Monday, February 11, 2008
|
|
How McCain Can be a Conservative and a Maverick
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
8:38 AM
|
I've been asked a lot lately about how McCain can keep his maverick brand, and still reach out to conservatives.
For McCain to win a General Election, it is vital that he maintain his brand as a maverick who is authentic and gives us straight talk. However, I believe there is a false assumption that this means he has to be liberal. In fact, I can give you at least two recent examples of where McCain has been a conservative maverick who gave us straight talk:
1. He went to Michigan and refused to pander. He told Michigan voters the truth -- that the world had changed and that they needed to adapt and be re-trained. His reward for this straight talk was losing Michigan.
2. He went to Florida and refused to support the government-run catastrophic insurance program. This was courageous, in that the popular Governor Crist was pushing it (this was before Crist endorsed him).
Both these positions were couragous conservative positions. But they were also maverick positions.
In terms of policy positions, there are two primary issues in which McCain needs to assure conservatives: Immigration and keeping the tax cuts permanent. McCain is currently on the right side of both issues (he now says he wants to secure the border first, and that he wants to make the tax cuts permanent). As such, McCain doesn't need to now start changing positions, he merely needs to reassure conservatives that he means what he says on these two issues.
In summary, I don't think McCain's challenge -- to essentially be a maverick who appeals to independents -- and a conservative -- is quite as daunting as people think.
The choice between being a maverick or a conservative is really a false choice.
|
|
|
is any view of the long term. I believe it was Ronald Reagan (although it could have been Walter Williams) who said "that what you subsidize you get more of". Isn't there a valid argument against rewarding John McCain with our support simply because it would encourage a further blending of the R's into the D's? For too many Republicans this has become a game over whose team wins the most points. Any concern over actual policies has long been tossed out the window. For them, being a Republican is a fashion instead of an ideology. They are perfectly happy with Democrat policies so long as their team is perceived to be in the lead. They are Republicans simply because they think an elephant looks cooler on their polo shirts than a donkey. If the Democrats would just adopt a more hip mascot they'd be gone in a flash. |
|
Now I have to rationalize my support for McCain. Yes...the guy who has stabbed conservatives in the back with a frequency of a slasher movie. This is the guy that has let me down so many times that I have lost count and optimism. Yet, I am now confronted with having to support him...why?...it is obvious...even on his most liberal day (and there seem to many in the last 5 years) McCain is more conservative than Obama and Hillary...this isn’t saying much, but it is saying something. When you are in rationalization mode a person will hang on any branch they can find.
The good news about McCain: He is pro-life, he is pro-gun and he is very mean. He is very mean to his enemies...I am hoping that the liberals become his enemies so they can experience Mc-Nasty. The other good news about McCain is that he wants to reduce earmarks and entitlement programs. He also, contrary to his recent opposition, wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. He also believes in free enterprise (please don’t distract me with the free enterprise contradictions of his global warming “cap and trade” idea...I am in rationalizing mode...).
He also believes in a strong defense and I hope he will have an unwavering strength against terrorism. He also believes in free speech...excuse me...I have now become delusional, I forgot he believes in McCain speech (hence McCain-Fiengold).
Bottom line: I am in hope mode. I hope he surprises me with conservative clarity and consistency. I hope he wins against the liberal machine...I have a feeling it may take one to beat one.
I am hopeful that he really believes at least half of what he said at CPAC.
|
|
|
Mac will win by being himself, not what Matt Lewis says. With Mac being the second choice of most of the southern conservatives who voted for Huck, well, in the most red state region of the USA conservatives ARE folks like Mac and Huck. So Mac holds the south and needs only to take midwest moderates, and Ohio and Pennsylvania, and still it is a long shot in a tough year for conservatives. |
|
The Stupid Party
The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.
Don't vote for one.
Another amnesty will result in Democrat majorities for decades, or until they are supplanted by the La Raza Party, why doesn't the RNC know that? How stupid do you have to be to import voters for the opposition at the same time you alienate your own voters? Nominating any of the amnesty supporters is a losing proposition, we will not support them. If the GOP intends to surrender our sovereignty and abandon the rule of law, they will find in November 2008, that they still have their big money/cheap labor donors, but they do not have voters. GOP-RIP |
|
From the immortal words of Mr. Miyagi:
"Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later [makes squish gesture] get squish just like grape."
All I ever needed to know about John McCain, I learned from watching the "Karate Kid." |
|
|
what do you say about the Soros-McCain collusion? |
|
John McCain is George Soros's stooge.
If you do not know who George Soros is, Google him. |
|
why are not you and other pundits telling the masses that McCain is a George Soros stooge?
Also, why do you not make clear that the pro-abortion members of the Republican Party support John McCain.
Also, the man-made global warming nuts in the Republican Party support John McCain.
If you vote for McCain, those are your teammates.
You cannot say you did not know. Anyone who is a George Soros stooge wants to eliminate what has made America great. The Spirit of 1776 that declared, "all men are created equal". George Soros does not believe that and neither does his stooge, John McCain. |
|
|
|
--
What seems to escape a great many political commentators - and their audiences - is that the U.S. Constitution (including its amendments) is nothing, more or less, than the law of the land.
Without it, the federal government is simply not legitimate, and warrants neither respect nor obedience nor even the right to exist.
Government adherent to the U.S. Constitution is compliant with an explicit social contract.
Government violative of the U.S. Constitution is criminal, and it is the duty of the law-abiding U.S. citizen to take whatever measures are required to compel federal officers engaged in any such criminal activities to cease, desist, and be held personally responsible for the damages they inflict.
We have John McCain, who makes much of his long experience as an officer of the federal government, first as a commissioned officer in the Naval Service, then in the U.S. Congress.
He makes much of his expertise and his knowledge of laws and regulations (civil and miliary).
Can it be reasonably concluded that Senator McCain didn't *KNOW* that the provisions of McCain-Feingold were blatantly violative of the First Amendment from the moment he began planning it?
Has he not demonstrated criminal *mens rea* (i.e., explicit intention to violate the law) in the formulation, introduction, and efforts to enact the statute known as McCain-Feingold?
