A trial ballon named Condi

Lawyers and military men have done quite well in the past. We don't get many of them running anymore though. It's also surprising how many presidents never even went to college. A few even grew up mostly illiterate. I know times have changed but still, looking back, some of the best presidents didn't have especially impressive resumes.


EDIT: Make that people who are primarily known to be lawyers. Most have some other claim to fame besides simply having a law degree. Good point Cutlass.
 
We still get lawyers. Most politicians are. The lawyers who have been elected recently include Obama and Clinton. But if you look at the candidates, most of them have law degrees.
 
Lately, the typical Republican presidential or vice presidential candidate would have trouble finding South Africa on a map.

How can anyone take you seriously when you say stuff like this?
 
Right. "Because according to you", concocting absurd arguments like this of people who happen to frequently disagree with you is just the same as rational debate. I never claimed she had no qualifications, now did I?

OTOH is claiming that Obama has no qualifications, and that the Democrats "pull the race card" while Republicans don't, even more examples of your "moderate" positions?
Once again your reading comprehension has failed you.
I said the Dems pull the race card more often... I didn't say Republicans don't pull it.
There is a difference.

You've spent about 20 recent posts deriding her as a stupid nitwit who's incompetent. Are you now denying this?
You know, never mind...
 
Condi would make a good VP, if she was pro-life. But, Rubio is the best choice for Romney, and he needs to choose him ASAP. Heck, I could see Rubio be America's first Hispanic President.

Why does her stance on one ridiculously divisive issue indicate whether she will be a good vice-president or not? Isn't the whole point of a VP to be the silent spare suit in the wardrobe which has to look good enough to wear on occasion?
 
How can anyone take you seriously when you say stuff like this?
How can anyone take you seriously when you continue to ignore the documented ignorance of people like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Santorum, one of whom thought Africa was a country and that South Africa was a part of it.

Here's a few Rick Santorum quotes to refresh your memory:

JUST HOW DANGEROUSLY IGNORANT IS RICK SANTORUM?

On Gays (and your right to privacy):

“If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything… In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution.”

In an interview Lara Jakes Jordan,when asked for his position on the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, Santorum said that the scandal involved priests and post-pubescent men in “a basic homosexual relationship” (not child sexual abuse), which led the interviewer to ask if homosexuality should be outlawed. To which he replied that “sodomy laws properly exist to prevent acts which “undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family.”

On Gays in the Military:

“They’re in close quarters, they live with people, they obviously shower with people.”

Gays shower with PEOPLE. You know, because gays aren’t people.

On Gay Marriage:

“Is anyone saying same-sex couples can’t love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?”

“This is an issue just like 9-11. We didn’t decide we wanted to fight the war on terrorism because we wanted to. It was brought to us. And if not now, when? When the supreme courts in all the other states have succumbed to the Massachusetts version of the law?”

“[Gay marriage] threatens my marriage. It threatens all marriages. It threatens the traditional values of this country.”

And to round things out, here are his thoughts on some other issues:

On global warming:

It’s “junk science“; and a “beautifully concocted scheme” by the political left and “an excuse for more government control of your life.” He backs and would support a policy of “drill everywhere” for oil and that there is “enough oil, coal and natural gas to last for centuries.”

On Condoms:

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

On Making ‘Black People’s Lives Better’ With ‘Somebody Else’s Money”:

“I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money and provide for themselves and their families.”

On Women:

“In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don’t both need to. … What happened in America so that mothers and fathers who leave their children in the care of someone else — or worse yet, home alone after school between three and six in the afternoon — find themselves more affirmed by society? Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism.”

On Palestine:

“There are no Palestinians. All the people who live in the West Bank are Israelis. There are no Palestinians. This is Israeli land.”

On Teaching Science:

“What we should be teaching are the problems and holes and I think there are legitimate problems and holes in the theory of evolution. And what we need to do is to present those fairly from a scientific point of view. And we should lay out areas in which the evidence supports evolution and the areas in the evidence that does not.”

