And I feel fine…
HAT TIP: The American Catholic; and do read the linked article about Obama’s prospects for 2012.
Tags: Ronald Reagan, Welcome Back Carter
Christie might be a favorable comparison with Reagan (governor from largish state) but Bachmann is a representative from Mondaleland and Mitt is Mitt so generic is actually the brand of choice for the GOP.
If the economy improves of course Obama wins easy. If there is still 10% unemployment and Obama wins it means the GOP blew the chance of a lifetime.
Do you honestly see the economy improving under bams? This experiment/lesson in keynesian economics is not working at all. What can more of the same do?
Besides Ron Paul, who else would you vote for president?
I don’t see the economy improving under Obama, but it might happen. If by Keynesian you mean the encouragement centralized planning it has a long long long history.
Maybe Cain so I could soothe my white guilt, LOL or the fact that he ran Godfather’s Pizza. Not too exciting a field thus far. Christie would be interesting but I haven’t heard any news from NJ.
A long long history of failure and producing misery across the board. Except for the ruling elites that is.
Just wondering who is acceptable to the libertarians is all.
I was a Pawlenty fan early on because he seemed to be the most electable with the least personal and political baggage and a solid conservative record in a blue state, but he seems to be pulling a Fred Thompson on us — no fire in the belly. Plus he shot himself in the foot when the moderator in the last debate handed him Romney on a silver platter, and he punted. He didn’t even need to attack Mitt. All he had to say was “I think RomneyCare will be such an albatross around Governor Romney’s neck that he can’t win”, or something to that effect.
If someone hasn’t come out of the pack by the time of the Ames Straw Poll on August 13th, it could end up being a long, drawn out battle for the GOP nomination.
I agree there’s not much of a chance of the economy improving between now and the election. The gun is empty. They’ve fired every bullet, and haven’t even hit the target. No amount of campaign cash is going to convince people that they just need another 4 years to get it right. It’s become pretty obvious that they either don’t want to get it right, or they don’t know how.
I also think the straw poll might end up being very important – it will either kill Bachmann’s campaign, or make her unassailable among social conservatives and TEA Party activists. Pawlenty may have to knock her off there, or never get another shot at it. Of course, it is still so up in the air (and we may yet have Perry and Palin getting in) that anything is possible (Bachmann also may run in to some choppy waters over her one-time membership in a Lutheran denomination that holds the Pope to be anti-Christ..I doubt she ever suspected they believed that, but it still looks bad…though the fact that she hasn’t attended services there for at least the past year gives her some distance).
Obama, though, stands or falls on his record…if the GOPer in October 2012 gets the people to say “no” to the “are you better off?” question, then Obama loses, period.
Ames does not have a very good history of picking the eventual nominee. So, I do not see its importance. Why is it important?
Normally, I wouldn’t give it too much thought…but Bachmann is on a roll and if she comes out way on top, then she’s going to look like the only serious challenger to Mitt Romney…and then the money will really roll in for her. On the other hand, if Pawlenty wins – or even comes in a close second – then doubts about Bachmann’s readiness for prime time will creep in, thus allowing Pawlenty as well as Cain to gain traction in the social-conservative and TEA Party ranks.
Still Ames only has at best a 50% accuracy for picking the nominee. If Bachman does win the straw poll that does not guarentee her any more money or support from social conservatives like me.
We pretty much have a list of people we will NOT vote for. (Sorry folks just the way it is and going to be.) Michelle Bachman is definately in our top three list along with Sarah Palin, if she runs, and Herman Cain. She does not have to do much to get our money, time, and votes.
So maybe im just missing something about the importance of this straw poll.
The WELS denomination where Bachmann was a member does not hold the Pope to be the anti-Christ. It holds that the office of the papacy, in teaching justification through faith AND works, denies that Christ’s death was completely sufficient for human salvation.
The WELS holds that, with the addition of ‘works’ the office of the papacy leads Christians away from ‘justification by faith alone’ and hence the office of the papacy is anti-Christ. This extremely obscure doctrine is not new and goes back to Martin Luther himself as one can imagine or if you read history.
