There's an article today indicating Frank Keating is "kicking around" the idea of running for president in 2008. Here is the story. (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/NewsStory.asp?ID=061217_Ne_A21_Keati1916%22) Seems somewhat strange to me. Governor, sure. But, president?
Why would he waste his time......
The republijerks are just trying to make Bush look better by proposing a clown like Keating.
It won't work.
But who do these powerful party manipulators want to run against Hillary?
Suggestions????
It really doesn't matter who runs against Hillary, she will lose.
Well, I would not vote for him but agree that it would be characteristic of him to think he has a chance. In fact, I would think he has an excellent chance or at least a good as chance as anyone, come to think of it. He is a straight-shooting, good-humoured, quick-thinking pragmatist that is missing from the race.
The Bushiites do not trust him or like him, and that is in Keating's favor. He is not the Arizona Keating, after all, and is on record for calling Tulsans 'dumb' for electing John Sullivan to Congress. In a city the Ambassador to the Holy See calls home, Keating is on record comparing the Catholic bureuacracy to 'the Mafia.'
He has vast experience in law, state government, unbeaten in state-wide elections, excellent contacts at the national level, Washington insider, solid right-winger that will spark outrage on the left and virulent hate from the far-left, distrusted by the far-right . . . he would kick Rudy's arse and make McCain look like crotchetty.
He is a good long ways from the Bushiites politically, and it would be interesting to hear him debate health-care policy with Senator Obama in the '08 general.
Go for it Frank! Worse case scenario is that it puts Oklahoma and Tulsa at the center of polical dialogue on the nationally.
Well, I would not vote for him but agree that it would be characteristic of him to think he has a chance. In fact, I would think he has an excellent chance or at least a good as chance as anyone, come to think of it. He is a straight-shooting, good-humoured, quick-thinking pragmatist that is missing from the race.
The Bushiites do not trust him or like him, and that is in Keating's favor. He is not the Arizona Keating, after all, and is on record for calling Tulsans 'dumb' for electing John Sullivan to Congress. In a city the Ambassador to the Holy See calls home, Keating is on record comparing the Catholic bureuacracy to 'the Mafia.'
He has vast experience in law, state government, unbeaten in state-wide elections, excellent contacts at the national level, Washington insider, solid right-winger that will spark outrage on the left and virulent hate from the far-left, distrusted by the far-right . . . he would kick Rudy's arse and make McCain look like crotchetty.
He is a good long ways from the Bushiites politically, and it would be interesting to hear him debate health-care policy with Senator Obama in the '08 general.
Go for it Frank! Worse case scenario is that it puts Oklahoma and Tulsa at the center of political dialogue on the nationally.
I have met Mr. Keating and he's very engaging in person. I don't always agree with his politics -- but then I don't always agree with *anyone's* politics. IMHO, he handled the OKC bombing with a hell of a lot more class and style than Bush handled 9/11. I think I'd be interested to hear what he has to say.
As for the Dems, it's too early for Barak and I sincerely doubt Hillary will make it through the primaries. Polls be damned, I think she's very unpopular in rural areas and among women, and the Democrats don't want to blow what looks to be a really good chance to reclaim the White House.
quote:
Originally posted by Artiem
I have met Mr. Keating and he's very engaging in person. I don't always agree with his politics -- but then I don't always agree with *anyone's* politics. IMHO, he handled the OKC bombing with a hell of a lot more class and style than Bush handled 9/11. I think I'd be interested to hear what he has to say.
As for the Dems, it's too early for Barak and I sincerely doubt Hillary will make it through the primaries. Polls be damned, I think she's very unpopular in rural areas and among women, and the Democrats don't want to blow what looks to be a really good chance to reclaim the White House.
Is Hillary unpopular among women? Seriously, I would've thought the opposite. Any particular reasons that stand-out?
Like I said, he has as good a chance as any other contender. I am sure that Clinton's detractors or critics scoffed at him when he first started making noise. In fact, he was a laughingstock after giving the nomination speech for Dukakis.
Why does the Guv of Iowa think he has a chance? This springs from the audacity of hope, and I hope Keating jumps in soon.
Keating is another hypocrite republijerk and they must do better....like, Collin Powell. And the dems? Well, Hillary might win out of the lack of repug contenders.
But I like Al Gore.
Have you seen "An Inconvenient Truth"?
Besides, the country deserves to see what Gore would provide in leadership after the election was stolen from him. Look what we got in return.
quote:
Keating is another hypocrite republijerk and they must do better....like, Collin Powell.
Really? Powell? I ask with all due respect, because he lost every shred of credibility with me when he kowtowed to the Bushies and went to the UN with "overwhelming evidence" of WMD that didn't exist, then despite his own reportedly deep reservations went ahead and committed to the war in Iraq. Even his early retirement didn't expunge his complicity, IMHO, and it's sad because I was a huge Powell fan up until that point.
quote:
Like I said, he has as good a chance as any other contender. I am sure that Clinton's detractors or critics scoffed at him when he first started making noise. In fact, he was a laughingstock after giving the nomination speech for Dukakis.
