The primaries
And the men who hold high places
Must be the ones to start
To mould a new reality
Closer to the heart
-- Geddy Lee, Rush
I love that song. Anyway...
While the primaries are just beginning, the debates started last May. And to me, the words spoken in the debates have been immensely important. Anyone remember "this smackdown?" Now with the votes starting to roll in... we're just beginning to be able to declare a winner.
But back to today... the number one "issue" for why I support Ron Paul is that he's not simply discussing taxes... he's discussing spending... in particular social security and healthcare (he is the only M.D. running). And to his credit, Fred Thompson is also discussing social security. But I'm not sure if any other Presidential candidates are even talking about reducing spending.
So a big thank you to both of them for at least acknowledging that America has some major issues with it's long-term liabilities... because if the men who hold high places don't... who will?
Tim White
25 comments:
There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.
Actually, John McCain has taken a lot of heat for his principled stand to reduce spending.
McCain was one of the few Republicans to vote against Bush’s tax cuts because they did not include corresponding reductions in spending.
Now Romney is blasting McCain for his vote against the tax cuts, but without mentioning the reason. (Romney is good at twisting facts to suit him).
The problem with most Republicans is that they’re conservative on taxes but liberal on spending. Thus the federal debt has nearly doubled in the last 8 years to $9 Trillion, and the US dollar is declining to junk-bond status.
John McCain has always been a fiscal conservative on spending as well as taxes. It was his big issue in 2000 and it’s still his big issue today.
Fiscal responsibility may not win many votes but it’s the right thing to do. And McCain is a man who sticks by his principles.
As a young voter, I remember Walter Mondale in 1984 saying that we had to raise taxes in order to decrease the deficit. So while he didn't advocate cutting spending, he was at least the first Democrat to recognize the need to begin trying to balance the budget. He lost the election pretty handily to Ronald Reagan, and as Redtown points out, the Republicans remained "liberal" on spending. The resulting deficits were not tackled until the next Democratic administration. With the advent of another two-term Republican, our deficits are once again soaring, and no Republican except Paul and McCain are talking about truly trying to balance the budget. Are the Democrats? Not much beyond the idea that the War in Iraq is expensive and if we got out we would be spending less.
John McCain has also earned the ire of many of his colleagues for opposing earmarked spending -- their wasteful, pork-barrel pet project spending.
McCain modestly admits, "I've never won the Mr. Congeniality award in Congress."
McCain didn;t look for $400M in earmarks for AZ, did he?
Did Giuliani seek them for NY?
We know Ron Paul did for TX
I can only presume the real reason he has support is his belief we should surrender in the war on terror and adopt Andrew Jackson's economic policies for the 21st century
McCain's "earmarks" for Arizona were arguably legitimate public expenses. For example, $14 million for improvements at Luke Air Force base. (Compare that to Hillary's proposed millions for a Woodstock festival memorial).
And the fact is that earmarks for Arizona are among the lowest (pro-rated) in the country.
Redtown... yeah... Romney's comments about McCain are less than candid. McCain did take a principled stand on calling for spending cuts before tax cuts... I appreciate that... I wish McCain was talking more about spending... but it's entirely possible that I simply haven't heard/seen his comments.
By the way, McCain is gonna win New Hampshire. I'm convinced of that. But I'm still at a loss as to who the GOP nominee will be...
Huckabee, McCain, Mitt, Rudy, Fred... or my guy... it really still is wide open. It's still possible that it's a brokered convention in Minneapolis.
Living on a lighted stage
Approaches the unreal
For those who think and feel
In touch with some reality
Beyond the gilded cage.
Cast in this unlikely role,
Ill-equipped to act,
With insufficient tact,
One must put up barriers
To keep oneself intact.
Living in the Limelight,
The universal dream
For those who wish to seem.
Those who wish to be
Must put aside the alienation,
Get on with the fascination,
The real relation,
The underlying theme.
"For those who think and feel
In touch with some reality"
GOOD NEWS - Nota Bene
According to an article in MRJ by Mary Godin, Shelden Dill, the chief of Cheshire's Chamber of Commerce, said that the W/S mall will have their own Dunkin Donuts as the anchor store. Why didn't they tell us at the P&Z? Now I understand what people were saying about having upscale shops and restaurants. For those people who worry about big box stores, this Dunkin will be less than 50,000 sq ft.
Finally something good for the Northend. Remember, "The world runs on Dunkin"
So no matter where you are in Cheshire, you can get to Dunkin.
I love Dunkin Donuts
I love Rachel Ray
Shelden Dill did say there would be a Dunkin. He didn't say it would be the anchor, but maybe it could be. What about McDonalds and Burger King?
Meet you at Dunkin.
Don't worry Westfield will save us all.
5th, Tim
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=The+Republicans%3a+McCain+wins&articleId=a34f309c-43a0-4995-b802-c69def8511a1
5th
Time to ground the blimp
According to all the major national polls, McCain is consistently the strongest Republican candidate against either Democrat.
Some show that McCain is the ONLY candidate who can beat either Hillary or Obama.
Here’s a summary of the most recent national polls:
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
I salute you, Tim, and all of Ron Paul’s supporters for raising some important issues in this campaign.
But as the primaries proceed in earnest, and we face the specter of a Hillary or Obama presidency, it’s now time for Republicans and Independents to unite behind a real winner: John McCain.
