Suitable Substitutes Abound

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
In America the President reigns for four years, and Journalism governs forever and ever. Oscar Wilde

The MSM decides which Republican president is an acceptable replacement for a Democrat president. Examine the current cavalry charge and you will see that Ted Cruz is the only Republican who is NOT a suitable alternative to Hillary Clinton. (In media circles Cruz is far less suitable than Donald Trump.)

Jeb Bush was the media’s first choice from day one, but he was shot out of the saddle months ago; so it is hardly surprising that former point man for the Gang of Eight has been chosen to fill Bush’s boots:


Marco Rubio To Jorge Ramos: I Will Keep Obama’s First Executive Amnesty In Place Until Legislative Amnesty Enacted
by Julia Hahn
2 Nov 2015

Marco Rubio To Jorge Ramos: I Will Keep Obama's First Executive Amnesty In Place Until Legislative Amnesty Enacted - Breitbart

On today’s Lucianne’s “MUST READS of the day” I found this beneath Julia Hahn”s title:

Is it possible that Rubio could flip parties and run against and beat a weakened Hillary?

If Rubio does end up the Democrat party’s nominee, it will be the first time in history that an acceptable Republican replaced a Democrat before the election.

Incidentally, C. K. had it right:


CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: The Republican candidates should quit while they are ahead.

They won this debate against the media, the debate about the debate is over, and they crushed the media, there is a general consensus including in liberal media that it was an awful debate run by disrespectful kind of useless moderators who clearly showed the world there is a liberal bias, so the GOP won and actually came out of the debate looking good.​


Republican wannabes should have quit before Republican voters asked real questions. The story is that the candidates are demanding they only be asked questions of substance. If you believe that you must believe nymphomaniacs are virgins. Candidates really mean questioners should ask where each wannabe stands on the economy, the military, the deficit, and blah, blah, blah. Every American voter with an ounce of brains already knows the answer to the questions they hear asked in every presidential election. Here are a few questions candidates do not want asked:

1. Would you sign bipartisan legislation if you disagree with any part of it?

2. What must be included in legislation that would trigger your veto?

3. Which bureaucracies would you shut down?

4. How do you stand on global government?

5. How do you stand on international law?

6. Would you abide by a ruling from the UN’s International Court of Justice (World Court) even if the decision is not in America’s best interests?

Assuming the candidates are smarter than this old dude, I would like to hear every candidate answer one question —— the same question —— put to them by each of the other candidates. With the exception of Ted Cruz there is not one of the other Republicans that could come up with a question of “substance.”
 
7. Would you accept a paycut and advise other members of your party to do the same?

8. Will you insist on a government audit by GAO or other body to help find and eliminate government waste?

9. Where do you stand on soft money donations in political campaigns?

10. Will you continue to fund Muslim rebels or allies against ISIS or future threats even knowing what happened when we funded the Taliban against the Soviets?

If you can't come up with 10 you're just not trying. :)
 
If you can't come up with 10 you're just not trying.
To Delta4Embassey: Your suggestions are not questions I would ask.
7. Would you accept a paycut and advise other members of your party to do the same?
To Delta4Embassey: Graft, not salary, is the problem.
8. Will you insist on a government audit by GAO or other body to help find and eliminate government waste?
To Delta4Embassey: Eliminating waste and fraud is standard campaign rhetoric.
9. Where do you stand on soft money donations in political campaigns?
To Delta4Embassey: In other words, overturn Citizens United —— but do not stop money going from private sector and government unions to Democrats.
10. Will you continue to fund Muslim rebels or allies against ISIS or future threats even knowing what happened when we funded the Taliban against the Soviets?
To Delta4Embassey: Put that one to military leaders.

Incidentally. instead of dreaming up clever questions you’d be happier in a lay-down joint sucking on a pipe full of dreams:


images

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/...AAAAAAECA/v4C2PujifsY/s1600/opium+smokers.jpg
 
1. Would you sign bipartisan legislation if you disagree with any part of it?

2. What must be included in legislation that would trigger your veto?

3. Which bureaucracies would you shut down?

4. How do you stand on global government?

5. How do you stand on international law?

6. Would you abide by a ruling from the UN’s International Court of Justice (World Court) even if the decision is not in America’s best interests?
You can be sure Rubio will double-talk every answer to the questions even if he answers. Slick Willy is sandpaper compared to Marco Rubio. Apparently, The National Review is buying it:

Marco Rubio Is Plenty Conservative
by Jim Geraghty
December 29, 2015 12:54 PM

Marco Rubio Is Plenty Conservative, by Jim Geraghty, National Review

Geraghty wrote a masterful piece pushing Rubio forward. Rubio’s problem is that true conservatives will not vote for him regardless how his positions are buttered. One thing is on target:

It is now axiomatic that Marco Rubio is the “establishment” favorite in the 2016 Republican primaries, . . .​

Conservatives learned one thing from John McCain and Mitt Romney: Never trust an establishment Republican the media promotes.
 
Rubio-Speaks-Out-of-Both-Sides-of-His-Mouth-640x480.jpg
http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/12/Rubio-Speaks-Out-of-Both-Sides-of-His-Mouth-640x480.jpg

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the NSA monitored Netanyahu’s conversations, including conversations with U.S. legislators

“We spy on everyone,” Rubio told Gowdy, defending the practice of spying on a U.S. ally. “That’s the nature of intelligence.”

“It’s more complicated than the [WSJ] story makes it seem,” Rubio added.

Gowdy responded that people are upset because the U.S. decided to stop spying on leaders of Germany and some other nations, but still spies on Israel.

But Rubio sang a different tune around the same time Wednesday morning on the Fox News program “Fox and Friends.”

Instead of defending the surveillance, Rubio said that the practice of spying on allies was possibly even “worse” than reported.

EXCLUSIVE: Rubio Defends NSA Spying on Netanyahu In Private, Condemns It In Public
by Patrick Howley
30 Dec 2015

EXCLUSIVE: Rubio Defends NSA Spying on Netanyahu In Private, Condemns It In Public

He of Two-Faces would be better off if he jumps on the White House eavesdropping on members of Congress as did Mike Huckabee:

 

Forum List

Back
Top