Captain's Quarters -

Proto-candidate?

More like penultimate candidate!

(As you can see, I'm still holding out hope for my man Newt ;-)

Proto- just in reference to his official status, not his potential, I assure you!

Perhaps they should have asked themselves why is a man who hasn't officially announced his candidacy is running number two in the polls. At the very least it should tell them most of the base is starving for a candidate who might be conservative on issues other than defense.

Perhaps they should have asked themselves why is a man who hasn't officially announced his candidacy is running number two in the polls. At the very least it should tell them most of the base is starving for a candidate who might be conservative on issues other than defense.

I'm not in Fred's corner and I'm rather sick of the inflated hype he has been getting, but that piece seemed to clearly target him in ways that other GOP front runners haven't been. Sure, they have taken swings at the candidates in commentary and back and forth discussion, but this was in the actual story. That said, the footage they showed of Fred was not flattering, but to make those stumbles THE story seemed biased.

This incident proves how Fox is anything but a Republican echo chamber. It's far more balanced than any other network.

I rarely watch cable news, but Fox tilts far less to the starboard than CNN/MSNBC and the networks tilt to the port side.

Just goes to show how unhinged the left becomes when anyone questions their warped worldview.

If, in fact, Thompson is muffing speeches (not the first time we have heard this complaint about him from other conservatives) and doesn't have any point of view on a issue as important as the effect of sub-prime lending on the financial markets, I think he is being fairly criticized. We all know he is running for president, but it looks as if he is hiding from debates, scrutiny, etc.. by continuing not to enter the race.

Apparently if he waits until September 5th to declare, he won't have to release any financial statements about his donor base until January -- after some of the first primaries. This strikes me as kind of fishy and I would take it as a sign of good faith if he would go ahead and release the information the way the other candidates have had to. It would certainly help Republicans avoid "buying a pig in a poke" if it appears that they are hiding something.

To be fair to the Panel, Fred Thompson has been less than impressive.

It is easy to provide pre-packaged written material, on the stump, in person, is essential.

Get in, debate, get going, or you will continue to sink...

So much hype is related to the Thompson push, when ironically his record matches the moderate McCain.

Some of the excitement behind Mr. Thompson reminds one of many fashionable tides we experienced after 2004, so many hyperbolic issues approached without objectivity, reason, rationale, which proved to have little basis, and ended up hurting Conservative interests.

Fred Thompson is a good Man. Period.

But this is a former Senator (Senators remain last on this author's humble list), who is old, never had serious CEO experience, and began his career in Washington as a Lobbyist decades ago, who said he won't promise NOT to raise taxation.

He even partly ran the McCAIN campaign of 2000, which opposed tax increases.

When Fred says entitlements are a problem, in a response to a question about future tax increases, it is fair to be skeptical.

McCain adjusted his position later, suggesting he was opposed to tax cuts in 2000, because he couldn't endorse them without reductions in spending.

This is almost exactly what a Democrat Politician will use as a defense or denial (or a Senator who spent too much time in Washington).

A true Conservative knows lowering taxation will actually raise revenue as a result of a growing economy, (some believe it is the only way to reduce the size of a massive bureaucracy).

When a Senator references Taxation, when confronted with an entitlement like Social Security, everyone should be wary.

In the analysis of Romney and Rudy's record, some fail to have the same strict assessments for others like Fred. His record is actually looking weaker than the two...

There seems to be a jaded existence in some arenas, clouding judgment.

Some lost sight of the big picture, the context of the alternatives, and actually advocated for empowering the likes of Pelosi and Reid prior to 2006.

Are those who produced a great deal of the vitriol back then, who failed to see the many positives the GOP provided, even the excellent attributes of the Bush Administration, seem to be most enthused by Mr. Thompson?

Again, Fred has a record so close to McCain, it should cause any sincere Conservative concern.

I would be happy to support Fred Thompson for President if he won the Nomination, with a Democrat as an alternative.

Sadly, some are not sharing this essential understanding if someone else gets the GOP nod.

Declaring a 'Super-Conservative', while debasing other fine Candidates, is completely misguided, (especially when the facts suggest there is no basis for the hyperbole).

Romney and Rudy both would make fine Presidents, advancing many sound Conservative policies.

No Conservative will help our Country, by not voting for one of the fine GOP Candidates we have referenced, because of some jaded dream of perfection, thus enabling the Democrat Party.

And in regard to the vivid opportunist named Mr. Gingrich?

