Santorum, Dobbs in ’12? Good grief
(I noticed this accidentally never got posted, but I’m throwing it up since it gives some background on my thoughts about a potential Dobbs run in 2012)
I’ve been spending the last few days thinking and writing a great deal about the future of the right and the GOP. Naturally, a great deal of this has crossed paths with speculation about who will emerge in 2012. Expect more of that: I find political parties, their formation, and the constant battles for control utterly fascinating. Even though I can’t do nearly as thorough a job as GOP 12 or Race for 2012, I’ll continuing writing about it as long as it piques my interest.
And of course with another day in the race for the White House (what? You really thought it ended last year? You cad, you) comes new faces. Sometimes alarming, sometimes bizarre. I think today’s conversation is a bit of both. First, there’s word that recently departed CNN anchorman and champion of anti-illegal immigration activist Lou Dobbs is perhaps mulling a run:
During an interview on WTOP radio in Washington, Dobbs fueled rumors he’s seeking a bid for public office, possibly the highest office in the land, when asked if speculation about an Oval Office bid is “crazy talk.”
“What’s so crazy about that?” Dobbs, 64, replied. “Golly!”
So, is it crazy talk or is it real, the radio station persisted.
“Well, I’ll tell you this much — it’s one of the discussions that we’re having,” he said. “For the first time, I’m actually listening to some people about politics.”
“I don’t think I’ve got the nature for it,” he added. “[But] we’ve got to do something in this country and I think that being in the public arena means you’ve got to be part of the solution.”
If Dobbs gets into this thing, I think he almost automatically starts as an indy. I think he just couldn’t pass the litmus test on abortion and LGBT issues and wouldn’t readily get corporate backing by any stretch of the imagination, since he both balks at immigration. The New Yorker had a great piece on him a few years back that examines his curious political positioning (which I would label as much more populist than Palin or even Huckabee) Crazy as it seems, though, I think there’s very real room for him in this race. If Democrats continue to overreach, Republicans twiddle their thumbs over what to do about the Tea Party momentum and illegal immigration becomes a hot button issue again (it polls very high in many regions, but enthusiasm ebbs and flows), Dobbs has a custom made base. He’s spoken highly of the movement and has his own degree of popularity (although he isn’t as “respected” a voice as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, his newly free status as another mic jockey and writer). His story of transforming from a Wall Street puppet to a populist firebrand would appeal to alot of disenfranchised voters. He’s Perot-esque without the Perot insanity. Given the overall climate and that both parties seem to be reaching their nadir, the time for candidate like Dobbs may very well be nigh. If someone like Lindsay Graham emerges as the establishment pick for 2012–well, he may very damn well have a shot. Whatever happens, the very fact that Dobbs is being brandied about indicates that even the huge field already emerging for 2012 doesn’t have “someone for everyone.”
Perhaps more shocking: the fact the Rick Santorum is starting to make moves towards a possible bid. From Hotline:
Santorum, who has already visited IA, will stop in Spartanburg, Greenville and Hilton Head to campaign for Rep. Gresham Barrett (R), who is locked in a tough GOP primary for GOV.
Santorum said he is “looking forward to visiting with South Carolina families to discuss the issues that matter to them and the future of this country. Too much is at stake to sit back and not participate in the critical discussion of how to address these issues,” according to a statement he released.
Santorum has been openly toying with a presidential run in ’12. He acknowledged that a trip to IA in late September was designed to gin up interest in his own political future.
“When you give a speech in either Iowa or New Hampshire, as a Republican or a Democrat, people pay attention,” Santorum said on a conference call the day before his trip. “This is an opportunity to speak and lend my voice to what I hope to be a conservative movement and a Republican movement to change the direction Barack Obama wants to take us.”
