Monday, January 21, 2008
|
|
Giuliani Attacks McCain: "McCain Not A Fiscal Conservative"
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
11:26 AM
|
Rudy is playing to win in Florida. From Team Giuliani this AM:
JOHN MCCAIN: NOT A FI$CAL CONSERVATIVE
http://www.joinrudy2008.com/article/pr/1181
“Rudy Giuliani is the only fiscal conservative in the race and it’s easy to see why. John McCain not only voted with the Democrats against the Bush tax cuts twice, he’s voted over 50 times for higher taxes. With a record like that, you can’t tell if John McCain will stand up to the Democrats in Washington who want to raise taxes or stand with them.” -- Katie Levinson, Rudy Giuliani Communications Director
MCCAIN HAS VOTED FOR HIGHER TAXES MORE THAN 50 TIMES
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA): “We Would Have Had A Much Bigger Tax Cut If It Was Not For John McCain.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “A Conservative Case Against McCain,” National Review, article.nationalreview.com, 1/14/08, Accessed 1/18/08)
In His Twenty-Year Senate Career, John McCain Has Voted At Least Fifty-Two Times For Higher Taxes On The American People – That’s More Than Twice A Year.*
McCain Was One Of Only Two Republican Senators To Vote Against President Bush’s 2001 Tax Cuts And One Of Only Three Republican Senators To Vote Against President Bush’s 2003 Tax Cuts. (H.R. 1836, Senate Vote #170, Conference Report Agreed To: 58-33: R 46-2, D 12-31, 5/26/01, McCain Voted Nay; Lori Nitschke and Wendy Boudreau, “Provisions Of The Tax Law,” CQ Weekly, 6/9/01; H.R. 2, Senate Vote #179, Passed 51-49: R 48-3, D 3-45, I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, Senate Vote #196, Conference Report Agreed To 51-50: R 48-3, D 2-46, I 0-1, With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 5/23/03, McCain Voted Nay)
- And McCain Questioned The “Economic Premises” Of The Bush Tax Cuts. “Nor does McCain spare the rod in rejecting Bush’s tax cuts, especially the $1.37 trillion blockbuster Bush pushed through Congress in 2001, criticizing its economic premises and its likely impact. At best, it’s a long-term economic stimulus, not the immediate boost the economy needs, McCain said. ‘All the predicates for the 2001 tax cuts and all the predictions for its results were absolutely, completely wrong,’ he said. And it will worsen the deficit before it ever helps the economy, he added.” (John Farmer, Op-Ed, “Maverick McCain Maintains A National Constituency,” Newhouse News Service, 2/24/03)
McCain Has Voted At Least Seven Times Against Repealing All Or Part Of Death Tax Through 2002. (H.R. 8, CQ Vote #195: Rejected 44-54: R 3-51; D 41-3, 7/14/00, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #124: Motion Rejected 43-56: R 2-47; D 41-9, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #135: Rejected 48-51: R 6-43; D 42-8, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #132: Motion Rejected 41-58: R 1-48; D 40-10, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #149: Motion Rejected 44-54: R 4-43; D 39-11; I 1-0, 6/12/02, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 8, Senate Vote #151, Motion Rejected: 54-44, McCain Voted Nay, 6/12/02; S. 1730, Senate Vote 28, Amendment Agreed To: 56-42, McCain Voted Nay, 2/13/02)
McCain Has Voted Against Capital Gains And Dividends Tax Cuts At Least 5 Times. (H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #115: Motion Rejected 47-51: R 40-8; D 7-43; 5/21/01, McCain Voted Nay; S. 476, CQ Vote #127: Motion Agreed To 62-38: R 14-37; D 47-1; I 1-0, 4/9/03, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1054, CQ Vote #171: Adopted 51-49: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1; With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, Senate Vote #179, Passed 51-49: R 48-3, D 3-45, I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, Senate Vote #196, Conference Report Agreed To 51-50: R 48-3, D 2-46, I 0-1, With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 5/23/03, McCain Voted Nay; Alan Ota And Martha Angle, “Senate Clears Tax Cut Package For Bush’s Signature,” CQ Today, 5/23/03)
McCain Sponsored And Voted For A Bill To Raise Cigarette Tax By $1.10 Per Pack. (S. 1415, CQ Vote #143: Motion Agreed To 72-26: R 27-26; D 45-0, 5/20/98, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1415, CQ Vote #161: Motion Rejected 57-42: R 14-40; D 43-2, 6/17/98, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1415, CQ Vote #162: Motion Rejected 53-46: R 11-43; D 42-3, 6/17/98, McCain Voted Yea; Senate Republican Policy Committee, “Tobacco Bill/Strike $755 Billion Payments,” 5/20/98)
LIKE A DEMOCRAT, MCCAIN SAID THE BUSH TAX CUTS WERE TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY
McCain: “I Cannot In Good Conscience Support A Tax Cut In Which So Many Of The Benefits Go To The Most Fortunate At The Expense Of Middle-Class Americans.” (Janet Hook, “Congress Sends $1.35-Trillion Tax Cut To Bush,” Los Angeles Times, 5/27/01)
McCain: “I Want To See Tax Cuts, If They Are Necessary, Go To Working Americans, Not The Wealthiest.” (Richard Ruelas, Op-Ed, “McCain Isn’t Saying ‘Oui’ To Bush’s Tax Cut Plan,” The Arizona Republic, 4/25/03)
“And McCain’s Stated Opposition To The Bush 2001 And 2003 Tax Cuts Was Largely Based On Socialist, Class-Warfare Rhetoric — Tax Cuts For The Rich, Not For The Middle Class. The Public Record Is Full Of These Statements. Today, He Recalls Only His Insistence On Accompanying Spending Cuts.” (Mark R. Levin, “The Real McCain Record,” National Review, 1/11/08)
IN 2004, MCCAIN SAID HE WOULD NOT SUPPORT EXTENDING THE BUSH TAX CUTS
In 2004, McCain Said He Would Not Support Extending The Bush Tax Cuts. McCain: “I would have--I voted against the tax cuts because of the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans. I would clearly support not extending those tax cuts in order to help address the deficit.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 4/11/04)
* (S. 1920, CQ Vote #403: Agreed To 53-41: R 21-24; D 32-17 12/10/87, McCain Voted Nay; S. 1630, CQ Vote #45: Agreed To 71-26: R 28-17; D 43-9, 3/28/90, McCain Voted Yea; S. 3209, CQ Vote #285: Rejected 49-51: R 12-33; D 37-18, 10/18/90, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 11, CQ Vote #235: Motion Agreed To 56-38: R 28-14; D 28-24, 9/24/92, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 13, CQ Vote #224: Motion Agreed To 53-47: R 44-10; D 9-37, 5/25/95, McCain Voted Nay; S. 949, CQ Vote #137: Motion Rejected 41-58: R 12-42; D 29-16, 6/26/97, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1415, CQ Vote #143: Motion Agreed To 72-26: R 27-26; D 45-0, 5/20/98, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1415, CQ Vote #161: Motion Rejected 57-42: R 14-40; D 43-2, 6/17/98, McCain Voted Yea; S. 1415, CQ Vote #162: Motion Rejected 53-46: R 11-43; D 42-3, 6/17/98, McCain Voted Yea; S. 442, CQ Vote #306: Motion Rejected 28-69: R 27-27; D 1-42, 10/07/98, McCain Voted Nay; S. 1429, CQ Vote #243: Motion Rejected 58-42: R 13-41; D 44-1; I 1-0, 7/30/99, McCain Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 101, CQ Vote #55: Motion Agreed To 52-48: R 51-4; D 1-44, 4/05/00, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 101, CQ Vote #68: Rejected 44-56: R 5-50; D 39-6, 4/07/00, McCain Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 101, CQ Vote #69: Adopted 51-49: R 6-49; D 45-0, 4/07/00, McCain Voted Yea; H. Con. Res. 290, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 50-48: R 50-4; D 0-44, 4/13/00, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #195: Rejected 44-54: R 3-51; D 41-3, 7/14/00, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #194: Motion Rejected 14-84: R 11-43; D 3-41, 7/14/00, McCain Voted Nay; H. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #71: Rejected 47-52: R 1-49; D 46-3, 4/04/01, McCain Voted Yea; H. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #82: Adopted 54-46: R 5-45; D 49-1, 4/05/01, McCain Voted Yea; H. