Hog Heaven is not necessarily a good place to be. Pork chops, bacon, anyone? Odd that Huntsman noticed the brakes worked well. Tea Partiers will put the brakes on Huntsman and he ain't going nowhere.

You think Huntsman is in trouble for his connections to Obama?

By election time in 2012, Red State Democrat US Senators up for re-election , will be riding Harleys out of town to distance themselves from the failed President...

I passed this by earlier, but it's worth a stop. The Harley "hog," manufactured in my home state, used to be the blue-collar working man's iconic dream, right up there with a fishing boat.

Too often, nowadays, the Harley is out of the working man's reach and, instead, has become the new macho emblem of success and wealth.

Thus, it is both ironic and symbolic that Huntsman would choose this particular way to show who he is.

Would that not be a spectacular move? Give the GOP/TP a taste of their own medicine.

Sweet dreams are made of these... who am I to disbelieve?

That would have been AWESOME!

Bryan,

When I first caught a glimpse of this headline, I wondered if John was auditioning for a lead role in the re-make of 'Deliverance'... ;o)

PS: Bll just passed the Senate! ;o(

Have heard 2 former US Circuit Appeals Judges says it would take only a couple of hours to get a with stranding order to put the 14th Amendment idea on hold. Nowhere in the 14th amendment does it give the President the right to override the congresses constitutional authority to appropriate funds. So by claim this amendment the President cannot grab authority solely given to the congress. It does give him the authority to pick and choose what he does pay. Why didn't Obama try this? His own justice dept told him it wouldn't fly. It would, however, make him look like he was trying to do an end run around the Constitution.

When I saw this headline before the photo, I thought maybe Huntsman decided to come to Iowa afterall.

Nothing wrong with candidates having a hobby, what bugs me is when they try to use that hobby as a tool to convince voters they are really "one of them". Anyone ever see Scott Brown load his pickup truck with something?

The progressives are dreaming about what could have been and singing lyrics from classic rock. I say keep them dreaming and singing.

Amy,

You are having a bad day, again. There is no helmet law in New Hampshire. But you Libs would like to force him to wear one anyway, now, wouldn't you.

You just may be the most uninformed person on this site and that is saying an awful lot.

Keep trying though sweetheart, study a little. Do just a little research before you post and it can get better.

Google is an amazing tool. Like my 8 year old says "Google knows everything!"

Notice that the local council candidate that Huntsman is courting doesn't say anything about Huntsman's proposed economic or foreign policies--his biggest issue is that Huntsman represented his country as an Ambassador to China. This because it was during the Obama administration. That depth of analysis is so important to the Republican party.

White Collar---just because it is legal doesn't mean it is a good idea to ride a motorcycle without a helmet.

White collar -- Amy never said anything about the "legality" of Huntsman being helmetless...only the stupidity of it.

White Collar Auto:

There is no helmet law in New Hampshire. But you Libs would like to force him to wear one anyway, now, wouldn't you.

Nope. As long as not wearing one automatically disqualified him from recovering insurance benefits if he suffers a head injury.

Why on earth should I pay for that?

What did you people think the American people were saying when we had the largest landslide mid term in 100 years last fall. Do you think they were sending these new elected representative to Washington to just "go along" with what the Democrats have been doing? It just amazes me that the left think these new congressmen should give Obama a blank check to spend as he has. If you think this is the end of the spending cut battle as Obama does, this is just the beginning. Now his idea of getting the economy going again is more stimulus spending. Haven't we done that already. No, over regulation is not the problem. We just need more "shovel ready" jobs spending.

AM, you should pay for it because its consistent with your belief system right? because you want the rest of America to pay for any behaviorial choices made right? Even if bad ones? You should be consistent in your beliefs? Isnt that the whole basic belief system of you progressives? Instead of personal responsibility and accountability for your own actions, you want your definition of wealthy to pay for everyone else right regardless of the choices made right? Its like no fault divorce, just level the playing field and eliminate all inequities through the government. So far its worked really well in the progressive states like Cal, Illinois, NY and NJ hasnt it?

