Authenticity or bust?

wrinkled weasel

Whilst I can understand that the leader of the free world might want a bust of one of the greatest men of the twentieth century, my choice of bust for the Oval Office, should I gain the Presidency, would be someone scary enough to remind me of the horrors of the world. Right at the moment, I cannot decide between Hitler, Ronald McDonald or Walt Disney.

Right On

Criticising Romney for a very clever answer to a question that the other candidates answered with, amongst other things beds, music, a Harley Davidson and a sense of humour is pretty weak.

Good night for Romney. Perry took a hammering from Bachamann and Santorum - he'll need to up his game in subsequent debates.

Augustus

"When the story broke, the Obama machine insisted that the bust's removal was part of a routine changeover between presidents."

"There is nothing wrong with change, if it is in the right direction."

TomTom

The British are pathetic....a bust of Churchill, half-American is hardly de rigeur like some memento mori on Cardinal Richelieu's desk.

Can Britain stop acting like Ruritania ?

disgruntled

Is this what passes for "political analysis" now? Irrelevant quips relayed via cliche ("never in human history etc"... please try and tell me something vaguely prescient/insightful about the debate... what issues were debated, where did the candidates come down, how did it play to the audience? Where does the contest go from here... You know, the kind of thing grown-ups might be interested in... as opposed to this drivel.

Vulture

Although the removal of Churchill's bust may seem like a little thing of no consequence, in fact it is tellingly indicative of Obama's hatred for Britain.

Another 'little thing' was his gift to mark the visit of Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the US's most slavish ally: a bunch of DVDs hastily purchased by an aide from Walmart.

Obama hates Britain because he blames us for the alleged torture of his drunken, polygamous absentee dad during the Mau-Mau emergency. (There is no evidence that this happened. Obama senior was a Luo whereas Mau-Mau were exclusively Kikuyu).

It all goes to show how un-American and how contemptuous of the West this weirdest of Presidents really is. Roll on the return of a Republican -any Republican, even Romney - to the White House.

Simon

"Only in America..."

Considering you sound like a Guardian writer I will ask isn't that a form of racism?

Magnolia

I go to Chartwell when I can.
There are always american and japanese tourists there.

denis cooper

"The British are pathetic" seems a rather sweeping response to this article, TomTom.

My own reaction was more mundane: "Who's Freddy Gray?"

denis cooper

Magnolia -

And if you went to Runnymede. you'd find that the monument to Magna Carta - the ONLY monument, as far as I know - was placed there and paid for by American lawyers.

http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-vh/w-visits/w-findaplace/w-runnymede/w-runnymede-history/w-runnymede-memorials.htm

"1957: Magna Carta Memorial

Standing at the foot of the Cooper's Hill Slopes is a memorial to the Magna Carta in the form of a domed classical temple containing a pillar of English granite on which is inscribed: 'To commemorate Magna Carta, symbol of Freedom Under Law.' This was built by the American Bar Association on land leased by the Magna Carta Trust. It was paid for by voluntary contributions of some 9,000 American lawyers. The memorial was designed by Sir Edward Maufe R.A. and unveiled on 18 July 1957 at a ceremony attended by American and English lawyers."

I wonder if this "Freddy Gray" knows that, or he or she even knows or cares anything about Magna Carta?

We don't know, because we know nothing at all about him ot her except that he or she has been invited to write this poor article to help keep the Spectator Coffee House blog rolling.

Hexhamgeezer

Does Gray get paid for this stuff?

At least my incoherent witterings are for free.

Andy Carpark

Pisspoor. Makes even Korski look like a laser of intellectual penetration.

Rhoda Klapp

How about if we restarted the Americano blog and asked Conservative Cabbie to write it? Then we wouldn't just get rehashed stuff from the NYT and Sullivan and Frum but a more rounded view. The whole election thing might assume some importance next year, you know.

macduff7777

Contrived or not, I agree with a Romney. I thought it was a disgrace when the bust was 'sent back' Did Obama not have any other place to put the MLK bust? It was only because he seemed to have fairy dust around him that criticism was muted. Now he is a busted flush I hope he regrets, that as far as this ex-Obama supporter, his disgraceful treatment on history and diplomacy.

disenfranchised

@simon.....