What did he do about illegal immigration when he was Speaker of the House?

To be fair to the Panel, Fred Thompson has been less than impressive.

It is easy to provide pre-packaged written material, on the stump, in person, is essential.

Get in, debate, get going, or you will continue to sink...

So much hype is related to the Thompson push, when ironically his record matches the moderate McCain.

Some of the excitement behind Mr. Thompson reminds one of many fashionable tides we experienced after 2004, so many hyperbolic issues approached without objectivity, reason, rationale, which proved to have little basis, and ended up hurting Conservative interests.

Fred Thompson is a good Man. Period.

But this is a former Senator (Senators remain last on this author's humble list), who is old, never had serious CEO experience, and began his career in Washington as a Lobbyist decades ago, who said he won't promise NOT to raise taxation.

He even partly ran the McCAIN campaign of 2000, which opposed tax increases.

When Fred says entitlements are a problem, in a response to a question about future tax increases, it is fair to be skeptical.

McCain adjusted his position later, suggesting he was opposed to tax cuts in 2000, because he couldn't endorse them without reductions in spending.

This is almost exactly what a Democrat Politician will use as a defense or denial (or a Senator who spent too much time in Washington).

A true Conservative knows lowering taxation will actually raise revenue as a result of a growing economy, (some believe it is the only way to reduce the size of a massive bureaucracy).

When a Senator references Taxation, when confronted with an entitlement like Social Security, everyone should be wary.

In the analysis of Romney and Rudy's record, some fail to have the same strict assessments for others like Fred. His record is actually looking weaker than the two...

There seems to be a jaded existence in some arenas, clouding judgment.

Some lost sight of the big picture, the context of the alternatives, and actually advocated for empowering the likes of Pelosi and Reid prior to 2006.

Are those who produced a great deal of the vitriol back then, who failed to see the many positives the GOP provided, even the excellent attributes of the Bush Administration, seem to be most enthused by Mr. Thompson?

Again, Fred has a record so close to McCain, it should cause any sincere Conservative concern.

I would be happy to support Fred Thompson for President if he won the Nomination, with a Democrat as an alternative.

Sadly, some are not sharing this essential understanding if someone else gets the GOP nod.

Declaring a 'Super-Conservative', while debasing other fine Candidates, is completely misguided, (especially when the facts suggest there is no basis for the hyperbole).

Romney and Rudy both would make fine Presidents, advancing many sound Conservative policies.

No Conservative will help our Country, by not voting for one of the fine GOP Candidates we have referenced, because of some jaded dream of perfection, thus enabling the Democrat Party.

And in regard to the vivid opportunist named Mr. Gingrich?

What did he do about illegal immigration when he was Speaker of the House?

I have no time for Fred. He's playing coy, I guess, waiting for people to just beg him to be president. I don't see that he has anything to offer outside of his Law & Order show (and I didn't like him in that either)! Give me Newt, Rudy or Duncan (in that order) and tell Fred not to waste his time!

Don't know about Fox. Because I never watch TV, anymore. But listening to Drudge last Sunday, I think he "goosed" Fred. He said "THE GUY'S GOT NO ENERGY."

And, he played that clip of him, in Iowa; with Fred's monotone voice, dribbling out "his testing the waters," scheme.

Not sure why Fred hasn't committed. He sure is a reluctant "suitor" with the American people. And, I know lots of women, who when they get a "reluctant suitor," instead of "falling in love," the toss him out. And, head for the hills. Reluctance, in other words, sure doesn't appeal to lots of folk. Let alone how the dads at home feel, when such a "nebish" suitor comes down the path for one of their daughters.

Again, Drudge, for me is a "gut pulse beat" on the news. He's err-ed, because we all do. But he's also always ahead of the curve. Always forcing people who are listening to him on Sundays, to think.

So, mine, here's not an "independent thought." But one I picked up listening to Drudge. And, I think Drudge is onto something.

Anyway, I don't know about you; but I've already "picked" Guiliani. Yes, he's a long shot to get the nod from the republicans. (But the real players are inside. And, many are looking at all the asses in the parade, to see if they can attach themselves to the longest coattails.)

No coattails? That means "professional whores," OOPS, I mean, politicians, can't get elected far down on the ticket; unless the man on top resonates pretty much across the board; appealing to candidates far beyond the 'base' of anything.

As I've learned (from Doris Kearns Goodwin's book on Lincoln: TEAM OF RIVALS), Lincoln worked for two years to get nominated by the republican party. And, he didn't go into the "teepee" a front runner.

