Michele Bachmann Enters U.S. Presidential Race

Excellent news. I wish her well.

My only concern is the fact she is from that bastion of socialism Minnesota. If she is really that conservative minded bring it on but if she is only saying what needs to be said like a certain X wrestler Governor I remember that changed his mind after being elected on a conservative promise. I say be very cautious.

It will be interesting. And - she has five children and apparently, fostered 23!
And, is adamantly pro-life. In fact, she seems to hold many of the same views as Palin.

But...I don't think she'll be attacked like Palin was. The difference is that she is already in Washington, in Congress..and Palin was viewed as an 'outsider'...as well as not being a 'professional'. Bachmann is a lawyer.

I find it hard to believe there can be that much hate towards an identifiable group, women. It seems more of jealousy than anything else. Both women have remarkable pedigrees, (Palin and Bachmann). Both have far more experience than the big owe did/has.

Their values simply don't correspond with those of the left, if they have any moral code at all. Palin in particular has a wealth of experience and she only quit as governor due to the plethora of frivolous lawsuits against her that was costing the state millions. All cases were dropped or were in Sarah's favour.

I've yet to see any politician that hasn't succumbed to at least one or two brain farts in their career. Of course, if you're a liberal/democrat it's an automatic pass.

A Bachmann/Palin ticket? Wow!

Until she fires Ed Rollins, she's not going to win anything. Rollins has already hissed off too many potential Bachmann supporters with his anti-Palin comments.

Eventual outcome that might be interesting to see on the ticket: Cain-Bachman

Sounds like it might be a winner.

Would drive the lefties right off the deep end.

" What!? A minority we own, and another identifiable victimn group constitute the tea party ticket?! AAARRRRGGGHHH! sob, sob..."

What agitprop lie do we deploy now Mr Soros? The mSSnbc troops are flapping in the breeze.

@ Old Spice. "A Bachmann/Palin ticket? Wow!" I could really get onto that train if it ever leaves the station!

trappedintrudeaupia, that sounds like a good idea.

Chris Matthews is a, is a, is a, oh shoot, I can not say what I think of him because it would violate all the posting rules.

I wonder, does Chris know how many states there are?

I seriously doubt we'll see a Bachmann/Palin ticket, seeing as Bachmann kicked off her campaign by attacking Palin.

I'd like to see a Cain/Palin combo, though I'm not sure yet which I'd like to see leading the ticket.

Very very slim chance she wins. But she can spoil things for others by splitting the vote and making romney look like more of a frontrunner. The big thing to watch is not the polls but the fundraising. He or she who has the best orgs and best appeal to one or more well-heeled groups will be at a definite advantage. Watch pawlenty and Cain. They have one or both of the above. Bachmann I'm not so sure.

Still, I think she's a keeper! There are other powerful positions beside president, and I don't think Palin, as much as I like her, is presidential material. Women are needed in many positions; if Nancy Pelosi can get in there, anyone can.

"Until she fires Ed Rollins, she's not going to win anything"

Ed Rollins is one mean dude. He made an ass of himself in NJ (early 90'), but he was celebrating/bragging how his Republican client (Whitman) won the State....

"I wonder, does Chris know how many states there are?" Ken (Kulak)

Who Knows! The question to ask Chris is how many pictures did Wiener send him?

I'm with rmgk - both on the Cain/Palin ticket and not being sure which I'd like to see in charge.

less attractive Leftist women

That's redundant.

"less attractive Leftist women

That's redundant."

That's Libby Davies.

I hate to say it but Mathews was right ( for the first time in his life). The founding fathers did jack about slavery.

Jason - They did jack about it, but by their ideals they had planted the seeds through the Constitution.
The early Church often called for the manumission of slaves as a component of penance before giving absolution. This lady is guilty of not knowing her history, but then, so few do nowadays, and left wing groups like teacher's unions are loath to teach the truth because it brings up ancient truths they don't want considered.

Well, I watched the debate as run by CNN. It was set up to be superficial..and that's a problem for some of the candidates, notably Pawlenty.