Can it be argued that he didn't know what he was doing?
Is John McCain, therefore, not a criminal?
Has he not violated the U.S. Constitution (a charter of government he has sworn to uphold and defend both as an officer in the Naval Service and as a member of Congress) with criminal intention and malice aforethought?
Can this "Maverick" possibly be both a conservative *AND* a criminal?
Well, hell. Look at what the "Rockefeller Republicans" have been offering us.
Senator Craig is self-admittedly such.
Senator McCain's high treason is self-obvious.
--
|
|
|
Mike huckabee is working harder than any candidate I have ever seen and is winning the hearts of conservative voters. Over the past few days Mccain hasn't even held a rally with voters there. The only one I saw in Virginia or Maryland, he was surrounded by old Washington cronies. I want a man who works harder than anyone else and has better ideas than anyone else. That man is Mike Huckabee! Vote for Mike on Tuesday! |
|
I think you should vote based upon your priciples, which I would encourage everyone to do. I think that's what Brian has been saying. I guess I fall in the middle somewhere.
I just think it is too early to say definitively that I will not vote for McCain under any circumstances. There is a lot of time between now and November and a lot can happen.
What I have said is that if the election was today I could not, in good conscience vote for McCain (or Huckabee either for that matter). He has a lot of work to do to earn my vote and, though possible, it is not probable. I will vote, but not for someone who is so far from my values.
My argument with you is saying that if we do not fall in line behind McCain then we forfeit all rights to complain when we don't like the results. I think that is absolutely unfair. This is not conservative's fault that McCain is the nominee, and I'll feel no responsibility if Hillary/Obama or McCain wins in November. Somewhere there has to be a line that I draw that says, "No more, this is too far left and I'm not going there" That's not an unprincipled approach in my book.
|
|
We already knew that (best Ken Curtis as Festus Hagen voice here) Matheeeewwwwww, was a McWhore,
so this is in more McSame.
The fig leaf of plausibility here is: McCain is a Conservative because he refused to offer bailouts.
So what? He caved on Strict Constructionist Justices, Shamnesy, Tax Cuts, and McFeingeld--all VITAL Conservative Issues.
Matheeewwww seems to think his rhetorical slight of hand will have us accepting Maverick=Conservative and Conservative=Mcbitch.
No sale Mattheewww. Happy landings on your Mcbused rump!
the big mick |
|
We will not accept ANYTHING short of full honesty and as of today we are not getting it from him.
He uses phrases like "Secure the Border 1st" but what then, full Amnesty? He still thinks we are wrong and he is right. He is trying to sell us a HALF TRUTH, which is something that cannot exist. If it is 1/2 truth then it must be 1/2 false, which makes it a lie. That is what we have been getting from Washington DC for years and we have had our fill!
McCain has time to get us with him but he is quickly missing the opportunity if he does not take ACTION-FIRST. I am not at all sure he will do what is needed. He has the ability to do what is needed but he does not have the stomach to woo those he has called "mongers of hate and intolerance" |
|
and 65+% of democrat want the borders closed and McCain is the poster child for amnesty. Not Hillary sh is the poster child of healthare
YOU GET BOTH thats why he can't win the red states |
|
80% of all voters know John McCain is a Maverick which means he can say what ever he wants. But when the rubber meats the road he will find some chicken hearted excuse to explain why politically he had to look past the best interest of his country, his party, or any pledge he makes to do what is best for hiself and his fellow country club Rinocrats. Same with his read my lips speech.
But wait said this article was a crock. Meaning since he can not possibly win a general election this nonsense is completely meaningless drivel. |
|
We each feel the other is making a mistake, and all we can do is let history sort it out.
To me, the idea on this site is to have fun doing what we political junkies like to do, and that's talk politics. I have absolutely no doubt that most of the people here are probably pretty nice folks. Even when we don't agree.
As to McCain, it seems that one of the main things that divide us is that you believe him and I don't. That's just the way it is, and it's not going to change.
(Unless I can learn that Vulcan Mind Meld. Then, watch out!) |
|
Sorry, must have missed your McCain-Feingold posit. To be honest, I hope he does, and as I trust his legal advisors and his own word, I think it's very possible he might put judges on the bench who would overturn it. I havn't heard him say much about the piece of legislation, because I think privately he understands it did little of what it was intended to do in the first place.
And don't take my words the wrong way, you have my deepest respect (along with many others on this board) who articulate why they feel they cannot vote for McCain. Again, I do feel it is a mistake to allow the Dems to win, and will continue to pray McCain gets the needed support to stop them.
|
|
we have to look at what one means by "principles", and which ones are important to you.
I actually respect your right to vote based on what you think is important. No problem. I always urge everyone to vote their own conscience after examining the issues and making their decision. That's what this country's all about.
I'm not leveling a criticism at YOU, not at all.
However, I also expect the same consideration.
I'm simply stating MY decision, and my reasoning. And giving you folks a heads up on what to expect come November. Obviously, there's nothing for me to gain. I have no horse in this race anymore. My candidates are history. Too late for them, and there's no way they can be revived.
As to McCain's Alito quote, there you have it. Of COURSE he'll deny it. He denies everything! Denies that amnesty is amnesty. Lied about Romney, right to his face on national TV, and in his cowardly campaign in Florida.
I believe the quote, Not Lyin' John McCain.
Further, you totally ignored my other point on SCOTUS: you think McCain would appoint Justices who would find McCain-Feingold unconstitutional? Because to live up to his promise, that's what he'd have to do.
Not a chance, not Emperor John.
|
|
I respect anyone who has principles in accordance with their vote. I am a man of principle myself, but when it comes down to an election like this, I just won't put them before my country's future. Right or wrong on that, I just believe this is the most important election in my lifetime.
And I've read Novak's column, among others, on the Alito comments. He cites two, un-named sources who say McCain said "something to the effect" of Alito wearing his conservatism on his sleeve--they couldn't remember exactly. McCain has denied the comments, and having followed the campaign closely, he's said on the trail about 10,000 times over the past 18 months that he wants justices "just like Alito and Roberts".