On People’s Hopes and Dreams for their Future:

“The idea is that the state doesn’t have rights to limit individuals’ wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire.”

“Suffering, if you’re a Christian, suffering is a part of life. And it’s not a bad thing, it is an essential thing in life … There are all different ways to suffer. One way to suffer is through lack of food and shelter and there’s another way to suffer which is lack of dignity and hope and there’s all sorts of ways that people suffer and it’s not just tangible, it’s also intangible and we have to consider both.”

These are just a few of the shockingly backwards thoughts that Santorum feels are worthy of saying aloud. Rick Santorum is a frothy mixture of hate, bigotry, and ignorance who needs to be exposed for the dangerously simple-minded fool that he is.

Once again your reading comprehension has failed you.
I said the Dems pull the race card more often... I didn't say Republicans don't pull it.
There is a difference.
Only that isn't what you stated at all. First you insinuated that Republicans don't do it while Democrats do, then you claimed they do it "way more often... hands down":

Right... because, according to you, she has no qualifications... unlike, oh, say, Obama, who really had, no qualifications.
Repubs pull the race card? Or dems do?
I'd say the dems do it way more often... hands down.
Care to try to prove that utter nonsense?

You've spent about 20 recent posts deriding her as a stupid nitwit who's incompetent. Are you now denying this?
You know, never mind...
Not only is your arithmetic skills as bad as your English skills, I have stated no such thing other than claiming she is incompetent which I think is quite obvious. Take getting us into the Iraq War and aiding and abetting the torture of completely innocent people to occur, for instance. Never mind that members of the GWB administration claim exactly the same thing.

Go ahead and also prove I claimed she was a "stupid nitwit" in this thread or any other. Has your "reading comprehension" "failed you" again?

And what were you just saying about "obnoxious" posts?
 
How can anyone take you seriously when you continue to ignore the documented ignorance of people like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Santorum, one of whom thought Africa was a country and that South Africa was a part of it.

So, you openly admit your point doesnt apply to any candidate for President or Vice President? Nice Job, you just proved yourself wrong again by undermining your own extreme and unsupportable comment.

Here's a few Rick Santorum quotes to refresh your memory:

None of those refer to the South Africa thing. Now, i'm sure instead of doing the adult thing and saying that you did indeed overstate things just to prove a point; you'll whine and cry and continue to try and justify your utterly inane comment.

Hang on, lemme get ready. :popcorn:

Ok, go for it.
 
So, you openly admit your point doesnt apply to any candidate for President or Vice President? Nice Job, you just proved yourself wrong again by undermining your own extreme and unsupportable comment.
Only the some of the leading members of the Republican party are utter idiots!
 
Only the some of the leading members of the Republican party are utter idiots!

Except for the simple fact that they arent. Not anymore so than anyone on the democrat side leastways.

You see, this is where I think a lot of leftys just cant face fact. They have to denigrate their opponents and classify them thus in order to avoid the real thing they should be doing: talking about the issues.
 
Only the some of the leading members of the Republican party are utter idiots!
Apparently not to those who are more than willing to vote for them. I guess it is all relative. Those who believe intelligent design is a scientific alternative to evolution, think global warming is a hoax, think gays deserve no rights, can't find Iraq and Afghanistan on a map, think Obama is a Muslim socialist from Kenya, and believe Africa is a country don't mind one bit having politicians who are just as under-educated and ignorant. They actually seem to prefer them that way so they don't have to be reminded they have an "elitist northerner" from Massachusetts running for president, the same thing they claimed to despise and hate in 2004.

And again, Sarah Palin did indeed believe that Africa was a country and that South Africa was a part of it, as Fox News documented itself:


Link to video.


Link to video.