Bachmann did very well but as a campaigner about herself; that is, she was describing herself as she is..not dealing with policies and programs.

The others were campaigning as well: Santorum, Gingrich, Romney, Cain. Ron Paul is Ron Paul and that's all I'll say about him.

The only person who wasn't campaigning, and who, I think, has trouble doing so, was Pawlenty. His strength is developing solutions, policies and programs. Not campaigning.

There's a difference between the two. Campaigning is a theatrical performance. You want to 'catchy line', the emotional connection, the dance, the wave, the 'shout-out'. Obama is great at this. Obama delegates all policies and programs to others; he can't even talk about them because he's so indifferent to these real issues. His focus is only on: selling himself. Campaigning.

Developing policies and programs is hard analytic work. It requires that you efface yourself; you aren't the primary focus; the problem is the primary focus..and the solution.

For Obama - the primary focus is always on himself. Period.

I've seen Pawlenty in one-on-one interviews on FOX, talking about policies and problems..and he comes off very well. Thorough, knowledgeable and analytic. Never a hint of the campaigner (i.e., talk, talk about himself). He's focused on the problem-solution.

He doesn't do well as a campaigner..and the CNN debate was set up for just that. It really wasn't interested in policies and programs and wasn't interested in the real problems of the US now (because that would involve criticism of Obama?)..and solutions. Debaters weren't allowed to get into any such issues.

So..at the moment, I'd go with Pawlenty because I want that focus on problems and solutions.

I agree with ET @10:59. Aside from the increasingly deranged Matthews' "balloonhead" comment, there's really no equivalent to PDS with Bachmann, and for the reasons ET stated.

Not once have I heard that any of the debaters were woefully shy of foreign policy experience.
This criticism is reserved for Sarah Palin alone.
Funny that.

If anyone really thinks that Sara Palin is un-electable in a Presidential campaign, think again. I suggest you read "Why John Ziegler is Wrong About Sarah Palin's Electability" at Breitbart.com. The point is that the MSM will have all their daggers out for anyone running against their precious Obama in 2012. Nobody has survived an intense, unrelenting MSM war against him/her such as Palin has, with steadily rising polls to boot. She's also become an expert in going over the MSM's heads directly to the people.

But read the article, especially his 10 reasons why Palin should run.

"Not once have I heard that any of the debaters were woefully shy of foreign policy experience."

From what I've seen of HC, he's very weak on the foreign policy side. I told my wife that I expect a presidential candidate to be more knowledgeable of these things than I. For now, HC is not a serious option because of this.

That said, I didn't see the debate yesterday.

Last night on Twitter, "Michelle Bachmann" was trending in Boston, and "Michele Bachmann" was trending in San Francisco. I guess Stanford people spell better than those at MIT?

There are two reasons Bachmann is more acceptable to the MSM than Palin. 1: Bachmann is an insider. Palin is an outsider. 2: So far Bachmann has been a 'go along/get along' type where Palin kicks over the established order.

I believe the US is in need of a Palin than a Bachmann if only because the corruption in the established order is so deep and entrenched that only drastic action can pull the US back from the abyss.

I guess Stanford people spell better than those at MIT?

I could have told you that. We're better looking and nicer, too.

On O'Reilly, Dick Morris said Bachmann was brilliant.
O'Reilly went into full Noo Yawk rough-neck blowhard schtick, brilliant? BRILLIANT?!!??. Michell Bachmann ... brilliant??!!!
Let's put it this way, Billy.
She's smarter than you, asshole.
I have an extremely low opinion of politicians at the moment having great difficulty respecting them more than mafiosa.
BUT, I think Bachmann is a true patriot, very sincere, strongly focused on what ails America and what needs to be done.

ET points out she's a lawyer. Ah, but more than that: TAX LAWYER.

I agree with ET on Pawlenty.

Developing policies and programs is hard analytic work.
- ET.

Ah, ET, but there's the rub. It shouldn't be.
Getting the hell out of the way is not "hard analytic work".

