Thursday, February 07, 2008

Romney Suspends Campaign; Buchanan Column; Some Thoughts on Ron Paul

So Romney's speech at CPAC was a doozy, we were listening live at the office this afternoon as he announced. It was actually a pretty good speech, the suspension of the campaign notwithstanding. If you haven't heard the audio, it's worth a listen, as the audience had no idea it was coming and there was a chorus of surprised "no"'s coming from the crowd.

Caught Laura Ingraham (on tape delay) after the speech and she and Mark Steyn knew what was coming. Steyn made some remark about going out for drinks after the speech in a knowing manner, which you'd never catch on to if you hadn't just heard Mitt suspend his campaign. Interesting. Look, I liked him better than the other "top-tier" guys in the race, and it's over. It was fun to support him while it lasted and he's 60. Maybe in four years he'll refine his conservatism and not face the challenges he's faced in this primary. Maybe he'll drop the constant chorus of "I love legal immigration." Who knows?

This column by Pat Buchanan is outstanding. Too bad Pat's not running, although he might be a good write-in candidate. This might be worth a discussion among our fellow bloggers: should there be a coordinated write-in effort?

Lastly, I've got to come clean on some things re: Ron Paul. I've been hard on him in prior posts, and he's not the worst option out there; in fact, he merits some consideration if he went third party against McCain and Clinton. While I'm not with him on an immediate and total withdrawal from Iraq, he's an outstanding option when one considers a McCain (or Huckabee) candidacy. He's disavowed questionable statements made by supporters, another concern I had about him. I think a Paul Presidency would be extraordinary for a couple of reasons: first, the awe-inspiring number of vetos he'd issue, and second, he'd dismantle some federal departments, no question about it. I'm not ready to support him (plus, we've already voted in Illinois) but he looks much better than either of the two so-called GOP front-runners.


DR said...

Outstanding post. I think I will probably voting for Ron Paul when it is Wisconsin's turn, although I am not completely decided. I hate him on foreign policy, but love his strong commitment to the Constitution. I think you may be hitting the nail on the head about the write-in candidate in the general.

Michael Tams said...


Thanks. I'll be checking your blog for your thoughts on Wisconsin's primary.

The war may for all intents and purposes be over by the time the next president takes office. I'm not there with Paul on Iraq; on other foreign policy things, I'm not sure yet. I'm glad that he's making the distinction between "isolationism" and "non-interventionism."


Call Me Mom said...

I think it is time for a coordinated write in campaign. One thing I am noticing is that no one candidate has had a real walk-away-with-everything victory over the others. Is that because we have so many candidates, or because we have so many we don't like?

DR said...

Call Me Mom,

I think it is because we have so many we don't like. I am personally tired of having to settle for a candidate who does not support Federalism.


I am probably not going to do a post on Wisconsin's Primary now. Before Thompson got out he was leading all the polls. Mitt was doing pretty good until he got out, but from what I have been reading and the reactions I see now I believe the Republican turn out will probably be extremely low in Wisconsin and McCain will probably win by a landslide.

victor said...

thanks ,, for this link ,,

Get 28 movie channels for 3 months free

sharon said...

thanks for the link....

Entertainment at one stop