But he sure had a way of marketing himself; inside and out. He came in, in 4th place. But when he got to the "production," it was here that the fencing surrounding his old Kentucky home, was taken down. Carried by supporters to Decatur. And, these folks marched around, gaining traction because all the newsmen wrote about what they saw.

"THE RAIL SPLITTER." That was one.

And, the TORCH BEARERS. That was another.

Lincoln understood mass appeal.

And, the politicians? Well, they understood the WHIGS had fallen out from under them; a dead horse. They were mounting this "new filly."

And, the guy who rode it to success was Lincoln.

Are we there yet? You're asking me?

I don't do gypsy stuff. I know enough about the future that it's riddled with enigmas.

On the other hand, when Drudge says Fred's opportunity's peaked, I listen. Being the tallest guy in the room, who shuffles his feet coming in, doesn't inspire what needs to be inspired. (Okay. What do I know about Southern "sleepiness?" Nothin.)

Captain, you'll be seeing people double posting because the program you're using has glitches.

Again, the "hour-glass" that you get, showing you that you've hit the post button, and your end of it takes awhile; only NOW doesn't clean the screen! No sir.

It just has the hour-glass disappearing.

How do I overcome this electronic challenge? Well, I go for my cup of coffee, after hitting "post." And, when I come back ... and still see my post inside this "writing screen," I "cut" it; and hit my refresh button. THEN I see my post is up there.

Time consuming.

Is this a big deal? No. Not really.

But Charles Johnson, at Little Green Footballs, has "tweaked" his comments bar to absolute perfection. Perhaps, you can ask the designers of your site to go and take a look at it? Because, there are so many wonderful devices in play.

There's a way you can tap a button, and just quote another. Or reply. And, you can make bold, and other assorted gizmos also appear, without knowing a thing about formatting; or the technical details involved.

And, best of all, when you hit the 'post' button, your comments SWEEP. It's almost instantaneous. And, your comments are up there. Ease. And, beauty. Two qualities.

Since this needs fixing, here, why not go look?

Fred has been on the verge of announcing his candidacy for a couple of months now, and each time the date for his announcement gets pushed back for various reasons. Now it's because there have been changes in the campaign team, and friction with his wife's involvement in the management of the campaign. All the while he sits on the sidelines pontificating and/or taking potshots at people.

Um, not a very impressive showing for one who would be President of the United States. It's a tough job that takes a serious minded yet extremely flexible leader, one who can change course on the fly, as it were.

Fred's management of his pre-campaign exploratory efforts shows a decided disorganization, lack of leadership and guiding hand, and a suspicious tendency to be painfully slow to change course as changes occur.

One thing I don't want is another 911, with someone at the helm who can't change course because he doesn't have the right team lined up just yet with the expertise to handle the new dynamics. Talk about operational paralysis!

The longer Fred waits, and pontificates and waits, and reconsiders while waiting, and tosses out teasers while waiting still longer to throw his hat in the ring, the less and less impressed I am with the man.

If it were a choice between him and Hillary, I'd vote for him without question. I'm just hoping it doesn't come down to holding my nose and gritting my teeth while I fill out the ballot.

I enjoy Brit's roundtable too, with the exception of the strain on my willpower that it takes to not break my TV every time Juan Williams shows up on my screen. I just can't take the man seriously, no so much because of the things he says while he's at Brit's table... but when he's away from Brit's table he's like a moonbat unleashed.

It's conversations like this roundtable though, that should indicate to someone close to Fred that they really needs to sit with him and say it's time to "do business" or get off the pot. Granted, I hate this extended run-up more than probably the average voter does. But if he waits much longer this low energy bubble he's been gathering is going to pop.

When that pops, and I would be surprised if it lasted much longer, it no longer will matter "when" he signs on. He'll be relegated to the 2nd or 3rd teir, and be out before he starts.

I'd be hugely surprised if there weren't a lot of people, like myself, who really aren't happy with the candidates at hand in any large way, like much of what Fred has to say, hope he might be as good as he sounds like he might be... but have about gotten fed up with him playing "hard to get" more than a high school cheerleader does with the high school chess club who is doing her homework for her.

Kendra Wilder: "PONTIFICATING." Perfect word.

And, should it be that Fred falters before he enters the race; the way a thoroughbred can get scratched, before he enters the gate ... I think the reason will be that "Fred Pontificated Too Long." He should'a done something, and then gotten off the pot.