"isn't that a form of racism?"
frankly, your question sounds pure guardianista, baby.....

ConservativeCabbie

Right On said

Good night for Romney. Perry took a hammering from Bachamann and Santorum - he'll need to up his game in subsequent debates."

Ahh, some substance. Nicely played. Actually I disagree with you about Romney, I thought he was pretty weak - I really learnt nothing about what type of America would follow eight years of a Romney Presidency. I do agree with you on Perry. I wanted to like him but I think he's pretty weak. It's a fact that Texas governers don't have a great deal of power - his weak performances so far tell me that Texas's success is down to those "four aces" Romney talked about rather than anything Perry did. Not necessarily a bad thing - getting out of the way can be a powerful form of governance, but even so, I'm not really buying into Perry at the moment.

Best performance of the night for me was easily Newt Gingrich. Not a particularly nice person with the occasional funny idea, but he was comfortably the smartest person out there. I also like Cain but am yet to be convinced, Santorum is smug, Bachmann is starting to sound like a one trick pony (although I agree with the trick) and Huntsman - Jeez!

Freddy

Exactly ... who does this 'Freddy Gray' -- if that's his real name -- think he is?

Verity

Vulture's post of 1:10 p.m. sums it up. Obama is indeed the weirdest of American presidents. And the nastiest.

When President Bush was sitting in the family quarters of the White House one evening, he thought of something he had forgotten to bring with him from the Oval Office and went back for it. Donning his jacket first. He would not demean the primacy of the Oval Office by entering it in his shirt sleeves.

Obama doesn't just enter the Oval Office to pick something up, but lolls around in it in his shirt and tie all day. He looks as crappy and crude in his shirt and tie in an important office of state as David Shamoron does. They're both pretetious nobodies.

They will both be dropped by the electorates with a dull thud at the first opportunity.

Verity

Dennis Cooper - I didn't know that. Thank you.

Andy Carpark 1:31 - First laugh of the day. Thanks!

Rhoda K -Inspired! I vote YES.

lescam

It always seemed to me to be a deliberate insult to the British, sending back Churchill's bust. He could have quietly had it moved somewhere else, but no, he had to shove it back in our faces as if saying "take your Churchillian bust and sod off". It is not a little thing at all, it is a nasty, in-your-face insult to one of the US's most loyal allies, and I just hope Obama gets it in the neck in 2012.

And as for the pathetic DVD's chucked at Brown, although I despise Brown as much as anyone, even he didn't deserve to be treated like that.

I would like Rick Perry to win next time, but anyone would be better than Obama.

Right On

@ ConservativeCabbie

Interesting take on Romney - my view is that he does very well in a debate setting, and has played to his strengths in all of the debates so far.

For him to win people need to be prepared to accept that he's very much a pragmatist - he'll be a capable executive and bring competence to the job. They also need to ignore that as a pragmatist he'll take decisions that seem right at the time (Romneycare being a clear example).

This effectively makes Romney's biggest weakness what is true of every candidate - nobody really knows what they'll be like in office, with him it's the front and centre issue as he's clearly shown he's not an idealogue.

Perry is similar, in that he's actually governed as a pragmatist - an arguement he should have used last night whilst he was under attack i.e. he's had to make real decisions while Santorum and Bachmann have talked about in Congress.

I agree Gingrich had by far his best performance, Huntsman was poor, but in truth the rest are also rans.

The race could well come down to whether Santorum and Bachmann can chip away enough support from Perry in Iowa to either hand Romney a win there or at least prevent a Perry victory.

ConservativeCabbie

"How about if we restarted the Americano blog and asked Conservative Cabbie to write it?"