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #84: Adopted 53-46: R 4-45; D 49-1, 4/06/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #112: Rejected 44-56: R 2-48; D 42-8, 5/17/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #115: Motion Rejected 47-51: R 40-8; D 7-43, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #117: Motion Rejected 48-51: R 3-46; D 45-5, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #124: Rejected 43-56: R 2-47; D 41-9, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #126: Rejected 49-49: R 5-44; D 44-5, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #127: Motion Rejected 43-56: R 1-48; D 42-8, 5/21/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #132: Motion Rejected 41-58: R 1-48; D 40-10, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #133: Rejected 46-53: R 2-47; D 44-6, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #135: Rejected 48-51: R 6-43; D 42-8, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #138: Rejected 46-53: R 2-47; D 44-6, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #149: Rejected 50-50: R 4-46; D 46-4, 5/22/01, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #161: Motion Rejected 49-51: R 49-1; D 0-50, 5/23/01, McCain Voted Nay; S. 1052, CQ Vote #214: Sustained 57-41: R 7-40; D 49-1; I 1-0, 6/29/01, McCain Voted Yea; S.1731, CQ Vote #28: Adopted 56-42: R 45-2; D 11-39; I 0-1, 2/13/02, McCain Voted Nay; S.1731, CQ Vote #28: Adopted 56-42: R 45-2; D 11-39; I 0-1, 2/13/02, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #151: Motion Rejected 54-44: R 45-2; D 9-41; I 0-1, 6/12/02, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #149: Motion Rejected 44-54: R 4-43; D 39-11; I 1-0, 6/12/02, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 8, CQ Vote #151: Motion Rejected 54-44: R 45-2; D 9-41; I 0-1, 6/12/02, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 23, CQ Vote #62: Adopted 51-48: R 47-4; D 4-43; I 0-1, 3/20/03, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 23, CQ Vote #68: Rejected 46-53: R 1-50; D 44-3; I 1-0, 3/21/03, McCain Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 23, CQ Vote #106: Rejected 48-52: R 47-4; D 1-47; I 0-1, 3/26/03, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 23, CQ Vote #108: Adopted 56-44: R 50-1; D 6-42; I 0-1, 3/26/03, McCain Voted Nay; S. 476, CQ Vote #127: Motion Agreed To 62-38: R 14-37; D 47-1; I 1-0, 4/09/03, McCain Voted Yea; H. Con. Res. 95, CQ Vote #134: Adopted 51-50: R 49-2; D 1-47; I 0-1, With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 4/11/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #179: Passed 51-49: R 48-3; D 3-45; I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; S. 1054, CQ Vote #171: Adopted 51-50: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1, With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 5/15/03, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #196: Adopted 51-50: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1, With Vice President Cheney Casting A “Yea” Vote, 5/23/03, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 95, CQ Vote #38: Adopted 51-48: R 4-47; D 46-1; I 1-0, 3/10/04, McCain Voted Yea; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #170: Adopted 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31, 5/26/01, McCain Voted Nay; H.R. 4520, CQ Vote #210: Motion Agreed To 66-14: R 41-3; D 24-11; I 1-0, 10/10/04, McCain Voted Nay; S. Con. Res. 18, CQ Vote #53: Rejected 50-50: R 5-50; D 44-0; I 1-0, 3/16/05; S. 1932, CQ Vote #283: Motion Rejected 50-49: R 6-49; D 43-0; I 1-0, 11/3/05, McCain Voted Yea; S. 2020, CQ Vote #340: Motion Rejected 50-48: R 6-48; D 43-0; I 1-0, 11/17/05, McCain Voted Yea)
###
|
|
are PANDERERS. As Huckabee is using evangelicals to further his political ambition, portraying himself as the dream candidate of the religious right.
Just as now for the first time, people are interested in all sorts of mormon religious beliefs, which is quite irrelevant to the candidate's stand on issues.
Those using religion as wedge issue, in politics, have no place in public office.
Faith should not be manupulated. |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI
|
|
First we had real conservatives. Now we have real christians. What a shameful party we have become if this is how we approach elections.
And here here to the last comment. McCain is hated by alot of people in his own state (By the way Arizona has a ruthless duo in McCain and Kyl) as well as the pork barrel freeloaders who used to manage the republican congress (Thankfully DeLay and Santorum were ejected, unfortunately not by our party) Everyone talks about trying to change Washington but if anyone goes after one of the real problems which is selfish pilfering of the treasury for private projects they are reviled.
Why don't the tax cut lovers yell:
Bridge to nowhere
2000 B1 Bombers while we have no armor
Because then they will be called on their own pork barrelness.
|
|
All of this only proves that unlike all the
other Republicans on the hill McCain is not
a Borrow and Spender. Talk show hosts like
to bash the irresposible Republicans who
expanded the deficit, and they decry the
Tax and Spend Democrats, but if a Republican
opposes a Borrow and Spend policy the Talkers
want us to question his conservative credentials.
Some of these big Talkers should put down
their microphones and get a real job. They
have no investment in the policies that their
agendas would foist on the rest of us, and
they have the luxury of being responsible only
to their sponsors for their ratings. Great way
to advance an agenda, lousy way to run a country.
|
|
|
Last election we conservatives were defeated at every level, in Ohio. Our present Gov. in the disguise of a christian conservative robbed the election from the real christain fiscal conservative, Ken Blackwell. I am still heartbroken. |
|
"Anyone who supports
keeping the income tax is no conservative. The income tax is the most repressive tool used by the elite to keep the masses in line."
I live in Ohio which has a moderate income tax and my brother lives in Texas, which has no income tax. But you know what he pays every January? Property taxes that are about 50% higher than mine (and I live in a relatively high property tax area). He also has a water/sewer district tax, a school district tax, a utility district tax, a public hospital tax, etc. Not to mention higher sales tax than what we have here.
There is nothing that keeps the masses down more than sales taxes. Yet that is what Texas relies on. And before you go dissing income taxes, ask someone in Florida what they think about their property taxes.
|
|
I meant the blogger no disrespect by saying that mormons planned to organize to vote for their man. But when 95% + of one religious group votes for a person is a strong rallying point. I am jewish and I can tell you now that a jewish republican would get 90% + of that vote unless he was a total jerk. There are less jews than mormons in America though and particularly less jewish republicans unfortunately.
Mormons though are a significant voting block in a few states though and in a Republican primary are a significant block. I believe that you are most likely right that you would support Romney even if he was a mormon, but be honest, his mormonism is something you relate to, making him an easier sell to you as a candidate. With evangelicals it is the opposite. They may distrust a mormon (or a jew or a muslim etc.) so that candidate would have to work harder to get over that hurdle.
I will agree with you on this though. Huckabee took religious campaigning to a new level. The fact is though Romney does not need to campaign as a mormon to get the mormon vote. Mormons would look at a mormon president as a national acceptance, the same with any other minority religion, especially one that wants to get bigger.
|
|
"MA is a lost cause and there was little to nothing Mitt could do about it."
Massachusetts is one of the wealthiest, best educated states in the union, with low divorce rates, high life expectancy, low teen pregnancy, and little crime. That you would call it a "lost cause" given the REAL status of Massachusetts says much about the cons . . . they truly do want every state to be Mississippi! |
|
Pasadena Phil wrote:
A NYC mayor has a strangle-hold over the budget process and Rudy had the benefit of billions of federal $$$ that poured in after 9/11. In MA, the governor has little power since Democrats hold at least 130 of the 160 legislative seats. Big difference. Besides, when tax revenues go up due to economic growth, it is not the same thing as raising taxes. MA is a lost cause and there was little to nothing Mitt could do about it. That is what MA voters wanted and they got it.
Only problem with your theory is New York City experienced signficant growth before 9/11 due in part to Mayor Giuliani's fiscal and tax cutting policies (while Massachusetts was still stagnating and the state fourth from the bottom in economic growth), by the time NYC recovered from the immediate economic effects of 9/11, Rudy was already out of office.
I am not going to blame Taxachusetts' problems all on Mitt Romney. Governor Romney was obviously better than his Democrat opponents, but Massachusetts was not turned around on his watch. |
|
|
to cut tax revenues and keep on spending? That is what McCain opposed and what, unfortunately for my 11 year old, what the rest of the cons chose to do. And MCCAIN is the bad guy because he would not go along? Insane . . . . |
|
|
in this election year are: 1) Second Amendment rights; 2) judicial appointments; 3)life issues (ending legalized abortion, protecting traditional marriage and not funding embryonic stem cell research); 4) eliminating the income tax. That is why I support Huckabee. Other issues have importance, but those are my big four. Other things I support are: smaller government (reducing the size, scope and power of the central government -- kind of like states' rights); sealing the borders; and reducing our dependence on other nations for our energy. |
|
The Republican are in real peril to lose this election and, as you do predict, with big tent ideology, and amensty. The conservatism with solid belief in limited government, free interprise, federalist principles, will just collapse.
That is why the MSM are pushing candidates they believe the Democrats can easily put away.
To tell the average voter that Republicans are no different than Democrats, is political suicide.