Teresa brings up the most valid "qualification." Fred's testing the waters to "hide the money." He sure has his hands out on the Internet. Where in a few short months Howie Dean raised $40-million-dollars. So, it's not (or possibly not), chicken-feed.

But likie Teresa says, even if this posturing gives him the ability to hide his finances; IF he wants to get nominated, he's gonna have to show a "bit of leg," here. Gone are the days a man could cover himself up so you wouldn't recognize the hidden piano stool. Well, that used to be a feminine trick. Doesn't matter. Equal opportunities exist, where stuff doesn't play well with audiences.

Sure. Lots of types. But few who are gonna be amused if Fred thinks he can hide "da money."

[I sure wish the comments system worked faster. I'm running out of "things to do" while I wait.]

Capt, totally agree Charles Krauthammer deserves his own show. I think he tends to outshine the rest of the panel.

Pho, I'm glad someone said what I was going to say. Juan Williams is always month's behind on the information for his "point of view" and is not worth even listening to. I do wonder though why other panelists just don't unload on him for his obvious oversights on what he says.

While others are impatient with Fred for getting in so late, he really is getting in at the traditional time rather than so damn early that we all have to suffer debate after useless debate and gotcha after gotcha reported in the media for longer than ever with the early start most candidates have forced on us. I can't vote any time this year anyway. So what is the hurry?

I have seen or heard nothing that makes me think that Fred has a record like McCain. I doubt Fred thinks as McCain has on immigration.

I do want all of the candidates to talk about free trade because past agreements have decimated business segments of our country where many who had good paying jobs no longer have good paying jobs now and struggle to get by. And our reward for that is defective and poisonous cheap goods coming into our country. Cheap doesn't look so good anymore.

Considering that what Fox News opiners may have shorted Fred on in glowing terms, the news team more than made up for in the TRANSCRIPTS of Fred's interviews, "edited for clarity" - and took out such MEANINGFUL FACTS as that he referred to the PERJURY CHARGE in Bill Clinton's Impeachment as a "TRIVIAL MATTER" in his interview with Sean Hannity on June 5 or 6, 2007...

Supporters of Fred should shut up about how Fox News treats Fred - because they treat him much much better than he deserves.
They've done the same thing for Newt, regarding his performance about a year ago when he laughed at Sean with Alan Colmes about SHAMNESTY for Illegal Aliens, and also the idea he considered totally absurd that we should be able to expect our borders to be secure.

And when Newt flip-flopped on that issue a few months later, NO MENTION of THAT aspect of HIS views from any of the FOX TEAM, least of all from Sean Hannity.

Posted by brooklyn | August 24, 2007 11:46 AM

********

EXCELLENT POST!

I concur, heartily, and completely.

And as another poster said of Fred recently, the man appears to be a loushe - cannot find that dictionary definition today that I found before, which essentially means a slightly degenerate, decadent-living, easy-going person of questionable ...attitudes.

Rose... the word I posted was LOUCHE.

I do like "loushe" though. Sort of a combination of "lush" and "louse"... and I've known a few of them in my time... :-)

I don't think Fred is a lush or a louse, but he might be just a wee bit loose. We'll soon see.

Posted by brooklyn | August 24, 2007 11:46 AM

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Well, the first h alf was excellent, anyway. :) I thought I read it all until my posted, then I read stuff there I didn't see the first time.

No, I will not vote for RINOS and "feel I did my duty to vote against the DIMS".

When it is 6 of one and half dozen of the other, with Dah Ahnold MAn showing us all exactly what I mean.

We have our Tom McClintocks - I won't help the GOP defeat a Hillary for the sake of a RINO - there is NO BENEFIT to America in it.

And RINO-LOVING GOP can live with it.
When they insist on a RINO, they are telling us they don't need our vote anyway - and they know it.

They think they are so smart and have all the answers - let them go for it.
Who can stop them - they sure don't care about our opinion that they are sinking the ship!

Our votes for their squirrel butted RINOS cannot save the ship from sinking - all it would do is keep them company on the ocean floor.

NO! I won't vote for a RINO.

I agree that the FoxNews Special Report's inclusion of NPR lightweights Juan Williams and Mara Liasson illustrates the network's openness to differing political viewpoints. Where else can one see Brit Hume once having questioned Liasson "Have you even read anything on this issue?" My vote would be to replace Williams or Liasson or both with Bob Zelnick. Some of you may remember Zelnick is the ABC old-school reporter who was fired by that network after he authored a book critical of the Clintons. That wasn't long after Britt Hume had abandoned the confines of ABC News group-think for the open minds FoxNews was and is attracting. I agree that Krauthammer deserves his own show perhaps in place of the tiresome Shepard "Mr. Hype" Smith.