Redtown, haven't you citicized giving benefits to illegal immigrants? What about John McCain's wanting to give amnesty to illegals?
I disagree with John McCain on giving amnesty and benefits to illegal aliens, but I think Congress will continue to block those proposals. At least McCain supports strict border and employer enforcement. If Hillary or Obama get in, the borders will become open floodgates again.
Most important, McCain has the greatest maturity, personal integrity, and sensible conservatism to be president of the United States and leader of the Free World. Plus McCain is the strongest one to beat either Hillary or Obama.
Redtown, as I told Frank Luntz this past weekend (saw him in NH)...
If it's a brokered convention in September... anyone with delegates could get the nomination, including Ron Paul. I realize it's a stretch, but if in September the polls are indicating that the election will be a referendum on Iraq and if HRC is the nominee... then I think that Ron Paul could be the nominee.
He's in agreement with the GOP on the core domestic issues: abortion, guns, immigration, spending & taxes. And if foreign policy is the issue, the GOP delegates (1018 of 2037) may conclude that the best "compromise" that could win is Ron Paul.
And if HRC is the nominee, RP would be the candidate of change that all the candidates seem to be talking about.
However, if Obama or Edwards are the nominee... I'm not so sure RP would win.
For at least six months now, I've felt that the best chance the GOP has for beating HRC is RP.
I know many of my fellow Republicans feel that she's easily beatable, but I disagree.
While her "disapproval ratings" hover near 50%, so do her "approval ratings." And consider...
People feel they know her. So the 49% she gets in "general election" polls is probably solid. And in 1992, 1996 and 2000... no candidate got a majority of the popular vote. A plurality won each time. So I have no doubt that HRC could win this fall... particularly if there's discontent over Iraq and the GOP candidate is talking about Iran.
I realize there are lots of variables here. But I'm sticking with RP for now.
What a beautiful and inspiring victory speech John McCain gave last night, and coming from him, you know he really means it.
McCain said:
"My friends, I learned long ago that serving only one's self is a petty and unsatisfying ambition. But serve a cause greater than self-interest and you will know a happiness far more sublime than the fleeting pleasure of fame and fortune.
"For me, that greater cause has always been my country, which I have served imperfectly for many years, but have loved without any reservation every day of my life.
"America is our cause, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Her greatness is our hope; her strength is our protection; her ideals our greatest treasure; her prosperity, the promise we keep to our children, her goodness, the hope of mankind.
"That is the cause of our campaign and the platform of my party. And I will stay true to it, so help me God".
with all due resepct, stop drinking the kool aid about Ron Paul.
While a brokered convention is a real possibility, odds are that Republicans would nominate a candidate whom a majority of the party actually liked, such as McCain, Romney, Huckabee or Rudy
Not someone whom 57% of the party doesn;t like
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHREP
I for one am sick and tired of the media beating up on Hillary. The reason she won in NH is because of women coming out in droves to support her. I'm not a fan of hers but I am a woman who is thoroughly disgusted with the media and their sexist comments regarding her. Last week they showed a picture of her tired and showing her age, it was all over the internet. So Guliani is Brad Pitt (no neck, bald, overbite). I don't see any of these pictures or comments about the male candidates. If the people who do not want her elected are behind this, their bringing about the opposite outcome. Women are really upset, with justification.
If Hillary wants to play with the boys, she has to play like the boys.
Pictures of her looking tired and showing her age were published. Big deal. You don't hear McCain whining because people call him old, or Thompson whining because they call him fat.
Not every criticism of Hillary is "sexist". As it is, she gets a lot of passes because she is female. For example, her public tears were said to make her "human" while Romney's tears called his stength into question.
Finally, I wouldn't be surprised if those men who chanted "iron my shirts" were actually planted by the Clinton campaign to garner women's votes for Hillary. Her history of dirty tricks doesn't put her above such tactics.
The last criticism of Hillary is sexist and offends womyn. It makes me feel like I’ve been assaulted.
Hillary will become president and she’ll empower womyn everywhere by destroying patriarchal privilege and male dominance of the family and workplace. I hope she picks Barack Obama for VP. He’ll turn this racist, sexist country around by empowering people of color and immigrants.
A Clinton-Obama ticket will be the Democratic party’s farthest shift to the left ever. Of course, she has to put out a moderate image to be elected, and that’s OK. I wish Barack would play along by saluting the flag during the national anthem. I share his distaste for the racist, sexist flag, but they need to get elected!
Hillary and Barack in 08!
Angrywomyn’s tantrum above is an example of the cliché-laden crap they teach in college women’s studies these days. It’s all emotive, lacks any reasoning, and is filled with communist-sounding slogans.
Angrywomyn says that criticism of Hillary makes her feel like she’s been assaulted. She accuses others of being sexist and racist without presenting any evidence. She bashes others rather than engage in any reasoned dialogue.
This is why I left the Democratic party some years ago. Angrywomyn may not be a mainstream Democrat, but the national Democrats pander to this sort of thing. And as angrywomyn reveals, underneath all their rhetoric for “change,” Hillary and Obama really do have a hidden, radical leftwing agenda.
Yes agree-the left wing agenda gave us this war in Iraq-oh wait a minute no this left wing agenda gave us the corrupt Rep congres with Tom dElay-no wait I mean the left wing agenda has given us all this ..
Ah never mind
I am going to order from the left side of the menu from now on
Go for it now
break out the plow
watch the cow
he is happy now
Post a Comment