Lemme put this to bed right now: I CANNOT back Santorum for President. The man was thoroughly whomped in 2006, and he’s just a strange cat to begin with. Recall that his family took home a stillborn child and introduced it to the rest of its family. I’m sure that this scene repeats itself across our nation on a regular basis–indeed, it actually has some historical basis, given that photos of dead infants were once a very common mourning device. However, Santorum openly wrote about it in the book that many considered the starting point for his 2008 run that never came to pass. This would indicate that Santorum believes that this anectdote (probably best left to family) somehow underscores his conservative credentials without taking into consideration his already stellar legislative record on these issues. This gives him that special hint of nuttiness that has doomed many a candidate. Additionally, the aforementioned campaign tome laid out a view of conservatism that gave bold powers to government to protect the family, which Santorum argued was central to political life. Santorum made little mention of the sort of fiscal and economic policies that have become central to our current political discourse. Santorum would certainly have his fans amongst the sort of conservative Catholics that have come to populate party nominating contests of late, but I believe that a Huckabee run leaves little room for Santorum to mobilize the hard right base towards a win, particularly given the fact that Huckabee appears to be determined to set himself up as Obama’s critic-in-chief on all issues, not just social issues.
On the Western Banks of the Shenandoah 
Dobbs’ book, Independents’ Day was a very interesting collection of Lou’s political leanings. Lou Dobbs would make credible candidate, although I doubt he would win the Republican Party nomination, since the Republicans approve of torture and jailing our citizens without trial, while Mr. Dobbs is steadfastly against such fascists policies.
We might see some of the formerly prominent Republicans, who have left the GOP join forces with the Constitution Party and try to bury the corrupt, xenophobic Republicans, once and for all.
We definitely do not need another “third party.” What the people are crying-out for is a replacement party that will take the place of the Republicans and that will be dedicated to ENHANCING our liberty.
J. listen no American citizens were tourtured or jailed, get it through you thick liberal skull, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not an American, Ramzi Binalshibh is not an American, Abu Zubaydah is not an American. Again they are not American and they were not tortured, they had water poured on their damn face, so I guess when you take a shower it torture, no Americans were jailed lay off the loony tunes and stop reading prison planet, idiot.
Mr. Watson, if you were just a little misinformed, that would not be too bothersome, but you are so egregiously in denial, it is astounding.
Did you not read anything over the past year regarding renditions carried out, or how about the political persecutions and phony trial s held here in the States?
Look up the Matt Hale trial, where none other than Michaeal Chertoff placed an informant in Hale’s group, who then baited Hale into a conversation about how the informant (not Hale) vowed to kill a federal judge.
The tape of the conversation was used in a show trial, and supposedly because Hale did not stop the informant with stronger language, other than words to the effect that Hale would have nothing to do with such an act, Mr. Hale was sent to prison for twenty years.
Matt Hale is a political prisoner, not a criminal.
The Bush regime directed its Department of Justice to create a state enemies list. This action was documented by a DOJ audit 9-25 of May 2009. While initially the Bushies listed 62,000 citizens as enemies, that list grew to larger than 1.2 MILLION citizens names by the end of the Bush regime. The Audit report disclosed that over 120,000 names were on the list without any cause, or lacked documentation as to why the name landed on the list. Just being on the list means that the person and their family received increased surveillance, warrantless wire taps and in many cases, active countermeasures designed to inflict economic, psychological, or even physical harm to our citizens.
I am not writing about foreign terrorism operatives, these are US citizens; real people with real families that our government agents attacked, because they were told to do so by the Bush administration.
Mr. Watson, you and I have met. I expect you to keep a civil manner in correspondence in the future. You, no doubt, were not aware of all of the facts regarding this matter.
The key lessons learned for Americans is that when we feel threatened by some act of war or terrorism, we must never suspend our Constitution, or allow the power of government to be turned against our citizens. We must remain a nation of laws, in spite of sensationalist propaganda poured forth on the idiot box (TV).
It should be noted that even though the Obama Administration published the DOJ audit, the enemies list has not been purged, nor have the names been made public. We must act to ensure that citizens whose names were added to that list are provided with the opportunity for reclama and to have the list purged of the innocent, or those who are merely political dissidents who were seen as threats by the Bush regime.
Excuse Mr. Ballance, where have we met?