Anna Molly -

What Kirk said.

Oh they won't lower America's credit rating. Everyone pays thier Visa with thier Mastercard don't they? We just need more things to buy with the Visa once that credit line gets freed up. (we'll call it Stimulus 5.0)..... :)~

Hey White Collar Auto

I am well aware that New Hampshire doesn't require motorcycle riders to wear helmets.

It's in keeping with their "Live Free or Die" bravado. I say, "Drive without a Helmet, End up a Vegetable."

Kirk:

AM, you should pay for it because its consistent with your belief system right? because you want the rest of America to pay for any behaviorial choices made right? Even if bad ones?

No, it's consistent with YOUR belief system, apparently, if the the injured person is well enough off to have a Harley and reckless enough to ride without a helmet.

I'm more about personal responsibility than you think, and I practice it in my own life every day. But I also seem to have a lot more compassion than you do for others who are not as fortunate as I have been. John Huntsman doesn't qualify for that. Your so-called compassion comes off, based on what YOU say yourself, as being more for show than for substance.

But thank you, Kirk. This only goes to show that you have no understanding whatsoever of my belief system. You might be surprised if you ever took the time to look past your own stereotyped assumptions. And not just about me.

Which is what got us here in the first place.

@ White Collar ~ What I said to Kirk.

AM, until you constantly attack me, I have never made assumptions about your compassion etc. Its you that is making judgements about mine. In fact, what I have been trying to say to you is exactly what you said to me which is "you might be surprised if you ever took the time to look past your stereotyped assumptions". You have stereotyped me as some wealthy noncompassionate conservative who doesnt get it only because I challenge your belief system without having a clue of who I am because I have the gall to challenge you. Its the typical approach by progressives when they get challenged and you use it too to personally attack my senstivity or charitable intent or lack thereof whenever the facts dont fit your convenient politically correct ideals. This spending debate is not about being compassionate for those less fortunate as you or I have been but thats where you want to take it because its an easy attack on us fiscal conservatives.

Your comment that you dont want to have to pay for his health care if he doesnt wear a helmet is consistent with my belief system. I do believe that people should be held accountable for their behavior so for you to say it wasnt consistent with yours. For example, I am sure you believe that abortion services (I am pro choice so dont make this example about pro choice vs pro life) for all women (regardless of income level) should be mandated and paid for by health insurance or I bet you think contraceptives should be mandated and covered by insurance. I totally disagree. These are behaviorial choices that increase the cost of insurance and then get paid by everyone else. Why should I cover the cost of contraceptives for you or any wealthy suburban mom just because progressives think it should be. However, I have no problem with social services providing contraceptives for low income as its been proven that providing contraceptives actually saves money for low income because of lower unwanted pregnancies and the social problems that causes, STDs etc. So I have no issue with that and its these nuances and middle ground that you progressives dont want to discuss. You would prefer to personally attack me when I voice an opinion that we have to get spending under control and that part of the discussion has to be about the personal choices, behaviorial decisions and causes, education gap causes, professional choice causes of how we got to where we are today. You run like the wind when you have to actually have a politically incorrect conversation.

By the way if you practice personal responsibility everyday, why dont you expect it out of your fellow man? Is it so patronizing that you feel that others cant quite live up to your abilities?

Yes, it is ridiculous, eric #s, but remember, it is a republican asking the question. In today's modern GOP, policies are secondary to dogma of social and cultural issues and being anti-democrat tops the list. What a sad thing. Jon Huntsman is the best GOP candidate in the group but he does not have a chance.

Oh quit blaming the Republicans or the Tea Party for your social or cultral lot in life. They are trying to save those entitlement programs for people who really need them. Try convincing people they can help themselves instead of brain washing them in to beleiving it's some one elses fault they are poor or stupid......