I don't come cheap you know!!

Actually I would like to see it as a group effort where any of us regular contributors can make a contribution (right, centrist or left) - a bit like the members section at Ricochet.com. There, there is an easy relationship between the paid members of the masthead and the commentators, where good posts are promoted to the main page and where the paid contributors mix comfortably in the comments section - Have you noticed how alex very rarely adds his thoughts in the comments anymore?

Freddy

Good idea Cabbie. Let's start here, though, with a question: which Republican candidate do you feel best reflects conservative values and why?

porkbelly

Once again I have the strong suspicion that "Freddy Gray" has not actually watched the debate, only read some blogger's reaction to it and extracted a random inane detail to babble about. Is the upcoming American election really of such minor consequence that the Spectator assigns a twelve-year-old to cover it?

ConservativeCabbie

@Freddy

Well I'm a committed Palinite so I hold out hope that she will jump in. As an aside, I just watched her recent speech in Indianola, one of the best political speeches I've seen.

I'm not thrilled about what's on the table right now.

Mitt Romney - Concerned about his flip-flopping. He's a manager, will probably be an effective one, but America needs radical reform and I'm not convinced Romney can provide it.

Rick Perry - Looked promising at first with his comments on 10th amendment constitutionalism. Unfortunately he flip-flopped on that almost immediately. I'm not seeing a lot of substance there and I suspect that there will be plenty of jobs for the boys in a Perry administration. Puts me in mind of Abramoff Republicanism and that concerns me.

Michele Bachmann - Has become a bit too single issue for my liking. I like her and what she stands for but she hasn't grown as a candidate but has retreated into a repeal Obamacare mindframe at the expense of anything else it seems.

Herman Cain - Love the idea of a non-politician getting to the White House and I like much of what he says but for some reason I forget what it was moments later. I do like him but have not been convinced.

Jon Huntsman - Yeuch!!

Ron Paul - Ditto

Rick Santorum - Afraid that he will spend too much of his Presidency worrying about peoples bedrooms rather than their wallets.

newt Gingrich - Had dismissed him but was very impressed by his debate. Will pay more attention in the future.

I'm struggling to get excited about any of them. However it's early so we'll see.

ConservativeCabbie

Freddy

Sorry, misread your comment when making my earlier reply.

The problem with "conservatism" is that it can't be rigidly defined. I could make the case that Perry, Santorum, Paul and even Mitt Romney best represent conservatism (Paleoconservatism, social conservatism, paleolibertarianism and Burkean conservatism respectively). All I can talk about is my own conservatism. Very small government, empowerment of the people, an economy free to create wealth rather than having wealth transferred, an emphasis on moral and ethical good behaviour and a radical agenda to bring those things about.

As I said in my previous reply, Palin best represents those things for me. The other official candidates don't encompass those values in quite the same way for me. Bachmann and Cain probably come closest.

What about you?

Dimoto

dennis cooper, interesting stuff, thanks for that. It puts the "bust kerfuffle" into context (doesn't the bible have something to say about graven images ?)

We should have learned by now, that these TV debates just serve to obfuscate, (who is the Republican Nick Clegg ?)
The whole thing won't really focus until the primaries start.

daniel maris

There's no reason why Obama - (claimed) grandson of a Kenyan - should feel warm to a dyed in the wool imperialist keen to hang on to Africa and careless of African rights. Churchill was a freedom fighter to half the world but an imperialist oppressor to the other half. Great men cast long shadows as someone once said.

Freddy

Afraid I am keen on Ron Paul: he has sense and decency. Of course he won't come anywhere near winning. Ricky Perry is Bush without the brains, I reckon.

Sally Clarke

But who IS Freddy Gray?

I S

'Disgruntled' - absolutely agree. Insightful comment and analysis would be much appreciated and is long overdue.
Con cabbie - Palin! You must be kidding. She's not even taken seriously by her own party. Moronic, parochial, know-nothing, celebrity nonentity quitter chasing the buck.

