he made a mistake in immigration, is a nogo. Guiliani – ha. Ron Paul is an absolute joke, sorry for those of you who support him, but – A JOKE. Huckabee has been a surprising bright spot. He has shown poise. His stances are honest, well-thought out, and in the right vein. He does not double-speak, and he listens to the voters. I could go for someone I never thought had a chance.

34. #34
    On October 24th, 2007 at 2:11 am, SpeakEasy said:

    Good intentions mean nothing if you do not get the job. (Ask Al Gore)
    Public support swings from side-to-side at specific moments in our history. As a presidential candidate, you have to be electable at the time of the race. (Or for Ralph Nader, at no time; Still, keep running Ralph and take the environuts with you…)

    Ask yourself what is THE most important issue at this time and for the near future. Which candidate leads this issue and is acceptable on the rest. Now, is he or she electable at this point in time?

    For me it is an easy choice. Rudy is absolute on the issue of Iraq (my #1) and acceptable on the rest. Most importantly, He would take NY and the Dems could not recover those electoral votes.

    Anyone but Hillary? Not quite (mostly yes) but anyone who takes a tough stance on terrorism and will not lead this country down the road to socialism. I can live with that until another Reagan comes along.

    On a side note, I am a huge Condelizza Rice fan. She has the brains, and the grit to get the job done. Run, Condi, run.

35. #35
    On November 1st, 2007 at 7:55 am, hunkahillbilly said:

    One MUST notice that mike Huckabee is not portrayed in the ‘toon. Probably because he already looks an awful lot like Reagan on issues.

    Open up your eyes, Conservatives…the right candidate is before us…if we’ll just recognize it!