Recent discussions about the 2004 election have mostly focused on the contest among the Democratic hopefuls and how they might measure up against Bush in November. I’d like to ask the conservatives here a purely academic question. If you could toss out Bush and Cheyney, or if they both caught SARS and died next week, who would you choose to run on the Republican ticket? On what issues do you feel like Bush has let you down? If Bush weren’t in the picture, who else would not only be electable, but would also be an improvement over Bush on the issues? Ya’ damn liberals can read and even participate in thishere thread, but ya’ ain’t allowed to go tellin’ yer Democratic Party buddies about what ya’ read. 
Hell, the Republicans have numerous alternatives though I am satisfied with the present line up.
Why not Colin Powell and Condi Rice? (notice this is the top of the list so goodness how does this jive with Republicans being sexist and racist? Gosh, maybe there are capable, talented Blacks and women that would get Republican votes as opposed to being quota candidates ala the Democrats? (over to you on that Alien. How does that jibe with your all white Republican males are racist, sexist and homophobic?) Or are Colin and Condi not real blacks or real women? (separated of course)
Or Rumsfeld for president, with Wolfowitz for Vp?
Then perhaps in 2008, we may see Jeb Bush and Giuliani?
Then of course, given the “unfairness” of the Constitution and laws, maybe the Republicans will begin their own civil disobedience to allow Arnie to run in 2008 or 2012? I mean isn’t it unfair that he cannot run just because he was not born in America even though he is an American citizen.
Finally, Tom Ridge? with VP Ashcroft? (over to you on that one Alien)
Fred:
See? I used the little colon again!
I don’t look upon Powell or Rice in terms of what race they are.
So, that is a non-issue for me, personally.
I think Powell might actually be an okay candidate, but I don’t see it happening. I don’t get the impression that he’d like to be in such a position, that it’s not really his goal in life.
I think it says a lot about a person if they run for a public office (especially Prez of the US), whether they’re coerced, born, or blackmailed into it.
As for Ashcroft, yeah right!
I can just picture his inaugural “serenade” now. The Prayer Breakfasts in School Act. The National Endowment of Flag Making and other Aesthetically Pleasing Patriotic ARTS. The God Loves My Agenda (and hates yours) Protection Committee. 
[quote]
Atty Gen. John Ashcroft:Likewise! I just want to add something for any of the young readers out there. Follow your dreams and if you have a passion for painting like I did, think about it less as some subversion or division from normal patriotic life. On the contrary, realize that you can also [color=red]paint such lovely things as flags [/color]for example, as Jasper Johns did, [color=red]or military portraits or scenes[/color], as some great painters of the past and present like Leon Golub, Anselm Kiefer, and Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier have done. [color=blue]In short, culture can service this great nation if used in an acceptable fashion, one which recognizes the beauty and power of the all mighty God and the power that he has vested in this blessed land, [/color]good night and thank you!
[/quote]:lol:
hscb.org/res-chats-ashcroft.htm
Leon Golub: tfaoi.com/am/16am/16am221.jpg
Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier: artcyclopedia.com/artists/de … rnest.html
Condoleeza Rice has practically been in hiding for several months now. I don’t think I’ve seen her name even mentioned in the news since last November’s Thanksgiving dinner in Iraq. No idea why. I could see her leading the ticket in 2008, especially if she switches to another high-profile position next term.
I think Colin Powell has been discredited over the last two years. Democrats now hate him because of Iraq; Republicans are no longer fawning over him because of his hesitation on Iraq. There was talk of him resigning last year, but he announced he’d stay through Bush’s entire term; I don’t know if he’ll bow out next year or not. I think the talk was a way to let him exit gracefully, which he declined, and the Republican leadership didn’t want an ugly confrontation.
Tom Ridge might have a chance, Bill Frist might have a chance, John McCain might run wild and fail again. Pataki or Giuliani might have a shot; I think they’re too liberal to interest the Republican base, but they would draw a lot of Democrats away from Kerry. Republicans have been deferring to Bush so much that, on a national level, I don’t see much name recognition outside of a few current leaders.
Where has Bush failed? On pretty much everything except for national security. Economically, he was dealt a bad hand, taking office just as the economy was already crashing, but he has made it worse by allowing spending to run out of control and by pandering to special-interest groups like steel manufacturers. He could have trimmed job losses in the tech industry by terminating the H1-B visa program. His amnesty for illegal immigrants was a non-started, IMHO done purely as a ploy to gain Hispanic votes. He has had a lot to deal with internationally, but he should have pushed domestically as well.
As for who I’d like, I don’t really see anyone good out there nationally. Larry Craig, maybe, but he’s too much of a regional politician to win.
Well, it’s cute, although it reads like another one of the websites that people such as yourself like to make up fake quotes on. Sorta like the “study” that “proved” Bush had a low IQ, and Clinton had the highest of any president – faked up by some Clinton-supporting dweebs, and then passed around as if it were true by credulous liberal boobs and news reporters:
snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.htm
But I digress. “Homeland Security Cultural Bureau”? Except that it’s not a .gov domain, and the registered owner is some guy in NYC who faked his phone number to avoid telemarketing calls (it’s actually 202-480-2093, not 99, according to a quick Superpages.com directory search), and I keep getting a “connection refused” when I try to open his website (which appears no longer to exist). Plus I find it a little odd that Ashcroft is commenting on 19th-century French painters.
Oh hey, and when I tried calling his number just now, I got an “invalid number” message from the telco. :moo: Surprise, surprise.
So color me skeptical, just as I usually am about anything you “liberal” types post about a Republican who isn’t a RINO. . . .
Edited to add:
And, of course, five more minutes of Googling answers the question – another bit of bullshit by the Left.
artthrob.co.za/02sept/news/hscb.html
16beavergroup.org/forums/RadioAc … sts/8.html
No doubt you’re gonna come back and say “it was a joke!”, but that’s kinda the point – all you leftists ever do is make jokes and create hoaxes. Asked for substantive debate, you throw mud. It’s really pretty sad to see, since you folks could serve as a useful counterweight, but instead you’re parodying yourselves into irreverent irrelevance.
Well Mapodurian:::: (sorry extra colons for you know who)
Gosh. What did you expect from a group that has to use Tommy Tomorrow cartoons to prove its point? I have every confidence that a suitable Tommy Tomorrow cartoon will come back lambasting our skepticism or our scurrilous attacks on the right-thinking, knee-jerk McCarthyites of our day: No, not the neocons but the hysterical leftists who see rights and constitutional violations around every corner. Ironic, but the irony is very much lost on these committed “activists.” Over to you… tick tock tick tock tick tock