The next election is the most crucial election. For the sake of the supreme court judges, case for legal, lawful immigration, secure borders, and a strong national security, taxes, these still are Republican issues, and deserve winning the next election. |
|
|
that the government will NOT grow smaller under a McCain presidency. That would be contrary to everything McCain has accomplished in his political career. John McCain has been on a government payroll ever since he left the Naval Academy. |
|
keeping the income tax is no conservative. The income tax is the most repressive tool used by the elite to keep the masses in line. From its invasion into personal privacy to the favors it grants to those with the money to sway Congressional voters, its main purpose is to keep the masses in line. If you do not understand that, I will pray that you stay home during the primaries and in November.
I did not know that McCain did not support traditional marriage, although maybe I should have since he dumped his first wife and found a replacement.
Also, how in the world can the Mitten claim to be conservative when he was elected governor in the most liberal state in the Union?
Giuliani is clearly not a conservative, i.e. his views on abortion, homosexuality and gun control.
However, they are all Republicans and anyone of them will make a bettter president than any of the Democrats.
|
|
|
Your hypothetical history under a McCain administration is already being written. It's called the North American Union. In my opinion all the candidates save for Ron Paul, are globalists who will help bring this about. |
|
seems to be a thread running here lately about John McCain. Frankly, I see little to no difference between McCain and Hilliray when it comes to their stated positions on tax policy, "global warming," ANWR, big government nannyism, immigration, etc. I really can't see it. E.g. "middle class tax cuts" is a nice sound bite, but when one looks at who really pays income tax, the guv-mint passing out alms to the middle class won't really stimulate the economy unless Walmart has THAT big an influence. But the term sure sounds good doesn't it?
The only difference I DO see between the two is Iraq, although I'm sure McCain will listen to "reasonable" arguments on that score. If turning RINO is the salvation of the party, probably better to have Hilliray or Obama in the Oval Office to explain again why liberals in power is a bad thing. |
|
Is Romney Viable? [Jonathan Adler]
Romney leads in the delegate count, but I think this weekend's results show astounding weakness in the candidate who was supposed to be the most electable conservative in the race. Consider two things: 1) Romney spent $4 million and 22 days in South Carolina, and still finished behind Fred. 2) Romney has not one any seriously contested constest. Nevada? Wyoming? Please. Where Romney has made a major investment (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina) he has failed. Michigan? No other candidate made a comparable investment or effort to winning the state, so I'm not sure that helps the case.
What's Romney's problem? For many folks (my self included), it is a perceived insincerity. I too often get the sense that Romney is saying what he thinks folks want to hear instead of what he believes. It isn't just the "evolution" of his views, it is also the small things: The small, subtle exaggerations that arise when Romney is trying to ingratiate himself with various groups. (Remember Romney the life-long hunter?) The blatant pandering to the auto industry in Michigan in a way that suggests some very unconservative views. Romney's MBA style does not help much here, as it reinforces the perception of Romney as someone who solves problems without much regard to underlying ideological principle.
Does this mean Romney's finished? Not necessarily. In a one-on-one race, he may be the least bad option. There's no question I'd support Romney over Huckabee (Then again, I'd support anyone over Huckabee.) There also may be many folks who would support Romney over McCain. But unless the race winnows down to a one-on-one soon, I would think Romney's in trouble.
|
|
|
attempting to make a point and if so, what is it? |
|
|
Right back to you mothers basement. Your supporters are holding a rally there for you. |
|
|
A NYC mayor has a strangle-hold over the budget process and Rudy had the benefit of billions of federal $$$ that poured in after 9/11. In MA, the governor has little power since Democrats hold at least 130 of the 160 legislative seats. Big difference. Besides, when tax revenues go up due to economic growth, it is not the same thing as raising taxes. MA is a lost cause and there was little to nothing Mitt could do about it. That is what MA voters wanted and they got it. |
|
Mr.911 is a fruitcake
Mitt Flompney is slimeball
Go Ron Paul! |
|
|
on this blog, and you all know who i'm talking about, in a recent post suggested that a RINO, after all, is not so bad. Yesterday, Tom Brokaw, proclaimed the end of "dogma", or conservatism. Seems that the spammer and Brokaw have the same hope and desire. If this primary season has done anything at all, it has exposed those on this board, who really don't like conservative ideology as it has been defined and are attempting to redefine it in their own image. IT WILL NOT BE REDEFINED. You and Brokaw can spam until the cows come in, but you and your's will fail. |
|
Over the past week, Romney and Giuliani have been fighting a long-range battle of press releases over their records on taxes and spending. The fight turned to close quarters in Michigan Tuesday, when Giuliani shared a stage with Romney at a GOP debate.
"I brought taxes down by 17 percent," Giuliani said. "Under [Romney], taxes went up 11 percent per capita. I led. He lagged."
|
|
|
One thing is for sure, should Romney win FL, the entire establishment will now say that FL is not important. That would really be something for Rudy to lose in NY. We may also discover later that the GOP establishment will refuse to back Mitt should he win the nomination which is ok. Most of us conservatives have already left the party and we outnumber the GOP bobbleheads by a substantial margin these days. |
|
|
Actually it is the new Marist Poll. It would be really interesting if Romney did have a shot at NY. I would think he would have a better shot at CT and RI. |
|
|
is where the Conservatives lie. Not so much in NYC. BUT, if Romney carries Fl, he'll have a really great shot at NY and CA. If he can pull 2 of 3 of the big boys states, he'll be the nominee. If McCain pulls out FLA, NY won't be far behind. Folks like to vote for winners. Romney currently ahead with Rassmussen by 5. That's not enough. Hopefully by weeks end, it will be up by 10. |
|
McCain filed a brief in the Supreme Court with several Democrats against the Wisconsin Right to Life organization challenging its right to run informative ads prior to an election.
So McCain is anti- right to life and anti- free speech.
It is one thing to not be conservative it is something else to lie about it. |
|
If he gets elected and gets his amnesty, he will be remembered as the last Republican President. The GOP will go the way of the Whigs and whatever party arises to replace it will never dislodge the Democrat majority, thanks to his stupidity of importing voters for the Democrats. He may go down in history as the man who simultaneously destroyed his party and his country. Of course that would be in the underground English language history books. The official Spanish language history books will laud him as the man who delivered El Norte to The Race. (LaRaza in Spanish)
|
|
Romney is tied with Rudy for 2nd in NY behind McCain in the Siena poll.
A Romney victory in FL would stop McCain and allow Rudy to hold NY with some effort. I am not sure if a Romney victory in FL would allow Romney to win NY. I just do not have a feel for how many conservatives there are in NY. |
|
|
successful in suppressing the vote for McCain in South Carolina. His numbers were down compared to his numbers in 2000. Keep it up, guys, in exposing McCain for what he is, the anti-conservative. |
|
|
I believe history will use the Bush administration's wording that "the US ceased its occupation of Mexican territories to the west of the United States". |
|
Why have we all read so many of your EXACT same posts over and over again, with the same comments leading to the exact same links?
If it's not somebody else's work, then you're cutting/pasting your own rhetoric over and over every day, which is equally dull.
So if you're not a plagiarizer, then you're just terribly boring. I'm not sure which is worse.
CasualConservative.com
|
|
As many of you know, I'm a McCain guy, NOT a conservative, and I never pretended he was one, either. But the truth is the truth, and the more I look at this situation, I've come to realize that my man won't win.
Romney's ahead in Florida, but he doesn't need to win there. All he's got to do is hang on until Fred, Mike, and Rudy dwindle away, and it becomes clear to everyone that it's a two man race. At that point, all the reluctance towards Romney will end, and the conservatives will coalesce behind him.Conservatives will NEVER support my guy.
This is not what I want to see, and I predict Romney will easily lose the general election, but its what I think will happen. |
|
|
That is all McCain has been as a spending hawk. Show me one bill or one example where he led an effort to cut spending. "I told you so" is not an argument. We can all claim that one. The truth is that he saved all of his energy and enthusiasm confronting his own party at the most crucial juncture. He's a reliable team member racking up statistics until the game is on the line. That is when he stabs his "teammates" in the back to prove his "bipartisan" creds. He never, ever does that FOR the team. |
|
|
When I'm dead, like all good Democrats! |
|
Didn't you all love Romney's plan to let retired citizens not have to pay taxes on earned income? It was clinton that put the taxes on. I love his plans and his economic expertise and boy do we need it. What has hillary run, what has mccain run, what has huckster run? We need someone who knows about business, knows how to negotiate with other countries. I know the MSM hates him because they can't report on his drug use, his drinking, his drunk driving, his maritial infidelities, his leaving his wife when she has cancer (his wife has Multiple s) and his kids are descent, honorable, honest young men. He doesn't drink, smoke, or do drugs, nor does he become mean spirited when challenged - oh my gosh how dull will it be for the MSM to report on. I was in a store where there were several hispanic workers and they were saying that they love clinton and it was mentioned about his filantering and they said, "Oh all men do it!" Some men don't they are honorable. It would be nice to have that kind of a person as an example for our youth.
