Vice President Pawlenty?

[Katzndogz]

No matter who Romney does pick, the democrats will whine that he didn't pick Condi Rice because she's a black woman.

Very suddenly a black woman, because when she was Secretary of State she was Aunt Jemima.

 

[Synthaholic]

No matter who Romney does pick, the democrats will whine that he didn't pick Condi Rice because she's a black woman.

Very suddenly a black woman, because when she was Secretary of State she was Aunt Jemima.

Condi isn't qualified, according to Conservatives.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pawlenty would be a good vp and or pres, but I don't know he will add what Romney thinks he needs to win.

 

[Katzndogz]

No matter who Romney does pick, the democrats will whine that he didn't pick Condi Rice because she's a black woman.

Very suddenly a black woman, because when she was Secretary of State she was Aunt Jemima.

Condi isn't qualified, according to Conservatives.

She's pro choice so she isn't qualified. Liberals found her not qualified because she is black and stepped off the plantation.

 

[Synthaholic]

No matter who Romney does pick, the democrats will whine that he didn't pick Condi Rice because she's a black woman.

Very suddenly a black woman, because when she was Secretary of State she was Aunt Jemima.

Condi isn't qualified, according to Conservatives.

She's pro choice so she isn't qualified. Liberals found her not qualified because she is black and stepped off the plantation.

Right. Because we would never vote for a Black president or Vice-President. Ever.

You really are a fucking idiot.

Pro-choice.

Also, never worked a day in the sacred private sector.
Also, no executive experience.
Also, never held any elective office.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Condi isn't qualified, according to Conservatives.

She's pro choice so she isn't qualified. Liberals found her not qualified because she is black and stepped off the plantation.

Pro-choice.

Also, never worked a day in the sacred private sector.
Also, no executive experience.
Also, never held any elective office.

But do you and other women find her "Creepy" too?

 

[The T]

She's pro choice so she isn't qualified. Liberals found her not qualified because she is black and stepped off the plantation.

Pro-choice.

Also, never worked a day in the sacred private sector.
Also, no executive experience.
Also, never held any elective office.

But do you and other women find her "Creepy" too?

 

[jillian]

The gutless rag known as The New York Slimes won't come right out and say it. But apparently they are doing their level best to suggest that the decision -- supposedly now reached by the Republican presidential nominee to be -- on who Mitt will be naming as his running mate is as good as done. They won't commit to it, but they like to subtly lay it between the lines.

They seem to believe it's Pawlenty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/us/politics/pawlenty-looked-at-as-romney-running-mate.html?_r=2

you seem to have a spelling error... that would be "times". just saying. slimes would be the washtimes rag.

as for pawlenty. he'd be a good choice. but i don't see willard picking someone as VP who is a superior candidate to him in every way possible.

but i guess you never know.

No. Then it wouldn't be The New York Slimes.

Then it would be The WASHINGTON Times.

Or maybe you meant The Washington COMPOST?

And here I thought you might want to address the substance of my post

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually wack far right cons believes that of her, Katz: her race and abortion stance.

Libs oppose her because she was into invasion and torture.

No matter who Romney does pick, the democrats will whine that he didn't pick Condi Rice because she's a black woman.

Very suddenly a black woman, because when she was Secretary of State she was Aunt Jemima.

Condi isn't qualified, according to Conservatives.

She's pro choice so she isn't qualified. Liberals found her not qualified because she is black and stepped off the plantation.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Romney should at least think about using Obama's logic in VP pick and choose someone for comic relief, maybe Dane Cook?

 

[Synthaholic]

Pro-choice.

Also, never worked a day in the sacred private sector.
Also, no executive experience.
Also, never held any elective office.

But do you and other women find her "Creepy" too?

I find her unqualified for NSA director, which was revealed when she failed to do her job and 3,000 Americans were murdered.

I find her unqualified to be SoS, since she didn't deserve a promotion, after her tragic failure.

I find her unworthy of VP consideration, as she is unqualified to be POTUS, should the need arise.

And most conservatives have always believed that Ivory Tower intellectuals are unqualified.

That all changes when they want it to, though, doesn't it, wingnut?

 

[Synthaholic]

Romney should at least think about using Obama's logic in VP pick and choose someone for comic relief, maybe Dane Cook?

VP Biden was more qualified in 2008 than President Obama (praise be unto Him!) was. He was my primary choice.

 

[Liability]

Romney should at least think about using Obama's logic in VP pick and choose someone for comic relief, maybe Dane Cook?

VP Biden was more qualified in 2008 than President Obama (praise be unto Him!) was. He was my primary choice.

President Obama is uniquely unqualified for the job he is mishandling.

And Vice President Obama is even dumber than the President.