Jimmy Carter was also a Democrat Governor who came out of nowhere to take the race -- and without much previous experience.
quote:
Originally posted by Artiem
quote:
Like I said, he has as good a chance as any other contender. I am sure that Clinton's detractors or critics scoffed at him when he first started making noise. In fact, he was a laughingstock after giving the nomination speech for Dukakis.
Jimmy Carter was also a Democrat Governor who came out of nowhere to take the race -- and without much previous experience.
Carter hired the right team. Keating couldn't figure out who's on first more or less assemble any punch...
Will he run as the Bull Manure Party Candidate?
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/teddy_keating.jpg)
Calls Tulsa home? I believe he's spent more of his life living out of Tulsa than in it. So much so that he was labled a "carpet-bagger" when he entered his first race for governor.
Keating was ripe for a Bush II appointment, but they avoided him like the plague for reasons which were never made clear. Either there was some previous bad blood or he's got some skeletons in the closet.
It's easy for Keating to say that Tulsan's made a mistake in electing John Sullivan, has everyone forgotten that it was Keating's wife that Sullivan beat in the primary?
I heard on one of the talk programs yesterday that a Clinton/Obama ticket could be un-beatable due to voter appeal- regardless of the issues or their personal politics.
The GOP needs to round up someone with a lot more charisma if they want any chance of keeping the White House in 2008. Clinton had a hell of a lot more charisma than Bush I and that had an awful lot to do with him winning in '92.
Bush has perpetrated enough screw-ups on a global scale, that the GOP could have a hard time keeping the White House no matter who they pick for their candidate in '08.
quote:
Bush has perpetrated enough screw-ups on a global scale, that the GOP could have a hard time keeping the White House no matter who they pick for their candidate in '08.
Which might be a reason for them to offer Keating, a not-quite-viable candidate (read: sacrificial lamb) rather than taint someone who might stand a decent chance in 2012.
I was talking to my wife about this last night ... the national GOP has really backed itself into a corner for 2008.
Bush is such a disaster as president that no one in his right mind wants to be associated with him or his policies. But many evangelical Republican voters wince with the option of voting for a moderate like Giuliani or McCain.
So that leaves candidates trying to be even more right-wing than Bush, like Gingrich. Trouble is, independent voters -- the ones that decide national elections -- have had it up to here with right-wing extremists, mostly because of doings of Bush and the Republican Congress. There's no reason to see that attitude changing in 2008.
For the sake of the GOP's survival in the coming years, its voters had better hold their noses and choose a more moderate candidate.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Besides, the country deserves to see what Gore would provide in leadership after the election was stolen from him. Look what we got in return.
It's been 6 years. Please, someone explain to be how the election was "stolen" from Al Gore. As I remember it, there were several re-counts after the fact that had the same result: Bush had more votes in FL. I also remember that if Gore would have won his home state of TN, he would have been president.
President Petulant appears to have made a much better President than Al Gore could ever hope for.
Rent "An Inconvenient Truth".
With regard to "stolen", I seem to recall a character named Harris who failed in the last election and it was her manipulations of actual votes that had a bearing on the Florida outcome.
Mr. Gore decided to give in to spare the country. That was a mistake.
Based on extremely good information, Keating's plan to capture the nomination is bold, audacious, and will put him on par with the other candidates and in an excellent position for veep.
This goes well beyond 'kicking around.'
Let's see, the Keating legacy really helped the Barnett campaign for Treasurer, didn't it?
There are going to be a jillion things that mean a lot to Okie yellah dogs that will not bat an eyelid among Southern Conservatives.
[^]keating would suck as president he sucked in office here but them he has to be improvement over bush. My dog would be improvement over bush though>>>>
Keating bows out (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/BreakingNewsStory.asp?ID=070116_Br_abrkkeat%22), and I for one am glad that I will not have to choose between cheering for a Tulsan out one side of my mouth and against a Republican with the other.
People still vote Republican?
[}:)]
By the way, everyone knows this is Barack Obama's election to lose, get with the program, folks.
I think he is making a mistake if he thinks by bowing out he advances on the 'short list' for VP. By bowing out he cedes the point that he does not have or able to gain broad support enough to place himself in the upper tier of POTUS candidates.
He obviously is too old-school in his approach to launch a Dean-like insurgency with the support of netroot conservatives. This is a real vote against the power of the grassroots' core beliefs, a vote for domination of the GOP by big money, an abdication of leadership disqualifying him for any further elected office.
Keating for dog-catcher.
quote:
Originally posted by ttownclown
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Besides, the country deserves to see what Gore would provide in leadership after the election was stolen from him. Look what we got in return.
It's been 6 years. Please, someone explain to be how the election was "stolen" from Al Gore. As I remember it, there were several re-counts after the fact that had the same result: Bush had more votes in FL. I also remember that if Gore would have won his home state of TN, he would have been president.
Are you being serious?