ET is quibbling on Bachmann's receiving less vitriol than Palin. The Dems poured tens of millions into Minnesota to try defeating her and a cursory google search will find no shortage of leftist hate directed towards Bachmann. She has been well tested in Congress and a big fan of Von Mises and Mark Steyn.

In a contest where a German Shepherd would make a better President than the incumbent, the question is who can beat him while properly representing the majority, supporting the Constitution, and tough enough to support the strong medicine required to bring America away from financial ruin.

Ron Paul or Gary Johnson would be my first and second choice but they both have no chance of winning the election, even if one of them got the nomination.

Romney is a RINO squish and can't credibly stand up to Obama Care, given his record. He has been recently quoted as supporting Cap and Trade. He currently polls well because the Tea Party candidates are split and only Bachmann has just announced. Romney currently holds the MSM and "establishment" Republican support.

Newt has too much personal baggage and his support will go to the last Tea Party candidate standing.

Cain is interesting, but as a political outsider, will only remain as such. VP?

Pawlenty is a competent leader but lacks minority status or wow factor. Santorum and Huntsman seem to fall into the same category.

If Palin stays out, Bachmann is the candidate to beat. If Palin throws her name in, it could be a bit of a cat fight and could result in Romney sliding in due to split Tea Party support.

John Chittick, I basically agree with your comment except for Ron Paul as I think he is clueless on foreign policy and would give the store to China and militant Islam. Europe does not have the gonads to fight its way out of a paper bag any longer and Russia is only about reestablishing itself as a world power.

JC

I agree with Ken K regarding Ron Paul. He's 'hit & miss" and when he misses, he misses bad. He's better for the 'think-tank'.

I don't believe that MR will survive the process, and I think HC's weakness on foreign policy too much to overcome.

Pawlenty is making a good case for his demure style. He seems very articulate and witty, as I've heard him say recently "Is Bill O'Reilly playing the 'race card' on me calling me 'vanilla'?", and coined the phrase "Obamney Care", and said "If America is looking for an "Entertainer-in-Chief" he's not the right guy. Pawlenty is starting to look very "Chris Christie-esq" in his ability with words. This bodes very well for him.

Myself, I said some time ago that I'm waiting for Rudy G to do something. He's the best candidate IMO, and would fit nicely with a Tea Party VP candidate.

All of that said, Sarah Palin is STILL the favorite for the GOP crown. She’s the best candidate, she’s the REAL LEADER of the conservative movement.

JC

I agree with Ken K regarding Ron Paul. He's 'hit & miss" and when he misses, he misses bad. He's better for the 'think-tank'.

I don't believe that MR will survive the process, and I think HC's weakness on foreign policy too much to overcome.

Pawlenty is making a good case for his demure style. He seems very articulate and witty, as I've heard him say recently "Is Bill O'Reilly playing the 'race card' on me calling me 'vanilla'?", and coined the phrase "Obamney Care", and said "If America is looking for an "Entertainer-in-Chief" he's not the right guy. Pawlenty is starting to look very "Chris Christie-esq" in his ability with words. This bodes very well for him.

Myself, I said some time ago that I'm waiting for Rudy G to do something. He's the best candidate IMO, and would fit nicely with a Tea Party VP candidate.

All of that said, Sarah Palin is STILL the favorite for the GOP crown. She’s the best candidate, she’s the REAL LEADER of the conservative movement.

sorry:(

John Chittick - interesting list.

I reject Ron Paul as I think his rejection of the modern global reality..ie that we are all networked together in complex economic connections - is a serious flaw.

I very much agree with you on Romney. I think that the left would like Romney as the GOP candidate because they think Obama could readily beat him. And I agree on that..Obama would pull out the comparisons (medicare, cap and trade, etc)...and declare ask why would someone reject him and 'his race'...for Romney. And don't think that Obama won't hesitate for a nanosecond to pull out the race card.

Gingrich has too much baggage and he's part of the Old Guard. Frankly, I consider Romney part of the Old Guard (Washington bubble) as well. I think the GOP should reject any and all of the old guard.

