2007-01-19 12:42:59 · 45 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think you need your @ss kicked!!
2007-01-19 12:45:58 · answer #1 · answered by Hi 7 · 7⤊ 9⤋
i love both those adult men, yet no, I gained't vote for them as President and vice chairman. there's no longer something of their adventure to make me believe that that they had govern properly. although a minimum of that that they had govern with the right set of principals. i might want to somewhat have Newt run. a minimum of he has an outstanding record of administration and success in gov't. Rush and Hannity might want to correctly be positioned on team as particular advisors. Heck, make Rush the White living house Spokesman. Now that is an staggering interest for him. i might want to like to make certain him do conflict with the liberal press daily. He'd whip their behinds.
2016-10-15 11:33:02 · answer #2 · answered by xie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
HELL YA! That's a combo I'd definitely vote for.
P.S. Dude in the red hat on page 1, Rush did not come from layfettte CA. He is from Missouri, around Springfield.
2007-01-19 12:55:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
lmfao @ the rock and dan quayle bit. Anyway, for all you people saying it would be the worst ever, you should be embracing it. It seems to me all these people who are vehemently against conservatives support people who are piece by piece dismantling this now pitiful excuse for a country. It's a silly question simply because it would never happen, but it's great to see the bigotry in all the responses. Feudalism anyone?
2007-01-19 12:54:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Try Hannity with Lou Dobbs!
Now there is a no BS allowed ticket!
Unfortunately, both are making way too much to take on the headaches! They are doing their jobs better where they are!
2007-01-19 12:49:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Argh! It gives me nightmares to even think about it!!!!!! I would definitely move to Denmark. The only worse thing I can think of would be Coulter & O'Reilly.
2007-01-19 15:06:52 · answer #6 · answered by Patchouli 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just the thought of that makes me want to throw up. Violently.
2007-01-19 14:01:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Rush Limbaugh can be annoying but he is what he claims to be and Hell Clinton had his weed and Bush used to coke up, I Don't think we have had a Oxy cotton guy yet.
As for Sean Hanity I think him a pseudo-christian and a mouth piece for the Republican party. Both would be better for America than most Liberals. (By "most" I mean "all".)
2007-01-19 12:50:36 · answer #8 · answered by sean e 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Hmmm.
How bout a rock for President, and Dan Quayle as VP?
No - that implies that rocks and Dan Quayle lie regularly, and/or misrepresent facts on a daily basis...
Well - if you want a pair of fear mongering, self-important, deceptive, manipulative neo-conservatives (look how successful the Bush administration has been) in charge... sure why not?
-dh
2007-01-19 12:47:55 · answer #9 · answered by delicateharmony 5 · 4⤊ 5⤋
No, Mark Levin for President, and Rush Limbaugh for VP
2007-01-19 12:45:37 · answer #10 · answered by Benji 5 · 4⤊ 6⤋
I listen to Rush, Hannity is too wild and mean for me to listen to. But I don't think either could run anything. Much like Sen. Barack Hussein Osama, their main role in life is to push words around the room. Despite their good talking, I would not want to be with them in a fire fight or any situation where actual action is required.
2007-01-19 12:47:34 · answer #11 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 2⤊ 7⤋