The Special Report panel, however, is lapsing into that broadcasting weakness which favors "good television" over slow news days. Fred Thompson hasn't provided red meat for the press by not having declared candidacy therefore the red meat is limited to his not having declared his candidacy.

Regardless of Fred Thompson's supporters or detractors the man is conserving his resources. Mindful that Kerry was given a free ride throughout 2004 by the old media before the Swifties sank him Mr. Thompson realizes he must save his ammunition for the same old media free ride Hillary will get in 2008. Holding back and letting the opponents sink each other isn't simply frugality he's realizing that most voters won't seriously be considering any of the candidates until next summer anyway.

It probably will make a few liberal heads explode to know that many consrvatives don't take orders from any news show, even the liberals' eeeeevil nemesis Fox. One stooopid comment from Juan, Mara, Bill or anyone else gets a very fast 'click' on the remote. IF, that is, I bother even to tune in.

I think that Thompson is rapidly blowing his chances at the nomination by holding out and I am very underwhelmed by what little I have seen of him. I also think he is violating campaign finance rules in the process. Given that he supported McCain-Feingold makes it hypocritcal as well.

By delaying entering the race, he becomes a less serious candidate with each passing debate. He needs to get in the race asap or his ship is going to sink as it has been the past few weeks.

For those of you who think there is no difference between the RINO's (Guilianni, Romney) and the Democrats, I urge you think through issue by issue the diffferences between them and president Hillary Clinton. It's as silly as the liberals saying there was no difference between Gore and Bush in 2000.

All of this talk of "RINO" makes my head spin! I think it is high time that we have a new rating system for candidates - similar to the Movie Ratings!

On the Republican side we could have:

Duncan Hunter - Conservative (7)
Tom Tancredo - Conservative (5)
Fred Thompson - Conservative (2)
Mitt Romney - Conservative (0)
Rudy Giuliani - RINO (2)
John McCain - RINO (9)
Ron Paul - (no rating system applicable)

On the Democrat side we could have:

Hillary Clinton - Socialist (2)
Joe Biden - Socialist (1)
Bill Richardson - Socialist (0)
Barack Obama - Communist (4)
John Edwards - Communist (7)
Dennis Kucinich - Marxist (3)

Fight4TheRight...

Here you go!

http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=zeron

I come out as a "Paleo-libertarian" which is pretty accurate, actually...

Posted by filistro | August 24, 2007 2:50 PM

Rose... the word I posted was LOUCHE.

I do like "loushe" though. Sort of a combination of "lush" and "louse"... and I've known a few of them in my time... :-)

I don't think Fred is a lush or a louse, but he might be just a wee bit loose. We'll soon see.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

HAH! I wondered if that was the correct spelling and the reason I didn't find it in the dictionary, today! LOL!

I like both words. The first definition I saw was sort of focusing on a sort of relaxed decadent enjoyment of life, a sort of laid-back, er, how you say...joy de vivre, bit of a scamp.

And Fred does very much strike me that way.

Someone who is very earnest, to me, would NEVER consider perjury over (criminally) lax personal conduct to be a "TRIVIAL MATTER".

But a guy who enjoys a little gambling, a few Vegas shows, a nice mixed drink and a table full of lovely people to enjoy a nice steak dinner with....and an after dinner cigar....
To me, that is Fred.

Thanks, filistro - I do love the word. hehehehe

Some interpretive notes from the creator of the quiz I linked to above:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dmccarthy/dmccarthy14.html

Holding back and letting the opponents sink each other isn't simply frugality he's realizing that most voters won't seriously be considering any of the candidates until next summer anyway.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Excellent tactic, Viking - however, with all the primaries taking place in the WINTER of '08, and long over with by the SUMMER of '08, they won't have a plethora of GOP candidates to pick over, by next summer - they'll only have the choice of "A" GOP or "A" Dim candidate - and Fred will be gone before he was ever THERE.

I don't know who dreamed up this shake-up of moving all the Primaries forward to the first of the year - but it isn't doing the VOTERS any favors.

And I think some PRIMARY WINNERS will bomb anyway, at their usual self-implosion rate and timing - leaving their parties in worse shape than ever - with the primaries all BEHIND them instead of in front of them, when those candidates fizzle.

