Herman Cain and Pawlenty are both sell-outs too complicated due to tea they they drank effecting their questionable decisions . Pawlenty changes his mind every time the wind blows about running. Herman Cain does not understand Planned Parenthood ; neither does Pawlenty . Herman Cain the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO is a fringe candidate, and Pawlenty both believe in less governing, and are too socially conservative in my opinion.

I saw Herman Cain tell Fox Noise he didn't understand Washington?

So my question is how can he lead?

Pawlenty has hired some of Bush 43 "handlers". But even GOP operatives cannot help someone who is as charismatic as a fence post.

VERY VERY much hope he decides to run!!! Read his book! He will make a GREAT leader!!! He was a GREAT Gov. for the State of Minnesota!! He know right from wrong and totally believes government needs a HUGE overhaul! We had our change and it is killing us! Need someone that is a REAL person!!!

Heicke

finaly a pug is willing to step up and take his lumps

Come on people, let us not forget that great Republican, that's right Republican, candidate out of New York running under the "rent is 2 damn high banner" James (Jimmy) McMillan. He was a Democrat but decided to run as a Republican to oppose the President. Could someone come up with any better fodder if it were made up?

Been there, done that. Will take the real person in charge right now.

He was a terrible governor for the State of Minnesota. Nice enough appearing but mostly ruled by veto and left a devastating deficit in his wake, in large part by kicking the budget can down the road with goofy short term measures.

Pawlenty would put an insomniac to sleep!! Please!! He won't win; everyone will fall asleep the second he starts speaking!!

Pawlenty to announce exploratory committee today via Facebook.

Yawn, who cares

I'm with Don, he was a terrible gov. If the party of NO is looking for a leader, he could be the one. If America is looking for a leader, look elsewhere.

I love it when you speak French!

I agree Pawlenty is a wimp, he would never make a good President.

Yep I think Sarah has bigger nads then T Paw

I feel the opposite Zafari, a firebrand with soaring, angry rhetoric will only excite the base. The rest of us are sick and tired of the soaring angry rhetoric and that is precisely the kind of campaign that will not unseat Obama.

Oh no no no, that would never work

Why? because we'd have balanced budgets, fair tax rates, good infrastructure, good employment, less pollution, less reliance on foreign oil and leaders who care about people over profits?

Obama's budget isn't even close to balanced, fair tax rates now that's a good one, by fair you mean stick it the rich, good infrastructure - roads and bridges are falling down all over the country, good employment 9.0% is probably good in a Liberals eyes, less reliance on foreign oil, you mean more reliance because you would not allow drilling here and leaders who care more about people than profits, how can you tax evil companys and soak the rich if they don't make anything. Either your the number 1 uber liberal or I'm not catching your sarcasm.

Oddly enough, until the last couple of years he was a pretty moderate Republican, which is what Minnesotans voted him in on. I think his far right turn has only happened because he knows that's how you win the republican primary for president. I agree with you that he won't even win Minnesota if he runs.

You've got that right! His policies have our state facing a multi-billion dollar budget, schools without funding, and bridges that collapse.

Really chewi bridges? What other bridges besides the 35W collapsed in Minnesota? Part of the reason and a primary reason why the state faces a multi-billion dollar budget deficit is because of budget forecasts, those forecasts are not exactly accurate along with economic meltdown in 2008 that was not pawlenty's fault which resulted in less tax revenue coming. Up until pawlenty became governor Minnesota budget was growing at a rate of 10-11% per year. Basically it was doubling every decade, that is unsustainable and Minnesota's population wasn't doubling every decade meaning you either raised taxes every year or you made cuts. Under pawlenty Minnesota's state budget grew less than 1% each year.

great the budget grew less than 1% every year while schools go unfunded and infrastructure further crumbles. But oh wait teachers and public workers are the cause of all this in the first place. give me a break

Schools were not going unfunded until the economic downturn. Infrastructure was crumbling even when the budget was growing 10%, the point being is that a lot of the infrastructure is not state, some of it is federal, some of it is,county and then some of it is city controlled infrastructure so blaming the state for infrastructure that they are not in charge of does not get you anywhere. If you actually followed the politics in Minnesota Pawlenty was in favor of adding tolls to roads to help pay for their upkeep.

In the end Pawlenty keeping the budget to less than 1% growth rate is a heck of a lot better than an unsustainable 10-11% in which you would be forced to raise taxes every single year.

Rudy-

Trickle down did eventually trickle down, but then it more resembled urine than jobs

Donald Trump - twice bankrupt businessman, real estate mogul, on 3rd wife, Protestant

Rudy Guilliani - ? Will he make a run?

John McCain- ?

Jeb Bush - ?

Rudy: Rick Santorum - Who?

You really should look up santorum on Google.

