RE: Does the Republican party need to change?

RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

rulemylife -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 8:46:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I wonder what kind of juicy debate fodder we'll have when the Obama offspring gets a little older and THEIR wild days get put under the microscope. Or will their rambunctiousness be declared "off limits" so that the obvious double standards we have now can stay alive. quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Except the point is her mother does believe it realistic, even in the face of her own daughter's pregnancy. And this was a woman on the brink of influencing national policy on the issue. Let's face some facts, the ONLY reason her daughter was ever brought up was the obvious contradictions exposing her mother's political stances on abstinence-only sex education as unrealistic. No one was criticizing her daughter directly. It was funny though to hear Moral Majority types explain it away as a teenage mistake, which it was. I kept wondering though, how they would have reacted if Chelsea Clinton had gotten pregnant. Well no, that's not true. I didn't really wonder because I know that we would have been hearing about the immorality of liberal Democrats and how the social fabric of the country was disintegrating. Kind of like we are hearing now of the imminent collapse of the country due to the new economic policies. But, speaking of Chelsea, and your supposed "double standard" regarding families of politicians, here's a proud moment in Republican history: “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” -John McCain, Republican Fundraiser, Washington D.C., 1998

xBullx -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 1:53:56 PM)
-fast reply- I have no problem with examining a candidates family to a ceratin degree. It demonstrates credibility and understanding. I do believe that we might all want to remain somewhat respectful of privacy, but like with the Palin crew it brought questions to the surface that needed logical and credible answers. I have been appraoched several times about running for a particular state seat and I have never said no. But I have always wondered how I would explain my mastered female, ishy. It isn't like no one is aware of her existance, but many folks just pretend I'm a nice guy looking out for her up to this point. But I'm sure some good journalist would discover my "taboo". And then the whole state would be sure I was intending on furthering some political agenda forcing all women into a collar and blah, blah, blah.... I like freedom, I think we should all be free to live..............and just live. So yes the Long Trunks need to change, they need to come to grips with reality and stop competing with the Long Ears. It's not about which party wins!!! It's supposed to be about America, you know the land of the FREE... Wanna but before the time it takes to read this post someone on this very site will be thinking of some way that they like I should better live and how that should be GOVERNED... Yeah, we all need to change...

xBullx -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 2:03:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” -John McCain, Republican Fundraiser, Washington D.C., 1998 Did Janet Reno have a sex change? What was her name before? That does explain Chelsea's looks though. Does Bill know he isn't the father? Does he care? Where does Monica fit into this? Do you think Bill gave out cigars at the birth of Chelsea? I wonder what brand they might hav(ana) been? Better yet, what flavor?

rulemylife -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 2:12:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” -John McCain, Republican Fundraiser, Washington D.C., 1998 Did Janet Reno have a sex change? What was her name before? That does explain Chelsea's looks though. Does Bill know he isn't the father? Does he care? Where does Monica fit into this? Do you think Bill gave out cigars at the birth of Chelsea? I wonder what brand they might hav(ana) been? Better yet, what flavor? I don't know. I think all those questions would have have to be asked of "the man of integrity" that made the statements. But have you seen Chelsea lately? She's looking pretty good!

MarsBonfire -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 2:35:33 PM)
Yeah, I'm sure the Obama girls will grow up and become hellraisers, the same way the Bush twins were drunken sluts for the first term of Bush's reign of terror. And hey, we all remember Amy Carter being an IV drug user who sold nude shots of herself to feed her habit, all while her father was negotiating the mideast peace accord.... right?

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 6:46:49 PM)
If it wasnt for his position on iraq and afghan i would have supported ron paul. hmmmmm if I knew what i know now i would have supported Ron Paul. He's one of the few people that could get us out of this economic mess. In 4 years he might be the only one who could undue obamas damage. Just think Obamas plan is to create or save up to 4 million jobs. So if the economy stays just as it is....he saved 4 million jobs and its all according to plan...yikes ;) quote: ORIGINAL: shivermetimbers quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Hello Kaine D, What I noticed in watching both the Democratic and the Republican Conventions was the vast disparity in the audience. Granted since the Republican Convention happened during a hurricane the attendance was much lower. But most of the people there were older, white and veterans. Missing was a mix of ages, ethnic backgrounds and socio-economic levels in the speakers and in the audience. And several of the speeches were heavy on war rhetoric and lousy on the economy and other real life issues for Americans. The missing mix you were looking for were over at Ron Paul's gig. Not all Republicans are neo-cons.