Now I can write a column right this second citing two un-named sources, who claim that aliens inhabit the moon--still doesn't make it true. So, in fact, I DO have my facts straight afterall.
|
|
|
|
and let the border state governors decide when it's secure.
Okay, I'm done laughing.
McCain and Bush are idealogical twins when it comes to border security. They think it's secure RIGHT NOW.
And if they don't, why, they'll just leave it up to Janet Napolitano, Bill Richardson, and the Governator (who gets his marching orders from the Kennedy clan) to decide when it's secure.
Which, if McCain wins the general, will be, oh, about January 21st of 2009. Give or take a day.
President McCain: After meeting with the border governors today after my inauguration, we have decided that the border is indeed secure. So I'm asking Congress to pass the amnesty... I won, so we can call it what it is... and put it on my desk by Thursday morning so I can sign it. |
|
|
|
... a conservative NOR a maverick. Besides, who wants to be associated with the Maverick -- one of the worst American cars ever built?
The Pope could endorse John McCain and that still would not convince me he is a conservative. Actions speak louder than words. Look at the man's voting record, the bill he has pushed, and his public statements against REAL conservatives.
The last 25 years have shown that John McCain is anything but conservative. |
|
I too am a Conservative first. Being a Republican comes in a very distant 2nd.
Over the past few days I have read one thing after another telling me why I should vote for McCain, and have come to the conclusion that so far, everyone telling me this has been full of BS!
I no longer vote for RINO's so there is NO way I can vote for McCain. |
|
Thanks Matt, but it doesn't fly with me. Conservatism should be and used to be grounded and based on a few standard virtues. One of them being honor...I've even heard that there is supposed to be honor among thieves. McCain's campaign against Romney was far from honorable. McCain called Romney on TV to his face a liar and battered and bullied overtop him refusing to allow him the time on air to counter his lies.
McCain lied the day before Florida on the phones about Romney's stance of Iraq and troop involvement. McCain lied on my phone the day before the California elections and said that Romney fathered and passed an abortion on demand bill in Mass....Romney voted prolife every time in Mass and McCain knew the truth. McCain knew that 85% Dem and Independent legislature in Mass time and again overrode Romney's vetoes...yet he lied time and again about the states liberal bills.
Honor is an important virtue...I do not call anyone conservative that has not honor...the honorable thing for McCain to do if he wants to prove himself to conservatives is to pick Romney as VP...then 35% to 50% conservatives in some states who support Romney might believe him. |
|
I hear ya.
Maybe we can go down to Mexico, since it'll be deserted by then, and just take THEIR water.
|
|
BrianR, we're obviously just a bunch of racists unwilling to allow every last human being their God given right to become legal US residents.
BTW, don't worry about all of Mexico being in LA. We've got more than our fair share in North Carolina as well now. We've been suffering through a tremendous drought in the Southeast for the last year. We've had droughts before but now we have to serve a population considerably larger than in droughts past. I wonder how we're going to deal with issues such as potable water with the additional onslaught of 100's of millions of new "Americans" in the coming years. I suppose that we'll have to xeriscape in the southeast as watering our lawns and plants will become too extravagant and wasteful. But it will sure be worth it for the cheap and abundant labor! |
|
|
I am a maverick against the GOP, not conservatism. Principles before party! |
|
I had to laugh at one thing in it, though. One of the report's authors stated "We're assuming that the rate of immigration will stay roughly constant".
Hell, at THAT rate, there won't be anybody left in Mexico by 2050; it'll be a deserted wasteland!
They'll all be here in LA.
|
|
Off the Drudge Report.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-11-population-s tudy_N.htm
Scary. Very Scary. Why do we need to add 150 million people to our nation in little more than 40 years? This is an environmental disaster in the making, and our environmental crusader John McCain will only accelerate this disaster. Can we live with another 150 million people living, breathing, consuming, and polluting in this country? Sure, but why? Will it make our quality of life and standard of living any better? I say no -- a big resounding no! |
|
Thanks for the kind words; I'm flattered.
And I agree, there are a great many of us.
I think that's probably why the "party uber alles" types try so hard to "shame" or "coerce" us into going along with their own capitulation on principle.
They know that without us, they're sunk. |
|
I almost feel like you plagarized my feelings.
I couldn't have said it any better. Thanks, my freind. There are many of us. |
|
You guys wanted the conservative vote, we warned you loud, long and clear on what it would take to earn it.
You ignored us. Your loss.
We don't care about "party", we care about principles. I know that's almost impossible for so many of you to understand; your problem, not mine.
When I could first legally register to vote, I chose the GOP because it most closely aligned with my ideology and philosophy, not because I had some weird affinity for the letters "GOP".
When they stop representing those values, they also stop getting my vote. To paraphrase Reagan in describing why he was no longer a Democrat, the party will have left me.
I value my vote very highly; it has to be EARNED. The GOP's in the habit of taking it for granted.
They've started treating us the same way the Dems treat Blacks and the NAACP: as a bloc they can take for granted as "being in the bag". Make a few meaningless promises at election time, then ignore them the rest of the time.
Well..... the "mushroom" treatment doesn't work on me.
|
|
|
If Ike, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I (Bush II would have without a do-over) were all capable of nominating liberals than how can you say with 99.9% certainty that McCain wouldn't nominate a liberal? |
|
I quoted McCain verbatim.
|
|
As far as you and I know, McCain has had nothing but compliments for both Alito and Roberts, and voted and worked for both of them to be confirmed. He has surrounded himself with conservative legal minds like Olson and Estrada, and I'm sure they will be heavily influencing any decisions he would make in regard to new justices. In any case, two points:
1. I'd rather not be any part of allowing Hillary or Obama the opportunity to name justices for the next four years--wishing they don't get the chance isn't good enough for me.
