Well, actually, replace "sincere" with disingenuous. Nonetheless, this is one of the reasons that, if I were a Republican, I'd be voting for Fred Thompson.

And I should add that I don't actually agree with the Cuba embargo, but it's not a huge issue for me either way.

And speaking of Huckabee, one can see why the Dems would think him the most beatable candidate. I pretty much agree with everything here. I can't stand Huckabee, either. My nightmare is a Hillary!/Huckabee choice.

Oh, one more comment. I was listening to Dennis Miller this morning in the car on the way to the dentists, and they said "Hey, he misspoke about Mormons thinking that Jesus and the devil were brothers. He meant to say Jews."

Thompson is the best choice. He's not Ronald Reagan incarnate as has been touted, but he's the best choice out there. The rest are way too crazy liberal RINOs or they're just too crazy.

Concur about the Cuban embargo, but I don't think lifting the embargo unilaterally is smart either. Better to use it for some gain since it is already in place.

Thompson has been my choice since he put his hat in the ring. He's been making some news recently, and I only hope it helps him in the polls. I do think NH and Iowa may be lost already, but he can still make a good showing.

Leland,
he is also the quickest on his feet thinker and best speaker of the bunch. And his stands on issues aren't his stands for the last 15 minutes, he's been the same for years.

he is also the quickest on his feet thinker and best speaker of the bunch.

I concur on this point.

Hey Leland, note that Thompson rebelled on stage at the most recent GOP debate, just as I hoped someone would. You expressed concern that refusing to play by the rules would be dishonorable (and you asked whether I had any ethics, which was nice of you).

I hope you were happy with the way Thompson actually did it. I was! Maybe we can both agree that what Thompson did was both honorable and impressive.

Rand, I agree there's a problem in the Republican party. But as long as 'vote for one' promotes a 2 party system, I have to run with the less corrupt of the 2 parties. I'd like more than 2 'viable' candidates on the general election ballot.

Raising hands is not a debate. I don't consider pointing that out a rebellion rather than a statement of fact. Besides, not only was the concept silly, but the question was two parts, thus there were 4 logical answers, and a binary answer was not sufficient.

What you suggested previously was pretending to answer the question, while completely ignoring it. I still consider that unethical. Saying outright that you refuse to answer a complex question with a binary acknowledgement is being straight forward and honest. Thompson also offered to directly answer the question if he was provided the standard 1 minute to respond.

Ha! You are so funny! You just want to interpret what I said in the worst possible way, even when we are agreeing.

Well, here is more agreement: I think you are completely right about there being four logical answers, if the answer is restricted to yes or no. Excellent point!

Oh, and I thought your comments about the Shuttle's liftoff trajectory were helpful too. Really!