Hey guys, the talk today was that the DIMS think they have a new lock on the RELIGIOUS RIGHT who are unhappy with the GOP.
To show how convincing the Left is with thier new-found faith they ae doing such a wonderful job of winning Right Religious voters over with, they showed a clip of KUCINICH as he was "~praying~ someone would ask him a question" in a Dim Debate.

I thought it was so funny - the premise was that Religious Right voters are turning to the DIMS - and the PROOF of it all was the RELIGIOUS STATEMENTS made by DIM POLITICIANS, expressing their great faith (I noticed they never were very explicit about what their great faith was IN!) and how well the Dims all agree that is going.

I'm sure it is going as well as Algore's 2000 declaration of his faith in John 16:3.

Carol, I like Fred because of the way he sounds, but I might be hoping he is the next Reagan. Guiliani has my respect, but I'm scared of having a McCaine type president who buys in to this MexiUsCanada bullshit. I want our values upheld and I believe the greatest number of Americans are conservative in how they go about their lives. I do like the New Yorker.

Hey guys, the talk today was that the DIMS think they have a new lock on the RELIGIOUS RIGHT who are unhappy with the GOP.
To show how convincing the Left is with thier new-found faith they ae doing such a wonderful job of winning Right Religious voters over with, they showed a clip of KUCINICH as he was "~praying~ someone would ask him a question" in a Dim Debate.

I thought it was so funny - the premise was that Religious Right voters are turning to the DIMS - and the PROOF of it all was the RELIGIOUS STATEMENTS made by DIM POLITICIANS, expressing their great faith (I noticed they never were very explicit about what their great faith was IN!) and how well the Dims all agree that is going.

I'm sure it is going as well as Algore's 2000 declaration of his faith in John 16:3.

OOPS! Forgot to delete the post and refresh when it said it failed to post due to frequency of my posting.

Sorry, guys.

Wow, Viking 01, you've become a MUST READ for me! I go through the posts looking for yours; And, I'm always amazed at how well you go over the media's "history."

Yes, I agree with you that Kerry got a free ride. So what? On the Net, a few soldiers, over in Irak, put up that wonderful poster: Asking for "Halp us, Jon Kary, we're stuck in Irak."

And, of course, the Swift Boat Vets; where I read BELDAR's piece. And, knew he was talking about a fine man, a "lawyer's lawyer," who was heading that thing. And, he "got" enough people to notice.

Kerry went down.

I even believe the 4-million-extra-votes boost that Bush got in 2004, came from Dan Rather's fall. In other words? People re-acted.

I even believe TNR's hit piece is the reason Bush's numbers began to go back up.

In any business, there are more things that can affect sales, than just hiring the right person to give the sales pitch.

Heck, you can be blown away by circumstance. Even the3 weather can play havoc with your "season."

That's the piece that doesn't get detailed too often. It's why the media has lost traction. And, why the voices of the Net have taken over the market.

As a matter of fact, I cancelled the "Dish." The TV doesn't even go on. But I get all the news I want. And, I start my mornings by going to Drudge.

When Glasgow got to be in the news, someone linked to SKY TV, and said they were covering this 24/7. So I went there. And, stayed at my computer.

I am not alone. As a matter of fact, there are people connected to the Internet, now, with Blackberries, and lap tops. Looking for free Wi-Fi. And, I never even leave my house.

There's something for everybody.

Even here, it's good to see the range. So, it's not just my own opinion, as I wait to see what Fred Thompson does, ahead. And, IF the press, even over at FOX, isn't being kind? Hmm? So, he's a front runner and he hasn't even declared? Not a bad place to be if you want to run in front of the pack.

That said, I still have my heart set on Guiliani.

As to the "Ron Paul" advocates; and those that crawl over broken glass to avoid RINO's; I still say the winner will be able to carry the MAINSTREAM. Nobody's out there that's gonna satisfy "all."

...and those that crawl over broken glass to avoid RINO's; I still say the winner will be able to carry the MAINSTREAM. Nobody's out there that's gonna satisfy "all."

If the heir apparent has the MAINSTREAM, then you guys won't miss us fringe rightwingnuts who won't be voting for Ron Paul, either.
So, hopefully we won't be getting any more lectures about US not voting for YOUR guys.

Like you would consider voting for OURS! SO LOL!

Be happy with your "Robert Dole" guy. With my permission. And your seat on that neat little white picket fence, too.