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:03:00 PM)
many people believe its realistic if taught properly and have influenced national policy on the issue before and will again in the future. hmm what if Bristol became pregnant from a condom failure? The combo of Palin and her daughter would have the ultimate power of influencing national policy on the issue. See my daughter didnt listen and did it the liberal way and still got pregnant. ;) During a year of typical condom use, between 10 and 15 out of 100 sexually active women will become pregnant. http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/2219.html Alice!, Health Promotion Program at Columbia University quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 She believes abstinence isn’t realistic on a tv interview. Except the point is her mother does believe it realistic, even in the face of her own daughter's pregnancy. And this was a woman on the brink of influencing national policy on the issue.

MarsBonfire -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:08:13 PM)
Lot of good that support of Ron Paul would have done you. Obama would have still won. Third party candidates do nothing more than syphon votes off from one or the other party. Sure, feel free to say "Oh, I just wanted to stand on principals." Who the fuck cares? Go ahead. Stand on principal. You can stand on them over there, in the corner, the one marked "irrelevant to the dialouge" with the rest of the republicans... who lost because they fucked up over the last eight years and ran a clownish, joke campaign... Stand over there, out of the way. The grownups are in control now.

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:27:53 PM)
No lying under bill clinton ;) if the cia had bad info it was just faulty intel with no bad motives ;) did clinton fuel the anger to recuit the 9-11 terrorists?? http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/05/12/cia/print.html Why the Chinese embassy was bombed A senior intelligence official says the CIA team in charge of choosing targets has no recent Belgrade experience. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Jeff Stein As NATO and the United States continue to deal with diplomatic fallout from Friday's Chinese embassy bombing in Belgrade, a senior U.S. intelligence official told Salon News that the CIA team in charge of choosing Yugoslav targets does not include any agents or experts with recent on-the-ground experience in Belgrade. Speaking on condition of anonymity Tuesday, the official said that no CIA officer with an up-to-date, walking familiarity with the Yugoslav capital was on the targeting team when China's embassy was mistakenly bombed Friday, killing three occupants and injuring 20 more. Nor, apparently, does the CIA have clandestine spotters in Belgrade helping verify targets picked from maps and satellite photos. The issue has taken on added gravity because the CIA has admitted it used a partially updated 4-year-old street map and "educated guesses" to select the target, which was thought to be a Yugoslav arms agency. In this case, the maps did not show that China had vacated its old property and built a new embassy elsewhere in 1996, even though American officials, from the U.S. ambassador to the semi-public chief of the CIA mission, frequented the embassy for events. The U.S. embassy in Belgrade was closed and its staff evacuated March 24. As the primary intelligence agency among U.S. civilian and military information-gathering organizations, the CIA takes the lead role in supplying targets to NATO planners. In response to a question Monday, a senior CIA official said the CIA alone had selected the mistaken target. The bombing tragedy, along with recent espionage revelations, has severely strained U.S. relations with China. It has also threatened to derail a possible solution to the Kosovo conflict proposed last week by the G8 nations. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/oct/17/balkans Nato bombed Chinese deliberately Nato hit embassy on purpose Kosovo: special report The Observer, Sunday 17 October 1999 Nato deliberately bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during the war in Kosovo after discovering it was being used to transmit Yugoslav army communications. According to senior military and intelligence sources in Europe and the US the Chinese embassy was removed from a prohibited targets list after Nato electronic intelligence (Elint) detected it sending army signals to Milosevic's forces. The story is confirmed in detail by three other Nato officers - a flight controller operating in Naples, an intelligence officer monitoring Yugoslav radio traffic from Macedonia and a senior headquarters officer in Brussels. They all confirm that they knew in April that the Chinese embassy was acting as a 'rebro' [rebroadcast] station for the Yugoslav army (VJ) after alliance jets had successfully silenced Milosevic's own transmitters. The Chinese were also suspected of monitoring the cruise missile attacks on Belgrade, with a view to developing effective counter-measures against US missiles. another story form taht site http://www.againstbombing.org/WPworldreaction.htm Bombing of Yugoslavia Awakens Anti-U.S. Feeling Around World By Anthony Faiola Washington Post Foreign Service Tuesday, May 18, 1999; Page A01 BUENOS AIRES—It's thousands of miles from Belgrade, and there's not a Serb in sight. But Gonzalo Etcheberry is passing a wall on a busy street here spray-painted with the words, "Yankee, out of the Balkans." He didn't write the slogan, but he couldn't agree more. "Your bombs in Yugoslavia are from the side of America that I can't stand," said Etcheberry, a 21-year-old medical student wearing a black Pearl Jam T-shirt. "I hate it when the U.S. plays judge and God." Such feelings are common in Argentina -- and in many other parts of the world far from the conflict over Kosovo. As the NATO air offensive against Serb-controlled Yugoslavia concludes its eighth week and such blunders as the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade and airstrikes on Kosovo refugees grab headlines worldwide, NATO warplanes are inflicting collateral damage of another kind -- damage to its international reputation. And Uncle Sam, NATO's dominant power, is bearing the brunt of public anger. Here in Argentina, one of Washington's closest Latin American allies, a poll last week showed that 64 percent of the populace opposes the NATO air campaign. More respondents had a negative opinion of NATO than of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. In Latin America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and other regions with little direct interest in the conflict, opposition to the bombing is surfacing in statements by elected officials, in newspaper editorials, opinion polls, public protests, Internet banter and street graffiti. Increasingly, there is little subtlety to the NATO-bashing. "NATO is blindly bombing Yugoslavia," Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee said in a fiery political speech last week. "There is a dance of destruction going on there. Thousands of people rendered homeless. And the United Nations is a mute witness to all this. Is NATO's work to prevent war or to fuel one?" quote: ORIGINAL: lronitulstahp quote: really? nobody died under clinton? http://www.againstbombing.org/foreignviews.htm Ummm... interesting link...yup...no slant there [8\|]....