You pathetic Obamaphiles must hate America almost as much the Dipstick in Chief does.

 

[Liability]

you seem to have a spelling error... that would be "times". just saying. slimes would be the washtimes rag.

as for pawlenty. he'd be a good choice. but i don't see willard picking someone as VP who is a superior candidate to him in every way possible.

but i guess you never know.

No. Then it wouldn't be The New York Slimes.

Then it would be The WASHINGTON Times.

Or maybe you meant The Washington COMPOST?

And here I thought you might want to address the substance of my post

Good one. A Jillian post on politics with "substance."

That's funny.

 

[JoeB131]

Best option for what? To win an election, or to pick someone who is qualified to lead the country, if?

Sometimes they are not the same. See: McCain/Palin, GHW Bush/Quayle
Sometimes they are. See: Obama/Biden, Bush/Cheney

Bishop Romney doesn't have good options. Piyush and Portman are not, T-Paw perhaps is, McDonnell is a joke.

I think Portman would be fine. So woudl Pawlenty.

Jindal, yeah, he brings a whole level of religious crazy.

"Magic Underpants/Exorcist 2012! - Because what this country needs is more religious craziness!"

Portman was Bush's OMB - read: budget - director.

Bush and budget go together like Palin and sophistication.

Bush's budgets seem quite nice compared to Obama's... Sorry, this really isn't a discussion the Dems should ever want to have.

 

[Synthaholic]

I think Portman would be fine. So woudl Pawlenty.

Jindal, yeah, he brings a whole level of religious crazy.

"Magic Underpants/Exorcist 2012! - Because what this country needs is more religious craziness!"

Portman was Bush's OMB - read: budget - director.

Bush and budget go together like Palin and sophistication.

Bush's budgets seem quite nice compared to Obama's... Sorry, this really isn't a discussion the Dems should ever want to have.

Portman would have to answer for...how many extensions of the debt ceiling?

Mitch Daniels answered for a few in Bush's 1st term, but answered rationally:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbj4A-uaMUo"]Mitch Daniels on the Debt Ceiling - YouTube[/ame]

You know that kind of response isn't going to cut it with these rabid crazies.

 

[Peach]

The gutless rag known as The New York Slimes won't come right out and say it. But apparently they are doing their level best to suggest that the decision -- supposedly now reached by the Republican presidential nominee to be -- on who Mitt will be naming as his running mate is as good as done. They won't commit to it, but they like to subtly lay it between the lines.

They seem to believe it's Pawlenty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/us/politics/pawlenty-looked-at-as-romney-running-mate.html?_r=2

Why are they gutless by suggesting that Romney has made a decision?

When the Times is useful to the fringe right, they are the "paper of record". Today the "Slimes". Likewise, there are no more critiques, or analysis, just the fabricated term "debunked". People do not change their opinions, they "flip flop". Christie will be the keynote speaker, which indicates the BLOB will not be VP. Romney could do worse than Pawlenty, but possibly better, particularly if Rice could somehow be convinced to change her mind.

 

[Peach]

I'm quietly confident that Romney won't give a rat's ass what the NY Slime 'suggests'. But it's sweet that they think they're relevant.

awwwwwwww.......... glad you finally came out of the closet as full rightwingnut.

no doubt you'll get lots of rightwingnut rep for it.

You had doubts? The NYT has too many multisyllable words for many on the right, likewise the Washington Post. Thus the NY Post, and Washington Times are "reliable". Like FOXnews, those papers are "SIMPLE".

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Vice President Pawlenty?

Perhaps in 2017; not next year, however.

 

[Synthaholic]

The gutless rag known as The New York Slimes won't come right out and say it. But apparently they are doing their level best to suggest that the decision -- supposedly now reached by the Republican presidential nominee to be -- on who Mitt will be naming as his running mate is as good as done. They won't commit to it, but they like to subtly lay it between the lines.

They seem to believe it's Pawlenty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/us/politics/pawlenty-looked-at-as-romney-running-mate.html?_r=2

Why are they gutless by suggesting that Romney has made a decision?

When the Times is useful to the fringe right, they are the "paper of record". Today the "Slimes". Likewise, there are no more critiques, or analysis, just the fabricated term "debunked". People do not change their opinions, they "flip flop".

So true. And you never see Liberals using WorldNutDaily or newsbusters or Townhall to make their point for them. And extremely rarely do we use National Review, Weekly Standard, or FOXNEWS.

One main reason is that they are so biased, they don't post anything pro-Liberal. But the New York Times, OTOH, posts straight news, which doesn't take sides.

Christie will be the keynote speaker, which indicates the BLOB will not be VP. Romney could do worse than Pawlenty, but possibly better, particularly if Rice could somehow be convinced to change her mind.

She's unqualified.