Do any of you know the statistics in jr high regarding oral sex? They are stagering and the comments are "It's not really sex." Well thanks billy clinton for that. |
|
So is there a difference between McCain and Hillary on taxesm, immigration, waterboarding?
(BTW, Waterboarding is psychological stress...it isn't torture...putting drills in the skulls of "Infidels" is torture.)
And do you remember WHY Juan McCain's campaign was dead last summer?
CasualConservative.com
|
|
|
I do not plagerize. I cut and past from conservatives and sources who support my arguments. The source is right there in the link. Is Hugh cutting and pasting someone else's thoughts when he does exactly the same thing? Of course not. The fact that I happen to agree with Michael Medved does not make what Michael Medved is saying wrong. Please do not lie about me just because you dislike what I am telling you. |
|
|
John McCain is not a conservative and we conservatives, know so. That's an undeniable fact. |
|
Shock or Disbelief--How could this be, his campaign was DEAD last summer?
Denial: McCain cannot win, Mitt Romney is the stronger candidate. He does not want to round up Mexicans and put them in concentration camps. A Republican cannot be trusted unless he is pro torture.
Anger: I am sitting out this election or voting for Hillary! Just watch me do it! I am going to join a third party of Neo Buchananites and I am stockpiling food and weapons in the mountains.
Guilt: How did we ever let this happen? What did I do to allow the GOP to sink so low?
Depression: Pass me the liquor. I feel sick.
Bargaining: McCain better make things right with the base, he has to get approval from Rush, Hannity and then agree to have Fred Thompson as his running made to keep him in line (actually even I hope for that!).
Acceptance and Hope: Well, it is better to win the general than to face President Hillary in the White House for possibly two terms. GO MCCAIN!
|
|
Great job cutting and pasting somebody else's thoughts and claiming them as your own Joe!
Would that be considered drinking pre-mixed Kool-Aid?
CasualConservative.com |
|
The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.
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 trio (McCain, Huckabee, Rudy) 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
|
|
"The Boston Herald? Isn't that a liberal newspaper? What else do you think they will report?"
Their political leanings are hardly relevant, any more than the New Republic's were with their piece on Paul's old newsletters.
Either the story is true, or it is not true. If the former, Romney is a liar or, at best, Clintonian in his statements.
If the latter, I would expect Romney to have a stronger reaction than either "They weren't invited to senior staff meetings." or "They couldn't possibly have any influence over me because I'm rich." |
|
We the People of the United States of America have the right to have our borders and our laws respected and enforced.
If we wish to keep our representative Republic, and our rule of law, we must elect a President who WILL secure the borders and enforce the laws. The actions of the next President will determine the fate of this great nation. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this will no longer be the United States of America.
The primary responsibility of the U.S. government is to protect the territorial integrity and people of this country. They have completely abdicated this responsibility. Both parties have been complicit in this. We are being told it is not possible to control our borders, enforce our laws, and thereby control our destiny as a nation. Hogwash. We are being sold out by corporations intent on importing workers for jobs that can't be exported with the taxpayers paying the true costs, financial and human. If we act like sheep and don't stop the inundation across our borders, we will lose our country without a bleat. |
|
Craig said. "I heard an interesting statistic. Half of Mitt Romney's vote totals in Nevada came from Mormons!"
I don't know the source of that but it sounds way inflated. The whole state has a population of only 6.8% Mormon and that includes children. And All Latter Day Saints are not Republican. Take Harry Reid for instance, the Democrat Majority Leader. He is a 'Mormon.' Besides if you take away even half of Romney's votes, that would leave him with still a substantial lead of 26% of the conservative vote. Still twice that of the nearest Republican candidate.
|
|
McCain, of course, voted against the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, while Romney didn’t support them as governor of Massachusetts. Noteworthy, however, is the fact that McCain favored the Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s, while Romney indicated a lack of support for the Reagan program during his unsuccessful 1994 Senate run against Ted Kennedy.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTQyODBlYzAyM2M2ZTYwY2 NjMzhkNGYxZjZjNzE4OTY=
Of course, McCain voted against the Tax Cuts as a protest for not agreeing to domestic spending limits. Had McCain's advice been followed, we could have even bigger tax cuts now. |
|
Looks to me like the term "Old Politics" just got a LOT older! Score another one for the status quo!
Maybe people actually believe that Washington isn't broken, and 4 years of McHillary is EXACTLY what we need!
CasualConservative.com
|
|
"I heard an interesting statistic. Half of Mitt Romney's vote totals in Nevada came from Mormons! I had no idea there were so many Mormons in Nevada, or maybe they are good at mobilization."
Well, since only 7% of Nevada's population is Mormon, it must have been mobilization.
Painting this is a Huckabee-style religious vote may be disingenuous though. Mormons tend to be very politically active (though you hear ZERO political talk from the pulpit, unlike the Huckabee situation) and likely came out in great numbers for previous Republican presidential nominees as well. Of course no one asked voters about Mormonism in exit polling for George Bush's primary run in Nevada in 2000, so I suppose we'll never know. But I'll bet a huge slice of Bush's support came from Mormon voters too.
One thing is for sure, no one was loading up the church busses and hauling Mormons to the voting stations. 1) Mormons don't have church busses, and 2) our church doesn't tell us how we should vote. Period.
"It is too bad for Romney that 70% of Utah is Mormon. If they can only distribute themselves among key states he would have it made in close votes."
Actually, it's 60%. Not that it matters much.
Ultimately, I'm voting for Romney not because he's a Mormon like me, but because he's built his substantial success on fiscally reinventing companies, getting rid of wasteful spending, and returning them to profitability. Which is *exactly* what this country needs right now.
In fact, I wish Romney *weren't* Mormon, so I could vote for him (which I would) without hearing that it's all about my religious beliefs. |
|
|
If they endorse Romney, I'm ok with that. I'm sure the Boston Herald disagrees. |
|
Here's another McCain supporter:
McCain’s message of cutting federal spending and eliminating budget earmarks is hitting home. More and more voters seem to be worried about excess government spending, and McCain remains the favorite on this issue. But McCain is now talking more like a spending and tax cutter, drawing the endorsement of time-tested supply-sider Jack Kemp and long-term deficit-spending foe Phil Gramm, the former Texas senator. Critically, McCain has pledged to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
Meanwhile, Sen. McCain is saying: “I told you so.” If the Bush tax cuts had been accompanied by stronger spending restraint, there would be plenty of budget room for large-scale across-the-board tax-rate cuts today.
Nevertheless, the McCain campaign is looking carefully at a possible corporate tax-cut proposal, as well as an elimination of the dividend tax as a means of ending the double tax on corporate profits. They’re also expected to unveil some new economic proposals in Michigan that would include a strong free-trade component.
As one McCain insider told me, “John is the strongest free trader in the country today, but never seems to get much credit for it.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTQyODBlYzAyM2M2ZTYwY2 NjMzhkNGYxZjZjNzE4OTY= |
|
I don't care if his family is wealthy.
I do care that he and his supporters appear to be spinning some kind of narrative that casts him as an anti-establishment outsider.
He's not. He's a member of the political class, and he insults our intelligence casting himself as anything but that.
|
|
|
someone named Joe and someone named McTec say that John McCain is a conservative. Someone named Rush Limbaugh and someone named Hugh Hewitt say that John McCain is not a conservative. Who's a conservative like me, suppose to believe? Granted, McTec says his stuff has been printed in The New York Times, long known to be sympathetic to conservative thought, so you see, that the decision is a difficult one. Hope, i can sort all this out. More as circumstances warrant. |
|
|
The Boston Herald? Isn't that a liberal newspaper? What else do you think they will report? Why would a guy who is almost a billionaire be kissing up to lobbyists? That is why the establishment hates him. Have your heard of any rumors about how his candidacy is helping anyone else's? NO! The reason the GOP is fielding a herd of candidates is to game the system against a conservative. Wait until Fred endorses McCain (looks more and more likely). How will the Fredheads react? Like Hillary after learning about Monica I suspect. I would love to have Duncan Hunter as the nominee but this election is basically Mitt against the world. |
|
|
|
Ask 100 people if a Conservative Republican or a Socialist Democrat said the following sentence;
“I Want To See Tax Cuts, If They Are Necessary, Go To Working Americans, Not The Wealthiest.”