Palin? No. My view of her is that her role is as an outsider, someone who dares to and can, say things that a candidate cannot get away with easily...but something that people feel is valid.
She's not just some 'plumber' speaking from the floor or via twitter; she has an enormous and vast public presence. What she says - goes very public in a way. The GOP needs her in this role.

I don't see her as president; she's commonsense, she's a realist, but I don't see her as aware of the complex history of the world.

Cain is great as, like Palin, a plain speaker, but he lacks that foreign history knowledge.

Bachmann? I'm going to say: No. She was campaigning on CNN last night - and my concern is I wonder if she can stop campaigning and move into policy construction. As I've said above, campaigning and policy devt are two completely different realms.

Obama is unable to work on policy devt; he delegates that to others and can't even be bothered reading and understanding the results. His focus is singular: campaigning. Performing and waiting for the standing ovation.

Pawlenty. He's my choice at the moment. Because of his focus on work, work and developing specific policies and programs..which are data based, specific, realistic and commonsense.
I'm not interested in any 'wow' factor. I'm interested in his work..and its results.

If he's picked, he has to be careful of his VP choice. McCain tried to define himself as a maverick...but he's an old Washington insider. So, he picked an outsider, Palin, as his VP. It didn't work..the gap between his experience and hers was too wide.

I'd think that if Pawlenty is nominated, he should pick someone like Rubio, West, even Ryan (who won't do it)..

That is, I think the GOP needs to have both candidates as part of the new younger crowd. Not part of the old Washington bubble. And then, define Obama as part of that old bubble..

Ken, I.H.
I have always been uneasy about Paul's isolationism but at this point it would be a refreshing change from the uber-costly, cascading and futile attempts at trying to civilize the Islamic wastelands. As long as the US military is not degraded, it would make a good foreign policy switch to state that the US is not interested in nation building but will, if provoked, make one hell of a mess of an enemy without any intention nor desire to rebuild said nation(s), including the ridiculous notion that "democracy" in the absence of a Constitution, rule of law, property rights, etc is some end-all and be-all.

It is a moot point due to Paul's chances but certainly one worth debate.

It seems Rubio is everyone's pick for VP.

This would bode very well for the GOP, as I believe it's imperative for the GOP’s long term future for the GOP (not the Dems) to resolve the immigration issue.

IMO Pawlenty's best political asset: he's the opposite of BO the "entertainer-in-chief".

Also, if BO continues his epic fall in the polls(as he appears to be trending towards), we can expect some late entries in the GOP field. Jeb Bush anyone?

What about a Tea Party Candidate not on the GOP ticket. This is a real possibility in today’s climate. How better to flip-off both parties than by electing Sarah Palin as an independent candidate? That is the easiest way to get her name on the Presidential ticket. It could happen!

What interests me is I figure Sarah Palin will be her running mate.
Both Women who are underestimated.
The mud will flow, unfortunatly for the left they blew the last wad on the Palin e-mails & came up looking like suckers. No one believes the media. Not even the MSM anymore.
JMO

ET

You are a rational thinker and not someone interested in a wow factor and therefore support a proven leader. Given the current POTUS, in terms of the US electorate, you are obviously atypical. Consider the following positives for Bachmann - Christian (60% of the US), Female (a pivotal consideration for a certain demographic), conservative (40-50% of US), independents (Tea Party in the bag). Negatives - Socially liberal, fiscal conservatives will have a hard time voting for Obama over her but may stay home in protest.

In a one on one with Obama, Michele can and will go for the throat. Pawlenty as a white male gentleman will likely not and if he did, he would be obviously out of his comfort zone. I realize this is not rational (I'm an atheist and My rational choice is Paul) but as a true conservative, likely the closest to Paul, Bachmann ultimately has the best chance for success.

John Chittick - you make some very valid points.

I think that Obama won in 2008 because the American people were tired of war, of being attacked, of seeing the world denigrate their values. Obama is a campaigner; that means that he tells you what you want to hear. He doesn't tell you the facts-of-reality. Instead, he operates in the imaginary emotional world of: words.