Actually I didn’t know Bachmann was a WELS and had dropped out. She can’t exactly switch to the LCMS since they hold the same doctrine and the other denominations of Lutheran are fairly liberal.
That means that for her presidential bid she will either quit religion all together or start attending a church which is radically different from that of her upbringing. The media can simply start asking her which church she attends/will attend and watch her squirm. Throw in the questions on creationism intended to make her look like a weirdo and she has already lost.
The media can simply start asking her which church she attends/will attend and watch her squirm – barstool
Why would they do that stool? Shouldn’t religion be off limits when questioning a POTUS candidate? Do you have a religious litmus test for POTUS candidates? And if so, why? Are there certain religions you think better suited to belong to in order to govern a country?
What wasn’t Obama questioned about his membership to Rev Wrights church by the main stream media? Do you find it acceptable for one to belong to a church that labels the USA as the US of KKKK A?
I guess I didn’t realize that you were so militantly religious stool. Considering some Faiths to be acceptable and others to be ridiculed. Care to explain?
Unless you were under a rock the Rev. Wright thing was on the news continuously for weeks during the 2008 race. So much so that some media outlets said Obama had to throw Wright under the bus. The media also followed JFK around in 2004 to show he only attended church when convenient.
You of course missed my point in correcting Mark and defending Ms. Bachmann’s former religion. For somebody to claim they are very religious it seems an acceptable question to ask what religion they conform to at the present time.
Ms. Bachmann has put herself in a tricky situation since she appears to be choosing her religious beliefs partly to suit the electorate. Why she needs to change churches for an obscure belief going back to the reformation is strange when plenty of Catholic Democrats run on a platform of pro-abortion.
I have no religious litmus test for candidates.
Just curious: By “creationism” do you mean the belief that everything on Earth was created as it is now, in seven days, just a few thousand years ago?
Or do you refer to the belief that while evolution is a proven theory, there was a divine origin at the beginning of that process, many eons ago? Kind of a “Big Bang vs Big Guy” question. Random or part of a long-term process?
Would either of these beliefs qualify her, or anyone, as a “weirdo”?
Catholic Democrats run on a platform of pro-abortion.
heretics comes to mind.
Did you watch the GOP debate 4 years ago where they asked McLame if he believed in evolution? The question was designed to make some of the GOP candidates look like kooks.
I’d guess Bachmann believes in a 7 real day theory happening less than 10,000 years ago. That doesn’t make her into a weirdo in my eyes, it certainly makes her an easy target for SNL.
I want to understand why she needed to stop going to her church. Christians hold that there the Messiah has already come and that other Jewish traditions that deny that are wrong on that point. Many protestants believe in justification by faith through grace alone and that other Christians that deny that are wrong on that point. That is not to be anti-Semitic or anti-Catholic. In the end those beliefs have no political impact.
On the other hand there are pro-choice Catholics in both parties who feel no need to justify their positions beyond a ‘I don’t want to impose my beliefs on others-cliche’. How about the next Dem debate asking the candidates, do you believe a fetus is a human being with a soul? Those beliefs impact everyday life.
How about the next Dem debate asking the candidates, do you believe a fetus is a human being with a soul? Those beliefs impact everyday life.
that is like asking a steaming pile of horse manure if it stinks.
a stupid question with the blood of 55,000,000 murdered babies on their hands
GMB, I wasn’t suggesting that the Ames Poll would pick the winner, just begin the weeding out process.
“Unless you were under a rock the Rev. Wright thing was on the news continuously for weeks during the 2008 race.”
Yeah, but the Rev. Wright thing didn’t sink Obama’s candidacy, as wingers we so sure it would. That’s why they’re still upset about it today.
dolf is “guessing” again.
This presumption that somehow he knows things that, in reality, he cannot possibly know, seems to be a defining characteristic of ol’ dolf.
The list of things he claims to know keeps growing, and keeps getting goofier and goofier. At least sometimes he admits he is “guessing”. Have you noticed that his “guesses” (and out-and-out lies) are always the most negative possible speculations or inventions?
Here’s another creepy peek into another creepy mentality.