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:50:36 PM)
You could have Bill CLinton with the daughter of the democrats VP and they would barely mention it. http://www.comedyontap.com/presgirls/mondale.html June 13, 1996, on The Rush Limbaugh Show: "The President has a new running mate - it's Eleanor Mondale. Jogged with her along the beach in Santa Monica early Tuesday morning with an aide and several Secret Service agents. Seven a.m. start time, because the night before, Eleanor Mondale was with the President in his hotel suite, in Santa Monica, along with seven other people... "...They went back to Clinton's hotel suite to discuss issues, and Eleanor Mondale was among the people who went there, and it was - Barbra Streisand was there too. And it broke up about one in the morning, and then at seven the following morning, I mean, it's six hours later, they're out there on the jogging trail... The story also says that, uh, Eleanor Mondale had an early morning jog with Clinton in Washington in late March - according to a source in Washington, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton were in Bosnia at the time... I'm not gonna describe what she looks like. I'm not gonna get into that. I'm not - it doesn't matter what she looks - none a - I'm not - what do you mean, describing what she looks like? Okay, use - whaddya mean? So what? What does that have to do with anything? Snerdly is telling me, in my IFB, what he thinks of her appearance. What does that matter? What does that mat- do not - you, you, you've got to risk the trap here. You, you are going to try to get me to say for you, because you would say it if the Golden EIB microphone in front of your big mouth, you would say that because she has a certain appearance, that there's something illicit more likely here. Yeeess. So, what does that mean? What does it have to do with anything? What does her looks have to do with anything here? Are you suggesting - I'm not even gonna ask you that, because then I fall into your trap. No, I've never seen him jog with Donna Shalala. But that doesn't prove anything (laughter). I have never seen him jog with the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt but how can you see the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt? I've never seen him jog with Janet Reno. But I'm, I'm not, I'm not falling into the trap. All - the, the information is the information. You can, you can make of this what you want. I'm not gonna come to draw any conclusions here. So he's jogging with, uh, Eleanor Mondale, in Santa Monica and in Washington when Hillary's out of town. What difference does it make what she looks like?" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/columns/source/980915.htm The Reliable Source [image]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/globalnav/images/spacer.gif[/image] By Annie Groer and Ann Gerhart Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, September 15, 1998 Eleanor Mondale on Her Presidential Visit When we last took note of Eleanor Mondale, she was nuzzling Revlon exec Ron Perelman at a dinner party at the home of Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Teresa Heinz. Now the leggy TV reporter has a cameo in the Ken Starr report, flowing from a private visit she paid President Clinton last December that sent Monica Lewinsky into a paroxysm of rage. The former White House intern went to the White House Dec. 6, 1997, to deliver a letter and gifts to Clinton, according to the report, but she had to cool her heels for 40 minutes outside the northwest gate. Betty Currie sent word that Clinton "already had a guest," a Secret Service agent let slip that Mondale was inside, and Lewinsky grew "livid" and "stormed away." Lewinsky suspected that Mondale was "romantically involved" with Clinton, the report offers in a footnote. The president then was "irate" that Lewinsky had been told. http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/6784/ quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I wonder what kind of juicy debate fodder we'll have when the Obama offspring gets a little older and THEIR wild days get put under the microscope. Or will their rambunctiousness be declared "off limits" so that the obvious double standards we have now can stay alive. quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Except the point is her mother does believe it realistic, even in the face of her own daughter's pregnancy. And this was a woman on the brink of influencing national policy on the issue.