2. Given the choice, I'd rather go with McCain where I'm 99.9% certain he'd make the right choices on nominees, versus Hillary/Obama who I am 100% certain would not. |
|
My hometown newspaper, The Charlotte Observor (yes it's a liberal rag like most of them but occasionally they have some good reporting) has a great series of articles germane to the subject of illegal immigration that I encourage all to check out...
http://www.charlotte.com/poultry/story/487184.html
In my opinion this addresses Bigkam's reply of outrage and nonbelief in my accusation that McCain and other politocos along with many connected big business donors WANT illegal immigrants. Why? Because it is essentially the new slavery. The illegals can be exploited with little repurcussion because their status frightens them into a state of compliance and submission.
So, if we go ahead and legalize the illegals, then were just going to need another sub class for these interests to exploit. So bring in the next class of illegals cause the demand for low wage compliant labor ain't going away. Note that these were all jobs that little more than 10 years ago were being performed by black Americans. I guess they wanted too much money and were unwilling to keep quiet on the workplace abuses and neglect. The current crop of illegals will feel the same way once they are legitimized and can feel free to speak out.
Illegal Immigration truly is the new modern day form of slavery. Please read this series of articles. |
|
What gives you the idea McCain will nominate truly originalist/constructionist justices?
First of all, he's already said he considers Alito "too conservative". The actual quote was "he wears his conservatism on his sleeve".
Further, that would mean he'd have to appoint the kind of Justice that thinks McCain-Feingold in unconstitutional.
You think THAT'S ever gonna happen?
If you do, let me tell you about a bridge I'm selling, cheap....
|
|
addressed the SCOTUS issue in detail here: http://viewfromtheisland.townhall.com/g/173e9e58-58e4-4121 -8697-75072746b75d
But the bottom line is that it's a specious issue.
SCOTUS nominees are notoriously unreliable as to doctrine, to begin with. Witness Souter, O'Connor, Kennedy, all appointed by GOP Presidents.
Further, the two most likely to retire are Ginsburg and Stevens, the hard-line liberals.
So we replce two libs with two OTHER libs? So what?
|
|
We the People of the United States of America have the right to have our borders and our laws respected and enforced.
Citizens of other countries illegally in our country have no right to demand anything from our government. They most certainly have the right to petition the governments of their home countries for change if they are unhappy with their home country. If they want to be Americans, we have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other nation, and it starts in their home country.
We need to insist on the equal protection, application and enforcement of the law or devolve into anarchy. Our Republic only functions if everyone follows the same rules. We should not change the laws to accomodate those breaking them.
If America annouces to the world "We can't stop you, so come on in" with another amnesty, the deluge will be overwhelming. If 3,000 a day didn't get your attention, then wait until it's 10,000 a day. We cannot sustain this influx and survive as a nation. We must speak up and speak to each other about this and not let false claims of racism or bigotry be used to intimidate us into silent assent. America is not Congress' to give away. America belongs to We the People. Speak to your neighbors, speak to your coworkers, but please speak up to your Congressmen and Senators. It's O.K. for us to enforce our laws, no really, it is.
|
|
|
As I understand it, a political party is an affiliation of persons who share the same philosophy of governance. A person who believes in monarchy, for example, would share no common ground with someone who believes in representative government. These differences are primarily a function of where it is believed power should reside, in the people through their elected representatives or in a sovereign, a king or ruling class. Latitude exists for differing opinions, but only to a point. An elected representative, for example, who supports policies that would tend to concentrate power in a king or ruling class would obviously be working contrary to his party's philosophy of governance. He should not be considered a maverick, but someone who is in the wrong party. Policies so fundamentally different that they undermine the express objectives of the party should raise serious objections. |
|
I have said before that if the election were to be held today I would not, could not vote for McCain and still sleep with myself at night; however, I will reserve that final decision until November.
You statement:
"They will bare some of the blame when the Dems inflict enough damage that it will take years to fix"
really raises the hackles on my back. I will not vote for either Hillary or Obama, but I will vote. McCain or Hillary/Obama will not be the only options. This is NOT conservatives fault, and will not be. We do not want to screw the country up just because we are sore losers or that we are sulking as some would suggest.
We have princples and values and I will vote for the candidate who best represents my values, not the one that is represented with an (R) next to his name. No candidate I have voted for in my nearly 40 years of voting has been 100% in agreement with me, and I wouldn't expect that; however, John McCain has drifted so far from my values that I see little hope that I can, in good consciense give him my vote, which I value greatly.
|
|
"Just the fact that they are here illegally is not a felony."
But document fraud, social security fraud, Identity theft, and tax fraud ARE felonies. All illegals (with the possible exception of minors) have committed at least 1 of these felonies. So let's deport them for the above offenses instead of the mere act of illegally crossing the border. Better yet, let's create a set of conditions that makes them want to go home on their own accord. This is not impossible -- far from it, the few states that have imposed harsher penalties on employers of illegals report that it is working quite well. Ramp this up nationwide and with the full force of the feds and it will work even better.
And even if we can't get whatever portion to return to their country of origin, why do we legalize them? Doing so adds additional burdens on the taxpayers, incentiveizes future illegals, and undermines the rule of law. Let them live with the indignity of being illegal that they so richly deserve. |
|
Thanks for the great points. The dems are here in force spreading their brand of crazy - not fooled fellas. McCain is a darned good man - will get my vote in primary and in Nov. if he is chosen. I am a true Republican - I will vote Republican because there is no hope with the dems (or deranged party) There will be no sweep in 2012, or 2016 and 2-3 SC judges will have 20 years of liberalism. Find that scary!! There is only one choice.
Go Republicans!!!! |
|
|
And if we allow Hillary or Obama to name 2 or 3 justices to the Supreme Court, how will we be able to fix that in a couple of years? Maybe you're willing to set back the conservative legal movement for decades, but I am not, even if I have probably as many issues with McCain as you do. |
|
You're wrong- the existence of an illegal in the US is a felony, just not yet convicted, because:
To work, they must steal SS numbers from legal citizens; therefore no legal SS or income taxes are being paid. Fraud is being committed. When that legal citizen who owns the number tries to do financial dealings, his life is upside down with illegal credit card usage. When he tries to draw SS benefits, double trouble if the illegal has already drawn on it. That illegal who manages to get financing for a house or a vehicle is using an illegal SS number- fraud.