Monty claims that the Right is “still upset” that the Reverend Wright thing did not “sink” the Obama campaign.
I suppose to someone whose total political outlook is based on personality and emotion, this makes sense. We could not expect anyone with Monty’s severely limited perception of political belief to understand that we were “upset” that the nation could elect a racist, someone whose self-proclaimed honorary uncle and spiritual and political adviser preached hated of whites.
He could not possibly understand why we objected to electing a man who admitted to sharing this hateful view of white people when he stated that his conversion to Christianity was brought about by his emotional resonance with the Wright statement about “a white man’s greed in a world in need”.
No, Monty has to reduce everything to his own level of comprehension, to his own superficial level of political involvement, and apply his own level of response to anything. By those criteria, the only reason for being “upset” COULD be based on resentment, because if there is one thing Monty DOES understand it is resentment.
“On the other hand there are pro-choice Catholics in both parties who feel no need to justify their positions beyond a ‘I don’t want to impose my beliefs on others-cliche’. ”
Why stop with abortion? My “beliefs” include that it is wrong to murder someone, wrong to steal, wrong to drive drunk, wrong to sexually abuse a child, wrong to beat an animal, wrong to commit perjury, wrong to commit fraud, and so on.
So why should any of those be illegal? After all, each and every one of them is nothing more or less than an effort to “impose my beliefs on others”.
Why shouldn’t the “right to choose” apply to everything? If I think I am a safe driver with a blood alcohol level of .12, why can’t I “choose” to drive? Isn’t it MY body, MY car, MY choice? And let’s face it, with this choice there is at least a chance no one will die.
Yeah, those wishy-washy types do like to posture as just being “fair” by “not imposing” values on other people.
Thanks for demonstrating my point, Amazona. I didn’t need you to, but hey, that was your choice. You were so sure that Wright would sink Obama. It didn’t. You’re clearly still upset about it. Just let it go, OK? You’re going to have to stop letting your emotions lead you around like this.
Or do you refer to the belief that while evolution is a respectable theory, there was a divine origin at the beginning of that process, many eons ago?
I’m ‘guessing’ in so far as I can’t be sure that Bachmann agrees with the teachings of the WELS where she was a member for 10 years.
I’m not guessing about WELS theology. I know the theology of the Wisconsin Synod very well.
It’s pretty anal to believe that your opinions are derived consequences of fundamental axioms, free of emotional entanglements. It is also false. Whatever floats your boat.
Can you offer up any explanation for Bachmann leaving her church beyond political gain?
I have no religious litmus test for candidates.- barstool
Your earlier post suggests otherwise.
nope, you’re wrong again, especially since lots of good friends are WELS members and I would vote for them, lots of good friends are Catholics and I would vote for them
I do have a pandering to the electorate test though. Obama failed it in 2008.
Yeah, but the Rev. Wright thing didn’t sink Obama’s candidacy, as wingers we so sure it would. – monty
So membership to a racist, anti American church was not sufficient grounds to nullify a candidate, but membership to a church with unusual and ancient positions, is? Or is it that Bachmann has an R behind her name?
I keep going back to vandregg’s sole purpose for supporting democrats – it was (in her words) because she felt that democrats CARED more for other people. I believe that is also the level of scrutiny Monty has given to his political positions.
I see the fact that Wright didn’t sink Obama sticks in your craw, too. You people need to get over your grudges, accept your losses, and move on.
PS: I don’t care that Bachmann’s church hates the Catholic church, except for the fact that I find it amusing.
I see Monty (little jeffy) is in his fantasy land again….
To him, there is no double standard when it comes to candidates with a (D) after his/her name. Then he chalks everything up to rage at some foolish idea that no one here ASSerts other than the dumbed down talking points he regurgitates.
Well, I didn’t have to guess that it sticks in your craw, tired. Pretty much everything does–you’re taking Leo’s “dumb and angry” schtick from him. All the same, you should get over your grudge, accept your loss, and move on.
Comments are closed.
Our new book, 150 Reasons Why Barack Obama is The Worst President in History is now available on Amazon.com!
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 1,796 other followers
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.