Hope and change; the oceans will cease to rise...and so on. Obama ran on what he was not; Not Bush. He provided and continues to provide, no information about himself, about his policies, about his agenda.

And, he tells different audiences different stories. That's because his agenda is to control you..which he does by misinformation and emotional manipulation. And, Obama ran on race - daring you that IF you rejected him, then you were de facto a racist.

People have become aware that Obama, entrenched within the radical socialists around him, has put through disastrous policies of socialist centrism and effectively, has attacked the people. He's ignored Congress with his executive decisions (EPA etc); ignored Congressional needs to read and vote..and so on.

People are aware of the problems.

Obama will try to campaign in the only way he can: in the virtual realm of words, words..lies and more lies.

My question is that I wonder if the electorate is fed up with this type of imaginary world; if the electorate has experienced the real world of Obama - that deficit, that unemployment, those lack of jobs etc.. and want commonsense solutions. Not campaign promises.

Michele Bachmann, in my view, is a campaigner. Pawlenty is not; he's focused around those practical, data-based solutions. So, he's not a performer, he won't excite the emotions.

But Can he be trusted?. That's the key question: Can he be trusted to mean what he says? I say: Yes.

My view is that the fact that Pawlenty is not campaigning, with the resultant 'virtual world words', but is offering real commonsense workable solutions to the real problems of the US..that this is what the electorate wants.

Let him pick a more dynamic colourful VP: Rubio. That will round up the offering. The dull, committed, sensible president, and the passionate vice-president.

Bachmann fits right in with the small dead teabagging crowd....deep as a birdbath and a hypocrite to her very roots. Talks a good teabagging game while living large on the public dime. Just another conservative welfare bum grifter, preaching small gov't while collecting $$$tens of thousands in farm welfare. Oh yeah, she's got all kinds of credibility.

Michele Bachmann, in my view, is a campaigner.
- ET.

Uh, oh. ET's laying in a meme and she's gonna stick with it. This will be the replacement for the "Obama is a narcissist" to the exclusion of all else including his socialist/marxist ideology. Remember, in dozens of posts he had no ideology, tho I notice she referred to Obama as a socialist quite recently, and I thank you very much for that, ET.

Michele Bachmann is not just a campaigner at all. She's very strong on policy. She's head of the Tea Party Caucus. She's smart; extremely well-informed; a tax lawyer; a small business woman; very specific on policy suggestions in interviews; recall her advocacy for disenfranchised auto dealers during the shakedown. And recall, she was against raising the debt limit, period. Not this bullshit about being in favour of raising it if there's a commitment to reduce spending, which even Rand Paul argued. Nope. Against raising the debt limit, period.
It's not either/or, here ET. She has to be a campaigner. And all politicians are campaigners, including Pawlenty, tho it's true they have different styles suited to their personalities and temperaments.

I'm with you on Pawlenty, but I'm equally impressed with Bachmann and have been for a very long time. And ET, I'm cheered by your reference to Herman Cain as "great". I was thinking today, wouldn't it be ultra cool for Cain's first electoral office to be POTUS. You're right about his plainspeak. Recent example, with Beck: Does President Obama have the interests of the US at heart? Cain: No. End of answer.

SDA Women, I have a question: what's with Bachmann's racoon eyes? Too much eye-makeup? Love her voice however.

me no dhimmi - you misunderstand me. I've repeatedly, and I mean repeatedly, said that Obama is a psychological socialist. Not an intellectual socialist.

There's an enormous difference. Obama is not an intellect; he's not interested in the theory and ideology of socialism. He's a psychological socialist - because socialism sets up a two-class system. The Elite Rulers..and the Ruled. No free individuals. Obama likes being a Ruler. As he says so frequently: "I'm the president'.

And no, I'm not replacing Obama's pathological narcissism. He remains that - which is why he's a psychological socialist not an ideological socialist. Whew.