CasualConservative.com
|
|
I loathe them both equally, but to placate you:
Given McCain's temperament, I'm less worried about his fiscal record than that he would probably launch a first strike against California if he ever had a cross word with Boxer/Feinstein. |
|
|
With LDS members voting. I voted for Mattethson (D-SLC) but Not for Reid (D-Nevada). One is conservative with a d behind his name, the other is a liberal with D behind his name. And since I don't vote in Nevada, I couldent vote for Reid anyway (not that I would have.) Only 8% of Nevada is LDS. A much lower percentage than Idaho, and Arizona. There are more LDS (but not higher percentage) in California than in Nevada. I know LDS folks who are Paul supports, some who are Clinton supporters and even a handfull of Obama supporters. There are more LDS in Florida than in Nevada. But as with CA, not a higher percentage. Utah is a given. We vote GOP here, regardless of the 'faith' factor. The exception would be Huckabee, who has only been to Utah once - in 1998 when he spoke at an Southern Baptist Convention Anti-Mormon convention. Rumors fly around here that Jon Huntsman - our current 'moderate' gov, is on McCain's short list for Veep. Hope that's not true, but Huntsman has expressed his support of McCain. Go Figure. IF McCain gets the nom, passes over the lapdog Huck in favor of Huntsman (not real likely as 2 westen states would not be a real big pull), then there would once again, be a rich mormon on the ticket. Personally, I'll take Romeny. I have a love/hate relationship with Gov. Huntsman. I adore his dad. But the son can stay or leave. No loss. |
|
Didn't take you for someone who has a green-eyed envy problem. I don't care if he's rich, what's wrong with money? The LOVE of money is the root of all evil. The Dems aren't in bed with special interests????The Boston Herald HATES Romney and I don't believe one word they say. Propaganda,period.Just like NYT and LA Times.Might as well read Provda.
What is a special interest, anyway? Life advocates, marriage and family values,tax cutters, balanced budget lovers, anti-illegal groups....don't we ALL have a special interest? |
|
|
|
... is that he is completely in bed with the global warming crowd and is fully prepared to use government force to make you comply with the wishes of radical environmentalists.
He explicitly endorsed the recent changes to the CAFE fuel economy standards -- these are changes that will essentially outlaw SUVs and full-size pick-up trucks. McCain wants to see you driving a much smaller vehicle and he is prepared to shut down any car company that dares to give you an alternative to his wishes.
McCain supports giving government the power to dictate what sort of light bulbs you can burn in your own home and where you can set your thermostat.
McCain is in favor of a global agreement for draconian CO2 emissions cuts -- which will be an economic disaster, throwing millions out of work. Too bad if you don't like it because according to McCain, "There is just too much pollution in the air."
McCain thinks that government should have the power to tell you what you can say about elected officials prior to elections.
McCain is an utter enemy of freedom.
|
|
You just don't get it do you!
This is a McCain trashing thread. Post your Romney trashing drivel somewhere else. |
|
|
Do actually have an argument to make? Why not cut and paste a poll or a link to Michael Medved instead? Like your man-love idol, you just can't handle disagreement. Anyone who disagrees with you is disingenuous, stupid, or so flat out wrong that a reasoned response is beneath you. Try using your noodle to actually think and reason. You have never, ever responded to the preponderance of facts that have been presented here about what is wrong with your idol McCain. Try that! You can't because he is indefensible in the context of the Republican party. He is LIBERAL DEMOCRAT! |
|
|
McCain thinks I'm not paying enough for my energy? I think I need that $50/hr lettuce picking job he once offered. |
|
"He just doesn't have to dance for his money which is infuriating to the other street monkeys."
No, he just has some lobbyists to do it for him. Despite his initial assertions to the contrary.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=106 7546&srvc=rss
Money Quote:
"Former Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney, who has cast himself as a Washington outsider and blasted his opponents’ ties to lobbyists, has more than a dozen federally registered lobbyists raising money for him and several others advising his campaign, records show."
The guy's a liar and in bed with special interests like the rest of them. If you're okay voting for him anyway, so be it, but don't pretend that he's some kind of outsider crusading against the establishment.
He's the latest scion of a political family with wealth and connections. He's practically a Bush brother. |
|
Hillary is still singing the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" tune (all the Dems, really), not realizing it is her swan song.
The only issue I have ever seen 75-80% of Americans agree on is stopping illegal aliens. Any GOP candidate that is credible (not Rudy, McCain, or Huckabee) on this issue could win in a landslide.
The biggest problem is the RNC has sold it's soul to the cheap labor express. They are determined to nominate an amnesty candidate, even if it means losing the election. Stupid Party, indeed.
|
|
I agree with Dread! :-)!!!! 10% tax rate sounds like a honeycomb!!!
Reduction in spending should start with SS and Medicare!
60+ continues their current benefits but privatize Medicare, give tax incentives to be healthy instead of sick!
50+ can get benfits at 72
40+ at 82
30+ no SSI but will have retirement 401K of their own.
The trillion (although I think it's less)on war spending is irrelavent because it kept us from another attack since 9/11 which cost the economy $2 trillion. Every year we delay fixing SSI/Medicare it cost $1.8 trillion more, according to Mr Watkins |
|
McCains voting record is a FACT no one
can distort:
THOSE are the FACTS; HIS 25 year DOCUMENTED RECORD:
Straight talk talker talks talks : LIES
PLUS::::::
--voted against the Bush tax cuts, one of only two Republican senators to do so;
--twice authored the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill with its Z Visas and path to citizenship;
--has done nothing to accelerate the construction of the border fence;
--stands behind McCain-Feingold even after the Supreme Court has struck down portions of it as unconstitutional;
--defends the Gang of 14 even though a long line of vacancies on the courts of appeal existed at the end of 1006 (and has only gotten longer in 2007);
--worked with Lindsey Graham to destroy the GOP's agenda in September of 2006 by grandstanding over the interrogation and treatment of terrorists bill;
--opposed drilling in ANWR; NOW supports kyoto treaty
--opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, twice;
--advocates a massive energy tax; (he even dictates why type of light bulbs you can use)
--backed the law of the sea treaty ( which gives control over our SOVEREIGN NATION TO THE UN:
__Hates and punishes success: tells Corporate America to shove it: so Corporate America moves off shore
|
|
Hugh, would take that bet. That's like betting the sun won't rise in the east tomorrow.
Also, an elite alert has been issued for McTec. To hear him, all who disagree with McCain are "nativist" and or "sophists". Incidentally, "sophist" is the word now used at all those DC, Manhattan elite cocktail parties, to describe us, conservatives who don't think the definition of conservative has changed. It was changed at some Republican consulting firm, so McCain could be called a conservative. |
|
King of FLIP FLOP FLIPPED MCCain has
flipped and lied about every major issue over his 25 years of Talking and LYING
1. Taxes
2. Immigration
3. Energy
4. Global Warming
5. ENERGY TAXES
6. Education
7. National security (protect SOVEREIGN USA)
a small list:
--voted against the Bush tax cuts, one of only two Republican senators to do so;
--twice authored the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill with its Z Visas and path to citizenship;
--has done nothing to accelerate the construction of the border fence;
--stands behind McCain-Feingold even after the Supreme Court has struck down portions of it as unconstitutional;
--defends the Gang of 14 even though a long line of vacancies on the courts of appeal existed at the end of 1006 (and has only gotten longer in 2007);
--worked with Lindsey Graham to destroy the GOP's agenda in September of 2006 by grandstanding over the interrogation and treatment of terrorists bill;
--opposed drilling in ANWR; NOW supports kyoto treaty, maybe or not sure again now:
--opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, twice;
--advocates a massive energy tax; (he even dictates why type of light bulbs you can use)
--backed the law of the sea treaty ( which gives control over our SOVEREIGN NATION TO THE UN:
__Hates and punishes success: tells Corporate America to shove it: so Corporate America moves off shore
|
|
Stop being disingenous, you did not even go through the motions of supporting Fred Thompson (although you did say a few positive Duncan Hunter things early on), you have been Mitt Romney's water boy forever.
And of course, you and HNAV are constantly kissing up to Hugh Hewitt (you both must have been unbearable brownnosers when you were in school). |
|
I heard an interesting statistic. Half of Mitt Romney's vote totals in Nevada came from Mormons!
I had no idea there were so many Mormons in Nevada, or maybe they are good at mobilization.
It is too bad for Romney that 70% of Utah is Mormon. If they can only distribute themselves among key states he would have it made in close votes.
|
|
These "Not real conservative" slogans are real sad and a real sickness in the Republican party.
McCain has consistently been called the patron saint of the pork cutters that now include Kyle and Coburn, who by the way have the same economic philosophy as McCain. These guys come from the conservative hawk school of government. That a dollar spent on government goes 70% down the toilet as oppose to 30% productive value because of deficits and inefficiency. They know that deficits are the most inefficent spending of all and have frequently threatened the congress with witholding tax cuts without commensurate spending cuts. This is not what many Republicans like, but it is a hard core conservative philosophy, which is why McCain is endorsed by just about every major spending cutter in Congress. Sure McCain acts like as jerk over it. He will hardly get his way by going "Mr. Santorum can you please stop having lobbyist open houses every friday. It is rather unseemly to our party. Also do you think that it is a little much to give 100 million dollars of federal money to build a new river park in Pittburgh."