They drive on our streets illegally, no license, no insurance, killing and disabling legal citizens- felonies. They shoot at and kill our police officers- caught or not, major felonies.
McCain says he'd round up the criminal aliens. How- when they scurry across the border and avoid capture or prosecution? The ones already in prison are costing us massively; but we want them there to prevent their repeating the crimes.
They must go and McCain has no intention of stopping the flow nor removing those here.
DO NOT ACCEPT MCCAIN- DEMAND A CHOICE!
|
|
It is not honorable to conspire behind closed doors with Ted Kennedy and La Raza against the American people.
It is not honorable to try to rush an amnesty for foreign nationals illegally in our country AND their employers through Congress without committee hearings shortcutting the normal process.
It is not honorable to have contempt for the will of the people. "I'll build the G-D fence if they want it |
|
The Republican Party under GWB seems intent on political suicide. Pandering to citizens of other countries illegally in our country while telling us we must be vigilantes if we object to illegal aliens ignoring our borders and laws. Mel Martinez was RNC Chairman to ensure an open borders candidate in '08. The cheap labor express will be kept running, regardless of the consequences, to party or country. GOP-RIP
|
|
JUAN HERNANDEZ TELLS US YOUR HEARING IS BAD.
SECURE THE BORDER. PERIOD.
ENFORCE THE LAW.
NO NEW PATH. |
|
Matt,
I see the point you are trying to make, but McCain is only seen as a Maverick by the media when he is attacking conservative principles not when he is championing them. In the general election the media will paint the scenerios you describe in Michigan and Florida as a sign that McCain is out of touch with common, hard-working Americans and their needs. |
|
is this: any damage done by the Dems CAN be fixed if the GOP returns to its conservative roots and takes back the reins of power.
Damage done by McCain in the name of the GOP can't be repaired. Who's going to be there to do it?
The only way to steer the country back onto the right path is to repudiate liberalism, and electing McCain is the furthest thing from that.
Just take a look at California to see the future of the country with McCain and his ilk at the helm.
|
|
Sammy writes: "So in other words you don't have a problem with granting amnesty to the illegals who are guilty of document fraud, tax fraud, Social Secuirty Fraud, and identity theft just not the ones guilty of drunk driving, rape, murder, etc.) so long as there is no hint of amnesty. Care to explain?"
Very simple. Just the fact that they are here illegally is not a felony. You don't deport people for misdemeanors. We don't deport people for shoplifting or traffic violations either.
I'm sorry, this is one area where McCain is right and the GOP base is FLAT WRONG. Those illegals who have committed no felonies are here to stay. They will get a path to citizenship. We will build the fence to cut down any more coming here.
But the 10 million illegals who haven't committed violence or felonies are here to stay.
GET USED TO IT.
That's one area where WE have principles too.
America is not going to be a white Anglo-Saxon country much longer.
And we all have to adapt to those changing circumstances.
We can do it gracefully, or we can do it over your opposition.
But we will do it.
|
|
|
I stand by my earlier summation that McCain was the best candidate in a flawed field. If people who call themselves conservatives would like to vote Democrat or not vote at all just to prove a point (while screwing the country up in the process), then that is their prerogative. They will bare some of the blame when the Dems inflict enough damage that it will take years to fix--and that's if we're lucky enough that they don't name a few SCOTUS justices while they're in the WH. But to say it's the "moderates' fault" for nominating McCain is ridiculous; you can't blame the people for moving towards the least flawed candidate. The bottom line is that it was not a strong field of candidates, and we are stuck with candidate who survived. I understand some will not vote for McCain, so I'm left praying (for the good of the country) that he attracts enough independents and moderate Dems to make up for it, which he could conceivably do. |
|
How much opposition is out there against McCain. None of my conservative friends are going to vote for this man. Some (who I disagree with) are saying they'll vote for Obama over McCain. I predict this will be a record low turn-out for Republicans if Obama is the Dem candidate. Its hard to judge how much motivation Hillary will provide the Republicans to vote against her.
We conservatives tried to warn you McCainiacs that nominating this guy was a HUGE mistake. But no, you chose to support the anti-conservative and try to marginalize the conservatives of the party. I'll say this again - YOU CANNOT WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION WITHOUT ENERGIZING THE BASE!!! This is a huge mistake which will be felt by the GOP for years to come!
Help keep America beautiful - vote conservative! |
|
If the GOP thinks they can continue to import cheap labor for their donors at the expense of the citizens, they will. I will not vote for that again. If we continue to play the game of "the other guy is worse", we will lose our country. Sorry, but I will not participate in that game any longer. The GOP power brokers think we will vote for "anybody but a Democrat" so they can continue to ignore securing the borders and enforcing the laws. The levers of power and the money in the GOP are all in the hands of the cheap labor express. They do not want anyone who WOULD enforce the laws and secure the border. I WANT to vote for a GOP candidate in Nov.'08, I WILL NOT vote for any of the amnesty supporters. If it takes crushing the GOP so a new party representing American citizens can arise, so be it.
|
|
|
is use his senate seat to introduce some bills to appease the base. A strictly enforcement based immigration bill. A balanced budget bill addressing the entitlements. Fight for it in the senate and grandstand in asking the dems to meet him for once for the good of the nation. The base will eat it up and forgive him. |
|
|
Mr. McCain spent much time villifiying Mitt Romney as a flip-flopper. Supposing he does now change his positions on immigration and tax cuts, which he is only doing to pander to the right (so much for straight talk), do you think Hillary or Obama may pick up on that flip flop? |
|
I am going to vote for gridlock rather than for a traitor to our country that tried to get one leg of the stool of the North American Union/SPP implemented.
Juan McCain is an elitist, CFR, sock puppet who along with the RNC apparatus manipulated the vote for him become our nominee. IMHO-there was massive voter fraud especially in Florida, Louisiana, W Virginia NH, California and now Washington State.(Do a Google, the MSM is not covering this)
Liberals and independents elected our Nominee thanks to people like Charlie Christ(r)who allowed illegal party changes on Super Tuesday. In Los Angeles, California, there are over a million voters that had their voter registrations hijacked so they could not vote for a nominee and currently there are 2 million absentee ballots that have not been counted, yet McCain was declared the winner. I was one of them and had to demand a provisional ballot.