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:55:16 PM)
Daddy taught Chelsea, that you cant get pregnant from Oral and its best to swallow to eliminate any evidence ;) quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I wonder what kind of juicy debate fodder we'll have when the Obama offspring gets a little older and THEIR wild days get put under the microscope. Or will their rambunctiousness be declared "off limits" so that the obvious double standards we have now can stay alive. quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Except the point is her mother does believe it realistic, even in the face of her own daughter's pregnancy. And this was a woman on the brink of influencing national policy on the issue. Let's face some facts, the ONLY reason her daughter was ever brought up was the obvious contradictions exposing her mother's political stances on abstinence-only sex education as unrealistic. No one was criticizing her daughter directly. It was funny though to hear Moral Majority types explain it away as a teenage mistake, which it was. I kept wondering though, how they would have reacted if Chelsea Clinton had gotten pregnant. Well no, that's not true. I didn't really wonder because I know that we would have been hearing about the immorality of liberal Democrats and how the social fabric of the country was disintegrating. Kind of like we are hearing now of the imminent collapse of the country due to the new economic policies. But, speaking of Chelsea, and your supposed "double standard" regarding families of politicians, here's a proud moment in Republican history: “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” -John McCain, Republican Fundraiser, Washington D.C., 1998

MasterShake69 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/21/2009 7:59:25 PM)
Ron paul was not a 3rd party candidate. quote: ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire Lot of good that support of Ron Paul would have done you. Obama would have still won. Third party candidates do nothing more than syphon votes off from one or the other party. Sure, feel free to say "Oh, I just wanted to stand on principals." Who the fuck cares? Go ahead. Stand on principal. You can stand on them over there, in the corner, the one marked "irrelevant to the dialouge" with the rest of the republicans... who lost because they fucked up over the last eight years and ran a clownish, joke campaign... Stand over there, out of the way. The grownups are in control now.

DominantDamsel -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 1:44:37 AM)
~fr~ The Democratic party needs to remove the BEAM from its own eye before it attempts to pluck the splinter out of the eye of the Republicans. [sm=anger.gif]

corysub -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 3:42:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire Lot of good that support of Ron Paul would have done you. Obama would have still won. Third party candidates do nothing more than syphon votes off from one or the other party. Sure, feel free to say "Oh, I just wanted to stand on principals." Who the fuck cares? Go ahead. Stand on principal. You can stand on them over there, in the corner, the one marked "irrelevant to the dialouge" with the rest of the republicans... who lost because they fucked up over the last eight years and ran a clownish, joke campaign... Stand over there, out of the way. The grownups are in control now. Great news..finally..the grownups are in control..! Errr.. Funny, I'm looking around and see the same people....I see a Joe Biden who has never had a job outside kindercare in the Senate since he was 30 years old...whose Iraq "solution" was to split the country into three parts...I see a stuttering Gibbs, eldest child of Maurice, stutering through press conferences, I see the Speaker of the House destroying the "honeymoon" of a new President within two weeks of his inauguration, resulting in the most exteme partisan politics since FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court...I see a an obviously over his head Secretary of the Treasury who is in charge of the IRS but can't fill out his own taxes...I see an Attorney General who right out of the box plays the "race card" and with more than subtle hints gives the crew in the Department of Justice their marching orders with a cattle prod. And than I see my President...a man who is so far over his head in responsibility he is afraid to stay in the Oval Office more than two days in a row and thinks he is doing his job by exploiting the poor conditions in a town in Iowa, Florida and Indiana...and than lies to the folks at a Caterpillar plant that his "simulated stimulus bill" will reverse the layoffs in their plant..to thunderous cheers, flashing cameras, and a choked up Chris Matthews. The inmates have taken over the asylum....and they are adults all over 21 years of age. And why would someone want to stand on his principal?

Lorr47 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 3:51:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 No! It`s fine just the way it is.....[:D] Rush/Palin in "2012"! The republicans have not learned. Gov. Jendal announced that he wants to reject $90 million that would benefit about 25,000 citizens of LA. The money would extend unemployment benefits both as to scope and duration. Jendal says that he wants the money rejected because it would hurt "the business sector." No one including Jendal can explain how the money will hurt the business sector. In any case, I went to a LA blog. The citizens who must sacrifice all for the business sector want Jendal's head. And another one bites the dust.

Owner59 -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 7:22:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DominantDamsel ~fr~ The Democratic party needs to remove the BEAM from its own eye before it attempts to pluck the splinter out of the eye of the Republicans. [sm=anger.gif] Oh really? What splinter/beam could be worse than getting over 4 thousand of our bravest,most precious sons and daughters killed in Iraq for nothing ( more than talking points and ego stroking)? Don`t trip over the dead bodys while you search for a reply.....