It is interesting that Hugh touts the deposed senators Santorum and Allen in their criticism of McCain as well as the unlamented Congressman DeLay. These men were McCain's primary nemesis in the Congress over pork and still take their shots at him
I also enjoy how bloggers do not reason in reponse. They repeat word for word the lines of the radio talk show hosts and throw out these "real" conservative platitudes.
Face it you guys. All you want is tax cuts. You never have cared about spending, and you never bring it up. Just more supposed goodies without any pain.
That is why the Republican party has been morally bankrupt the last five years and why the Dems kicked our behinds in 06.
|
|
Joe says McCain is a conservative. Florida disagrees. Your spamming ain't working on Floridians, Joe.
From the latest Rasmussen poll:
"In Florida, Romney leads among conservative voters, attracting 28% of them. Giuliani is second with 18%.
Among moderates, McCain dominates with 34% support. Giuliani is second with 23%.
Huckabee leads among the state’s Evangelical Christian voters, but his lead is not as substantial as in earlier states. Huckabee currently attracts 25% of the Evangelical vote, Romney 20%, and Thompson 17%.
Giuliani is viewed favorably by 74% of Likely Primary Voters. Romney’s favorables are at 70%, Thompson at 66%, McCain at 64%, Huckabee at 54% and Paul at 28%.
Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely Primary Voters view Thompson as politically conservative, 45% say the same about Huckabee and 43% view Romney as a conservative. Just 21% see McCain in that way while 14% see Giuliani as a conservative.
Eighty-three percent (83%) see Giuliani as politically moderate or liberal and 76% say the same about McCain. Fifty percent (50%) see Huckabee as moderate or liberal and 49% hold that view of Romney." |
|
Rudy's claim that he's the only fiscal conservative running is preposterous.
Conservatives that use use tax cuts as the only measurement of fiscal conservatism are making a massive mistake. Whatever happened to the principle of cutting the size of Government? |
|
Like an energizer bunny, that joe,
11 posts, still counting, he's like a crow.
He aint slow, 'ol joe,
an' one thing for sure, he's in the know,
as long as it's about McCain vs. "The Show". |
|
These "Not real conservative" slogans are real sad and a real sickness in the Republican party.
McCain has consistently been called the patron saint of the pork cutters that now include Kyle and Coburn, who by the way have the same economic philosophy as McCain. These guys come from the conservative hawk school of government. That a dollar spent on government goes 70% down the toilet as oppose to 30% productive value because of deficits and inefficiency. They know that deficits are the most inefficent spending of all and have frequently threatened the congress with witholding tax cuts without commensurate spending cuts. This is not what many Republicans like, but it is a hard core conservative philosophy, which is why McCain is endorsed by just about every major spending cutter in Congress. Sure McCain acts like as jerk over it. He will hardly get his way by going "Mr. Santorum can you please stop having lobbyist open houses every friday. It is rather unseemly to our party. Also do you think that it is a little much to give 100 million dollars of federal money to build a new river park in Pittburgh."
It is interesting that Hugh touts the deposed senators Santorum and Allen in their criticism of McCain as well as the unlamented Congressman DeLay. These men were McCain's primary nemesis in the Congress over pork and still take their shots at him
I also enjoy how bloggers do not reason in reponse. They repeat word for word the lines of the radio talk show hosts and throw out these "real" conservative platitudes.
Face it you guys. All you want is tax cuts. You never have cared about spending, and you never bring it up. Just more supposed goodies without any pain.
That is why the Republican party has been morally bankrupt the last five years and why the Dems kicked our behinds in 06.
|
|
|
we have learned that polls are absolutely useless. |
|
|
You are selling me more and more on Mitt. The establishment hates him because he is the only one who can stand up to them and win. He just doesn't have to dance for his money which is infuriating to the other street monkeys. The country still doesn't know Romney but are trying to and they have to do it wading through dishonest establishment hacks like your spreading lies. The other candidates are well- known quantities. Over time, advantage Romney. And Romney has surged to the lead in FL according to the latest Rasmussen poll. Deconstruct THAT! |
|
Remember that bet we made last night at the restaurant in Anaheim?
As to who would be the first "trolling poster" to your article about Giuliani and McCain?
I WIN, you see very plainly, it is Joe.
Not only did he start his engines this morning, he's already in 4th gear and rounding the corner on his 200th lap.
I swear, this Joe is not playing fair. We all have 6 cylinders under the hood and he's got to have a Hemi 8. Just listen to that noise its making.
Hugh, how about a "double down"? |
|
Notably and appropriately, Senator Coburn explained this decision by praising McCain, without dismissive or negative references toward anyone else.
“Since I came to Congress in 1995,” Tom Coburn declared, “I have met one true reformer- John McCain. He has the unique blend of character, guts, and experience needed to transform Washington from the inside out. He is beholden to no special interest. He is guided by strong conservative principles, and committed to doing what he believes is right without concern for political consequence.
“John McCain has never been afraid to take the road less traveled, and he has fought wasteful spending at every turn along the way. He’s saved taxpayers untold billions, and he has rightfully earned the reputation as the Senate’s number one fiscal hawk. I trust that as president, John McCain will veto any pork-barrel bill that crosses his desk, and will make the authors famous.”
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/d7d27fe0-c7d1-4727 -9f59-f26d8a3ab833 |
|
|
38 comments so far and 10 are yours? Honestly, your spamming is getting to be as bad as Synthesizer's (who should be here shortly, as soon as he gets the money transfer from the Huckabee campaign - assuming they have any left). |
|
|
...still has McCain in front in Florida, and none of these polls have taken his SC boost into consideration. I'll be more interested to see the polls by the end of this week, where I am convinced McCain will be ahead 5-7 points. As long as Huck keeps stealing votes from Romney, we can all be spared from having to vote for that sociopathic opportunist come November. And who knows, maybe Romney will see that he's just wasting his money and drop out after he loses Florida next week. We can all hope, I guess. |
|
originate in Congress, not with the President.
Where has McCain been for the last many years?
That's right! He has been in Congress!!!
Why didn't he spend as much effort to cut spending as he did in stabbing conservatives and the Republican party in the back?
It is because he isn't one of us, no matter what Joe says or who he quotes. |
|
At a campaign event Aug. 8, 2007, Giuliani told a crowd in Iowa, "I happen to be a very big admirer of Sen. McCain and I can tell you quite honestly that if I weren't running for president I would be here supporting him. If for some reason I made a decision not to run he'd be my candidate."
It was the second time this summer Giuliani voiced support for McCain without much prompting.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=349244 0
Somehow Pasadena Phil, I doubt Rudy Giuliani is going to throw his support for your guy. But then again, you called Rudy slimy and corrupt didn't you?
|
|
FL is a national stage and McCain will be exposed for the liberal he really is. He is definitely not an economic conservative and by his own admission in the NH primary, he does not understand economics very well.
That line needs to be picked up and used in an attack ad. I am not sure where the video is the the Rudy people know for they are the ones who quoted McCain.
It is time to move McCain to the back of the pack. He can drop just as fast as he came up. If he loses FL it will do to his 2008 campaign what SC did to his 2000 campaign.
Huck appears to be fading fast. SC really hurt him. Many of those votes will move to Romney as will most of Fred's votes. Fred needs to bow out of FL or he will be labeled as a stalking horse for McCain. Fred can go camp out someplace else if he is not ready to get out. |
|
McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman.
More of this kind of leadership I don't need or want.
We have run out of time on the illegal alien inundation. We either stop it now or we lose our country. McCain won't do it. He thinks it's impossible to enforce our laws. I want someone who doesn't.
The GOP cedes their best issues by running McCain. He agrees with Hillary on Gore-Bull warming, gays, guns, and amnesty. I want someone who doesn't.
America is worth saving. Vote conservative.
|
|
I do not make this stuff up:
Hillary Fav v. Unfavorable Rating
49% / 50%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/fav orables/election_2008_democratic_candidates_running_in_2008 _presidential_election
Mitt Romney's Fave v. Unfavorable Rating
36% / 50%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/fav orables/election_2008_republican_candidates_running_in_2008 _presidential_election |
|
If I had my way, tax rates across the board would be no higher than 10%.
Of course, the government would be much smaller. |
|
"Tax rate cuts increase government revenues."
To a point, they do, but that is irrelevant. I am not against tax cuts.
I am against long term tax cuts without subsequent decrease in government spending.