Not a peep from the CFR controlled MSM, their guy “won”.
The Rockefeller GOP Elite have sold conservatives out and will sell America out if we do not take our Party and country back.
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCFrCIt1aas
Huckabee must only win 59% of the remaining delegates to go to a brokered convention. We all thought that was a good Idea while Mitt was in the race, Mitt dropped too early, strategically. The brokered convention is still what is best for our chances to win in November. As long as Obama and Hillary are duking it out we shouldn't sacrifice the free media to their talking points. |
|
Please do NOT stay home. You must vote. You do not have to vote for Hillybama or McAmnesty. There are always other parties and people on the ballot. You could write in Joe Oliva. The important votes are for House and Senate seats. Conservatives MUST win seats in the House. The House is where things get done. It was the passage of H.R. 4437, an enforcement bill, in Dec.05 that sparked the illegal alien protest marches and moved this issue to the front burner. It was the Senate that tried to jam amnesty down our throats. The D's that won seats in '06 were conservatives running on enforcement platforms. One of them, Heath Shuler D-NC, introduced the SAVE Act. Call, e-mail, or write your Congressman and urge support of this legislation. Enforcement is what Americans want, not amnesty.
Amnesty is a losing proposition.
I don't think Hillary is stupid enough to step in front of this bus.
McCain is.
|
|
Regardless of his faults, McCain is almost without doubt the GOP presidential nominee.
I think if he very soon announced Mitt Romney as his running mate that conservatives would rally around the McCain/Romney ticket and immediately gear up for the fight to defeat the Democratic nominee in November.
http://mittromney.townhall.com
|
|
Here's what McCain REALLY said on border security: "Alright, I'll give them their f***king fence!".
That is a verbatim quote.
Further, he has NEVER backed off his amnesty position.
Forget it, Lewis, you can beard for the guy all you want, real conservatives see through him -- and you -- like a plate glas window.
|
|
The Stupid Party
The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.
Don't vote for one.
Another amnesty will result in Democrat majorities for decades, or until they are supplanted by the La Raza Party, why doesn't the RNC know that? How stupid do you have to be to import voters for the opposition at the same time you alienate your own voters? Nominating any of the amnesty supporters is a losing proposition, we will not support them. If the GOP intends to surrender our sovereignty and abandon the rule of law, they will find in November 2008, that they still have their big money/cheap labor donors, but they do not have voters. GOP-RIP |
|
What's the likelihood of anyone who has been called names for wanting the gov't to actually enforce the laws, to vote for those jamming amnesty down our throats?
McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Leiberman. Leadership like this I can do without.
Carbon taxes, constitutional rights for Gitmo detainees and amnesty for illegal aliens await us no matter who wins, whoopee!!!
I will not participate in the dissolution of my country.
You simply CANNOT have national security if you will not defend your own borders or enforce your own laws. Foreign nationals numbering in the thousands are entering our country at will daily. John McCain has done and will do NOTHING to stop it. Don't believe me? Ask Juan Hernandez!
|
|
When I heard McCain's Hispanic Outreach guy was none other than Smiling Juan Hernandez, I knew John McCain has heard nothing we have had to say.
Smiling Juan Hernadez
We know who he is, we know his loyalties are to Mexico, we know he wants to erase our borders and immigration laws.
JOHN MCCAIN, YOU NEED A NEW HEARING AID
Smiling Juan Hernandez
In case you don't know him, he used to work for the Mexican govt., lately he has been shilling for "rights" for illegal aliens in this country. He has said he wants Mexicans to remain Mexicans even if they are living here. His loyalties are to Mexico, not U.S.
Questions for illegal alien apologists like John McCain:
Why does The National Council of the Race (la raza in spanish) and the Chamber of Commerce get to negotiate a "Comprehensive Shafting of The American Citizens" behind closed doors? Since when does an organization representing foreign nationals breaking our laws get to rewrite our immigration laws to suit the lawbreakers? Isn't this akin to allowing NAMBLA to rewrite our laws regarding child predators? Or allowing organized crime syndicates to rewrite racketeering, gambling, prostitution, and extortion laws?
We The People are being told by our representatives that we should sit down and shut up while they invite in the entire world. We The People should get some say in this matter. Another amnesty will set off a stampede like we have never seen before. There is not much time to save our country. All the money and power are on the side of shoving this amnesty down our throats. The RNC wants an amnesty candidate, don't vote for one. |
|
|
I respect your positions and arguments, they are pretty much valid. But to say what evidence have we of McCain wanting the borders sealed, look no further than Pres. Bush's plan that he pushed in the Senate. One of the major provisions was to build the wall and certify that the borders were secure. The problem of course, was that Bush's plan also called for a pathway to citizenship for those already here, which obviously didn't go over too well with Republicans. What evidence do we have for MOST of our Congress doing anything about the illegal immigration issue? Should we then assume, using your logic, that they all want open borders? I don't think so. Now if we're going by what most of them have been saying, McCain included, they want the borders secured, and need to come up with bi-partisan legislation to get it done (and soon!). Otherwise, we are stuck with broken borders and de facto amnesty until Congress gets something done about it, which honestly doesn't seem likely in the near future. |
|
"McCain is currently on the right side"
CURRENTLY!? Meaning this stance has or will change. Doesn't that mean he is a flip flopper, or are we not allowed to call him one cause he has declared himself a "straight talker". |
|
|
McCain "reaching out" to conservatives. Kind of sounds like he's on the wrong side of the aisle to begin with. |
|
His ego- self-righteous, belligerent,and vulgar character is the reason we will NOT accept him- he is unfit for the ultimate power of POTUS.
He has not, will not, admit he was/is wrong on the destruction illegals cause to our treasury, environment (see photos of trash 100 miles from the border), culture, rule of law- killing police officers and citizens driving legally on our streets.