Magnolia

@Denis Cooper
Thanks for that. I didn't know about the memorial but you will be pleased to hear that my teenager (who's just finished A levels) did know.
When he was very young we took him to see an old copy of the Magna Carta at Lincoln Castle and young though he was I can remember him begging me to buy him a copy!
I've looked up the memorial on the National Trust website and we now plan to go and see it for ourselves.

lescam

I S
September 13th, 2011 8:06pm

"Palin! You must be kidding. She's not even taken seriously by her own party. Moronic, parochial, know-nothing, celebrity nonentity quitter chasing the buck"

Couldn't agree more. She does not even appear to know the difference between North and South Korea. To call her a "know-nothing" is being too polite. A loudmouth, yes, and pig-ignorant, definitely.

daniel maris

Lescam -

And I third that motion. It was clear from the last election that Palin didn't even read a newspaper on a daily basis. Hardly a qualification for being an effective politician.

I don't find her particularly repellent, but she is clearly better suited to being the governor of a low population state than President of (still) the most powerful nation on earth.

ConservativeCabbie

One mention of the word Palin and the Palin haters come out from under a stone - a nice pavlovian reaction.

Kinda boring how predictable and unthinking most Palin criticism is. I long for the day when I get to see an original critique of Palin rather than the same Daily Kos/elite class retreads.

ConservativeCabbie

Freddy

Ron Paul is fine as far as domestic policy is concerned but I can't square his views on America's foreign policy with anything that I believe in. America is "occupying" 150 countries? A little bit over the top methinks.

Rhoda Klapp

Cabbie, got a link for the Palin speech? Is this the one which is widely unreported because it lambasts the media, and points out that the division is between the political class and the people, not left/right gop/dem any more?

And no, I don't want you to write here for free if Messrs Gray and Korski are getting paid.

Right On

@ Conservative Cabbie

Agree, most of the attacks on Palin are so shallow and baseless that they deserve no credence.

I'm still less of a fan than you though, I find her to be very inconsistent and really lacking when it comes to either policy depth or leadership.

Having said that she's achieved a lot - especially in comparison to many of her critics - and deserves more respect than she's offered.

ConservativeCabbie

@Right On

I have no problem with that sort of critique - needless to say I disagree - this is what debate should be all about. I am equally unhappy with those Palinites that won't hear a bad word said about her, it's just as dishonest a debating style. It says something that it took me a week to get around to watching her speech, as much as a fan as I am, sometimes her voice grates on me. Having said that, glad I did, it was a tour de force.

I'm guessing you are a Romney guy?

I S

Conned Cabbie - Do yourself a favour and try reading some of the factual reports on Palin contained in the books and articles referencing her aborted Governorship and farcical Veep campaign. She is revealed to be astoundingly ignorant, shallow, petulant, unstable, uneducated, grasping and vindictive. True, she can deliver a (scripted) folksy, aw-shucks, demagogic rant better than most of the others, but that only exposes her as the front-woman she is for the vested interests of the US power elite.
She would be thoroughly dangerous in any major role, but, thankfully, the Republican party and the wider electorate already realise this and her stock has steadily continued to fall.
She is a money-grasping clown who peddles her shtick to keep the hillbillies in a state of rage and to satisfy her considerable ego.

ConservativeCabbie

Rhoda

The speech on youtube (give her a few minutes to get going.

http://tinyurl.com/3juntte

James Delingpole highlights the important parts

http://tinyurl.com/6jgfz4t

And yes it's the speech that barely got covered because Palin didn't make her getting in announcement. although funnily enough the speech did get the NYT to say of her:

"Along with her familiar and predictable swipes at President Barack Obama and the “far left,” she delivered a devastating indictment of the entire U.S. political establishment — left, right and center — and pointed toward a way of transcending the presently unbridgeable political divide."

http://tinyurl.com/43o6p94

Right On

@ Conservative Cabbie

I'm up and down on Romney, I dislike his flip flopping but I think he's a strong executive and would make a good President. I'm concerned that he would drift away from pushing for small government if the economy improves.

