Some...timely pics
I can't decide whose reputation this more improves in my mind, John's or Fred's. 
In case you don't know, that's Gretchen Wilson and Cowboy Troy joining them.
I have long enjoyed Fred's no nonsense commentaries over the last few years, I really think he has a lot more going for him than star power. His emphasis on federalism strikes a very tender cord in my political heart, and I really think we could use a healthy dose of political speak that leads us back (ahem...conservatism) to the way our government was designed to function.
I do not envy what he is going to have to endure after tomorrow...they've already given him a preview, but it seems thus far none of the mud has stuck. Looking forward to the announcement, and then the first REAL debate.
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Then again, I could not also name any of the characters FDT ever played (save himself)...at least I can see a real congressional record...the star status and good communication skills just helps - hopefully - to beat Hilary. It's all about the issues and as I've said before FDT keeps speaking my mind...I really do not have a choice here.
sf
what he IS good at however is the folksy soundbite. the distinct opposite of obama... who's soundbites are pretty bad, but no one can touch him in terms of pure oratorial prowess in the speechmakind dept - except maybe jed bartlet.
Judgment call. I suspect people will agree or disagree with you based largely - perhaps exclusively - on the extent to which they agree or disagree with what is being communicated.
In a way ALL politicians these days must be actors...but the part FDT plays speaks to me...a happy dupe who'd like to go shoot trap with Fred.
his current platform is more-of-the-same
Not at all...talk about soundbytes....but I would not ask you to try and investigate further, but he is certainly not the same man as GW, nor does he share all of the same policies and agendas - surely no more than all the dems on the debate stage are cookie cutter renditions of one another...heck James Dobson doesn't even think FDT is a Christian so hopefully we can do away with the leftist slander that he might be a religious maniac bent on bringing back the messiah through war.
It's like me saying the dems have no platform other than "I'm not George Bush" and "everyone else is more of the same."
his revolving door of campaign staff suggests leadership problems
It doesn't suggest much to me. These problems if truly in existence as such will have their relative effect on his campaign whether I hold an opinion on it or not.
his speeches are terrible
Well, sure, if you don't agree with what he is saying. I've rather enjoyed them...though some have surely lacked luster from time to time...but what I've noticed is that those that I find lacking luster are those that don't seem to even try and communicate his political philosophy. Like the one at the Lincoln such and such group down in Orange County...boring.
obama... who's soundbites are pretty bad, but no one can touch him in terms of pure oratorial prowess
But, is it helping him against Hilary? But that doesn't really matter...You see, my biggest problem with Obama isn't HOW he says stuff...but WHAT he actually says.
As I said...FDT speaks my mind like no other candidate has. I don't think any repub stands a snowball's chance in the nether regions of winning...but then again...I thought the same thing before the last election.
I have vowed not to spend too much time over the next year wringing hands over the news as each and every candidate is molested by the media on all manner of mostly silly and trivial issues. The microscopes are coming out and all of the subjects have unwanted organisms crawling their skins...the political armies are marching with keyboards in hand...bent on wielding destruction. All thought of policy, agenda, and political philosophy aside. Sadly this is how politics work today...which is another reason why real federalism is so important.
photo section of FDT website.
he is regularly critiqued (by republicans) as being a poor speechmaker. that's not a big deal to me... but it doesn't help his "good communicator" marks.
yes, i hear you about the WHAT vs the HOW. i dont care if a president is a poor speechmaker. well, i take it back. i do care about the current presidents ability... i think the leader of the US needs to be at least moderately articulate.
nevertheless, it is true that most americans vote for a symbol. ie, someone they can "go shoot trap with", so to speak.
federalism, as you speak of it, will not make any kind of resurgence due to the simple fact that money dominates politics NOT ideas.
the simple fact that money dominates politics NOT ideas.
Seraphim! How can you be so cynical when you have Obama to come and lead us to a new frontier...a new vision? Yes, we vote for symbols.
All I ask is that the symbol stay true to what they have symbolized. Fred will no doubt have to defend his fiscal responsibility as will all candidates who have the nuke of "what about the cost" dropped on them.
It's a good nuke, don't get me wrong...but it is always easier to say something cannot be done than to prove it can.
federalism, as you speak of it, will not make any kind of resurgence.
I think it might...because it could have a broader appeal when people understand it. It can appeal to both conservatives who appreciate smalled federal government and to liberals because...well, Heck just this morning I was privy to a conversation in which elitist liberal Seattlites were slamming backward, redneck midwest and southern states who hold them back...politically speaking. Well, maybe with a healthy dose of federalism - a greater establishment of 50 little political labs - we can see just how well California does with universal health care or elimination of homeschooling or whatever. less top heavy government...its a good thing.
We free up the elitist coasts to do more as they will in their grand and affluent wisdom.
Overall, however, my trip to Uganda has convinced me of one thing in regards to politics. And that is this: politics are not usually a very good solution to life's woes - to some degree this leans me more toward traditional conservatism/libertarianism and further away from liberalism/democratic notions of governmental solutions: a way to make the world beautiful. I just don't think we ought - or CAN - look to government to do this.
They say you can't legislate morality...which is true or false depending on how you define morality. But I know this for sure: you cannot legislate love.
So I don't see myself as being quite as invested as I perhaps once was...unless Hilary seeks to bring her village into my living room where I am raising my kids.
"politics are not usually a very good solution to life's woes"
>>amen
which is PRECISELY why i've been so stridenly against the current administration from the beginning. cannot think of another administration who has tried to use political means (and massive amounts of money) to solve life's woes.
and yes, there are all kinds of cultural clashes at play here (liberal elite seattle-ites vs down-home mid-westerners)... but *substantively* I think there is more common ground than not - it just doesn't get emphasised... we live in a culture of divide and conquer. Obama tries, and I symbolically salute him for it... but at the end of the day, candidates largely vote along the lines of the people who've paid them into office, no matter their rhetoric. and serious politicians know this... they know that there are deep limits to what they can REALLY change and transform (except, of course, when it comes to something like, uh, war... and even then.)
if you want a serious return to federalism, then support a serious restructuring of campaign finance laws.
I've actually really appreciated a great deal of what Newt Gingrich has been saying... that we need an election based on truly new ideas and methods of solving traditional problems. i think he'd made a lousy president, but that single sentiment is right on.