I think it is a toss up between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.
2007-06-07 03:27:28 · 19 answers · asked by John 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think that it would be Gingrich. I think that he would make a great choice. Also I think that it might be one of the reasons that Newt is not running for the presidency is because he knows that he would make a great VP.
2007-06-07 03:30:29 · answer #1 · answered by ColoradoBrew 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Last time I checked , we were at war with the Taliban. Why should we let one of their cousins inti the White House?
This one happened 150 years ago but I think its still relevant because Mitt Romneys church pardoned a terrorist mass murderer of Americans and protected over 100 other accomplices from federal prosecution.
It was September 11, 1857. A wagon train of 160 settlers on their way to California was massacred by a bunch of Mormons dressed in Indian clothes. 17 children under the age of 8 were spared and lived to tell their story.
1st. They dressed as Indians but after five days they changed tactics.
2nd. Then they went a bit away ,dressed back into normal clothes and acted like the Rescue Party who had negotiated a deal with the"Indians".
3rd, Then confiscated all the guns as part of the deal for "saving" the travellers and Mormon dissidents( who were the reason for the attack in the first place).
4th. Took everybody off a mile or so and shot them all. 2 men got away but were eventually tracked down and killed a day or so later.
5th. Took the 17 children they had not killed back with them to Salt Lake City.
6th. Got away with it. After a publicized trial, with the childrens own testimony admitted into the court, only 1 man was convicted and shot, John D. Lee. ( pardoned by Church 1960)
It ended up being called the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The first time in U.S. history that U.S. citizens were massacred on U.S. soil by religious wackos. This event is even more significant because the total U.S. population at the time was much smaller.(I dont know the exact numbers, maybe only 30 million or so) In todays numbers it would be around 1400 dead
2007-06-07 20:07:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Condoleeza Rice
2007-06-07 10:32:20 · answer #3 · answered by tigrompy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Jack Bauer
2007-06-07 10:37:37 · answer #4 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably McCain or someone like Mike Huckabee. Romney is a maybe, but I doubt it. Newt I do not think would have a chance. He has such a bad past and is such a divisive figure people might not vote for him.
2007-06-07 10:31:33 · answer #5 · answered by Drake 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I like Mitt. Actually I prefer Mitt/Thompson, but I'm cool with the other way too.
2007-06-07 10:30:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
John, don't worry about it because it won't happen. He won't need to do that as he won't get the nomination in the first place. His record in the Senate is puny, he has a history of poor health, he doesn't have the financial backing needed to do it.
2007-06-07 10:32:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I adore your optimism!
You're probably right, but John Bolton would be a great pick.
Not so many people know who he is, though, so it won't happen, and wouldn't help in the election.
2007-06-07 12:29:23 · answer #8 · answered by Bad Kitty! 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First off! God Bless you, John. For You & Your Wife's Service to This Country!
I would love to see him pick Dr. Rice! (yeah, yeah, I know!) But it would make a solid point for Conservatism!
We Honor, you John! Good Question!
2007-06-07 10:33:04 · answer #9 · answered by Nunya Bidniss 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Mark Foley?
Scooter Libby?
.
2007-06-07 10:33:10 · answer #10 · answered by Brotherhood 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