OK - Here's Santorum:
- In 2005, four teenagers were ejected from a bookstore in Wilmington, Delaware, where Santorum was scheduled for a book signing, after they were overheard expressing critical opinions of the senator.^[70] The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit, which was settled in 2007. As a result of the settlement, the Delaware State Police were required to pay legal fees for the plaintiffs and provide training to officers on free speech rights. The Santorum staff members who requested the ejection were required to apologize and to relinquish their salaries for the event—$2,500.00—to plaintiffs in damages.
- As a key member of the Gang of Seven (a group of seven freshmen Republican Congressmen), Santorum helped expose a scandal at the House Bank. The Gang of Seven's reform-minded agenda is often cited as a foundation of the 1994 Republican takeover of the House of Representatives.
- Though not a named author of the special Schiavo legislation, Santorum played a key role in shepherding the bill through the Senate to a vote on March 20, 2005. Santorum has frequently stated that he does not believe a "right to privacy" exists under the Constitution, even within marriage.
- Santorum is also a supporter of partial privatization of Social Security.
- n 2005, Santorum sponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which appropriated $10 million aimed at regime change in Iran. The Act passed with overwhelming support. However, Santorum nevertheless voted against the Lautenberg amendment which would have closed the loophole which allows companies like Halliburton to do business with Iran through their foreign affiliates.
- On May 22, 2006, the polling firm Rasmussen Reports declared that Santorum was the "most vulnerable incumbent" among the Senators running for re-election.
- Santorum on August 28 gave a speech to Pennsylvania media at the Pennsylvania Press Club luncheon in Harrisburg (which he earlier gave to the National Club) claiming that terrorist attacks on America by "radical Islamists" were part of a more than three-century-old plot to restore Shia clerics to power and bring "the 12th Imam" out of hiding.

this country is in a finacial mess and we need someone with experience with money and busines

Nothing says experience like bankrupting not ONE but TWO companies does it...?

Whereas Obama is bankrupting only one country...got it.

No the other guy did that... obama is still cleaning up his mess.

Bob, stop drinking the Kool Aid!! Try something other than Fox News for a change. Obama didn't bankrupt the country. The mess was created the 8 years before him. Bush came into office with a budget SURPLUS. He left office eight years later and Obama came into office with the biggest budget DEFICIT the US has ever known, a stock market collapse that came near to matching that of the 1920s, an energy crisis that was pretty much ignored for decades, two foreign wars costing TRILLIONS of dollars and many states on the verge of bankruptcy. Obama was dealt a harsh hand to work with. It is not going to get fixed in four years. It is going to take MANY years to fix what that idiot Bush and his administration did to our country.

Are you kidding me? On what planet have YOU spent the past 15 years?

That planet must circle the star Alpha Deficiti or Beta Bankruptus.

a twice bankrupted business man with multiple wives and a reality tv show that would make a mockery of the presidencty jim are you kidding me?!!

lawful1:

Huh? Did you just begin following politics??

Candidates may opt to form exploratory committees for two main reasons. (They don't have to, and not all of them do.)

The reason for my comment is this: "The first is that it's a legal halfway house between running and not. You can start up campaign bookkeeping without having to disclose where your money is coming from – although you are still subject to federal donation limits.

The second and perhaps more important reason is that it gets you attention. It's a decision point the press will chew over for weeks. First, you – already knowing full well what your poll numbers are – hint that you might form an exploratory committee. Story! Then you say you're close to a decision. Another story! Finally, you announce the actual formation. Story No. 3!"

I was just thinking that in so doing it would appear that he is spending money without it being crucial to the campaign. And, no, I did not just start following politics.

Do you really have to form a committee to study whether or not you should run for office?

Only if you want to start living on campaign contributions.

This seems to be the republicans' favorite form of welfare these days. Take it directly out of the pockets of the ignorant and give it to me.

Sounds like you gave already since you are obviously ignorant

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't a Demoncrat President been doing all the killing in the last 2 years. I think you are already on another planet called Moron and it is colonized by tiny brain liberals

Soupy55,

Short term memory loss is a disease. Obama inherited these 2 wars. He is doing the right thing by the soldiers who have fought and died due to the previous administration's decisions. You cant't just come into office one day, and pull the troops the next. That creates a vacuum of instability and is a message to the soldiers that they fought/died for nothing. They have to be phased out slowly, and you have to ensure the country can survivie on their own. To allow the country to fall to waste by leaving too early is a slap in the face to all the soldiers who were over there, because it says they fought and died for nothing. Faux news won't tell you that part though. Go ask a soldier who has been there.