Of the current field I probably still think Perry just edges it for me, I think his drive for small government is strong, the jobs record speaks for itself and I think his mistakes (HPV etc.) are inevitable for someone who's been a Governor for so long.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

Let's play spot the Andrew Sullivan reader. Oh look! There's one. I mean seriously, you want others to take you seriously with tripe like that? I mean this:

"the front-woman she is for the vested interests of the US power elite."

Best laugh of the day.

I S

Cabbie - I am not a 'Palin hater.' I scorn her suitability for any senior role, given that she could not even govern Alaska adequately before she quit. She is not intellectually capable; she is thoroughly ignorant of history and foreign affairs; she is malicious, small-minded and vindictive; she is a mendacious fantasist. All these accusations can be backed up by a variety of sources.
To repeat, she is not even taken seriously by her own Party, far less the mass of American voters in the centre or on the left.
As she is a paid shill for Fox and was strongly promoted by the shadier elements behind the Tea Party, I stand by my assertion that she is a 'useful idiot' for the far Right in the US. They spotted how she connects with the hicks and the rubes, so have cannily promoted her brand. She is no 'woman of the people' figure. She is out for what she can grab and that is plenty, given the lucre that can be earned by being a mouthpiece for corporate interests.
As I requested before - try reading up on what, often dispassionate, commentators have noted about her. There are several books and serious articles out there for your consideration.
Yes, I do read Sullivan, among others. So what? Do I always agree with him. No. I have, and have had, a very keen interest in US politics and read widely about it. Try expanding your own range of sources and you may find yourself better able to engage in meaningful debate.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

Kinda regretted my reply to you when I made it - a little harsh.

So being more reasonable

1. Who are these reliable sources you mention? I only ever see Levi Strauss or some journalist with a book to sell mentioned. Hardly reliable and dispassionate.

2. She may well be an unpleasant character - I don't know and I don't care. I'm never going to meet her. All I care about is that her philosophy and policies match up almost exactly with mine. Why on earth would I not be supportive of her.

3. There has been a conspiracy against Palin to discredit her. From investigations into her e-mails, her fallopian tubes and hundreds of reporters being sent to Alaska whilst all the while, Obama's pre-political life remains largely undiscovered. And yet with all that, not a single serious scandal has been discovered. In fact, almost everything alleged against Palin has been disproved and by and large she emerges as the principled fighter against special interests and corrupt politics that she always made herself out to be.

If you can come up with some damning indictement of Palin, I'm all ears but I've done a lot of research into Palin and I haven't discovered it yet.

VolcanicArmado

To be honest I've never really been much of a fan of Obama and his utter failure to accomplish any sort of lasting economic recovery have left me yearning for a new Republican President. Combined with his weakness on foreign policy and seeming continual apology for Anglo-American action in the world is disgusting. If you throw in this assault on Churchill I'm just a bit tired of his attitude, actions and lies. Ideally I'd like to see Perry in the White House in 2012, Romney is alright but I don't want a Mormon with his finger on the button. My only real concern with Perry is his record on immigration is a bit weak, considering where he's from and the endemic problems with illegal immigration they have there he should be more hawkish.

I S

Cabbie - I'm aware he's like kryptonite to you, but Sullivan's site has a handy guide to the many lies and fantasies of Palin.
'Race to the White House' contains many insights regarding Palin from the point of view of McCain insiders.
Also, you may now be fuming over recent revelations from McGinnis.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

Re Sullivan - I can't really take anyone seriously who, still three years later, obsesses about the birth of Trig. That's about as unserious as reporting can get.

Re McGinnis - Why on earth should I be fuming about someone the NYT describes:

"Mr. McGinniss used his time in Alaska to chase caustic, unsubstantiated gossip about the Palins, often from unnamed sources like “one resident” and “a friend.”"

