Tuesday, February 22, 2011


         Q.  I didn’t get your reference yesterday about Romney.  When some say his Massachusetts care will torpedo him you answered “I don’t guy that.”
        A. Ah that comes from an octogenarian writing quickly without a copy-editor.   I meant  “I don’t buy that.” Romney is one of the most accomplished men of his time—in private as public sectors—and I’m not willing to spit him away because of a mistake in healthcare or because evangelicals don’t cotton to Mormonism.  The point is conservatives shouldn’t be so picky that they eliminate a guy with freckles or because he believes in a religion that has little touch with Christianity. What does this mean—they can’t vote for a Jew either?  Nonsense. 
       To them I say Reagan signed the most liberal abortion law in the United States.  Nixon overcame the most obnoxious, unlovable personality imaginable becoming a politician who really didn’t like people very much.  He smote the two-headed Communist Sino-Soviet dragon and divided their empire—a notable achievement.  Watergate was a liberal confection where he was forced to resign not because of  what he did but because of what in a moment of outrage on tape…probably fortified with bourbon…he said!  What I have said is that these times deserve an accomplished governor not senator.   Romney should continue to be considered.  Period.
       Q.   Some have said to disqualify Mitch Daniels the way  you did is short-sighted because social issues will get in the way of saving the economy.
      A.  Those who  say it don’t understand that in a national sense, believing Christians are the Republicans’ equivalent of African Americans to the Democrats.  You alienate blacks in the Democratic party and on a national basis you might as well forget it. You turn off people who concentrate on social issues and you have a loser—plain and simple.   Mitch Daniels should have known this.  You must remember that Illinois is at great variance Republican-wise with other states.  We can elect a Mark Kirk here.   And even so things are changing.  Take my old state of Minnesota—its governor Tim Pawlenty did most of what Mitch Daniels did and did it in what was a far more hostile environment than Indiana.   Speaking of whom--.
       Q.   Tim Pawlenty?  
       A.   Yes.  Pardon me but this computer has a mind of its own and has decided to swing into all caps without my having any say in the matter.  Pawlenty has the three-legged stool qualities that give him a little time he can utilize into a first-rate cAndidacy.   now i’ll give this up because for the life of me I can’t dislodge the capital key.   Anybody know how to change a computer which determines to print all caps?

1 comment:

  1. I still don't get your continued antipathy to Gov. Daniels. He never said that people were wrong to "concentrate" on social issues. All he said was that they should, for the moment, unite to face the greatest challenge of our times --the out of control federal deficit. He did not ask them to give up their beliefs, many of which I assume he shares. And to assume, as you do, that all "believing Christians" agree with each other on every social issue is wrong. Gov. Romney--who went from liberal Massachusetts governor to conservative candidate for President in the blink of an eye--continues to dominate your blog while Gov. Daniels--a steadfast conservative who accomplished great things in Indiana is left twisting in the wind. There's something wrong with your computer, and it's not just because it's stuck on caps! (Have you hit the Caps Lock?). Jim Thompson