As for Bachmann, I do read lots of praise for her. If you can believe it - even MSNBC's Chris Matthews is very impressed with her. Got that? I said the left wouldn't go after her as they did with Sarah Palin.

I got the impression, watching the 'debate' (one can hardly call it that with King reducing answers to 30 seconds)..that Bachmann is 'presenting herself'..and I didn't see the policy/programs. I'm sure that will come..but I remain still watching. Krauthammer likes her.

As for Pawlenty, I repeat my appreciation for him. He's not a campaigner; he's not someone to attack opponents or to speak-in-tongues..as does Obama.

I refer to Thomas Sowell's comments of today:

"Among the other announced Republican presidential candidates, former governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota talks the most sense and shows the most courage. It takes guts to tell people in a corn-producing state like Iowa that you want to cut back on ethanol subsidies, because Iowa will also produce the first results in next year’s primary campaign season. And first results, like other first impressions, carry a lot of weight.

But somebody has got to talk sense about our dire economic problems — and it is painfully clear that Barack Obama will not be that somebody. The fact that Pawlenty has put his neck on the line to do so is a big plus."

My point here- is that Pawlenty doesn't campaign with rhetoric. He can be trusted to keep his word. And, he's committed to policy development. Unlike Obama.

Sowell continues: "Some fear that Governor Pawlenty doesn’t have the charisma and pyrotechnic rhetoric that they would like to see in a candidate. Charisma and rhetoric are what gave us the current disastrous administration in Washington. Charisma and rhetoric gave people in other countries even bigger disasters, up to and including Hitler.

Politicians and the media may want a candidate who uses verbal fireworks, but the people want jobs. As Tim Pawlenty put it, “Fluffy promises of hope and change don’t buy our groceries, make our mortgage payments, put gas in our cars, or pay for our children’s clothes."

I like that warning about charisma.

Cain? I really like his plain speaking. But, he's not knowledgeable enough in foreign history and complexity and I don't see any -perhaps it's early - data-based policies. Running a business is not comparable to developing legislation.

But I think that what is needed is a dull, committed, unselfish, non-narcissist individual with courage and integrity as president. So far, to me, that's Pawlenty.
Who as VP? I could see Bachmann though I think there are more important roles for her. I'd prefer someone like Rubio.

That's where I'm at so far.

Me No Dhimmi - I can't contribute to none of this here deep brainy conversation, but re. Bachmann's eyes - yes, they can look strange in some pictures, (I wouldn't say "raccoon eyes"; I'm afraid I'd have to go with "p*ss-holes in the snow"), especially in TV interviews where I believe people are told to focus on some point just above the camera; maybe she does this a little too fixedly or robotically. The only issue really is that they are extremely pale, to the point where she barely seems to have irises. I think people think "killer android from sci-fi film". Eyeliner is not her friend because it actually draws attention to this problem, and I think the stuff she's wearing is too dark; in addition, her eyes are close together (which can make someone look cross-eyed) and she should be careful not to use dark colours or any eyeliner except on the outer edges, far away from the nose.

Aggravating the "killer android" problem, her smile sometimes looks very forced. This is normal; "actor/politician" smiles are extremely unnatural and few people can really pull them off without practice; anyway they don't carry to the eyes, and the disconnect can be unnerving. (I once read an article on the "show us your dental-work" smile and how it migrated across the policial classes of Europe. Mitterand had his incisors filed because he looked like a vampire.)

I should add that I actually do think she's rather pretty. Now don't say I contribute nothing of worth.

(Why if you could combine Palin's eyes and Bachmann's voice....)

Not "incisors", sorry, I always make that mistake. It sounds like the right word. Canines, he had his canines filed. (That doesn't sound like the right word... ick.)

That's most interesting Black Mamba!
Yeah, I think Bachmann is a beauty (she's 55 -- I thought younger). I really like her accent too. Her "killer android" thing, notwithstanding, she radiates. And she's got that maternal thing too which men of a certain age find irrestible.