So who is making "utterly inane" comments, as usual? :popcorn:
 
Did you even listen to your own link? This was according to 'insiders' i.e. anonymous and non-accountable (not to mention untraceable) allegations. And certainly not based upon any single remark she ever made on the record. I really love how you treat nameless 3rd party report as 'fact' while it remains unsubstantiated. Not to mention the utter hypocrisy you show here in using a Foxnews segment, which you are on the record myriad times stating how they are lacking in journalistic integrity. Why do you treat this as fact, when you so often accuse them (foxnews) of not being factual? Or is it they are only factual when dishing on GOP/conservatives? I see.

Please tell me you know the difference in 'on the record' and simple allegation by nameless sources. Because there is one...a big one.

Now, we absolutely have, for example, Obama on the record stating that the USA has 57 states.......Does that mean you consider Obama to be an 'utter idiot'? In order for your point to be consistent you must.

But I dont. I dont think simple mis-statement or faux pas make one an idiot. You seem to; and thats why we are different, you and I.

So who is making "utterly inane" comments, as usual?

Since you insist on treating reports from nameless sources as fact, i'm going to have to go with you.
 
Why does her stance on one ridiculously divisive issue indicate whether she will be a good vice-president or not? Isn't the whole point of a VP to be the silent spare suit in the wardrobe which has to look good enough to wear on occasion?
Pro-lifers view abortion as a form of murder. Yes or no question: Disregarding whether you agree or not, if you saw the Vice President as supporting the choice to murder people, would you think it's worth ignoring? Again, disregarding your personal opinion on what constitutes murder, if you had the choice of voting for someone who's Vice President supports the legalization of murder, would you vote for that candidate?
 
Energy will pick up once its obvious to all the economy simply isnt coming back by election time. Romney doesnt need to get fancy, he just needs to ride the wave of national suckiness to victory.

So how many shares of Romney do you own on Intrade?

He's actually pretty cheap at the moment...
 
The religious old white base with a firearm in one hand and a bible in the other would be keen on a single middle aged black women who believes in abortion ?, just look at the strikes against her, black, unmarried, liberal on abortion.

This bloke Rubio is a smart cookie( why is he a conservative ? ) but he is not keen on locking those who do not look like real Americans in rail cars heading for the Mexican border.

Obama needs a smart young good looking white woman as his running mate to keep all those young women on board
 
Pro-lifers view abortion as a form of murder. Yes or no question: Disregarding whether you agree or not, if you saw the Vice President as supporting the choice to murder people, would you think it's worth ignoring? Again, disregarding your personal opinion on what constitutes murder, if you had the choice of voting for someone who's Vice President supports the legalization of murder, would you vote for that candidate?

I can't say I would, no, but in a country which routinely practices capital punishment, I'd hope that people would have more nuanced views on what constitutes murder or not.
 
Both parties...
How is that relevant, and why does that make things better?

But I see, you're on your "fair and balanced" crusade again.
 
Just pointing out that idiocy lay on both sides of the fence.

Many here seem to forget that.
 
I dont think Condi would be a good choice because shes black and pro-LGBT and pro-choice which is the antithesis of the Modern GOP base.
 
I can't say I would, no, but in a country which routinely practices capital punishment, I'd hope that people would have more nuanced views on what constitutes murder or not.
Zing!

I dunno, this seems to be a bigger deal than I'd anticipated among Republicans I know from real life and the Internet. When spit hits the fan, I really don't think attracting Republican votes will be of huge concern for Romney though.

If he feels appealing more strongly to the base is necessary, what about Huckabee? He's experienced, affable, not particularly crazy and oh-so very, very conservative. He's not as brainy or broadly liked as Condi, and I understand there's personal dislike lingering from the 08 campaign (although it's all gossip really). Still, could be an interesting choice. Leads to nice jokes about the best the Republicans have being the two people who lost last time, and a Biden-Huckabee debate sounds enjoyable, like watching two kind uncles pretending to hate each other for a laugh.
 
Back
Top Bottom