Bush's tax cuts would be a great thing... IF the Decider had bothered to veto some spending bills until Congress started taking the axe to the budget and if he had not gotten bogged down in a trillion dollar war. |
|
Rudy is not going to win FL. Hopefully he can divide the moderate vote with McCain. Rudy got kicked out of IA, NH, MI, and SC. At one time he lead in NV.
All of the party will now turn on McCain to stop him. Rudy can win NY if McCain is stopped. Huck who is fading fast in the South can win AR if McCain is stopped. Romney is the best hope Rudy and Huck have to allow them to continue.
|
|
|
Rudy sounds like Marcia Clark in her wrap-up statement to the jury in the OJ trial where she eschewed the typical tactic of "...an therefore there is only one conclusion: guilty!" for the Rudy-esque "You really have a difficult decision to make and I don't know how I would decide if I were in your shoes". OJ walked. All Rudy proved in that statement is that he is interchangeable with McCain. They are both RINOS, just like your beloved Medved. |
|
|
There is a discernible change in Hugh's posts the last week weeks. it used to be all Romney all the time..but i think he realized he became a laughing stock not only among commenters but other bloggers as well. So, he has somehow managed to extract his tongue from Romney's derrier...if only we could do this to some of Hugh's blind followers here (you know who you are...) |
|
|
with some sense, S.E. Tex. No links are needed, just good old common sense tells us that John McCain is not one of us. If he's anything, he's Teddy Kennedy's lackey. |
|
Good to see you back with us, Hugh. I was wondering where you went after the McCain win. It is clear the conservatives and near conservatives are splitting the non-McCain vote. Only trouble is - who gets out?
It's too bad Gov. Huckabee is pulling away from Fred. As is Romney but you can't blame Romney for that. For crying out loud, he is leading in the delegate count.
Let's hope Rudy wins Florida and pushes us that much closer to a brokered convention. I am a Fred guy, but am beginning to appreciate Rudy's specificity and eloquence. He is the only one I have heard who has said he will cut the bureaucracy through attrition.
I am sending Rudy some money, at the very least. |
|
|
Do actually have an argument to make? Or have you been reduced to "neener-neener" responses? If you haven't noticed, the new "big-tent" GOP is shrinking as it chases out conservatives and allows Democrats and liberal independents (who aren't enlisting to the GOP) to select its nominee. Duh!!! |
|
At a campaign event Aug. 8, 2007, Giuliani told a crowd in Iowa, "I happen to be a very big admirer of Sen. McCain and I can tell you quite honestly that if I weren't running for president I would be here supporting him. If for some reason I made a decision not to run he'd be my candidate."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=349244 0 |
|
According to Rasmussen, Romney has opened up a BIG lead in Florida!
"The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds Mitt Romney with a lead in Florida’s Republican Presidential Primary. John McCain and Rudy Giuliani are close behind in what may develop into a three-man race. It’s Romney at 25%, McCain at 20%, and Giuliani at 19%. Romney has picked up seven points over the past week while McCain and Giuliani each inched up a point."
I think there is a good rationale for this:
1. Fred supporters prefer Romney 3:1 as a second choice over anyone else. God love him, Fred is done.
2. Giuliani is stealing moderate voters from McCain. Ah those lovely moderates. Also, no primary-crashin liberal indies get to vote for McCain in Fl (thank God!).
3. Huckabee is fading badly and those voters may be going to Romney rather than McCain (least of all evils from their persepctive).
4. The race is now about the ECONOMY which has been BROKEN BY POLITICIANS and maybe a businessman is needed to save it.
5. Romney, tanned, lean and handsome will appeal to Floridians who appreciate a bit of glam and flash.
6. Romney has always polled well with the 65+ crowd and there are LOTS of them in Florida. |
|
Fred needs to quit. I gave him $$$ and I had his sticker on the SUV. But he ran the worst race ever. We gave him his shot in SC and it didn't work. So Fred now needs to get out of the way and stop sucking votes from the guys who can stop McLame.
I think Rudy is going to shock the world in Florida. He is the one guy who is not afraid to nail McCain and Hillary hard. He also has laid out his positions very clearly.
If the Reagan conservative movement is to continue.. the movement that actually works for America, it has to be Fred or Mitt at this point. McCain is now the biggest threat to our party we have. McCain is a bigger threat to conservatism than any Democrat. If he wins and becomes the face of the GOP, conservatism, as we know it is over.
People can desperately try and call McCain conservative all they want. They can post little links to MSM stories that also like McCain. But in the end, McCain has SO many things on his record that screw over conservatives, there is simply no way to deny it once it is all out there.
Rudy is not afraid to put it out there. I love people who say Rudy is some lib as they defend McCain. Classic.
McCain is going to get the beat down this week he deserves for being a traitor to the GOP. Fred should have done it last week but Fred was too nice to his old buddy McCain and it cost Fred his chance at winning.
Facts are facts people... McCain, who John F'n Kerry wanted as his VP is a global warming, gitmo closing, tax raising, lib. Time for the smack down.
Joe... keep those desperate posts coming trying to convince nobody that McCain is a conservative. You would have just as much luck posting that Saddam was a huge fan of the Jews.
|
|
So Michael Medved is just a liberal now? Why, because he has the temerity to disagree with you?
Using your own logic, I guess you are just a Neo-Buchanan Bircher who wants to start a new party for conservative "purists." Come out of the closet Pasadena Phil. |
|
|
not a conservative. Keep up the good work, Hugh, John McCain's not one of us. |
|
South Carolina Republicans trusted McCain. He won there and would have won despite independents voting.
How conservative was the electorate that cast ballots on Saturday (in a big, ehtusiastic turnout despite inclement weather)? Exit polls showed 69% of GOP voters described themselves as “conservative” (as opposed to “liberal” or “moderate.”) Among those self-styled conservatives, an overwhelming 61% went for Mac and Huck; only 35% for Mitt and Fred).
The exit polls even sorted out voters who described themselves as “VERY conservative” –a group that represented a full 34% of the primary day electorate. If any segment of the public should have been influenced by all the apocalyptic shouting about “the end of conservatism” if Huckabee or McCain led a national ticket and defined a new direction for the GOP, it would have been these folks. Among “Very Conservative” voters, however, Huckabee won handily (with 41%). Again, the Huck-and-Mac duo, representing talk radio’s two designated villains, swept 60% of the “Very Conservative” voters in very conservative South Carolina while Mitt and Fred combined for only 38% (22% for Thompson, 16% for Romney).
In other words, even among the most right wing segment of the South Carolina electorate, talk radio failed – and failed miserably – in efforts to destroy and discredit Huckabee and McCain.
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/6dee8f0b-a7a5-40c6 -b670-c0637d945de1 |
|
|
Since Romney is gaining some momentum and has terrified the MSM/Libs with a new Rasmussen poll showing him with a 5 point lead in Florida we are already seeing the spin hyping McCain as leading in other states (liberal states of course). The all important hype of Florida being the newest must win will now change to Superduper Tue will be the new must win. Get ready for the battle of conservatives vs liberal/democrat/MSM as they all combine to derail Romney. They won't be able to do it. Rush is making my point on the radio as I write!!! |
|
Facts are a strange thing. They can come back to haunt a politician. McCain wants it both ways. He is proud of his record in the Senate, but his record represents a liberal Democrat rather than a conservative Republican. He wants to receive the Republican nomination with a Democratic record. He should be running on the same ticket as Mrs. Clinton and Obama.
As far as McCain's "great" leadership Mark Levin said it best:
"One last thing: Why is it assumed that Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson would be inferior commanders-in-chief? McCain heroically led a squadron, but he was never in military leadership. That’s not to put him down in this regard, but to make clear the limits of McCain’s non-POW/non-fighter pilot experience. McCain’s activism for a surge has been underscored as evidence of his leadership and judgment on national-security matters. (I have pointed to other issues that provided, I believe, a broader view). But we’ve had great leaders who’ve had little military experience, the most obvious being Abraham Lincoln. While there have been some rhetorical missteps on the campaign trail, Romney, Giuliani, and Thompson have been quite clear about their intentions of taking a hard line in dealing with terrorism and prosecuting a global war. I’m not saying any are Lincoln. I am saying that even when criticizing certain aspects of the war (as McCain has), nothing suggests they’d be weak leaders. (Huckabee is another story.)"
|
|
Oddly, many of these same voices support Governor Romney, who has changed his views on a number of points, and openly admits it. He sounds one way in New Hampshire and then another in Michigan, at least as I heard him this last week or so. (I still can't see why he told autoworkers that he could get their jobs back. If you believe that you are living in a world that has passed you by.) Romney sounded to the left of Ted Kennedy in the early 1990s in a Massachusetts race for the Senate. If you watch this debate with Senator Kennedy on You Tube you will see what I mean. But McCain has held the same pro-life position for twenty-six years in Congress. McCain is conservative fiscally and has never, never taken pork for Arizona projects. He is also a conservative socially, without pandering to the evangelicals. And he is far and away the most conservative candidate on how he would defend the nation and face the world in the years ahead.
http://johnharmstrong.typepad.com/john_h_armstrong_/2008/01 /why-does-conser.html |
|
I am an American and I don't trust him. All his experience has taught him nothing. He is not honest or he would run on his record instead of election year conversions, and his principles are guided by the NY Times editorial page. They like something and he is for it. Real Republicans are for something and he is against it. Again George Will sums it up best.