If such unsubstantiated tittle-tattle is what you regard as "dispassionate commentator" and "serious articles" then I think we take very different views on that sort of thing.

I am amused that the left are scandalised by the fact that a SINGLE white Sarah Palin had an affair with a black man. I know liberals don't like white and black mixing (America's most liberal cities are also the whitest), but I didn't realise they still had a problem with miscegenation.

I S

Cabbie - You haven't mentioned 'Race to the White House'. Have you read it? Check it out - the scales amy fall from your eyes.
Also, by dismissing Sullivan because he has attempted to make sense of the suspect Trig narrative does not address the veracity of his compendious (fact-checked) list of Palin lies and fantasies.
I couldn't care less who Palin screws, is screwing, or has screwed. The interracial one night stand and the extra-marital affair will certainly damage her standing with her core support.
I can also think of many who may agree with my philosophy or ideology, but that doesn't mean I consider all or any of them intellectually or managerially capable of holding high office.
On every occasion that you have responded to my posts, you have signally failed to answer any of my claims that she is a greedy, mendacious, ignoramus who falsely portrays herself as one of the people.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

"On every occasion that you have responded to my posts, you have signally failed to answer any of my claims that she is a greedy, mendacious, ignoramus who falsely portrays herself as one of the people."

I did in my first politer response when I pointed out that the character of a politician is irrelevant if one agrees with their philosophy and policies which is where I am with Palin.

Politicians always rub some people up the wrong way and to that end, you will always find people to dish the dirt. That doesn't mean we should treat that evidence with any veracity. Which is where I stand on Palin. He is so fixated on her negatively that anything he says about her can not be taken seriously.

"because he has attempted to make sense of the suspect Trig narrative"

What's suspect about it? Woman gets pregnant has baby end of. What's the difference between a Trig truther and an Obama birther? Both as dumb as each other.

"but that doesn't mean I consider all or any of them intellectually or managerially capable of holding high office."

That depends on how you define that doesn't it. My view is that intellectual smarts are not of themselves qualifications for high office. Gordon Brown and Obama's disastrous Presidency are proof of that. In my view, the person who should be President is the person who knows what the right thing to do is and who is uncompromising in wishing to carry that out, is prepared to fight entrenched interests and has an instinct for the politics. In my view Palin meets all those criteria. I can absolutely guarantee that from my perspective as a "common sense" conservative, Palin would be far superior as President than the likes of Obama and Mitt Romney. That you disagree is fair enough but you should at least respect the fact that my views on Palin go beyond personality.

she is a greedy, mendacious, ignoramus who falsely portrays herself as one of the people."

I would describe Obama similarly but doing so wouldn't get us very far would it. I haven't addressed directly what you said because I don't accept it as an accurate description. She's greedy because she earns money? A liar? You're not referring to those silly "lies of Sarah Palin" posts that Sullivan does are you? I've probably read every one and they are all ridiculous. Ignoramus? By what measure? I'd say the man who thinks spending more and more money when a nation is in debt is the ignoramus, Palin on the other hand talks more sense than any other politician I've heard from.

Look I know Palin isn't popular to many, that doesn't mean I should just go along with the herd. I don't accept your description of her although acknowledge that many share it.

Finally, you accuse me of "signally failed to answer my claims". That's because you haven't made any. All you've made are meaningless assertions not backed up with any evidence. Do so and I'd happily address them.

I apologise for my tone in my initial response to you, I enjoy a good well intentioned debate and would be happy to carry on in that vein which I shall leave up to you.

I S

Concab - 'America's most liberal cities are the whitest.' This is true Alice through the Looking Glass.
Where does the MidWest fit into this absurd statement? New York? LA? Dallas? Detroit?

