These debates have been wonderful theater and quite entertaining. I confess to watching all of all of them. Perhaps I should get a life.
Ah, the irony, the spectacle, the agony:
Newt: I like Newt. Newt hits home runs, bunches of them, in the debates. But Newt is a walking political time bomb. I lightly defended his adultery and multiple marriages in past months but the latest renewal of the marital revelations makes it tough. Can South Carolinia evangelicals dismiss these and feel comfortable with Newt, his moral failures, and his former adulteress, third, current, and hopefully last wife as First Lady?
I'd vote for Newt for Visionary-in-Chief but not president. His ability to debate Obama will be far less important than his lack of ability to put forth a record of character, consistency, and integrity.
Santorum: He described himself last night as not the flashiest candidate but steady, slow, consistent. Hmmm, a plodder. I kinda like the concept there, Rick. The more I hear Santorum, the more I like him. I just don't think we need a plodder as our candidate in 2012.
Paul: Unelectable. I'm still with Krauthammer who says that libertarianism is not a governing philosophy. Paul can be the Goldwater of our time - get waxed in the election but successfully frame the debate for future successes. I'd rather win the election.
Romney: I'd settle on him were I in SC.
You know the Lord has a sense of humor or we wouldn't have the scenario we have in SC:
Ah, the irony, the spectacle, the agony:
Newt: I like Newt. Newt hits home runs, bunches of them, in the debates. But Newt is a walking political time bomb. I lightly defended his adultery and multiple marriages in past months but the latest renewal of the marital revelations makes it tough. Can South Carolinia evangelicals dismiss these and feel comfortable with Newt, his moral failures, and his former adulteress, third, current, and hopefully last wife as First Lady?
I'd vote for Newt for Visionary-in-Chief but not president. His ability to debate Obama will be far less important than his lack of ability to put forth a record of character, consistency, and integrity.
Santorum: He described himself last night as not the flashiest candidate but steady, slow, consistent. Hmmm, a plodder. I kinda like the concept there, Rick. The more I hear Santorum, the more I like him. I just don't think we need a plodder as our candidate in 2012.
Paul: Unelectable. I'm still with Krauthammer who says that libertarianism is not a governing philosophy. Paul can be the Goldwater of our time - get waxed in the election but successfully frame the debate for future successes. I'd rather win the election.
Romney: I'd settle on him were I in SC.
You know the Lord has a sense of humor or we wouldn't have the scenario we have in SC:
- The best fellow evangelical candidate, Perry, was talked into dropping out by his wife this week so that he wouldn't be embarrassed by coming in behind a Mormon, a good catholic, a new catholic former Baptist, and the libertarian. He of the mammoth prayer rally back in August can get only the dregs in SC. Should be sued for political malpractice.
- Evangelicals get to choose between one member of what we always called a religious cult, a former Southern Baptist, thrice married, now Catholic or a lifelong Catholic...
- ...leaving Paul, a Baptist, as the most acceptable evangelical but who deliberately and principally refuses to cater to evangelicals on their pet issues.