Short term memory is a liberal disease. Odumbo said he would have us out of Iraq by August 2010. There are still 50,000 Americans with bulls eyes on their backs there. He had to be dragged kicking and screaming into a surge in Afghanistan. Jury is still out there. Glen Beck is a Fool said that "all Republicans want to do is destroy and kill people on this planet". My point is simply all the killing on the planet has been done by the current occupant of the White House. You say Obamaniation is doing right by the soldiers who fought and died based on the previous administration decisions. What about this fools decisions and the soldiers that are dying on his watch? Is that the previous administrations fault as well? What do we tell the family of the first Combat Pilot we lose in Libya, a place we shouldn't be killing more people? Do you think innocents will not be killed by our rockets or machine gun fire? You libs can't have it both ways. Like it or not, Obama is the killing machine now.

soupy55: While I appreciate your wanting to have an opinion, I do wish you would stop insulting the President of the United States of America. You may not like the man, but please respect the office. You lose your argument with the eigth word written.

We are free to criticize and insult our elected officials as we please. Look at the comments about Bush Palin and any other Republicans on this thread. It may not be nice or even politically correct, but it is my right. I do respect the Office of the President and I think he has denigrated it by appearing on TV shows like Jon Stewart and with the hags (not Elisabeth) on the View and bowing down to foreign leaders. It is Odumbo that has no respect for the Office of the President.

I understand, soupy55, all I am saying is that you lose your audience with the name calling. If your whole point is that you don't like the President, ok, I get that. However, if you are trying to make a point about what he has or has not done in, then the name calling just reduces your ability to make a salient point.

I'm not saying you don't have the right to say something. I'm just asking for curtesy. I have found out (the hard way) that the only way to avoid being collapsed is to be courteous and to make an argument without denigrating to name calling.

Yeah, to make a good leader and be electable, you have to vote present while holding office so no one really has any decisions you've made to hold you to, be able to speak articulate and read a teleprompter well, hang out with corrupt people and have no governing experience and no idea how to balance a budget or create a job. If Obama got elected on experience it proves you need none. About anyone would be better than Obama.

Perhaps the democrats then GK should of realized that they should have reduced funding for welfare programs and instead take that money and put it towards bridge maintenance programs? Seeing as they were the majority in the legislature at the time and everyone knows that it is legislature that makes the decisions not the executive branch, i.e. governors/presidents.

Well said!

mom, If we're not careful, we could have a Christian theocracy. The GOP has become a refuge for religious zealots, sociopaths and anti-government cranks. I wish the GOP would purge their once great party of this rabble and try to broaden their appeal with the normal folks.

You won't vote for a Republican? I'll vote for anyone who I think has what it takes to run this country. Very shallow statement from you mom.

I don't think it was a shallow statement. When has the Republicans done anything for this country...?

Also, the right wing republicans are on a "God thing" that will destroy our freedom of religion. Remember the Mayflower, anyone? They left because of the religious zealots of England. Too bad the only place to go to practice our own beliefs would be outer space. And eventually they would follow and, on and on.

God did not create the mess of the Christians ideas, man did. God did not say babies is what he wanted. Adam and Eve did. They could have lived forever without one single child, until they decided to do otherwise.

Slightly old I would say the civil rights act of 1964, more republicans supported it than democrats did.

Yes, your right Jeffreey. But, after that time the Republicans have repeatedly tried to take away the rights of many. But, yes, you are right on the civil rights act.

I would argue freeing the slaves and then support black people but also all other minority rights in that act more important than gay marriage and abortion rights, in fact it is probably besides the bill or rights to be the most important thing any political party has ever done in this nation for the nation. But that is just me. Maybe to you slightly old they are on equal footing but to me they are not. If you honestly believe the republican party hasn't done anything for this nation then you are a fool. To be honest though I don't think you are fool, I think you are a person who is just trying to get a cheap political shot in.

"I am not a big fan of Obama but I will never vote for a republican. I do not want to be pushed into poverty and forced to live in a christian theocracy!"

Amen to that, and pass the biscuits, please!

I think you will find that many of the Southern Democrats of the 60's (who opposed the civil rights act) eventually morphed into the so called "Dixiecrats" who supported President Reagan's first run and eventually became the so-called moral majority of his second run. Since then, they moved from being Dino's to full-fledged Republicans and TP's.

They were still Democrat politicians Duh101. That is like saying a Republican that votes with Democrats isn't a Republican. The support base might have shifted to a different political party over the decades after that civil rights act but that is irrelevant.

A Republican who votes with Democrats isn't a Republican for very long. Ask Spector.

For a minute there, I thought your post was about Obama.

Sounds just like Obama! He'll fit right in!

Votin' plenty of times for Pawlenty!!

Your absolutly correct Rick I know he could not even carry Minnesota with the mess he left here.

Minnesota, who cares, Humphry, Mondale, Ventura, Franken says it all. I think we should give Minnesota to Canada, what do you think, eh

I think some how you pasted gas in your own ear it comes out your mouth.

Boy, you women in Minnesota are just to quick for me. Great come back. Hahahahahahahaha