Palin, of course, is a great beauty -- a sweetheart -- but I gotta admit to being a bit uncomforable with the cutesy-pie pop-star act she's been running, which is not at all to suggest she's an airhead.

I'm with ET and Thomas Sowell. It would be great to have done with the charisma thing but in this hyper media age I'm doubtful that the public will stop being enchanted with charisma. The US is celebrity-mad.

I'm not with ET on Cain's "lack of foreign history". So what? Ask yourself, to what extent the US benefited from Kissinger's?! I'd like the US to butt out of foreign affairs for a few decades. This "foreign history" thing is fertile ground for a lot of expensive bloody mischief.

ET: "dull, committed, non- narcissistic individual with courage and integrity". Sounds like the guy we just elected in Canada. :)

(BTW the earrings in the above clip, with the grey suit - she wears them at least 1/3 of the time, no exaggeration. I've been looking through photos of her.)

polly - exactly right. That's a similar description of Harper.

"I reject Ron Paul as I think his rejection of the modern global reality..ie that we are all networked together in complex economic connections - is a serious flaw."
ET

It's a flaw to project a naive position but another to foresee potential negative results such global "associations" might entail; for the people of the Republic he serves anyway. That should be foremost to any candidate...Serving his people first. Last time I checked, the US was a sovereign nation, not the Government of the world. Yes we are financially tied but that should be between lender and borrower, seller and buyer only.

The UN is a corrupt entity that needs to be kicked out of New York city IMO.
Why did the Federal Reserve bail out banks overseas at precisely the 2008 "financial crisis"
/US fed election point? (Coincidence? Ahahah!) Still has not been answered.

The European union is a good example of the perils of "globalization"; many Germans would like no better than to split from it right now. They are the ants who keep the Greek, Portuguese and Spanish grasshoppers fat and lazy and they are fed up.
America, because of it's massive military might is used to police the world...What the hell is the socio economic advantage of bombing Libya short and long term for the US?... The fraction of oil Libya outputs does not even go to the US nor are the private oil Companies extracting there.
The leaders of Egypt and Saudi Arabia want the Gaddafi 'problem' removed...If the US is going to do the dirty work and then be constantly critiqued for doing so then I say like Trump said naively: "Make them pay"
"Guns for hire"...Otherwise let France take care of it's own oil 'imports'.

BTW...Don't hold your breath about Boehner giving Barry Friday to respond on the Libyan offensive...It's all a show to appease the peons.

I think Ron Paul senses that there is less and less 'transparency' and 'logic' behind many of Federal Government motives for their actions...Based on their Constitution of course.

IMO, The main driver for "Globalization" ideal is the USA itself. Obama is a firm believer in it. Obama considers himself citizen of the world first...His current home address is America.

I don't think Americans have signed on such a deal. Their Constitution still says so anyway.

Ron Paul is THE ONLY true 'outsider'...He also has no chance in hell.

"Palin? No. My view of her is that her role is as an outsider, someone who dares to and can, say things that a candidate cannot get away with easily...but something that people feel is valid.
She's not just some 'plumber' speaking from the floor or via twitter; she has an enormous and vast public presence. What she says - goes very public in a way. The GOP needs her in this role.

I don't see her as president; she's commonsense, she's a realist, but I don't see her as aware of the complex history of the world."
ET

I agree...Palin is an asset where she is...A TEA party Rep. She is equivalent to Rush of sorts.
Bachmann should not run for the same reason, she has no chance and would be better at being a TEA clarion too.

The rest I consider "prone for manipulation"...They will not be able to change a thing. America, like Canada has been stuck in "Centrist" mode for a long time...There is no more 'left and right'...It's an 'establishment' of elites who cater to other powerful elites first and foremost.

The only time Washington will truly change is when the folks congregate there with the army in tow.

Basically, that CNN GOP convention thing was a show. America has become show business with too many now dumb down because of it.

I also like content ET, Pawlenty is very interesting in that regard but like you say, in dumb down America he has not much chance unfortunately.

If William F. Buckley was still alive and well, he would be my first choice but he would also have no chance.
Sad.