I S

Cabbie - Thanks for your last comments which have genuinely helped me to see more clearly your point of view.
I absolutely concur that intellectual ability is no guarantee of effectiveness as a politician. However, following my experience in a multinational, I would be a great deal more comfortable with a CEO-type figure who is adept at critical analysis, problem-solving and displays clear leadership qualities.
Where I would have a distinct problem with Palin or Bachmann is that I believe they are, like our own dear Gordon, 'psychologically flawed' and would be unable to cope with the various pressures of leadership.
From my point of view, I have to confess I regard Palin as a folksy phony and suspect her of being a simplistic demagogue. She has clear, but limited, appeal and I do not believe she will even run for the nomination.
However, putting all that to one side, I respect your wish to engage in debate, rather than simple mudslinging.
As a matter of interest, what do you think of Rubio for 2016?
Also, have you ever read 'The Selling of the President' by McGinnis? I found it a fascinating insight into what the US population desire from a Presidential figure. Having read it some decades ago, it made me wonder if the US could ever elect a woman as President, given the number of masculine attributes that were rated highly by the electorate.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

I do think Palin's presidential moment has passed and I do think that she has erred. There's plenty to criticise her for:

1: Whatever the justifications, her resignation from the Governorship was a disaster in PR terms

2. She has spent too much time complaining about the lamestream media and her opponents. She's right but unfortunately, it just sounds bad.

3. She should have committed earlier on this Presidential race. I think she's blown any chasnce of getting the nomination.

I've made a prediction on my blog that she will declare that she's not running and will endorse Newt Gingrich. I hope I'm right - short of a Palin candidacy, I'm more and more in Newt's camp.

You said:

"Where I would have a distinct problem with Palin or Bachmann is that I believe they are, like our own dear Gordon, 'psychologically flawed' and would be unable to cope with the various pressures of leadership."

This is the best point you've made. You may well be right on Palin, I share some of those fears. However, it's also possible that as Palin isn't wedded to the DC way or to preconceived ideas about how politics works that she may be uniquely qualified to bring something different to DC. Sadly I don't think we'll get to find out.

Palin's best hope for future political say is to back the right horse in the primary get a cabinet position and perform outstandingly. We'll see.

As for Rubio, well he's the GOP's Obama isn't he? Not a bad thing, I like him a lot - will be interesting to follow his career and if he continues on his current path, he will be someone the Dems come to dread.

I've been touting Rubio for a long time now, long before anyone really knew about him. We'll have to see what substance goes on top of what is an excellent political package.

I suspect I won't be reading anything by McGinnis for some time to come :-)

I S

Cabbie - Thanks for your points and I agree Rubio is someone to watch.
Palin quitting as Governor was a major error of judgement, which she will always struggle to justify.
Seriously, 'Selling of..' is an absolutely fascinating book, with tremendous insights into the races between Nixon/Kennedy and Nixon/Humphrey. It also enables one to understand the appeal of a candidate such as Reagan to the US electorate and why the likes of Dukakis, Mondale and Kerrey were always going to fail. It is honestly a key work. I guarantee you will enjoy it.

ConservativeCabbie

I S

"Where I would have a distinct problem with Palin or Bachmann is that I believe they are, like our own dear Gordon, 'psychologically flawed' and would be unable to cope with the various pressures of leadership."

Just one more thing on this point. How does one recognise how a person will be as President from their psychology? What is the x factor? Take the current incumbent, "no drama Obama". He was compared to FDR, Lincoln and Kennedy and yet, even from a non partisan perspective he's been a flop (you should hear what us partisans are saying about him). He was supposed to be perfectly suited for the role and yet has failed to live up to those expectations. So if the experts can get him right, then I'm not sure recognising the x factor a priori is possible. The candidate is what the candidate is, only the trials of office will determine whether or not they are "psychologically flawed" and unable to live up to the requirements of office.

I S

Alastair Campbell certainly got it right a priori, but he was an insider. Agree it is difficult to assess suitability without evidence of of performance in high-pressure roles, given the spin and hype that surround, and obscure, the candidates. Also, the US press have a tendency to be overly po-faced and reverential about the assorted misfits and oddballs aspiring to be Prez.