DarkSteven -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 7:38:27 AM)
The GOP has never apologized for Bush, nor did anything more than a half-hearted effort to separate themselves from his insane policies. They have never renounced the war in Iraq and his massive deficits, and have consistently tried to make the case that the economy wasn't so bad under him if you only overlook the meltdown that occurred during his last year. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so true. If only they renounced him and tried to shake his legacy, they could return to their roots as the champion of a healthy private sector-driven economy. If and when the Obama-driven economy falls apart (which may require it to do worse than Bush's, which may never occur), they would be able to present themselves as the voice of reason.

KaineD -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 7:48:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven The GOP has never apologized for Bush, nor did anything more than a half-hearted effort to separate themselves from his insane policies. They have never renounced the war in Iraq and his massive deficits, and have consistently tried to make the case that the economy wasn't so bad under him if you only overlook the meltdown that occurred during his last year. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so true. If only they renounced him and tried to shake his legacy, they could return to their roots as the champion of a healthy private sector-driven economy. If and when the Obama-driven economy falls apart (which may require it to do worse than Bush's, which may never occur), they would be able to present themselves as the voice of reason. claps Excellent, couldn't agree with you more. And the republicans need to end their false outrage over topics that have little relevance with reality. Like, how one of the members here ahem tried to make the case that the DOW dropping just, what, a day after Obama signed the stimulus bill is a sign that Obama is a failure? C'mon! Conservatives, your case against Obama will be a lot stronger if you actually stick to legitimate complaints. And also, if you're seen to be bi-partisan, that's good too. If you're all "hey, I may not agree with the stimulus bill, but I'm going to wait and see what works and doesn't work", people are going to respect you and listen to you so much more rather than waiting for a few points of the DOW to drop within Obama's first month so you can shout "OBAMA IS TEH FAIL!" You just make yourselves look ridiculous. Go with the first approach, and THEN, say a year from now, when we can REALLY see the effects of Obama's stimulus bill, point out what went right and what went wrong. Then we will listen to you instead of immediately dismissing you.

rulemylife -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/22/2009 9:13:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterShake69 many people believe its realistic if taught properly and have influenced national policy on the issue before and will again in the future. hmm what if Bristol became pregnant from a condom failure? The combo of Palin and her daughter would have the ultimate power of influencing national policy on the issue. See my daughter didnt listen and did it the liberal way and still got pregnant. ;) During a year of typical condom use, between 10 and 15 out of 100 sexually active women will become pregnant. http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/2219.html Alice!, Health Promotion Program at Columbia University The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs ..oversight.house.gov/documents/20041201102153-50247.pdf One recent study of abstinence-only programs found that they may actually increase participants’ risk. Columbia University researchers found that while virginity “pledge” programs helped some participants to delay sex, 88% still had premarital sex, and their rates of sexually transmitted diseases showed no statistically significant difference from those of nonpledgers.15 Virginity pledgers were also less likely to use contraception when they did have sex and were less likely to seek STD testing despite comparable infection rates.16 In contrast, comprehensive sex education that both encourages abstinence and teaches about effective contraceptive use has been shown in many studies to delay sex, reduce the frequency of sex, and increase the use of condoms and other contraceptives.17

Sanity -> RE: Does the Republican party need to change? (2/28/2009 3:09:22 PM)
Did someone say "change"? Careful what you ask for... quote: Limbaugh Rallies Conservatives to Find 'Right Candidate' Rush Limbaugh was 15 minutes early to the stage, but no one was complaining Saturday evening in Washington, D.C., at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Quite the contrary. On the conference's third and final day, the conservative talk radio host was the headliner, and the crowd greeted him with an immense ovation."Ladies and gentleman, this is my first ever address to the nation," Limbaugh joked, noting that FOX News and C-SPAN were broadcasting the speech live.Limbaugh then spent his first 15 minutes giving an impassioned summary of what it means to be a conservative before turning the focus to the movement's recent electoral record. "We can take this country back. All we need is to nominate the right candidate," he said. The speech was the culmination of an event that featured often fiery speeches by some of top names of the conservative movement and the Republican party, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and conservative commendator Ann Coulter. Earlier Saturday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, another failed GOP candidate, won his third straight presidential straw poll at the annual conference, edging out Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Rep. Ron Paul and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who expressed support for President Obama's $787 economic stimulus plan, finished last of the 10 named choices. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/28/romney-wins-second-cpac-straw-poll/

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875