"There is a place in American politics for moralizers who think in such Manichaean simplicities. That place is in the Democratic Party, where people who talk like McCain are considered not mavericks but mainstream."
John McCain, "mainstream" Democrat. |
|
|
Citing Medved to prove McCain's fiscal conservative chops is like citing Dr. Mengel to prove that Hitler loved the Jews. Medved is a thinly-veiled Democratic liberal. Come out of the closet Medved! |
|
|
Guiliani should be careful not to throw rocks inside of his glass house. No one (even 1994 Mitt Romney) is as liberal on social issues on the GOP side, and the McCain team would do well to respond by pointing this out. Not to mention that Guiliani has backed Democrats (Koch, comes to mind) in New York for many years, while McCain was working with Reagan on his tax cuts for America. I understand Rudy is desperate in Florida, but I don't think his attacks will work because of his own conservative shortcomings. |
|
understood the bell curve shaped objective function of a fixed based optimization problem. They would understand why revenue to the government goes up when taxes go down.
The reason this so is because increased economic production taxed (and regulated) at a lower rate produces more revenue than the higher taxed (and regulated)/lower economic production of our current condition.
So then we are on the WRONG side of the bell curve. To get to the better side of the curve taxes must be reduced significantly.
If Congress won't cut spending then the only way to reduce the deficit is to continue to reduce taxes. |
|
|
Had he fought spending as enthusiastically as he fought his party in cutting taxes, maybe he would have credibility on this issue but he didn't. His reputation and popularity among Democrats and the MSM was built on his insistence on making a big production of fighting his own party. He COULD have made himself the voice of fiscal conservatism in the Senate and had almost 30 years to do so. He didn't. |
|
|
I thought the dragon slayer religiously adhered to Reagan's 11th commandment? I guess it's easy to adhere to a commandment when you aren't acutally competing for anything. I'm anxiously awaiting Rudy's attack on McCain for immigration, which will be sort of hard since they have almost identical positions. Well, if Rudy get's the nominaiton, at least I'll have election day free. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax rate cuts increase government revenues. The main problem in the financial markets today is looming SS/Medicare. President Bush tried to deal with voluminous IOU's and was smacked down by Dems and MSM. The markets TODAY are reacting to that,not our current budget deficits which are not that large. The budget would be balanced in 2012 easily if the economy continued to grow at last few years rate.
The comptroller of the USA, David Watkins was on Glenn Beck last week and laid this out in easy to understand language.
The President should say to Congress, we will meet in closed session and will not come out to we have a solution to SS and Medicare......... |
|
Support Capitan Queeg if you want but he not a conservative just admit it. You will feel better. Also just think about, God forbid, President McCain gets the Amnesty bill, he tried to shove down our throats previously, on his desk. Will he sign it. You know he will. Then how will you feel. If you feel good about it you like McCain are not a conservative either. And for all you "he will appoint conservative judges" Koolaid drinkers here is some is George Will's take.
"McCain says he would nominate Supreme Court justices similar to Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Sam Alito. But how likely is he to nominate jurists who resemble those four: They consider his signature achievement constitutionally dubious.
When the
Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold 5-4, Scalia and Thomas were in the minority. That was before Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, who was in the majority. Two years later, McCain filed his own brief supporting federal suppression of a right-to-life group's issue advertisement in Wisconsin because it mentioned a candidate for federal office during the McCain-Feingold blackout period prior to an election. The court ruled 5-4 against McCain's position, with Alito in the majority.
In the New Hampshire debate, McCain asserted that corruption is the reason drugs currently cannot be reimported from Canada. The reason is "the power of the pharmaceutical companies." When Mitt Romney interjected, "Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys," McCain replied, "Well, they are."
There is a place in American politics for moralizers who think in such Manichaean simplicities. That place is in the Democratic Party, where people who talk like McCain are considered not mavericks but mainstream."
McCain the "mainstream" Democrat. Nuf said. |
|
|
thanks for pointing out in detail, John McCain sticking his thumb in our eyes, year after year, time and time again, and now he asks us to believe that he's one of us. No thanks, John, i'm not buying what your selling. |
|
Hugh just wants Giuliani to do Mitt's dirty work for him:
Hugh Hewitt, who became the completely deranged lap dog of Mitt Romney, started the whole process. I used to love his radio show and linked to his blog frequently. As he went on a campaign of spreading filth about all of Romney's rivals, both on his vicious blog and his utterly sycophantic radio program, I started examining the sources of my convictions. In the comment threads on Hugh's blog I noticed a continuing theme about this candidate or that being a Republican In Name Only (RINO). There were all kinds of litmus tests thrown out there, including pro-life, tax cuts and so forth. Each one was held up as a kind of religious orthodoxy and if you had any traces of sin upon your legislative hands, you were considered an apostate.
The tax cutting thing started to get to me. Here's why.
The national debt soared under Reagan and both Bush presidencies. It dropped during Newt's time in the congress. Reagan and W both cut taxes, but did not cut spending. The result was a financial catastrophe. I'm far more forgiving of Reagan since he had a hostile congress that was carried over from the spend-like-crazy 1970s. The current Bush has no such excuses. Nor does the Republican party.
http://ktcatspost.blogspot.com/2008/01/whats-wrong-with-bei ng-rino.html |
|
|
McCains past actions speak much louder than his current rhetoric. |
|
Tax cuts are only one side of the equation.
Without government spending cuts, they can do more harm than good as greater and greater amounts of capital that could be used for investment purposes gets tied up in paying off interest on government debt.
|
|
Notably and appropriately, Senator Coburn explained this decision by praising McCain, without dismissive or negative references toward anyone else.
“Since I came to Congress in 1995,” Tom Coburn declared, “I have met one true reformer- John McCain. He has the unique blend of character, guts, and experience needed to transform Washington from the inside out. He is beholden to no special interest. He is guided by strong conservative principles, and committed to doing what he believes is right without concern for political consequence.
“John McCain has never been afraid to take the road less traveled, and he has fought wasteful spending at every turn along the way. He’s saved taxpayers untold billions, and he has rightfully earned the reputation as the Senate’s number one fiscal hawk. I trust that as president, John McCain will veto any pork-barrel bill that crosses his desk, and will make the authors famous.”
http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/d7d27fe0-c7d1-4727 -9f59-f26d8a3ab833 |
|
According to American Spectator blog, popular Florida Governor Charlie Crist will endorse McCain this week. They also claim Senator Mel Martinez will also endorse McCain, but I've seen published reports to the contrary.
Today's Siena poll has McCain leading Giuliani by 12 points in New York- yes, New York.
Ok, Hugh, start spinning. I'll get you started:
"This is actually great news for Mitt because...." |
|
The national debt soared under Reagan and both Bush presidencies. It dropped during Newt's time in the congress. Reagan and W both cut taxes, but did not cut spending. The result was a financial catastrophe. I'm far more forgiving of Reagan since he had a hostile congress that was carried over from the spend-like-crazy 1970s. The current Bush has no such excuses. Nor does the Republican party.
So just what does it mean to be a Republican these days? It certainly doesn't mean that you're fiscally responsible, does it? Frankly, the wild increases in the debt during total Republican control of the budget makes me want to re-register as an independent.
For those of you who are still Republican stalwarts, just what does that (R) mean? Reality suggests that an (R) means the same as a (D). A profligate, pandering vote-buyer. That's the truth. You can't point to real data and argue otherwise. Since that's the case, what's wrong with being a RINO? I want a RINO. There's no way I want some tax-cutter who refuses to cut spending in any meaningful way. We did that. The evidence of fiscal mismanagement is pretty clear.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to end up supporting McCain. I know everyone runs about pointing to his immigration votes, McCain-Feingold and so forth, but I'm beginning to look at those with a different set of eyes as well. I spent a lot of time listening to the Republican High Priests of Theology, Rush and Hugh and so forth, who I now see were either completely ignorant of financial matters, or were simply lying to support the party. They colored my view of these issues and it's time to re-examine what I support and why.
http://ktcatspost.blogspot.com/2008/01/whats-wrong-with-bei ng-rino.html
HT: JTS Hamster
|
|
|
|