The voice of the Tea Party seems to be making a difference even before the primaries start for the 2012 Presidential Election. More presidential hopefuls are deciding not to run than there are those deciding to run. While I believe that we should have as many possibilities out there to vet the final candidate that makes in on the ballot, this development that sees RINOs falling away is very positive. It proves that the power of the Tea Party continues. When a Mike Huckabee looks at the spotlight he will be under, he realizes that he has it real good at Fox News where he gets paid big bucks to host a mediocre show. Haley Barbour understands that being governor is not such a bad deal. And Mitch Daniels listens to his wife and stays out of the race.
We will no longer tolerate those that do not stand for something. The wishy washy, lukewarm candidates of years past will no longer pass muster. And of course, the attitude of the left in the mainstream media as demonstrated by Rick Soisson is that the Presidential race for 2012 has been left “to the bland and the fringe.” The questions become, who is bland and who is fringe and according to who? There are some very exciting people in this race that have strong followings. The Indiana Democrat Party also referenced the current race being one of “silliness and distraction.” So having more well known names like a Mitch Daniels who ran the budget under Bush (enough said) and Mike Huckabee who left preaching to becoming a big tax, big government politician (enough said again) would add credibility to the race? Frankly, I’d rather have “bland” and “silly” over establishment frauds anyday.
The real question is this one – a question I ask everytime the media piles on Sarah Palin – what are these libtards so afraid of? Thou doth protesteth too much! I could not be happier that the RINOs are falling away.





Big Dawg Music Mafia
Blog Talk Radio
CATO Institute
Family Security Matters
Jeremy Sarber
People's Cube
Red State Talk Radio
Smart Girl Nation

Jeez, Diane, thanks for the (digital) ink. I can’t tell you how delighted I am to know that I’ve been promoted to “the mainstream media.” (I wish my bank account reflected that.) Or let’s put that another way: Since you’ve allowed yourself a self-characterization on this site, I need to identify myself as a moderately Democratic citizen scribbler. I have no radio platform. My sexual orientation is none of your business, but I only write that to give my former softball teammates a laugh. You should also be reminded that you should not jump to a conclusion that those whom you disagree with do not stand for something. But enough of all that. Let’s invoke that great philosopher Rodney King: “Why can’t we all just get along?” I’ll bet you and I are on the same page about Rick Santorum. However, if you imagine yourself some sort of voice of the people, you really need to lose terms like “libtard.” Like gays, the mentally handicapped and their families are sensitive about certain terminology. (It wouldn’t hurt to be able to distinguish between the proper uses of “who” and “whom,” either, but that’s something that only “edtards” care about, right?) Now be a good libertarian and make sure you post this.
Rick, thank you for your condescending commentary wherein you correct my grammar and tell me, “Now be a good libertarian and make sure you post this.” I stand corrected for lumping you with the mainstream media. I hadn’t noticed that you were posted with Associated Content rather than the Associated Press. I will continue to use terms like “libtard” because I am not politically correct and clearly retarded people do not have a fully developed intellect due to genetics which is not derogatory. I merely am pointing out that liberals do not have a fully developed intellect either, but unfortunately that is not due to genetics. Not sure what sexual orientation has to do with anything unless you are telling me that you are gay. If that is the case, we both probably do agree on a theocrat like Rick Santorum. I’m also sorry for concluding that people with WHOM I disagree do not stand for something. They do indeed, but whether that is a positive or not is clearly subjective. After all, the President stands for bowing to our enemies and wearing mom jeans and that, to me, is clearly not a positive.
I have to be gay to find Santorum a boob? And yes, of course, “I’m politically incorrect” is a wonderful defense against any offensive term…terrific tortured logic on “libtard” (which I actually find funny). I really don’t see that genetics has anything to do with offense taken, however. For the record, my work has also appeared in Studies in Contemporary Satire, The Baseball Chronicle, and The Broad Street Review (still not mainstream), and yes indeedy, AC is not AP. I’d repeat King’s remark here…and for god’s sake, lighten up. Your candidate likely won’t take the ’12 election; neither will mine. If things don’t change much in the economy, we’ll all be stuck with Romney, who truly seems to believe in nothing but winning.