He has not changed; he's only saying what he thinks he must to get elected. Have you forgotten the massive effort we had to make to stop his dead-of-night bill, while he said "I always do what's right"- yeah, in HIS opinion, while 70% of citizens shouted "NO". And keep in mind his "outreach director "- Juan Hernandez, Mexican citizen and chief booster for illegals.
Who would "certify the borders are secure"? RINO Arnold, Janet(D-AZ), Richardson(D-NM),Perry (RINO-TX)- all favoring illegal immigration.
If he were honest, he could right now demand the Bush administration accelerate the double fence required by the 2006 law, on a pace to completion by mid-2009. (As is, SEVEN miles are planned in AZ this year!) He could in Arizona right now support the sheriff and county attorney who are doing their best to round up illegals, convict the criminals and deport the
others. He's not doing either one. He only wants the power of POTUS to become King John. |
|
...with conservatives. He had a chance with his CPAC speech, but if fell flat. Aside from a minor tweak to an Amnesty position that is still wholly unacceptable (that being to "secure the border" before he grants the amnesty), his message was
a) I stand on my record (no help for me there in finding a way to vote for you, McCain)
b) I will continue reaching across the isle (now you're just getting nasty, McCain - I hear "I don't need you conservatives" all over that).
and c) "Everyone just calm down". Enough said.
I've said this before, to all you Poll watchers, Moderates, and to you conservatives willing to give in because you live in absolute terror of the dems winning...you need to focus your efforts and energy on McCain. HE is the one who needs to show US he is willing to make consessions to us.
It's amazing to me that you all, along with emotional opportunistic twits like Medved, would hammer and bully and rage against the bedrock conservatives about "keeping the coalition". In reality, you don't LIKE us or our beliefs, and you are just as divisive to our movement as you claim we are for opposing him.
I'm insulted that anyone takes my sacrificing my principles for granted. |
|
You say WI has a chance to go for McCain, I will post what I said before.
**
For all those...
... who don't believe us when we say there is a great discontent within the LARGE conservative base.
There are those here who say that the conservatives who loath McCain to the point that they won't support him even against Hillary, won't vote for him, won't donate to him, and won't volunteer for him are few and far between.
They say that when the election comes around we will all fear Hillary so much that we will flock to McCain, grudgingly, and at least vote for him.
I say to you that you STONGLY UNDERESTIMATE the number of people that feel this way. Last night I attended a Lincoln Day Dinner in northern Wisconsin (You know, one of those pesky swing states), and of the 40-50 attending I could find virtually no one who wants to support McCain. The Pro-McCain sentiment on a scale of 0 to 10 was at about a 0.1. This dinner is a gathering of the people in the area who are the most active, represent the largest portion of donations, who invaribly volunteer, campaign, debate, and promote Republican canidates. And they had NO enthusiasm for McCain at all. If this is any indication of things to come, you McCain supporters better hope my read of this is wrong.
** |
|
In John McCains world, he will have the governors of border states certify that the borders are secured. The only problem with that are the governors of the border states are pro illegal.
I can speak specifically for Perry in Texas. He has made it clear that he, in no way, will do anything to quell the sanctuary city policies of San Antonio, Houston, Dallas.....
You think Schwarzenegger will do anything?
How about Nepolitano?
I dont know, it doesn't look that good to me....
As far as being a maverick, he would not have that name if he actually supported his party views. So not pandering to government give-a-ways would only make him a maverick to the Democrats. |
|
|
Your points are well taken, but John McCain's biggest obstacle to overcome is TRUST. Conservatives don't believe him - we have been sold down the river to many times to believe that he really wants to secure the border. Tim Russert asked two weeks ago woulD he sign McCain Kennedy immigration bill if it reached his desk as President and he said yes, but then tried to say that it won't reach his desk. With him as President and the Democrats running Congress, it is disingenuous to believe that it won't reach his desk. HE IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED!!! |
|
RASHUM writes:
"McCain can and will win in November. Despite all the negative news Republicans have been receiving he still leads Hillary and trails Obama by a tiny margin."
Wrong. Look at RealClearPolitics, and focus on the polls starting from the leadup and aftermath of Super Tuesday, when McCain solidified frontrunner status. You'll see the trend is moving aginst him:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/g eneral_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/g eneral_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
McCain is trending downward. The reasons for this are simple. McCain benefits from name recognition (always has) and a soft MSM. Now that it's him against the MSM's ideological ally (either Dem), expect all his (fairly serious) negatives to be highlighted. Expect the Dem warroom to unload on him big time.
McCain doesn't just make a bad candidate for all the principled reason we discuss here. He's old. He's angry. He looks confused, tired. He stutters over words. Put him next to an Obama and he's toast, with those squishy moderates to who princpled left/right positions aren't as important as worrying the man will keel over on stage.
Romney would have done well with moderates precisely because he governed well is a blue state, because he is articulate, fit, with a positive attitude. I believe unlike McCain (and again, not related to positions of principle, just for the sake of this argument), his numbers would trend in the other direction. He has substantive comments about issues that would counteract the cult of personality at play with Obama.
This is why everyone agrees that Romney is the future of the party. Huckabee may play a part too, but Huck is also corrupt and not a true conservative on anything other then social issues. Huck is not as well vetted as McCain in this, but over time (before 2012) he will be.
|
|
|
What about McCain not voting for the rebate. Instead of picking a side he sat this one out along with many more votes this past year. He cares more for himself than the people he is supposed to represent. No way can he win against Obama, so we all lose. Thanks GOP. My wish is that even one of his endorsers would step up and say they have changed their mind instead of goose-stepping to the GOP drumbeat. Only one candidate left who can reach the masses and you have said it would take a miracle to win. Give the people a chance to vote. Out with the old, in with the new. |
|
For real conservative "Straight Talk" I recomend: http://nowaymccain.com
At least it's factual! |
|
Sorry Bigkam, I don't hate McCain and have no paranoia for the man. I just simply won't vote for him because of the amnesty he will push. I am merely trying to point out to conservatives that there is nothing conservative about McCain's "new" approach to immigration. The only thing that has changed is that promised border security (with no details) will PRECEDE amnesty instead of his old approach of promised border security and amnesty happening simultaneously. Either way we still get the amnesty and the idea that the border ever becomes completely secure is laughable.
Do you have any recent statements or positions to counter my analysis? Or for that matter any history or efforts by McCain that debunks my argument that he likes the flow of cheap 3rd world labor. What efforts has he ever made to stop the flow of illegals? |
|
|
You must not be good with numbers. McCain can and will win in November. Despite all the negative news Republicans have been receiving he still leads Hillary and trails Obama by a tiny margin. Considering the war the Democrats are going to have at their convention and that the Republican convention will be in September. McCain is going to go into September with a lead. Although McCain was not the top pick of many conservative, they will vote for him. That is unless the want to see their taxes raised, and radical Islam to go unchecked. The press has been focused on Republican states Democrats could win, but fail to mention all the Democratic states McCain would win. McCain has a shot in NH, PA, WI, MN, NJ and OR. |
|
|
McCain's idea of "securing the border" will be to get somebody to "certify" that it's secure. What a bunch of baloney, and we aren't buying it. |
|
The fatal flaw in this whole theory is the path to Super Tuesday talk radio is trying to nomiate McCain. He can not win a majority of party support because the 66% that voted against him would never vote for him. For all the hype about the so-called evangellical vote the real story is CPAC. Romney couldn't catch the carrot talkradio used to try to get him nominated. The real question is are they just setting up for his 2012 run? To the CPAC crowd it is Romney or Hillary then Romney. The left wing of the GOP is clearly playing Clinton party politics
|
|
|
I do think that this is critical to McCain maintaining those independent voters that will be crucial in this election. He has vowed many times (and voted twice already) to keep the tax cuts permanent, so I think he is talking about this and has evidence to back it up. He has also talked about having border state governors certify that their borders are secure, but I think he needs to lay out a more concrete plan for us to see before I am sold on this topic. But honestly, the people that continue talking about how "McCain wants many more illegals to come" are just being foolish, and are obviously blinded by a hatred for the man that borders on paranoia. Even if I don't completely agree with Pres. Bush's immigration reforms that McCain pushed in the Senate, I think it's plain to see that in terms of America's security, that has always been McCain's number-one priority. |
|
How do you square this... "I don't have that big a problem with the ones that have ben here a while,have a steady job and no criminal record."
With this... "I think this approach minus any hint of amnesty..."
So in other words you don't have a problem with granting amnesty to the illegals who are guilty of document fraud, tax fraud, Social Secuirty Fraud, and identity theft just not the ones guilty of drunk driving, rape, murder, etc.) so long as there is no hint of amnesty. Care to explain? That just doesn't make any sense to me... Give most of them amnesty just do it without any hint of amnesty??? |
|
The fatal flaw in this whole theory is the path to Super Tuesday talk radio is trying to nomiate McCain. He can not win a majority of party support because the 66% that voted against him would never vote for him. For all the hype about the so-called evangellical vote the real story is CPAC. Romney couldn't catch the carrot talkradio used to try to get him nominated. The real question is are they just setting up for his 2012 run? To the CPAC crowd it is Romney or Hillary then Romney. The left wing of the GOP is clearly playing Clinton party politics
|
|
Excuse me. Did I read that correct? McCain is now on the conservative side of the immigration issue?
Yes, he has said that he now wants border security first (God only knows how he defines that empty statement), but he won't sign onto any border security efforts and pledge until he has his true goal (amnesty) as a part of the deal. In other words there is no way we are getting a haphazard pledge of border security unless the amnesty immediately follows as a part of the deal.
Does someone have any recent statements or policy positions from McCain that demonstrate he is willing to deal with border security independent of any other promises, guarantees, or concessions? I didn't think so. Let's not get carried away. It is absolutely disingenuous and outright fraudulent to claim that McCain's position on immigration is now conservative. He just recently said he would still sign his failed McCain-Kennedy Amnesty Bill so how has anything really changed? He still wants wants the amnesty. Have we forgotton about his shameless hypothetical sob story of the 90 year old illegal alien grandmother with a son serving overseas in the military? How can we possibly deport her??? (sob, sob, sob)
Please Mr. Lewis, you do your reputation a sad disservice by blatantly ignoring the obvious. McCain is an open borders, illegal alien loving, Mexico first kind of Presidential candidate. If McCain could wave a magic wand and all of the illegal aliens could humanely be teleported back to their country of origin he wouldn't use this magical power. Why? Because he wants them here -- and many more to follow. There's nothing in McCain's history to suggest otherwise. |
|
McCain refused to pander in Michigan and lost - but worse, the guy who did pander, Romney not only won but also became the darling of this website and talk radio.
So, pandering does have its benefits - your website alone proves it |
|
Is a nice catch phrase but why hasn't he said what he would do to get it accomplished? He's also said the border governors have to declare it secure.What are the tenants of a secure border? Is there a certian number still coming in that's ok? Is he going to put troops down there? They can't get enough border guards because they have to learn to speak Spanish first.Unless they change that rule,they'll never get enough guards. The virtual fence is an absolute joke. What good does it do to see people coming in from a 100 miles away? The only true way to secure the border is to shut down the magnets.That means a lifetime cap on welfare benefits,somewhere around 5 years, most importantly HUD housing. All these people piled into HUD housing allows them to have money to send back home. The "anchor baby" mother gets the housing then the relatives sneak in and live with them. They get side jobs and that is the money that is sent back to pay the coyotes to smuggle more people back in.
I don't have that big a problem with the ones that have ben here a while,have a steady job and no criminal record. I want the 2 million criminals deported which McCain has said he would do. I want lifetime caps on welfare benefits and i want tamper proof ID for the workers. I think this approach minus any hint of amnesty would be acceptable to both conservatives and independents. |
|
|
These are good points and well reasoned. Thanks for bringing them to our attention. I hope McCain will hear them and followup. Even though I have been against McCain and still do not plan to vote for him, I am open to genuine/believable 'course corrections' on his part on those matters which we anti McCain voters have been so opposed to him. Thanks again for posting these, Matt, and please pass on any other info you may get on these matters. |
|
|
|